Partisan politics and corruption; business as usual

[madame_zora]

Your mastery of articulation is emblematic of your intellectual fortitude MadameZ.
Translation: Youre a Marxist Moron !!!

And you've won an exotic trip to my ignore button.:tongue:

 

[dongdick]

You certainly are a dreamer Dreamer20. Have you read the 17 uaniminous UN resolutions? Of course you have not. Why dont you take some time and illuminate the dark reaches of your mind that keep you enslaved to left wing propaganda. Read the resolutions. The Security Council did vote to take military action against Iraq or were you dreaming that day too? If you think that the UN vote to use force against Iraq was "unprovoked" then your dreams are clearly drug induced and are more properly called hallucinations. Read the record.
Furthermore the Congress voted to authorize The United States Armed Forces to to invade Iraq including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry , John Edwards and the whole left wing tribe. Did you dream that away too ? Why dont you call them vicious hateful names ?
What treaty are you refering to ?

 

[dongdick]

Gee MadameZ I'm going to miss your brilliant witt and intellectually stimulating, thought provoking conversation.

 

[dreamer20]

dongdick I was never mislead by George W. Bush's propaganda. His attack on Iraq was illegal and its consequences have been stated quite eloquently by Hotbulge et al.

Why don't you call them vicious hateful names ?

Because I prefer to live by the golden rule.

 

[dongdick]

I see you are still asleep Dreamer.Why do you flatly refuse to admit the facts of the matter ? It is all a matter of historical record. The Congress of The United States voted to use military force to invade Iraq pursuant to United States law .Are you so delusional that you deny that fact ?
The United Nations voted unanamously to use force against Iraq. Do you and Hotbulge et al deny that fact also ? Have you ever read a newspaper ?
You are so completely and hopelessly brainwashed that you can only be called not mentally competent. I am stunned by your profound ignorance.
You should never be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.

 

[dongdick]

On Friday Octber 11 2002 the United States House of Representatives voted 296 to 133 to use The Armed Forces of The United States to invade Iraq. What about that was "illegal " ? Apparently you do not believe in the Constitution or the rule of law .Or do you deny that vote was made ? Do you deny that John Kerry voted for it ? Do you deny that Hillary Clinton voted for it? Do you deny that John Edwards voted for it ?

 

[davidjh7]

sigh---and such a nice penis, too.....

 

[HotBulge]

Let's end some of the circularity here:

1) There was a coalition of countries that joined the US in invading Iraq. They were acting outside of the UN charter in 2003. THe US tried to get an "18 resolution" to force Iraq to comply, but not enough countries agreed , so the US withdrew the proposal. The US gathered its own "coaltion of the willing" - the equivalent of the mob - to go after Iraq. Koffi Annan, the Sec. General, France, and Russia, in particular, are noted for having objected to war: it would create too much regional instability. ... that's exacty what happened, too.

2) Congress authorized Bush to go to war based on FALSE information. We've already discussed that several posts back! The evidence was fabricated. It wasn't Congress' responsibility to analyze the validity of the evidence - that's the CIA's job. Congress was responsible for making policy and legislative decisions based on the information. Sadly, Congress received LIES. The president misled the Congress! The situation is called "crying wolf", to use a popular idiom. The Congress (i.e. the villagers) rushed in to an emergency situation only to discover later that no emergency existed as the case was presented.

3) The fundamental philosophical question about Iraq was do you pre-emptively strike an uncooperative nation or do you contain an uncooperative nation?

I see you are still asleep Dreamer.Why do you flatly refuse to admit the facts of the matter ? It is all a matter of historical record. The Congress of The United States voted to use military force to invade Iraq pursuant to United States law .Are you so delusional that you deny that fact ?
The United Nations voted unanamously to use force against Iraq. Do you and Hotbulge et al deny that fact also ? Have you ever read a newspaper ?

 

[fortiesfun]

sigh---and such a nice penis, too.....

Don't you just hate it when a dick turns out to really be one???

 

[Full_Phil]

I see you are still asleep Dreamer---

It is true that bush, most in the Congress, and (I believe) all but one or two of the Democratic hopefulls voted for re-invasion and bought the argument of WMD's. That the information was false has been proved only to about the 95% level as far as I'm concerned (it can be argued that some poisonous gas may have been spirited into Syria). As was the case in Viet Nam, it has been the lying afterward, and, I'm afraid to say, the lack of success that has turned the majority country against our leadership, both in the WH and on the ground. When we are mendacious (had to throw that one in) at the governmental level, especially a President who snuck in the back door, it ALWAYS gets discovered in our current technological environment, and we react accordingly. There are so many other instances of both the right and left pandering to, and lying on behalf of, their financial support, that we as a people have become totally cynical, striking out at whatever the other side is to our own views. The right has gone too far in this regard and we have to let the left take over and start the same process IN ORDER TO GET BACK TO THE CENTER!

Welcome to Full_Phil's class on Civics 101. Be kind when you take aim with the rocks thrown at the blackboard.

 

[dongdick]

Bulgehead : Why are you people so adamant about denying the historical record ?
Tha action to invade Iraq in 2002 was in full compliance with the United Nations Charter and International law because Iraq violated the terms of the cease fire therefore the unanamous UN resolutions that initiated the use of force were still in effect !!! Its like when your buddy gets caught smoking crack and the judge puts him on probation then your buddy, being the genius that he is, goes out and starts smoking crack again. Guess what ; the judge revokes his probation and enforces the original sentence. Sorry for your crackhead buddy but this is the way the law works. Your claim that the invasion was outside the terms of the UN Charter is absolutely one hundred percent bogus.
Your claim that the envasion was a "pre-emptive" strike is equally ridiculous. I guess you also deny that Iraq invaded Kuwait and that the world condemmed that overt act of overt aggreesion. It sounds like you claim that never happened. Was that one of the "lies" told by George Bush ?
Koffi Annan is a very bad joke. He is corrupt as a person can be and a dedicated Marxist !!! Sounds like he is your hero.

 

[dongdick]

So now you people claim that Iraq did not use weapons of mass destruction against its own people, that it never had these weapons. Apparently you did not see the film of hundreds of thousands of dead Kurds, mostly women and children, murdered by the Iraqi government. Those films must have been "fabricated" by George Bush.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt Irag had and used WMDs , not only against the Kurds but against Iran. The UN issued seventeen resolutions ordering Iraq to turn over its WMDs. Do you also deny that fact ? Was the entire world lying when the said Iraq possessed WMDs?
The Iraqi leaders boasted about their massive supply of WMDs and threatened to unleash them if Iraq was invaded. What kind of reckless irresponsible fool would assume that his boasts were not accurate ? Clinton said that Iraq had them long before Bush was elected .But of course we know that he is a convicted liar , the first President to be held in contempt for lying under oath. He was held in contempt of court and fined $100,000 by federal judge Susan Webber Wright. I know that you will deny that fact too. Thats what you people do: deny the historical facts and repeat your lies over and over and over and over ad infinitum.

 

[B_JQblonde]

Bush Jr's so-called evidence was even suspect in 2002. Within Bush's cabinet, Colin Powell expressed reservations about the accuracy of the evidence to the President, several CIA directors expressed their misgivings. The Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfkowicz triad just generated this climate of fear and made it "Unpatriotic" to question the president at the time. The Congressional committees that have oversee national intelligence and foreign relations were fed wrong information. Their job was to make effective recommendations and decisions on the CIA intelligence, not vet the evidence themselves.

Regurgitation of lw blogtripe, full of lies, and half-truths.

It wasn't " bush Jr's" 'evidence. It was an accumulation of evidence made by US Intel agencies, much of it under Clinton.

Powell may have had doubts about specific bits of intellignece < so what? > but not about the overall conclusion.

The Intel agencies concluded that Iraq had WMD. Tenet had no reservations. Do the words 'slam dunk ' ring a bell? "Doubts' are part of the game . What leaders, like the President of the United States are required to do is make something called DECISIONS.

And Bush's decision about IRAQ's WMD was the same as Bill Clinton's, Hill Clinton's, John Kerry's, Bob Graham's, Howard Dean's, Sandy Berger's, Bill Cohen's, Maddy Albright's , Nancy Pelosi's , Jacque Chriac's, Tony Blair's and many others .

But I think you should be the National Security Advisor for the next Administration. I can see you answering questions.


" Mr hot Bulge, Unscom claimed that Iraq had not accounted for all it's WMD when they left in 1998. saddam has refused to fully cooperate with UN inspections since the the first Gulf war, Every intel agency has concluded that Iraq has WMD , So has every leading member of the Clinton Adminisration, the US Senate and the US House, and heads of foreign governemnts with their own intelligence agencies. What is your conclusion?"

"WELLLLLLLLLLLLLL, maybe we should give Saddam the benefit of the doubt....."

GAKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK/

It's why your ilk should never , ever, NEVER be in positions of national security.

 

[B_JQblonde]

The unprovoked attack on Iraq by George W. Bush was indeed an illegal action in more ways than one:
.

Then put on your turban and go arrest him.
Dope.

 

[HotBulge]

Regurgitation of lw blogtripe, full of lies, and half-truths.

It wasn't " bush Jr's" 'evidence. It was an accumulation of evidence made by US Intel agencies, much of it under Clinton.

Powell may have had doubts about specific bits of intellignece < so what? > but not about the overall conclusion.

The Intel agencies concluded that Iraq had WMD. Tenet had no reservations. Do the words 'slam dunk ' ring a bell? "Doubts' are part of the game . What leaders, like the President of the United States are required to do is make something called DECISIONS.
....

FYI: I don't read blogs, and LPSG is the only bulletin board that I participate on. AS for my reading habits, I read a combination of the NYTimes, the BBC, and CNN websites on a daily basis and The Economist on a bi-weekly basis. I've been reading these sources of since the early '90s (in paper form before the WWW exploded in US circa 1990).

On Sources: For quick facts that I've listed in these posts, I've referenced Wikipedia. I pay attention to the neutrality of these articles, and I do follow their sources. I also use the NYTimes and CNN archives to see the evolution of news reports over time.

On CIA Intelligence: Tenet's phrase "slam dunk" is often quoted, but Tenet himself even disputes that he used the phrase. Whether he said "slam dunk" or not in reference to finding WMD, those are his famous last words. Tenet abruptly resigned in June 2004, presumably because his intelligence oversight concerning WMD was just wrong. Intelligence is an exact science, but there's a fundamental problem when the intelligence "picture" is so far from the verifiable truth!

More evidence is being revealed that there was no "slam dunk" and that Cheney, in particular, had his intelligence subordinates scan the evidence several times. The accusation is that Cheney selectively used evidence that would support tghe pre-determined conclusion that Iraq had WMD.

Even if the CIA's evidence for WMD was under-supported, a responsible executive i.e. a CIA chief, Cheney, etc, must also examine what other sources can corroborate or refute their "picture of the truth" regarding WMD. European intelligence could not independently corroborate the "smoking gun" of conculsions that the CIA had. UK and the EU had just as much at stake in the Iraq controversy as the US in terms of geopolitical interests. I'll refer you to the UK's Downing Street Memo, a secret internal memo within Blair's cabinet writte in July 2002:

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
​

TO: DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
​

On What to Do about WMD:
Bush ultimately had to weigh the "imminent threat" of WMD in Iraq vs. UN action/resolutions vs. the risk of military action in Iraq. First, even if one believes that Iraq had WMD, who was Iraq threatening directly? Could Iraq afford to wage a war, especially after 10 years of sanctions and international isolation? Determing Iraq's ability to wage war places a certain approximate bound on his ability tow age a war.

As for the UN, yes, Hussein's non-compliance towards inspections was frustrating. The major objection to a military solution, however, was the geopolitical instability that it would create. The Bush cabinet did not weigh these risks appropriately in 2003. It may have taken longer, but pressuring Hussein to open up to inspections did achieve results.

 

[HotBulge]

JQB is still struggling how to reason with facts and corroborating evidence. His political reality is his only reality, and he's having difficulty working beyond those limitations.

Just for repetition.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Give what up. Pointing out the balatantly illogical lies told by the left that Bush 'lied' about WMD???

Maybe you can expalin.

Bill <blah blah> had WMD.

Your copy&paste rant here belongs in another thread. Please at least attempt to stay on topic - unless that's too difficult for a republican parrot.

A call for some historical accuracy is needed! Less political rhetoric and half-truths, please!

I agree. However,

George Bush Jr. accused Iraq <blah blah> destabilized the world, squandered the US credibility worldwide, led a $1.5 Trillion(+) ruinous war at the American taxpayer's expense, and failed miserably.

Wrong thread.

The Ignorance of DC_DEEP is breathtaking !!! Clinton fired 93 Attorneys General when he took office. <...> Study the record and stop repeating the myhological defenses of the Leftists.

Would you care to point out where I claimed Clinton did NOT fire 93 US Attorneys (by the way, the ignorance of dongdick is breathtaking; he does not know the difference between a US Attorney and an Attorney General. It would be, uh, impossible for one president to fire 93 Attorneys General, unless he could fire the ONE current AG, all the past ones, live or dead, and some future ones, living now or not yet born...) You are a fucktard, aren't you?

The Complete And Utter Ignorance Of Dc_deep Is Beyond All Heretofore Known Examples . His Statements Are Completely False And Easily Proven So. He Is A Blithering Fool Who Who Thinks Leftist Emotional Rantings Can Somehow Change The Historical Record. May God Protect Us From Such Vicious And Malignant Ignorance.

Hey, you blathering idiot, at least give a reference for my ignorance that requires two posts. Point out my completely false statements? Otherwise, you simply point to yourself with your rambling, barely cogent rant, and point out your own vicious and malignant ignorance.

 

[B_JQblonde]

Keee-rist ,would you be honest for one day of your life? You're not neutral. Maybe compared to some of the impeach bush lw freakazoid morons, but not compared to grounded with grounded, rational people.

You eat up every bit of lw blogtripe that slams Bush with a friggin fork and spoon.
Yyou've made the classic mistake of the partisan. You made up your mind FIRST and then decided to backfill the supporting facts. And in that backfill process you've had to completely shut down your internal logic process.

Only a completely illogical individual would process the following :

Person A said X .
Person B said X
Person C said X
Person D said X
Person E said X
Person F said X
Person G said X
Person H said X

Ergo , person H is lying.

See how stupid it sounds when you remove your partisan bias???

 

[DC_DEEP]

I repeat:

Your copy&paste rant here belongs in another thread. Please at least attempt to stay on topic - unless that's too difficult for a republican parrot.

Keee-rist ,would you be honest for one day of your life? You're not neutral. Maybe compared to some of the impeach bush lw freakazoid morons, but not compared to grounded with grounded, rational people.

???

You eat up every bit of lw blogtripe that slams Bush with a friggin fork and spoon.
Yyou've made the classic mistake of the partisan. You made up your mind FIRST and then decided to backfill the supporting facts. And in that backfill process you've had to completely shut down your internal logic process.

Only a completely illogical individual would process the following :

Person A said X .
Person B said X
Person C said X
Person D said X
Person E said X
Person F said X
Person G said X
Person H said X

Ergo , person H is lying.

See how stupid it sounds when you remove your partisan bias???

What the fuck are you ranting about, you idiot? You are posting this trollish shit in the wrong thread, what do you not understand about that? Now, I will indulge your stupidity for a moment, and DARE you to point out where I have supported any partisan Democratic politician. Do it. I dare you.

Oh, and can you possibly use SOMETHING besides that same "Person H said X" tripe? You have pasted that at least 40 times into 4 different threads. Stay on topic and don't be so trite.

 

[B_JQblonde]

On CIA Intelligence: Tenet's phrase "slam dunk" is often quoted, but Tenet himself even disputes that he used the phrase.

link?