Gawain 0 #26 May 14, 2004 QuoteTrue all of the above. Does that mean he is universally correct? Of course not and his behavior, in my opinion has not suggested otherwise. QuoteGWB also said he was POSITIVE that Iraq had WMD's and that Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat, enough so to send Americans there to risk their lives and die. It was Tenet that said "Slam dunk". GWB was the sceptic during planning and intelligence reviews. That's in that journalist's book that was the rave about three weeks ago. QuoteDoes that mean he is universally wrongheaded? Strongheaded? -- I'd say yes. Moral conviction? -- I'd say yes again. Wrongheaded? -- No.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TypicalFish 0 #27 May 15, 2004 Quote It was Tenet that said "Slam dunk". GWB was the sceptic during planning and intelligence reviews. That's in that journalist's book that was the rave about three weeks ago... But as CIC and President of our country; doesn't the "going to war" buck stop there? If he is skeptical; shouldn't he HOLD OFF ON TAKING OUR NATION INTO WAR until he feels comfortable with the facts?"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #28 May 15, 2004 QuoteBut as CIC and President of our country; doesn't the "going to war" buck stop there? If he is skeptical; shouldn't he HOLD OFF ON TAKING OUR NATION INTO WAR until he feels comfortable with the facts? I don't discount that point. Obviously Bush saw further evidence he felt made the case. Either way, this wasn't a mistake IMO.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TypicalFish 0 #29 May 15, 2004 Fair enough, though from an objective standpoint (as in whether you believe in the validity of the war or not) I think anyone would have to admit that to publicly tout WMD's as the primary reason for engaging in the conflict was a serious miscue. Truly, might have been better off public opinion-wise with "Saddam and his sons are BAD dudes and need to go.""I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #30 May 15, 2004 QuoteFair enough, though from an objective standpoint (as in whether you believe in the validity of the war or not) I think anyone would have to admit that to publicly tout WMD's as the primary reason for engaging in the conflict was a serious miscue. Truly, might have been better off public opinion-wise with "Saddam and his sons are BAD dudes and need to go." Miscue, on it's own, yes. However, I think a lot of people have forgotten that at the onset of the Iraqi conflict, the message was exactly this: QuoteMy fellow citizens, at this hour, American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. Full Text Here.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #31 May 15, 2004 Gawain, they need to post this statement as a sticky. It seems you have to reiterate this fact often. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TypicalFish 0 #32 May 15, 2004 Quote Miscue, on it's own, yes. All I was saying. I stay out of the war debate for the most part for fear of being called: A Ignorant Puppet Of A Corrupt Administration A Liberal Bleeding Heart DemoKKKrat Raghead Or some other "label via viewpoint" that really has nothing to do with what my attitudes are."I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #33 May 15, 2004 This is an interesting scenario. Let's say they do have their elections and we pull out. My question would be, what do we do about the Al Queda presence there (whether they set up camp since the war or were already there)? Remember the warning of GWB to any nation harboring, financing or giving safe haven to Al Queda will face consequences. My hope is a new gov't is put in place who will swiftly deal with the presence of Al Queda in their nation. I don't think it will be that easy though. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,171 #34 May 15, 2004 > My question would be, what do we do about the Al Queda presence > there (whether they set up camp since the war or were already > there)? Remember the warning of GWB to any nation harboring, > financing or giving safe haven to Al Queda will face consequences. No easy answer there. It's likely that they would come to a very uneasy truce with Al Qaeda if the terrorists just avoid the Iraqis (there's a lot of empty desert in Iraq.) But then we've created a new sanctuary for Al Qaeda. That would be an ironic result of the war. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #35 May 17, 2004 "My hope is a new gov't is put in place who will swiftly deal with the presence of Al Queda in their nation. I don't think it will be that easy though." Lets face it Chris, if we can't do it, deal swiftly with the presence of terrorists in Iraq, how can we possibly expect a brand new government to cope?-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)