Hostages found dead.

[Tulkas12]

Sure, now,

When has Iraq ever attacked the United States?





And the longer we stay there, we will certainly be attacked again. It is a lose lose situation. But hey, I never supported the war in the first place.



You are trying to weasel out of what you said. You tried to tie Saddam to 9-11. I won't have it. Then you tried to act like that wasn't your intention. It has happened time and time again in the news, where a pundit says 9-11 in the same breath as Saddam, creating a subliminal linker. But not here. I will not stand for it, and I will call you out on it.

As if I really give 2 @#$%s about what you will and will not let me get away with. There is still evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and Al-queda agents. You may wnat ot act like you know more than anyone else here but you are mistaken.

Conections were possible especially before the war. . .http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/152lndzv.asp

"The meeting lasted for three days. Khalid al Mihdhar departed Kuala Lumpur for Bangkok and eventually Los Angeles. Twenty months later, he was aboard American Airlines Flight 77 when it plunged into the Pentagon at 9:38 A.M. on September 11. So were Nawaf al Hazmi and his younger brother, Salem, both of whom were also present at the Kuala Lumpur meeting."

 

[malclave]

United States and Afghanistan. Lets Bomb Florida!

Sad thing is, I'm not 100% convinced that he's joking about attacking the U.S.

 

[Neomega]

Saddam was not involved in the 9/11 attacks,

So stop mentioning 9-11 when talking about Saddam. Talk about his WMD's (oops), or plans to attack to the Untied States (oops).

 

[Tulkas12]

So stop mentioning 9-11 when talking about Saddam. Talk about his WMD's (oops), or plans to attack to the Untied States (oops).

Stop telling ppl what they can and can't say. If you don't like the link go home and lick your wounds, stop forcing yourself on others.

 

[.Shane.]

And in regard to 9-11, where were the terrorists trained?

Afghanistan (you know, that OTHER place we invaded), the US, Sudan... many places. Not Iraq, at least not under Saddam's auspices. Remember, he was a secular leader. Had Bin Laden not spread his terror to the US its possible he would've directed efforts to overthrow Saddam. Many of their interests were in conflict. Everyone thinks this stuff is cut and dry, black and white. Its not, not by a longshot.

 

[malclave]

So stop mentioning 9-11 when talking about Saddam. Talk about his WMD's (oops), or plans to attack to the Untied States (oops).

I didn't bring it up, I only mentioned it in reference to your post.

And while we're telling each other what we can and cannot bring up... how about documenting your quotations, so people can see the context?

 

[Tulkas12]

Afghanistan (you know, that OTHER place we invaded), the US, Sudan... many places. Not Iraq, at least not under Saddam's auspices. Remember, he was a secular leader. Had Bin Laden not spread his terror to the US its possible he would've directed efforts to overthrow Saddam. Many of their interests were in conflict. Everyone thinks this stuff is cut and dry, black and white. Its not, not by a longshot.

No its not cut and dry. Many of his officials were very sympathetic to the cause. He may or may not of approved.

 

[.Shane.]

No its not cut and dry. Many of his officials were very sympathetic to the cause. He may or may not of approved.

As, no doubt, there are sympathetic officers/politicians in Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, etc... That =/= a policy of support.

 

[Neomega]

As if I really give 2 @#$%s about what you will and will not let me get away with. There is still evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and Al-queda agents. You may wnat ot act like you know more than anyone else here but you are mistaken.

Conections were possible especially before the war. . .http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/152lndzv.asp

"The meeting lasted for three days. Khalid al Mihdhar departed Kuala Lumpur for Bangkok and eventually Los Angeles. Twenty months later, he was aboard American Airlines Flight 77 when it plunged into the Pentagon at 9:38 A.M. on September 11. So were Nawaf al Hazmi and his younger brother, Salem, both of whom were also present at the Kuala Lumpur meeting."

I knew this would come up.

1. Dick Cheney himself has said there is no connection between Saddam and 9-11. yet you conspiracy theorists continue to try to believe he is lying to us.

2. Do not link to Neo-Con papers, and expect any kind of credibility. The Weekly Standard was founded by William Kristol, who also founded the Project for A New American Century

3. There is no real evidence between any of Saddams officials and Al_queada collaborating in 9-11. There is a few (read: 3 so far) scant traces of unofficial, handwritten memos, by low level official, of metting with Al-Q agents. This is circumstancial, it very well could have been exploratory visits to see if Al-Q and Saddam could have formed a relationship. It certainly is not enough evidence to make Saddam, or the Baath party, a co-conspirator. The CIA regularly meets with unsavory people and groups the world over, this does not mean we condone them or their MO's, most of the time they are exploratory meetings.

 

[Neomega]

I didn't bring it up, I only mentioned it in reference to your post.

And while we're telling each other what we can and cannot bring up... how about documenting your quotations, so people can see the context?

fine:

from http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/t03302003_t0330sdabcsteph.html

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, weapons of mass destruction. Key goal of the military campaign is finding those weapons of mass destruction. None have been found yet. There was a raid on the Answar Al-Islam Camp up in the north last night. A lot of people expected to find ricin there. None was found. How big of a problem is that? And is it curious to you that given how much control U.S. and coalition forces now have in the country, they haven't found any weapons of mass destruction?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Not at all. If you think -- let me take that, both pieces -- the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. It happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

 

[Tycoon101]

What I ask is "What happened to the WMD's?"

We took a census of all the WMD's that I raq had after the Gulf War, and they had quite a few. Because of that, and the fact that they couldn't be found, states that they hid them out of the country. There was sufficient evidence that the WMD's were there, but they outfoxxed us.

And- Why not bomb the USA if we harbor so much terrorism. I propose that we kill off gangs, and the crime rings within America, they are no much better than the ones in the Middle East.

 

[malclave]

fine:

from http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/t03302003_t0330sdabcsteph.html

Convenient how you decide not to include

I would also add, we saw from the air that there were dozens of trucks that went into that facility after the existence of it became public in the press and they moved things out. They dispersed them and took them away. So there may be nothing left. I don't know that. But it's way too soon to know. The exploitation is just starting.

In your citations. But I guess that puts his statement into context, and is not as easily mocked as the spin you can put on your sound bite.

 

[Neomega]

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Cheney-insurgenct-6-19-06.wmv

Here is Cheney saying,

"Cheney: I think so, umm I guess, the uh, if I look back on it now. I don't think anybody anticipated the level of violence that we've encountered...."

geez, levees, planes flying into our skyscraper, and insurgency... does this administration anticipate anything?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/30/cheney.iraq/

A year ago, Cheney says,

"The insurgency in Iraq is "in the last throes," Vice President Dick Cheney says, and he predicts that the fighting will end before the Bush administration leaves office."


Wow, Cheney, keep up the optimism. The power of faith will save us all, I remmeber hailed as liberators, and I remember your buddies talking of cakewalks, flowers and sweets, and only costing the taxpayers $1.7 billion.

Maybe Cheney actually flipped the switch to "on" for his crytal ball before making the "last throes" statement.

 

[Neomega]

Convenient how you decide not to include


In your citations. But I guess that puts his statement into context, and is not as easily mocked as the spin you can put on your sound bite.

So they saw the trucks go in, they saw the trucks "disperse" but even the facilities showed no signs of being WMD labs, they can't find the turcks, or the WMD's, and your "saddam is Crazy" arguments are like "God is God" arguments. They can be used to justify anything, no matter how ridiculous.

Bushpologists.

 

[Tulkas12]

So they saw the trucks go in, they saw the trucks "disperse" but even the facilities showed no signs of being WMD labs, they can't find the turcks, or the WMD's, and your "saddam is Crazy" arguments are like "God is God" arguments. They can be used to justify anything, no matter how ridiculous.

Bushpologists.

Question megalib. How old are you? Did you vote for te Clinton administration? Whats your feeling about the left wing in America? What would you have done post 9/11?

Lets see your bias naked and cold. Sure I voted for Bush not once, but twice. I loathe the fact I had to the second time. We should have incinerated the Sunni triangle, and we are still half-assing around with them. Besides, I do actually believe that we mislead people to go towar, I just think that its ireelevant to the long term strategies that have us there. We need to control the area and fight them there, Iraq is a centerpiece and very accessable to our enemies. Afghanistan is absolutley impossible to fight in 4-6 months out of the year. Its also a mountainous agrarian society, which means regionally speaking it is of very little importance.

I also think that at the time it was totally plausible to believe in the intel we were getting. You may hate people for standing up for what they believe in, but trust me, they are no different than you. If one defends the administration its probably not Bushpology that they are doing it for, but love of our country. I'm sure you feel the same way when you vehemently attack the administration.

In the end, you'd have us sit on our hands and wait. We'd have us neck deep in the mid-east.

 

[usarmy18]

Anyways, here's some links to some interesting stuff. Oh'z no'z, it's from Fox though so I guess I'm reading propaganda.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199053,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199757,00.html

Oh yea, by the way Neomega. I don't think you're in the position to be telling people what they can or can't say. What ever happened to free speech? Or can people only speak their mind when it agrees with your position? I guess all of us are just going to have to continue to be brainwashed by the goverment because I guess we don't really feel the need to be "enlightened". "Enlightened" like how you posted before we invaded Iraq that you couldn't wait till Iraq was awash in American soldiers blood. Wow, what a great patriot you are.

 

[Stylesjl]

So how is two American soldier hostages killed news? American soldiers are killed in action all the time in Iraq and are not reported as much

 

[Riesstiu IV]

Because the soldiers were tortured and mutilated before getting killed. That always seems to upset people more then other military deaths. It was the same with the Mogadishu incident over 10 years ago. People want to believe that there is a certain amount of standards for warfare. Torture, mutilation, and desicration of bodies show otherwise.

 

[Azash]

Two soldiers were killed, oh goody, they died so they wouldn't be captured. You know this how?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

You aren't in Iraq.

I'm American. Hence "we".