|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 19th, 2003 05:25 AM | ||
| The_Rorschach |
"Why do we (America) have to be in control of everything. We are just in this war for the oil or gasoline or some other crap for cars" Prove it. Or is this another, trypical, accusation that you heard from someone else and decided to pass off as your own with absolutely no knowledge of the facts behind it. "Iraq's only export is OIL! That must be what Bush is after!" That doesn't even hold enough water to pass as faulty logic. One of the major factors which has kept Bush from invading already, hasn't been lack of UN support, or even the opinions of the Eurotrash opposition, its been the fact that after the war is over, the United States is going to have to take control over Baghdad, remain to build political and constructional infrastructure and also maintain a military presence to preserve a relative peace in the post-Hussein Iraq. What does that translate into? Another fucking Gaza strip, where instead of Israeli's, US soldiers are going to be bleeding over some dusty, worthless terrain which rather than profiting America, is going to be a drain on its assets. You think a new company, Presidential Oil, is going to magically spring up? Or that the land is going to be given to Shell, and Exxon in return for campaign contributions? Lets here this War Is For Oil theory of yours in plain terms. |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 10:19 PM | ||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
I haven't seen this story anywhere else. Anybody other than the arm of the administration covering this? Is Fox News just too good??? Lest we forget..... http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer washingtonpost.com (I know, not NEWSMAX or FOX, but I try my best) Bush Clings To Dubious Allegations About Iraq By Walter Pincus and Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, March 18, 2003; Page A13 As the Bush administration prepares to attack Iraq this week, it is doing so on the basis of a number of allegations against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein that have been challenged -- and in some cases disproved -- by the United Nations, European governments and even U.S. intelligence reports. For months, President Bush and his top lieutenants have produced a long list of Iraqi offenses, culminating Sunday with Vice President Cheney's assertion that Iraq has "reconstituted nuclear weapons." Previously, administration officials have tied Hussein to al Qaeda, to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and to an aggressive production of biological and chemical weapons. Bush reiterated many of these charges in his address to the nation last night. But these assertions are hotly disputed. Some of the administration's evidence -- such as Bush's assertion that Iraq sought to purchase uranium -- has been refuted by subsequent discoveries. Other claims have been questioned, though their validity can be known only after U.S. forces occupy Iraq. In outlining his case for war on Sunday, Cheney focused on how much more damage al Qaeda could have done on Sept. 11 "if they'd had a nuclear weapon and detonated it in the middle of one of our cities, or if they had unleashed . . . biological weapons of some kind, smallpox or anthrax." He then tied that to evidence found in Afghanistan of how al Qaeda leaders "have done everything they could to acquire those capabilities over the years." But in October CIA Director George J. Tenet told Congress that Hussein would not give such weapons to terrorists unless he decided helping "terrorists in conducting a WMD [weapons of mass destruction] attack against the United States would be his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him." In his appearance Sunday, on NBC's "Meet the Press," the vice president argued that "we believe [Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." But Cheney contradicted that assertion moments later, saying it was "only a matter of time before he acquires nuclear weapons." Both assertions were contradicted earlier by Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who reported that "there is no indication of resumed nuclear activities." ElBaradei also contradicted Bush and other officials who argued that Iraq had tried to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes to use in centrifuges for uranium enrichment. The IAEA determined that Iraq did not plan to use imported aluminum tubes for enriching uranium and generating nuclear weapons. ElBaradei argued that the tubes were for conventional weapons and "it was highly unlikely" that the tubes could have been used to produce nuclear material. Cheney on Sunday said ElBaradei was "wrong" about Iraq's nuclear program and questioned the IAEA's credibility. Earlier this month, ElBaradei said information about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium were based on fabricated documents. Further investigation has found that top CIA officials had significant doubts about the veracity of the evidence, linking Iraq to efforts to purchase uranium for nuclear weapons from Niger, but the information ended up as fact in Bush's State of the Union address. In another embarrassing episode for the administration, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell cited evidence about Iraq's weapons efforts that originally appeared in a British intelligence document. But it later emerged that the British report's evidence was based in part on academic papers and trade publications. Sometimes information offered by Bush and his top officials is questioned by administration aides. In his March 6 news conference, Bush dismissed Iraq's destruction of its Al Samoud-2 missiles, saying they were being dismantled "even as [Hussein] has ordered the continued production of the very same type of missiles." But the only intelligence was electronic intercepts that had individuals talking about being able to build missiles in the future, according to a senior intelligence analyst. Last month, Bush spoke about a liberated Iraq showing "the power of freedom to transform that vital region" and said "a new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region." But a classified State Department report put together by the department's intelligence and research staff and delivered to Powell the same day as Bush's speech questioned that theory, arguing that history runs counter to it. In his first major speech solely on the Iraqi threat, last October, Bush said, "Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles -- far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey and other nations -- in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work." Inspectors have found that the Al Samoud-2 missiles can travel less than 200 miles -- not far enough to hit the targets Bush named. Iraq has not accounted for 14 medium-range Scud missiles from the 1991 Persian Gulf War, but the administration has not presented any evidence that they still exist. © 2003 The Washington Post Company |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 08:51 PM | ||
| Esuohlim |
Birth control device? At a reasonable price? |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 07:44 PM | ||
| AChimp | Scheiss. | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 06:45 PM | ||
| Skulhedface |
Heidi Fleiss? Ginger Spice? Not once but twice? Not twice but thrice? Hey man be nice? |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 06:11 PM | ||
| FS | Janet Weiss? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 06:10 PM | ||
| kellychaos | Black beans and rice? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 06:02 PM | ||
| Protoclown | Three blind mice? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 06:00 PM | ||
| FS | Old Spice? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 05:20 PM | ||
| kellychaos |
Miami Vice? 
|
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 04:16 PM | ||
| glowbelly | puppy lice? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 04:03 PM | ||
| mburbank | Fuzzy dice? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 03:53 PM | ||
| Cap'n Crunch | Why do we (America) have to be in control of everything. We are just in this war for the oil or gasoline or some other crap for cars. | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 03:13 PM | ||
| Anonymous | 2 for them too | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 02:45 PM | ||
| FS | But not for the limeys or the ozzies, right? | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 02:35 PM | ||
| Anonymous | I hope we drop 2 MOABs for each American killed. | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 02:33 PM | ||
| FS |
BE SCARED AMERICA, BE VERY VERY SCARED (They're not looking Dick, let's get those pesky amendments out the back door pronto.) |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 01:52 PM | ||
| mburbank | We'll see. On the other hand we have wmd for sure and our secretary of defense refuses to rule out there use in this conflcit. We probably won't need them. After all, we're already going to use the largest conventional bomb ever. | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 01:28 PM | ||
| Anonymous | Don't worry. UN Inspectors made SURE that there were none. | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 01:12 PM | ||
| Anonymous | HOW DARE YOU GET TOTALLY OUTMANNED IN A WAR YOU DIDN'T WANT, AND THEN HAVE THE AUDACITY TO KILL OUR SOLDIERS IN A WAY WE DIDN'T APPROVE! :growl :hiss :snarl | |
| Mar 18th, 2003 12:21 PM | ||
| Protoclown |
WHY YOU UNAMERICAN CANADIAN  living in north america 
|
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 11:54 AM | ||
| Buffalo Tom |
Quote:
|
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 11:40 AM | ||
| mburbank |
Okay, there's some good journalism. Fox news 'has learned', by which they mean, a pentagon spokesperson told me this is what they think is going on. The proper journalistic format is to simply report the pentagon statement. This is a PEAK moment for disinformation. We will certainly know one way or the other if the Iraqis have and use chemical weapons very soon. On Meet the Press over the weekend, Chenney said he believed Iraq already has nuclear weapons! Based on what? He couldn't comment. Why had he saved this info tidbit until now? Brave journalists neglected to ask! Why is this not huge front page news? Becuase it's transparent crap and even Cheney doesn't expect it to be widely accepted or even debated. It's just provocative dissinformation to throw out there and get people ramped up. |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 11:27 AM | ||
| sspadowsky |
I love a good pissing contest. ________ My green heaven ministry milbre |
|
| Mar 18th, 2003 11:17 AM | ||
| Ronnie Raygun |
Chemical weapons to be used by Saddam http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81303,00.html Iraq Arming Troops With Chemical Weapons Monday, March 17, 2003 WASHINGTON — Iraqi troops south of Baghdad are armed with chemical weapons, Fox News has learned. Senior Defense and other U.S. officials confirmed that intelligence reports indicate that Saddam Hussein's troops are armed with chemical munitions. "The information is raw … and hard to confirm ... but we are seeing -- using different methods -- that Saddam Hussein has armed troops south of Baghdad with chemical weapons," one official said. Officials say it's hard to tell how many of these weapons are being distributed, but the intelligence reports indicate that "some chemical shells" have been provided to troops. Senior Defense officials say they expected the Iraqis to use these weapons, and they predict more movement by Iraqi troops in the South and the West in the next day or so. Iraqi troops along the Kuwaiti border far to the south are in shooting distance of U.S. troops stationed there -- but the troops with the chemical shells are further north -- still in the southern no-fly zone, but south of Baghdad. Saddam said Monday that Iraq once had weapons of mass destruction for defense against Iran and Israel, but it no longer holds them, according to the Iraqi News Agency. "We are not weapons collectors," Saddam said in remarks during a meeting with a Tunisian envoy.. "But we had these weapons for purposes of self-defense when we were at war with Iran for eight years and when the Zionist entity (Israel) was, and it still is, a threat." Iraq and Iran fought a ruinous 1980-1988 war in which chemical weapons were used. "When Saddam Hussein says he has no weapons of mass destruction, he means what he says," Saddam said. He also said his country had fully cooperated with U.N. inspectors seeking to verify that Iraq had eliminated its banned weapons. "We have a real desire to rid our region and the whole world of weapons of mass destruction," Saddam said. He then called on the United States to set an example by destroying its own weapons of mass destruction first. President Bush has warned Saddam bluntly to disarm or face the consequences. Bush will give Saddam an ultimatum -- either get out of Baghdad or face a military thrashing -- in an address to the nation Monday night . Fox News' Bret Baier and the Associated Press contributed to this report |
|
