01-21-2008, 04:51 PM
| #61 |
| Senior Member   Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,859
|  To those contributors that are privvy to the political forum,a question. Is it really interesting? do folks talk about politics in a rational manner or do they usually resort to personal attacks? I ask because I have considered it but seen some other forums that were nothing but a circus and I didn't even see much. 
__________________  USAF '62-'66  . |
|  |
|
01-21-2008, 04:52 PM
| #62 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| Quote:
regardless of any ones views or politics one thing that appears certain is what Powel said,"you brake it you bought it"! | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 04:54 PM
| #63 | |
| Resident Armed Liberal   | Quote:
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 04:55 PM
| #64 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,313
| Quote:
were done no more politics Last edited by mym1a; 01-21-2008 at 04:57 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 05:22 PM
| #65 | |
| Resident Armed Liberal | Quote:
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 06:43 PM
| #66 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,859
|  That's kinda what I figured,on one political forum they Made Rufus a moderator and I wound up being the only one posting. Kind of pathetic imo. 
__________________ USAF '62-'66 . |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 09:21 PM
| #67 | |
| Resident Armed Liberal | Quote:
The setup now isn't quite that lonely. People do post, especially in threads that get moved there. But they're usually just commenting; there aren't the room-clearing verbal brawls we used to get in the Powder Keg before Chris put a lid on it...
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France Last edited by troy2000; 01-21-2008 at 09:24 PM. | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 09:27 PM
| #68 | |
| Member  Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: central IL
Posts: 75
| Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 09:41 PM
| #70 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: mn
Posts: 4,785
| letsroll, no i just figure its common sense. saying there's no WMD's (found or unfound) is kinda like saying there's no silicone in playboy. now im not arguing a point that its a reason we should be there- we shoulda just finished the job the first time we were there, but all our good UN buddy's wouldnt agree. |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 10:02 PM
| #71 | |
| Resident Armed Liberal | Quote:
I believe Bush daddy left Saddam in power for the same reason we helped Saddam in his war against Iraq: Bush was afraid of creating a power vacuum that would destabilize the entire region, as Syria and Iran rushed to take advantage of the situation. Whether he was right or wrong to do it is debatable. but it certainly makes more sense than just saying our UN good buddies wouldn't let us finish the job...
__________________ If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. -Anatole France Last edited by troy2000; 01-21-2008 at 10:14 PM. | |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 10:13 PM
| #72 |
| Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: central IL
Posts: 75
| Troy is right.We did not go into Iraq with all the resources we needed. Someone said we went with what we had. I believe if we had finished in Afghanistan with all the resources we redirected into Iraq, we would have had Bin Laden, the borders along Pakistan would be secured and most all outlaw Taliban would be imprisoned or dead. Right now Pakistan is about to go off the deep en ed and many of the ones that got away from us in Afghanistan are causing that. I feel we would be sitting pretty for pushing around the Iraq government and maybe would have been able to help a coupe by the people of Iraq rather than be set to occupy for the next 20 years or more. Just my opinion. But I believe a lot of top military people have said the same thing about our incursion into Iraq. Too soon with too few. |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 11:27 PM
| #73 | |
| Senior Member |  Quote:
| |
|
| |
|
01-21-2008, 11:36 PM
| #74 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: New York
Posts: 2,294
| Quote:
Unlike Dubya, Bush Senior was operating under a UN mandate, with allies. The objective of that mandate was not to invade Iraq with the goal of toppling the Ba'athist regime; it was to throw the Iraqis out of Kuwait, which Saddam had invaded and occupied. Bush Senior, working with allies, could go into Iraq and smash the army, particularly the armored divisions, so Saddam could not try something similar in a hurry; but he did not have a mandate to take and occupy Iraq. Norman Schwartzkopf, the senior Alliance commander, is on record as saying an attack to capture Baghdad with the goal of toppling Saddam was never discussed, much less battle-planned. Bush Senior pushed his mandate to free Kuwait to the limit, but when he met its objectives, he stopped. So far as I know, he never had any intention of taking over Iraq. Bush Senior was successful in his 'war.' Dubya, in an act of hubris that defies both intelligence and belief, invaded the wrong place, attacked the wrong regime, did not think the problems through, ignored the advice of his generals as to how to carry out the occupation and reorganization of Iraq, and made a dog's breakfast of the entire exercise. And the hell of it is, he attacked a regime that was on the al-Qaida hit list right behind the United States! I've heard his rationale for ordering the war. What I haven't heard is what he could possibly gain by doing so. | |
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 12:17 AM
| #75 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,846
| Quote:
Afghanistan and Pakistan. Get Bin Laden. You know, the real job? My wife lost two cousins in the WTC, by the way, so don't you go thinking I blew that off. I was born in NYC, Brooklyn, but still... Do you honestly think Hussein was a greater priority than Bin Laden? Because that's the impression I get from you. If I'm wrong, please do correct me. As for terrorist training grounds in Iraq? I don't doubt it. You know who gave them the seed money? I got a picture for you: [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/et/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-2.jpg[/IMG]  Why, lookee there. It's Rumsfeld, shaking hands with the guy we gave material support to because he was Iran's enemy during the 80s. You still want to tell me he was a threat to us when we invaded? He had other problems. I fully supported Gulf War I. Bush Sr. knew when to pack it in and take the win. That conflict had a clear goal: push Iraqi forces back over the Kuwaiti border and damage their ability to wage a ground war. We did that, we went home. All was good. It was a totally one-sided fight and we planned it that way. It's really one of the more successful military campaigns of the last century. This? This is nonsensical political theatre. Why didn't the desert where we had reason to believe Bin Laden was hiding swarm with our troops? Why didn't we lock down the borders of Afghanistan. Remember, the people there, generally speaking, did not like the Taliban, and would have actually accepted our support far more eagerly than the Iraqis have. Surprised at my response? I would have preferred we went for the right target in the right country. But we didn't, and now Bin Laden laughs at us and is free, we look incompetent, we've wrecked a nation that didn't attack us, and killed, conservatively, thousands of civilians. There are ways of getting what we want from Pakistan if we had to. They're a nuclear power, but economic might and our alliance with India would have served us well if applied intelligently. You think we couldn't have cut a deal with them in the early stages to hand Bin Laden over for certain political considerations? It almost beggars belief that you'd honestly question if rational people would have us do nothing after 9/11. Do you really think so little of people who don't share your political views? - Coeloptera [IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/et/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpg[/IMG][IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/et/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-1.jpg[/IMG] | |
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 01:01 AM
| #76 |
| Super Moderator   | I thought this War in Iraq was a U.N. Sanctioned Attack after the weapons inspectors were kicked out while trying to do their job. The U.S. Government TOLD Sadaam that if this happened there would be Consequences, and we were Backed By The U.N. We were Not the only Country to attack Iraq, it was done with Multi-national forces , With our ALLIES. We had the talking part done and in order to save face, Iraq had to be attacked and Sadaam Captured and tried for Genocide. If there werent Terrorists already there, then why are Terrorists and Suicide bombers killing Iraqi Citizens as well as troops Now... They were there Training before we went in...and we had Satellite photos of the Training Camps...If Sadaam wasn't supporting Terrorists, he damn sure was giving them safe haven. Am I the only guy with friends fighting over there and dying that is getting Info as to what is really happening ??? The News...No , I don't watch much News from the Liberal Media...Horsecrap ! You all can believe what you want to, I believe in our Military doing its job and getting My support 100% and what our Generals and Commander in Chief think is Best for what has to be accomplished. Bash all you want, if YOU Think you have a better plan, make a call to the Pentagon!
__________________ You know you might be facing your doom,when all you get is a click when you're expecting a BOOM!  |
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 03:11 AM
| #77 |
| Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Iowa
Posts: 133
| If you have a excellent platform for delievery of WMDs and you bury it in the desert, doesn't common sense say the WMDs are buried in the desert. I really don't want to say anything but this argument has been heard before as in every time we have gone to war. I remember returning from NAM and being called all kinds of names and slurs, but are LT reminded us that we fought for the right for them to do that. You are lucky to live in a country where you can vioce your thoughts and opionins openly without retributation. You may not like Mr. Bush but you still have to call him Sir with respect because he is the president of this great country. Please don't rag on the president to much as you do not know how bad it makes a military person feel to have the Commander in Chief run down, it is not a good feeling when folks back home don't support you in your endevors to keep this great nation great. |
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 06:44 AM
| #78 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 174
| Quote:
I agree, let free speech be free. As long as this debate continues,here and elswhere with input from all sides that is,a solution may be found. The truth will come out,too late for some but maybe just in time for others. Regards.
__________________ You dont need a weather man to know which way the wind blows  | |
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 07:45 AM
| #79 | |||||
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,859
|  Quote:
Wow,talk about playing one against the other!  Quote:
It finally died from inactivity. Quote:
 Quote:
I tell ya;,the 911 Commission report is must read for those really interested in the facts,and it's not Bush bashing.  Quote:
As it stands now Iran has most of southern Iraq thanks to the Brits who co-existed with them so they would not get hurt by the mean ol' Iranians,that's why the only casualties after the first flurry was over were accidents,now they are parked at an air field ready to flee if those same mean ol' Iranians come after them' I see our hero Tony Blair got a big time job in the U.S.'payback for a job well done,big business trumps all.
__________________ USAF '62-'66 . Last edited by Rave; 01-22-2008 at 08:02 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost | |||||
|
| |
|
01-22-2008, 09:06 AM
| #80 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Idaho
Posts: 533
| oh thats right there were no WMD's tell the kurds that "cough cough". Must of used them all? give me a few months warning with threats and I wont have any fire arms either Halabja poison gas attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia According to Human Rights Watch (HRW) "at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 people, many of them women and children, were killed out of hand between February and September 1988, the victims being Iraqi Kurds systematically put to death in large numbers on the orders of the central government in Baghdad". There are other champions of the genocide claim. One is Jeffrey Goldberg, whose 18,000-word story, The Great Terror, in the 25 March 2002 issue of The New Yorker forms the basis of the US Department of State's website on alleged Iraqi genocide. What Happened in Kurdish Halabja? Genocide in Iraq: Further Reasons for a Criminal Tribunal Genocide in Iraq: Further Reasons for a Criminal Tribunal (January 14, 2003) Saddam Hussein is known for his brutality but some of his most brutal acts of genocide have focused on the Kurdish people in northern Iraq. He directed an atrocious campaign involving mass evacuations, mass executions, and massive military actions, including chemical attacks, against Kurdish men, women and children. The town of Halabja was the victim of the most notorious chemical weapons attack. And the people of that area are still suffering serious illnesses and deformities as a result. Oh and the iranians "cough cough" CNS - Iraq - Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Middle East Established Chemical Corps in the mid-1960s, foundation of the future CW program. The Corps were tasked with the nuclear, biological and chemical protection of Iraqi troops and civilians. Mid 1970s, the Corps developed a laboratory-scale facility which later synthesized chemical warfare agents and evaluated their properties. Repeatedly used CW against Iraqi Kurds in 1988 and against Iran in 1983-1988 during the Iran-Iraq war. Due to CW success in the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam viewed this type of warfare as efficient and necessary in defensive and offensive strategy. Saddam considered his chemical weapons program to be a deterrent to Coalition forces moving toward Baghdad in 1991. ISG found all CW holdings had been destroyed in 1991 after the Gulf War as a result of Saddam's desire to have sanctions lifted. Throughout the 1990s, Iraq maintained a trust of scientists that had worked on the previous CW program. Chemical programs were reinstituted in the mid-1990s due to a brief period of economic recovery. ISG found no evidence prior to the 2003 invasion that proves Iraq had revitalized a chemical weapons program. Evidence shows most chemical research done in 1995 and 1996 was conducted in the realm of infrastructure improvement. An extensive CW arsenal–including 38,537 munitions, 690 tons of CW agents, and over 3,000 tons of CW precursor chemicals–was destroyed by UNSCOM prior to the inspectors' withdrawal in 1998. Not a signatory of the Chemical Weapons Convention as of February 23 2006, however the new Iraqi government has declared its intention to accede to the Convention. Iran-Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia With more than 100,000 Iranian victims of Iraq's chemical weapons during the eight-year war, Iran is one of the countries most severely afflicted by weapons of mass destruction.[65] The official estimate does not include the civilian population contaminated in bordering towns or the children and relatives of veterans, many of whom have developed blood, lung and skin complications, according to the Organization for Veterans of Iran. According to a 2002 article in the Star-Ledger: Denying reality over the hatered of ones own president is not logical. Just my 2 cents worth no interest in an ongoing diolog of demigoging hatered thus I have nothing more to say
__________________ Living the life Last edited by Idaho Dave; 01-22-2008 at 09:13 AM. |
| |
