How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Iraq Votes..   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Iraq Votes..

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


25 posted 02-03-2005 02:15 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Noah,

"No chance was given to those in America who believed the Iraqis, as everyone in the world, deserve freedom, but also believe they don't have to be amidst a war to make it possible. America didn't decide to go to war democratically."

12 years
Wasn't that long enough?

Your pacifism as would have sustained Saddam’s terror
is like citing freedom of speech in favor of child pornography.

JoshG
Member
since 11-16-2004
Posts 127
TX, USA


26 posted 02-03-2005 10:07 AM       View Profile for JoshG   Email JoshG   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JoshG

To add to that...

Iraq had 8 years of of Clinton (liberal democrate) and his peace negotiations, not to mention the previous 4 years of negotiations previous to Clinton.  There is absolutely no way you can say Iraq wasn't given the peaceful opportunity.  Matter of fact after Desert Storm, we with drew our troops and with in a matter of years Iraq was already pushing out the UN inspectors.  Saddam WAS not a peaceful leader, but maybe you feel given the chance we should have flown in a million peace marchers.  I mean if negotiations don't work, how about peaceful protest?  So we fly 1 million peace marchers (Americans, oh and to make sure we are "marching with the support of the world (seems to be a huge thing to liberals)" we will let the UN know and might get a few other "peaceful militants" to join in from other countries.  Yeah, so we drop you off in Bagdad and there ya go.  The biggest slaughter in the history of the world and before its all said in done, American's cry out for the "Military" to rescue the peaceful alternative.

I think you get my point.  This was the last and only options, oh and WMD's.  Everyone knows he had them and if he decides to hide them in another third world, go him, but lets not pretend like we didn't have any other valid reason for going.  Oh, and if you don't understand why Bush said that is why we are going to war, I suggest sometime of visit to a politics 101 class.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


27 posted 02-03-2005 11:54 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Oh, and if you don't understand why Bush said that is why we are going to war, I suggest sometime of visit to a politics 101 class.

Understanding why someone lies to you, Josh, doesn't make lying the right thing to do. When government controls through spin and deception, because they don't feel they can trust the people to make the choices government wants made, the result is no less of a dictatorship than that which we fight.

Politics 101 should be about persuasion, not deceit.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


28 posted 02-03-2005 02:07 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Firstly, I was never even a Clinton fan. I have no respect for what he did in writing the Welfare Reform Act, signing the Telecommunications Act, and reluctance in trying to resolve the conflict in Sudan in particular.

Clinton never struck me as a real liberal Democrat. I think he was very much in the center, and that's where the both of us seem to see him as ineffective.

Josh, I don't need to take a Politics 101 class to believe, in my heart, war is senseless.

I myself was absolutely disappointed that even after a strong election, Bush still refuses to hint out an exit strategy timetable. He had a golden opportunity there, and as long as there's more of the same, I will continue to protest the war with every fiber of my being. To justify keeping the occupation in Iraq by what one interpreter said to a reporter ("Tell America not to abandon us.") is an unhealthy and alarming position to take. A majority of Iraqis patiently want us to leave now. They tell us this was a "turning point", so it should be treated as one.

Impatience, fear and cynicism was what fueled this war. You can say all you want that the WMDs are in Syria or Lebanon and that explains why we haven't found any. It's exactly this type of thinking that is unhealthy and could only lead to domino effects of ricocheted rage across the world.

I have heard the stories of my relatives and the wise words of others. I have studied history and could only imagine the experiences in the darkest of times. I have reflected on my own experiences. And I feel in my heart hatred and malice is like a virus. You can fight fire with fire, and in the short term, everything is accomplished, but I believe the fire only incites more tension, and like viruses do, they mutate or develop into some other form. I believe in the end only understanding can scratch beyond just the surface and resolve the deepest psyches and conditions of these raw emotions that fuel such aggression and hostility in the world.

Bush quoted Franklin D. Roosevelt in his speech last night, where he said, "each age is a dream that is dying, or one that is coming to birth." and added that we live in the country where the biggest dreams are born, citing the end of slavery here, fascism in Europe, and communism worldwide.

Our generation indeed has dreams of its own, and I am one among millions of Americans who believes the "uneven road to Providence" does lead to freedom, and we can ultimately get there by the means of non-violence and peace.

As John Lennon so eloquently put it in "Imagine", "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one." Some may now look back cynically and think of "Imagine" as a beautiful but utopian silly pop song. I still feel and believe in the cadence of his lyrical heart, and as I respect there will be other millions who may disagree with me or see my dreams as "unrealistic", I turn the other cheek and respect their three feet of personal space and say, "I hope someday you will join us".

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"You'll find something that's enough to keep you
But if the bright lights don't receive you
You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20

JoshG
Member
since 11-16-2004
Posts 127
TX, USA


29 posted 02-03-2005 03:40 PM       View Profile for JoshG   Email JoshG   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JoshG

"Understanding why someone lies to you, Josh, doesn't make lying the right thing to do. When government controls through spin and deception, because they don't feel they can trust the people to make the choices government wants made, the result is no less of a dictatorship than that which we fight."

I don't feel that Bush deceived anyone.  He believed in WMD's, but he also believed in ending a terroristic regime.  The strongest attempt to build a coalition is to prove a threat beyond the boarders of that country in question.  Everything is fine if Iraq is hurting Iraq, but once they can reach out and touch someone it becomes a UN issue.  You sell your strongest card, but that does not mean its a unilateral and sole initiative.

Bush did not lie, but rather persuaded with his best selling card.

Noah, I wish that you were right about your peaceful dreams.  Yet, human history is laden with fighting and disputes.  Just because I dream and hope for peace does not mean I ignore the reality of our current world.  Bush did not start this war, but rather reacted to it.  He is a preventer not an instigator.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


30 posted 02-03-2005 04:41 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Well, I do believe there was great deception on his and his administration's part before and during this war. I also believe Bush wasn't an architect of the war, but he DID start it. Anyway, I want to talk about that later in some other thread.

Right now I want to talk about that very moving, touching moment in-between the mundane recycled campaign rhetoric last night. That moment when Safia Taleb al-Suhail, the daughter of a man killed in Iraq, and Marine Corps Sgt. Byron Norwood gave each other a heartfelt hug. That very moment was a breath of fresh air last night. I was moved and impressed by that gesture of kindness and love.

It's those type of moments that we desperately need more of, and non-politically motivated of course. Some may even have seen this as so, some may believe that sending an Iraqi voter here was indeed some sort of photo-op. That may possibly  be true. But in my heart I absolutely believe the emotions that triggered the hug were natural. That hug was a natural gesture, and anyone who wasn't touched then, I wouldn't understand it.

There's one other thing I noticed last night, that I believe also suprised, perhaps even shocked, many.

The issue of abortion or Roe vs. Wade was never brought up. If you may recall, Bush spoke directly to the protesters at the 32nd Annual March For Life last week from Camp David, on the 32nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade and he told them, "This movement will not fail." and added, "This is the path of the culture of life that we seek for our country."

Yet, last night, he didn't resound that message off to pro-life audiences.

What will this mean in the weeks ahead? How may pro-life groups be reacting to the silence last night? Are they disappointed, perhaps upset, or is the fact this issue wasn't brought up in one speech just overreacting?

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"You'll find something that's enough to keep you
But if the bright lights don't receive you
You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


31 posted 02-03-2005 04:50 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

To justify keeping the occupation in Iraq by what one interpreter said to a reporter ("Tell America not to abandon us.") is an unhealthy and alarming position to take. A majority of Iraqis patiently want us to leave now. They tell us this was a "turning point", so it should be treated as one.

Really, Noah? Then what about this....?

At his news conference, al-Yawer was asked whether the presence of foreign troops might be fueling the country's Sunni-led insurgency by encouraging rebel attacks.

"It's only complete nonsense to ask the troops to leave in this chaos and this vacuum of power," al-Yawer said.

He said foreign troops should leave altogether only after Iraq's security forces are built up, the country's security situation has improved and some pockets of terrorists are eliminated.

"At the end of this year, we will witness the beginning of the decrease of forces and not their withdrawal," al-Yawer said.


Seems he doesn't agree with you. What we are seeing here is simply a Democratic diversionary tactic. The elections went off and were a resounding success which left the top Democrats with little to say. So, instead of saying anything about the election, they immediately countered with, "Ok, then. When are you bringing the troops home?!?!?!" The question itself is ridiculous. As Bush said last night, to give a date for troop withdrawal would be giving information and support to the enemy, telling them how long they had to hold out. How senseless would that be? Kerry tried that during his election campaign and fell flat on his face because people saw how stupid an action like that would be. Bush has said repeatedly that troops would be pulled out when Iraqi forces were trained and equipped enough to be able to defend their country and freedom. What else needs to be said? Al-Yawer agrees in the above quote. To pull out now would be completely senseless. I don't think Bush wants to stay there one more day than is necessary but he's not going to remove the troops before the Iraqi forces are ready or else it would all be for nothing. Can you not agree with that?


And I feel in my heart hatred and malice is like a virus.

That's right, Noah. WHen was the last time you conquered a virus by asking it nicely to leave or begging it to become a good virus? When you have a virus to take medicine to expunge it from your system. You don't try to reason with it because it does not care about reason. You eliminate it. If you don't the sickness continues...
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


32 posted 02-03-2005 05:18 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Josh, I don't want to cite yet another litany of all the times this Administration made claims that were later shown to not only be false, but to be knowingly false. There are plenty of old threads here for that. I have absolutely no doubt that Bush thought his exaggerations were justified. And I am equally convinced they can never be justified. Doing the wrong thing for the right reason, in the name of expediency, is what got us into this mess in the first place. I'm old enough to remember when the expedient thing was to support the dictatorship we have since decided must be destroyed.

I'm tired of expedient. I'm tired of self-serving. If our government can't convince the population to do the right thing for the right reason, I'm honestly not sure we have anything to celebrate. Freeing a people from tyranny is a worthy goal. But it wasn't ours, and making it ours now, when the goal we said we pursued turned out to be a fiction, seems just a bit hypocritical.

I will be gladdened if something good comes of this war. But I'm not going to take credit for it.
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


33 posted 02-03-2005 05:26 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

That is not a diversion, Michael. It's the truth. The last response you bold-faced echoes the administration's very own diversion, in treating an individual as a metonymy, thus attempting to justify everything with use of metonymy.

al-Yawer has the right to his opinion, but he can't speak for all Iraqis. They want to take their country into their own hands and we should respect their wishes. We should help out in setting up the new government, but then we should give them the space.

That question isn't ridiculous. Those in support of the war tend to think that there will always be war and fights no matter what, while I prefer to remain optimistic that it may be some time before much of it dissolves but it can happen. It doesn't matter if it's tomorrow, 2007 or fifty years from now. There will be misguided, tortured, tangled, troubled spirits who'll hear out that information one way or another, no matter when we pull out, which I believe this war has only incited more of these instincts.

I recognize there is indeed hatred and terrorism in the world. I don't deny that. It is a virus, and viruses and bacteria are often said to play a vital role in our ecosystem. I don't deny that it can be general human behavior when children who weren't loved or uneducated tend to bully other children around, and there will always be quarrels and skirmishes and such. Yet, we shouldn't be paranoid about these viruses or sneeze them at one another. There has always been a natural way to keep healthy and to protect yourself from sicknesses a large percent of the time. Keep well-hydrated. Keep your blood circulating. When we get struck by the common cold, we must accept it, but also try not to take it so seriously. Often the more you worry, the more likely and often you'll get sick. Just accept it and keep well-hydrated and free yourself of the bug naturally. Viruses make a vital role in our ecosystem, so we should just train ourselves not to get overwhelmed or overly fearful of it or we'll only exhaust ourselves out and make us more vulnerable to it.

And please note that I'm referring to the common cold simply as a metaphor here, not malaria or HIV or any other greater diseases of that sort. In any case, in reality, we should and must continue to find natural antidotes and cures for these great ailments and I believe someday we'll find these cures, but we musn't despair.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"You'll find something that's enough to keep you
But if the bright lights don't receive you
You should turn yourself around and come back home" MB20

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


34 posted 02-03-2005 06:08 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Hussein was not a common cold, Noah. Common colds do not kill millions of people....ask the Iraqi people if they considered Hussein a "minor" virus to be tolerated. While that wonderful "natural" antidote is waiting to be discovered then you suggest we simply tolerate the discomfort? Sell that idea to an Iraqi or a SUdanese.

I feel fairly certain that if you were to poll the average Iraqi citizens today they would not  want the allied forces to leave yet. They want them gone, yes, but not until their own forces are ready otherwise what happens to them? Think about it....

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


35 posted 02-03-2005 07:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Understanding why someone lies to you, Josh, doesn't make lying the right thing to do

Ron, for the life of me, I just can't understand your thoughts. You are not a "I hate Bush so anything he does is wrong" fellow and I'm sure you're capable of rational judgement so I can't understand why you keep referring to Bush's "lies". In numerous threads I have listed all of the speeches the Democratic leadership made in the 90's...all of them, Kennedy, Pelosi, Kerry, Clinton...that declared they knew for certain that Iraq had wmd's and were a threat to the world that had to be taken care of immediately. If you don't remember them I can repost them for you. Somehow it seems that when Bush used the same facts they used and said the same things they said, his turn out to be lies. Even though the entire world believed in their existence (and, if I recall, you stated in a thread that even you believed in their existence) somehow when Bush stated it you call it a lie. I would appreciate hearing your reasoning there.

Obviously there were no WMD's. Hussein propogated that belief for his own purposes, perhaps to keep Iran at bay. Bush was wrong, Clinton was wrong, all of the Democrats were wrong, you were wrong and most of the world was wrong - yet Bush is the one you label a liar.

Why is that?
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


36 posted 02-03-2005 09:38 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Mike, I think there was sufficient evidence to suggest WMD. However, there clearly wasn't convincing evidence, else everyone would have been convinced and everyone would have approved military intervention. I don't fault the Bush administration for believing Iraq had WMD. I do fault them for not presenting evidence fairly (I'm being kind), and for acting prematurely in the face of what turned out to ultimately be unconvincing evidence.

There were simply too many incidents (one would be too many) such as the reported aluminum tubes that could only be used for nuclear weapons production -- only to find out later that our government had already been told it wasn't true before they ever reported it as true. Again, I don't want to repeat a litany of the inconsistencies the Administration used to justify this war. I think Bush was convinced he was right. But I also think, when he found the evidence wasn't sufficient to prove he was right, he felt justified in twisting the facts to support his beliefs.

I think Bush knowingly lied. Even had he been right instead of wrong, that's not something I would quickly forgive him.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


37 posted 02-04-2005 12:31 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Ron,

“Mike, I think there was sufficient evidence to suggest WMD. However, there clearly wasn't convincing evidence, else everyone would have been convinced and everyone would have approved military intervention.”

Mike is right.  Ample information has been provided as to how everyone
both in and outside Iraq believed Hussein had WMD, (including Hussein).
Also why countries like France and Russia out of their own self interest
opposed intervention.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


38 posted 02-04-2005 09:09 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Ample, John? Perhaps for you. Others, however, might feel more is required before they are willing to pull the trigger.

I can see myself sitting on a Grand Jury and voting to indict a man on strong circumstantial evidence. However, I'm going to need to see a smoking gun, or at least something much stronger than circumstantial evidence, before I send the same man to death row. And God help the D.A. should I later find out he manufactured the smoking gun he couldn't find.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


39 posted 02-04-2005 11:57 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


Ron,

No one was going to wait for a smoking gun after 9/11.
And with the emasculation of human intelligence capabilities
over the past years, you were not going to get an American agent
lugging back a canister of nerve gas or smallpox to show
the world, (as if that would make a difference).

I just don’t understand where one gets this fantasy that
there were people within our own intelligence service,
and there were other national intelligence services that
were telling Bush that Saddam did not have WMD.  The
contrary facts have been cited repeatedly here without
dispute.   Everyone, everyone, the French, Russians,
Germans, Saddam and his own said Saddam had WMD,
(we knew he had it before, had used it; we even have an
idea where some of it went before the war, which Saddam
and everyone knew would come with his non-compliance).
On and on and on, and yet this romantic fiction that there
were individuals and groups advising Bush who knew
different and told him otherwise.  To suggest that he never
the less knew they were all wrong, yet lied, is to attribute to
him a certain divinity, (however ill used), not typical of any
political figure, (outside of Massachusetts).
JoshG
Member
since 11-16-2004
Posts 127
TX, USA


40 posted 02-04-2005 12:49 PM       View Profile for JoshG   Email JoshG   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for JoshG

Yeah lets think about this for a second.

9/11 happens and we decide to attack the terrorist in Afganistan to try and desolve the threat.  YAYA everyone is supporting it and believe its a great effort.

We start uncovering more information of financial support coming from the Sadam regime in support of terrorism.  On, top of the proven suspicion of WMD's in Iraq and the years of threat Saddam was to his people and the world.

We are already in Afganistan taking care of business, but let me get this straight.  Your saying we should have talked another year maybe two, till we have the support of the world potentially brought the majority of our military home and then gone back?  Wow, want to talk about the story then, it would be Democrats screaming about an even more intolerable war budget.  War was inevitable with Iraq, I am glad it happened before they executed anymore harm on its people or other countries.

The truth is that he didn't lie.  His only mistake was not getting more buy in before moving forward.  I personally think it was the best course of action, but obviously if your not on the fence of being sold that war was necessary you aren't going to agree.  It does not mean he lied.

Not to mention that China and Russia would have never joined or approved the war efforts, given the amount of monetary transactions they were getting for weapons.  I find it hard to believe they would have jumped on board.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


41 posted 02-04-2005 01:51 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
No one was going to wait for a smoking gun after 9/11 ...

John, outside of tone and mentality, 9/11 had and has nothing at all to do with Iraq. Using a disaster to attack people not responsible for the disaster is an affront to everything we fight to preserve.

quote:
I just don’t understand where one gets this fantasy that there were people within our own intelligence service, and there were other national intelligence services that were telling Bush that Saddam did not have WMD.

I never said that, John. On the contrary, I've already said I think Bush and his people believed the WMD existed. Indeed, they believed it so strongly they felt justified in manufacturing evidence to prove it.

quote:
We start uncovering more information of financial support coming from the Sadam regime in support of terrorism.

Seems to me, Josh, that was one of the lies. No one has ever been able to show anything except negative links (they got along not at all well) between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

quote:
On, top of the proven suspicion of WMD's in Iraq ...

LOL. Josh that is exactly the kind of double-speak with which I fault the administration. Proven suspicion? Come on, which is it?

quote:
... and the years of threat Saddam was to his people and the world.

The threat he posed to his own people was never raised, Josh, and it has become increasingly clear he was no direct threat to anyone outside his borders.

quote:
The truth is that he didn't lie.

Bush repeatedly presented interpretations, like the aluminum tubing as one example, that we later discovered had already been exposed as faulty, in this example by the reports from Oak Ridges about those tubes. Bush either knowingly lied or was amazingly inept and uninformed. Frankly, I'd really prefer to believe he lied.

For the record, guys, I have never said I was against the war or, indeed, even believe today that it could have been avoided. What I do believe is that I was never given an opportunity by this administration to make an informed choice. I wasn't given the chance to fight for the right reason, and hardly feel I can take pride in the results, no matter how laudable they might be.

If you start a fist fight with your neighbor to stop his dog from digging in your yard, only to discover he doesn't have a dog, I don't think you can take any credit should it turn out the guy was beating his wife. The woman may appreciate what you did, but you still did it for selfish reasons that had absolutely no basis in fact. I just don't think that deserves a pat on the back.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


42 posted 02-04-2005 02:08 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Ron,

As has been said before, Vladimir Putin has publicly,
for all to hear, stated that he had informed Washington
that his intelligence services has gathered information
that Saddam’s regime was planning attacks against
the United States both within and outside its borders,
and Russia, which also believed WMD still to be
present in Iraq, (no doubt it was there before),
by virtue of its links was in a far better
position to know.  9/11 was relevant in that it gave
us an illustration of what a “smoking gun” could look
like, (just with nineteen guys with box cutters).  No President,
conscious of his responsibilities, could face that prospect
given the information that was provided from around the
world and from within Iraq itself and not act.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


43 posted 02-04-2005 04:07 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

And you feel that justifies lies, John? If all of what you say is true, if even half of what you say is true, why fabricate evidence? Why say we're going there for one reason, then emphasize a different goal when the first is proven wrong?

The neighbor didn't have a dog. We thought he did, our own leaders said they had proof he did, but when push came to shove, they lied and we were wrong. All the "yea, buts" in the world won't make us right.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


44 posted 02-04-2005 04:42 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi


Ron,

To “lie” you must know that what you are saying
is untrue.  Where did the Administration lie?

“if even half of what you say is true,”

So everyone else was lying as well?
You seem fixated on the idea that the Administration
had some ulterior, (even evil),  motive.  I think
they were good men and women doing the best
they could with the resources they and the world
had available to them.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


45 posted 02-04-2005 06:59 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
To “lie” you must know that what you are saying is untrue. Where did the Administration lie?

If you don't know, John, you're coming to the party much too late to catch up now. I've given one example already, and don't intend to repeat a litany.

quote:
I think they were good men and women doing the best they could with the resources they and the world had available to them.

I completely agree, John, and that's what has most frightened me. There's no need to fear evil, for evil never has the heart to stay long against good. But good men willing to do evil in the name of good? Ah, now there is a thing that makes me cower, for good men are willing to sacrifice all for a noble cause.

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


46 posted 02-05-2005 12:04 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Here's one:

quote:
This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda.
—President Bush, in an exchange with reporters, June 17, 2004



[A]cting pursuant to the Constitution and [the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002] is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. [Italics Chatterbox's.*]
—President Bush, in a letter to Congress outlining the legal justification for commencing war against Iraq, March 18, 2003


From Slate, Whopper's section.


Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


47 posted 02-05-2005 04:12 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

quote:
including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.



He said or, Brad, not and. Saddam did aid terrorists by being a safe-haven for them. There was even an Al-Qaeda training camp within Iraq. But that's different than directly orchestrating the attacks with Al-Qaeda, so I don't see that as indicative of a lie.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


48 posted 02-05-2005 04:13 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ron, I doubt that Bush's talk about aluminum tubes or the other things that went unmentioned were what had convinced you that Hussein had WMD's. The world believed they existed long before Bush even came on the scene. Kennedy called for war, Clinton spoke of "immediate action" - and this was back in '98. However, for the sake of argument, let's say you were right and Bush misrepresented the facts. I personally believe that Bush considered Iraq a large terrorist threat. 9/11 showed us that terrorism was not only alive and well but ready to attack us on our own soil.  The Taliban lost control of Afghanistan. Terrorist groups could not operate freely there any longer as they had. So there is Iraq, a country under the control of a dictator who hated the US, who supported terrorism and had foiled any attempts at inspection for wmds for over a decade. It would have been criminal NOT to have considered them a huge threat. Even then Bush went to the UN, gave Iraq more opportunities to conform to the inspections - all with no results. So, for the sake of the argument, we will say that Bush misrepresented the threat of Iraq having wmd's in order to invade and take Hussein out of power and thereby eliminate a huge threat to US security. It wouldn't be hard since the entire world believed that they DID in fact exist.

You claim that it is that misrepresentation that offends you and you give examples. Permit me to give an example myself.

A friend asks you to meet him at a car dealership and give him advice on buying a car. While there, you meet the salesgirl who comes across as pretty, friendy and the type of person you would like to know better. You ask her out, you begin dating and eventually it leads to marriage. After the wedding your friend tells you the whole thing was a set-up. The girl was a friend of his and he just KNEW that the two of you would hit it off well together so, since the two of you were close friends and with her being agreeable, he "arranged" the meeting to see what would happen.

What is your reaction?

Do you tell him that, even though it worked out well, even though you were very happy, you did not want him to proudly boast that he brought the two of you together because the metting was arranged on the basis of deception and lies? Even though the results turned out beneficial to you, do you tell him you have no respect for him due to his dishonesty?

I hope your answer is no.....
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


49 posted 02-05-2005 06:40 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Mike, I honestly can't say I would be terribly angry at my friend. However, I would be a fool to not begin questioning everything he said to me, poking and probing for a hidden agenda.

People who lie to us for self-serving purposes are a burden we all must bear. The usual defense against such people, I think, is to not entirely trust someone who has something to gain from lying. We have no such easy defense for people who lie to us "for our own good," and I think that makes them a hundred times more dangerous and a thousand times more offensive. I don't like being treated like a child.

People who don't trust us to make our own decisions can never be trusted to make decisions for us.

p.s. Marrying me off to a used car salesman was a cruel ploy!
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Iraq Votes..   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors