Unable to save comment (key failed)
Comments for “Whatever It Is, I'm Against It” -- whateveritisimagainstit.blogspot.com
Somehow it sickens me to see him touch these men. How dare he! A few more photos and he can walk away to say how he experienced the wounds of war, firsthand. Fucker.
Bush to soldier: "What's happening there, Stump? Oooh, you lost both your arms and a leg AND you got burned up in a fire. Man, in Texas, we call that a trifecta. What? Too soon?"
The guy in the 3rd picture is also blind.
The White House should be ashamed for posting the tame pictures and not the ones showing the real consequences of war. (But then again, there is a long history of shame associated with the White House, so I am not real surprised.)
The message the WH is peddling here? Go to war, get blown up, go rock climbing and boogie boarding. It's fun!
This modern urban myth that it's not deeply traumatic to lose your legs because you can pick up a couple of carbon steel replacements is another reason Bush would not sleep at night if he had a conscience.
First of all, I am a DAV and I don't appreciate your condescending idiocy.
GWB, with all of his faults, and, they are many, is doing what your kind could not stomach to experience.
His smiling is meant to reveal an air of wonderment of the strength, courage and spirit of The American Fighting Man...something else your kind cannot stomach to experience.
We volunteered and know about and knew the risks involved. It is what we do, moron.
Have a nice life.
Jerks.
One more thing...
"You can't handle the truth.
Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg?
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives.
And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty.
We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.
I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand at post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to."
Give yourselves a thumbs up when you figure out who said the above.
Cowards.
That last picture should be titled "See, waterboarding isn't torture, it's fun."
Three cheers and a big tip of the hat to Snooper. Best Post Ever. Thank you.
Keep smiling!
And here's a clue for the rest of you.
FACTBOX-How security in Iraq has improved
http://www.reuters.com/article/m...s/
idUSL08506245
I have had the honor of meeting President Bush along with many Iraqi war Vets and many Gold Star families. I have seen the President console and hold the family members that have lost a loved one and some that have lost two loved ones in the GWOT. The man may not be perfect but he is a sincere man.
YOU ARE A DISGRACE TO THE ONES THAT PROTECT AND DEFEND YOUR LIFE AND FREEDOM! YOU DON'T DESERVE FREEDOM! YOU DESERVE A ONE WAY TICKET TO CLUB GITMO!
YOU SICK SEDITIOUS BASTARDS!!!
GOD BLESS THE AMERICAN SOLDIER AND THEIR FAMILIES!!!
"The White House should be ashamed for posting the tame pictures and not the ones showing the real consequences of war. (But then again, there is a long history of shame associated with the White House, so I am not real surprised.)"
They should be ashamed for not callously using the misfortunes and pain of others to try to score cheap political points? I guess I can add "shame" to the growing list of words the left doesn't understand.
Re-read the President's statement again, he's saying he understands the consequences of sending men to war, not being in combat.
If you actually knew any servicemembers, the last thing they will do is play the victim, and we make jokes to cope with the difficulties we face, sometimes we're pretty damn funny, and that causes others to laugh and smile.
I've met The President, and a few other congressmen in Iraq, I didn't any of you snarky commenters, did I?
Why don't you self-righteous people go do some volunteer work instead of sitting in front of your computers making snide comments.
If my attempt at a joke above has caused people offense, I am sorry. If WIIIAI wants to remove it, I'm cool with that.
In my opinion, George W. Bush doesn't give a crap about America's soldiers and veterans. His actions are abusive to the brave soldiers that volunteer to defend their country and democracy.
The Iraq War is an illegal action that has needlessly finished off that nation and has nearly destroyed the US Army and economy. Thousands of troops are returning from Iraq with traumatic injuries, some very visible, like those shown in these photos, and others not so visible, such as PTSD and severe brain injuries from being close to IEDs and other explosions.
Thousands of Iraq War vets are homeless:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/02...02s01-
ussc.html
In my opinion, Bush is the one trying to score cheap political points by appearing in photo ops with injured veterans. If he truly cares about these people, why does he routinely support CUTTING veterans' benefits?
http://www.vaiw.org/vet/modules....=article&
sid=59
The US military is being used as a tool of offense, repression and global intimidation and the Iraq War in particular is no defense of American security and democracy. I understand the cognitive dissonance faced by the average American soldier who signed up to defend the country but found him/herself sent to an immoral and unnecessary war in the Middle East.
Lastly, someone above wrote that we should "re-read the President's statement again". Believe me, around here, we do a lot of that and it ain't pretty. You can read and re-read the President's daily utterances and it only gets scarier and scarier. You should try it sometime. It's brutal.
The saccharine bootlicking of Snooper is offensive. I think he should apologize.
The caps lock hysteria of AmericaRising is embarrassing.
You, SFC SKI, make no sense at all. Meeting a celebrity means nothing. Meeting one in Iraq in the midst of an occupation that shouldn't have been started is nothing to be proud of.
WIIIAI, Reader, Scruggs,
You have not dishonored yourselves, as you have no honor to begin with. You're bitter because you don't feel like you fit in this great country. And you're right. Get out. You add nothing and you're not welcome.
[Man, I love when people cross-post to Freeper sites. It really brings out the best commenters.]
Hey Zeus, maybe you're right. I would leave the US but I can't get a flight out because I'm on Bush's no-fly list.
Maybe if I join the Army I'll feel better about myself. Or maybe you could help me check into the Waterboarding Suite at Guantanamo by the Sea.
Seeing how we're never going to agree on things, I will refrain from commenting further on this post. I think I have stated my position as clearly as possible.
Semper Fudge
It may be very difficult for many of you to understand, but there is a segment of our society that willingly places themselves between enemies and the rest. That segment has always been there throughout our history and will remain in the future.
Some pay the ultimate sacrifice and are forgotten by all but family, loved ones and those that sent them.
Others return wounded and damaged. They face a life of scorn by the very ones they were protecting. Those who wish to use them to further political agendas and who could care less about them use them as political props. They are looked upon as victims instead of the heroes they really are.
Most desire to return to the battle as soon as possible, missing limbs and all. Lifelong friendships may be forged after the battle ceases while others shun closeness, fearing the pain of losing a friend during battle.
And still, they continue to come from all corners of the nation to fight for our freedoms, liberties and to keep our great nation free.
Those that sent us to battle carry a terrible burden for their entire lives. Some may have borne the brunt of battle themselves. Some may have served in a reserve status. Other may have never served at all. Still, they had to decide to send others off to face our enemies, a very hard decision and one that very few can make.
All can talk about it, but few can actually make the decision and commit our Troops to fight. Of those few, even less have the courage to face those that they sent off to fight.
For those that were sent to fight and have returned broken, seeing and talking to the ones who made the decisions is a very emotional experience. A few may harbor resentment. Most feel honored that a person serving in the capacity as the leader of the free world makes time to come see them. It makes them feel appreciated to actually shake that persons hand as they share a common feeling that the fight is worth it and we wouldn’t be a free people without the commitment from both.
President Bush, while not perfect, is doing what few before him had the courage to do. He doesn’t meet with families and the wounded publicly for political gain, he does it out of a sense of gratitude that these brave people share his vision of keeping us free. He understands that he owes these people and their families the thanks of a grateful nation. It isn’t for his glory, but for the glory of those who have sacrificed their lives, limbs and time.
He could have a letter read to them, as did President Nixon when I returned from Viet Nam. He often goes in person instead.
Complain about him, hate him, ridicule him, he still sees the awesome responsibility he has and carries it like a man. Making light of his courage to face these wounded just shows the shallowness of those who do.
Instead, they should spend their time also visiting these wounded warriors and let them know their sacrifice is appreciated, if they too had the courage.
Lew Waters, member American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars and Life Member Disabled American Veterans.
Hey Zeus!,
You say the same things as an egghead Soviet psychologist, with the same rectal twitching and the same smug stupidity.
Get out. You add nothing and you're not welcome.
Live with it, pookie.
Lew Waters, it may be difficult for you to understand that shattered states offer no threat. Iraq was not and could never be a threat to the United States. It was never possible.
There is not a single country that can invade us. There is only one country has anything like the military capacity to do us serious harm, Russia, and anything they tried would take them down too.
That is the reality of violent power today.
"There is not a single country that can invade us."
Your lack of understanding of politics and history does not constitute an argument. If there was no one around who could kick your ass in a fight, would you therefore not worry about disease?
Christ, but you're pompous, B Moe. That imitation 19th century rhetoric fits you like a bikini on a donkey. You're also incapable of making a clear statement. Where is the threat that made invading Iraq necessary? Where are the fleets parked off our shores? Where is the army poised to sack Washington DC?
Scruggs, what you can't seem to comprehend is that the threat wasn't a pending attack from Saddam, but his possible alliance and support of terrorists as well as refusal to live up to his cease-fire over 12 years and account for what the whole world feared and said he had.
There was also the fear and threat of one of the worlds largest oil fields falling into the hands of terrorists to be used against the free world. With that oil, and the massive profits they would have reaped, and still could, if the anti-war crowd gets their way, the free world becomes faced with a well financed enemy desiring to enslave the globe.
After three decades of attacks against American interests, twice on our own soil, and even more attacks against our allies in the same time period, maybe it is time to wake up and realize these radical Jihadists are serious. They do not desire peaceful coexistence, but domination.
Their quest is the same despots have had since history was recorded. We stood up and stopped them every time before. Today, too many are ready to give up our liberties for their safety for a short time.
If you lack the courage to protect our freedoms, that is okay. We have in the past and will in the future fight to save our liberties for all.
But remember, these radical Jihadists are serious about this. We better be too. If not, we just pass this battle on to our grandchildren to undertake when the enemy is even stronger.
Can't afford to get out, scruggles?
I'd be glad to pay the postage to mail you to Mexico. I'm sure you'd fit in a shoe box.
Scruggs, you pick the country, and I promise to buy you a first class one-way ticket. My share of the Bush tax cuts will cover it.
Do I really need to list all the governments that have fallen without a military invasion? Your beloved Soviet Union would be were I would start, you need to research the rest on your own, first step of your recovery.
Look at the growth of radical Islam in the past few decades. Try to discern the difference between radical Islam as a religion and as a political system. A truly imperialistic political force that you proclaim to so fear. Look at the insidious influence it is having in Europe. It is not an invading army we need to fear or fight, it is a religious and political disease, a moral corruption that threatens the very essence of Western Liberal thought.
How fucking shallow a thinker do you have to be to think an overwhelming invading force is the only thing to be feared in today's world?
Today, the Big Wig Mullah in DC said that Islam will replace the government of the USA by 2050.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/T...n/~3/182876705/
No, an invading force isn't needed to take down the US
It is groups like the above and CAIR and idiots on the Appeasement and Blind Left that will bring this nation down...as was predicted in 1963 in the Halls of Congress.
By the way, have y'all thanked a Veteran today...or ever? Or, is hat BDS simply in the way?
If you can read this, thank a Vet. If you can worship as you please or don't please, thank a Vet. If you can travel in the USA without threats of death and without "papers", thank a Vet.
If you are reaping the benefits of Freedom, thank a Vet, not a politician or a journalist...I never met one of those in a fox hole.
Today, the Big Wig Mullah in DC said that Islam will replace the government of the USA by 2050.
Well, then it must be true.
no, dummy...it solidifies the threat the Fatwah in 1998 has proclaimed. Educate yourself.
"Well, then it must be true."
Okay, then. Explain the strategy and goals that might cause him to lie about such a thing, I would truly be interested to hear that.
To scare the shit out of people like you, who are so terrified of Muslims that any blowhard with a beard sends you scurrying under the bed.
Uh, you guys are the ones advocating hiding under the bed, we want to hunt down and kill the bastards.
Care to try again?
Don't waste your breath, B Moe. These Children of the Corn have no clue of that which we face.
This page is a perfect commentary on Remembrance Day, now, isn't it?
I always thought Remembrance Day had to do with remembering the horrors of war, that we as a species had better get our act together to avoid such atrocities recurring. Unfortunately it would seem a lot of people are still willing to volunteer to fight The Enemy, that constantly shifting entity identified by their political masters.
"Hunt down and kill the bastards" indeed.
I'm a regular reader of this blog, and not the only former servicemember here.
Sending US troops to fight and die for a lie is about as bad as it gets. You support this, I do not. To me you appear to be a jingoistic partisan, overblowing the threat from a force(Qaeda) that doesn't compare (in manpower, cash, or ideological purity) to the Stasi of East Germany, not to mention the entire Soviet Union.
You might, B Moe, want to "hunt down and kill the" enemy, but, in fact, 100s of thousands of Iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 have been killed. If we should "never forget" 3,000 Americans dying, how soon should Iraqis forget 300,000 of their fellow countrymen dying?
I would like to make an analogy. We are in a bar. Someone comes in and says "Dam Sad over there has illegal weapons in his car" so we all start beating the stuffing out of Dam Sad and then it turns out there were no illegal guns, it was all an orchestrated lie, and some people are saying we have to keep beating the stuffing out of Dam Sad, or we will look weak.
Well, with people like you around, we look stupid.
"You might, B Moe, want to "hunt down and kill the" enemy, but, in fact, 100s of thousands of Iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 have been killed. If we should "never forget" 3,000 Americans dying, how soon should Iraqis forget 300,000 of their fellow countrymen dying?"
Assuming your numbers are correct, who killed most of those hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's, and who killed the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's prior to 9/11 under Saddam? I doubt the Iraqi's will soon forget all those deaths, in fact I am counting on that.
You choose to believe this conflict is solely about 9/11 and bullshit conspiracy theories that demonize your fellow Americans and can never be proven, while the real enemy plainly states his beliefs and intentions and you claim he is lying. It really is pointless to try to engage you.
It really is pointless to try to engage you.
You will be missed.
Whatever it is, I am against it.
Except moronic circle-jerks, huh?
Fight for a lie...the tripe of a foolish imp.
Oh boy, WIIIAAI, you really got the dittoheads visiting, didn't you?
There is another right wing blogger whose site I only visit to laugh at him (I won't give him the oxygen of publicity). He also believes the shit that these idiots believe:
that Muslims are a threat and intend to enslave us all under Sharia law... somehow. And it is all a conspiracy - you know, kinda like the Jewish conspiracy, but since they can't talk about that any more they move it on to the Muslims. Oh, and since they can't talk about killing "niggers" any more - at least, not in polite company - they talk about killing "sand niggers" instead.
These people are really quite easy to understand. They are racist supremacists who have been given a quasi-legitimate target for their hatred. If it wasn't the Arabs or Muslims they would have different "others" that were the target of their vitriol.
They also fail completely to understand the role of the US military. They think that the largest military in the world is just some sort of police force who go after the bad guys, who are actually protecting the US from attack.
Rather than the reality, that the job of the military is to attack anybody who can be attacked with impunity. The crazy thing is that these days the only people the US can attack with impunity are third rate dictatorships.
Snooper.. the circle jerk practitioner really is just another "big Wheel" (strictly in its own fragile diminutive mind...)going 'round in circles... Probabaly now circling all over to find the meaning of circle jerk with his " progressive jerk practitioners" also wondering what you mean as they circle jerk... Fruit loops rolling...
The children are just that...children. The uneducated have their same mentality. Blind as bats and ignorant.
...and so naive in their clueslness that they make a box of rocks appear intelligent!
Gosh, I was hoping for something better. I couldn't help notice that I was accused of believing conspiracy theories on the reason for war, and on 9/11 conspiracy. Does that play well in Peoria?
Anywho, nothing Rightie worth responding to here.
I basically believe that OBL and the neo-Abbasid-caliphaters mean most of the things they say. They believe these things because they are religious absolutists, like the Pope, the senior Jewish Rebbem, or George Walker Bush.
But there are nutcases of all stripes, and I simply am not nearly as concerned about these people and there adherents as I am about 400,000 disbanded Army members (thank you Bush/Rumsfeld/Bremer) or collective punishment against Fallujah (death toll comprable to 9/11 (include the people who died from being forced out of the city into the desert), who did the killing there?).
For four years the violence got worse and worse and worse, and the Bush administration did not change course.
You know, during the "surge" time in Algeria, attacks/day were about 10? We haven't been that low, um, ever? The best time was the February almost a year after the invasion. That month the troops were lowest, too. That month the Defense Department and compliant press corps began *imping the (to my eyes, dubious in authenticity) al-Zawahiri to Abu Musab Zarqawi letter. During this lull in the violence the US troop presence increased from 120,000 to 160,000. Violence increased more than proportionately.
It's hard to believe that one competent General running the field is really going to help considering the morons sending in the plays.
Appatrenmtly your Ideas and lack of facts are still ONE or two years Behind the actuality of the Real successes of the SURGE... Rant on.. Pelosi!
Redhawk, these Children of The Corn are truly delusional.
... Must be the BAAAADDD WEEED... FRIED!!!!!
... r my b ths MRN mn bt s rlly n lngr prt f th Hmn Gn pl... y thnk???
This comment disemvowelled by site owner.
The surge wasn't announced until January of 2007, the first troops weren't in country until February of 2007, and the violence didn't start declining until July or August of 2007. In other words (in the words of our Commander-in-Chief) I am, at most, 4 months out of date, not the 1 or 2 years you so breathlessly describe.
More importantly, let's make an analogy. Iraq is similar in size, geography, and population to Texas. The US military claims it kills 1 or 2 civilians a week. Can you imagine Texans thinking an occupying military force is doing a good job if it accidentally kills only 1 or 2 people a week? What Iraqis constantly think is "If the US are so competent, why can't they do good with this project?"
In fact, Bush is not a competent leader, and that is why it took him four years of escalating violence to take a _slightly_ different course. I have said since 2004 that Petraeus is the only US general grade officer in Iraq that didn't seem like a moron or a hack. Psycho-and-elevated-by-Bush-to-3star Boykin, anyone?
But really, at what point are you planning to support withdrawal of the troops? What of violence is acceptable? Is one attack/day OK? We've never seen violence that low. How about one car bomb/month? Can we declare "victory" then and come home? You folks seem more like muddle-headed Bush-ists than clear-minded thinkers.
Of course, what website did you come here from again?
Wonder How the New York Time latest Front page will affect the Leftonistas like Pelosi, Reid, Casey and the rest of the LOsers to actually REALIZE that We are Winning???
Their Timing,living in the past as they seem to be stuck in, in witholding funding for the troops is proof positive how out of touch with reality this bunch or gagle treally is!!!
Looks like the latest will be:
W 42
Losers 0
.. Thec Surge was NOT FULLY In Place until JUNE '07 you Misinformed verbose LOSER!
Redahwk, I never said when the surge was fully in place. Only a loser could write that I was "ONE or two years Behind the actuality of the Real successes" of the surge, and then prove I was right by pointing out the surge wasn't fully in place til June.
Like I said, and like you, as a loser, failed to pick up on, was that violence didn't start declining until July/August.
Of course, the violence is down 90% in the British areas, where instead of surge, they pulled out.
I'm sure you've got some harebrained explanation why violence is down more where troops were pulled out, compared to where they were put in, but considering your previous efforts, I'd be surprised if it helped you win here.
..Well Hare Brain .. TRY living in the REAL time world.. We are at war? YES!
We are THere? YES!
We Were attacked first? YES!
War is always "messy' ? YES
Mistakes Made? YES!! as in any conflict when NEW enemy appears and out of uniform and the American lack of Arab customs undestanding... Yes major Screw ups took place as in WWl.. WW TWO BUT with RESOLVE well troll boy WE WON as we are DOING RIGHT NOW from the GROUND UP.
So your pacifist and defeatist attitude is really OUT of touch once more with REALITY . try getting out of the STUCK ON STUPID mind set and come up for air!
... Say hare brain
Surge success took place once fully implementes and , had you listened to Petraeus, it was anticipated that once we went on the attack casualties would increase at first as you well pointed out, so actually tou made MY PINT for which I thank you.
Once AQ and Sectarians were Flushed out in the open.. well they got relocated to their place of used Virgins and casualties started getting lower.. BRITISH section in Basra was a different issue in that the Locals are of ONE group primarily and was less subject to sectarian uprisings... End of lesson.. and enjoy the RIDE!
redhawk...these idiots are merely slime-ball idiots and wouldn't know truth if it slapped them in the face.
Even their left-wing socialist talking rag of the NY Slimes cannot ignore truth any longer.
Snooper?Where do you find these clowns that have their heads buried so far up Reid's ass that they can probably taste the food he is eating?
I agree with with Spree. Snoop where do you find these moronic doombats?
One of these days the bats are going to be very thankful to have our military.
To the Bats that need help with this: say..........
THANK YOU TO OUR U.S. ARMED FORCES
past & present.
And I'm getting sick & tired of hearing this same BS from the batty morons regarding our Troops & Veterans.
If you people want our Constitution
then at least figure out it needs to be defended. This is where the Soldier comes in, for it's the Soldier that defends our freedoms.
Believe it or not war is hell. People die, our people die, and untill someone comes up with a new way to get these idiots out of our planet WE WILL HAVE A WAR.
You bats remind me of the lugheads in congress. You bats are as crazy as they are. You pretend to be American and congress pretends to represent us.
Sorry Snoop but had to get this off my mind.
Redhawk, you said we were attacked first. When did Saddam attack us? Actually, we were engaged in an unsanctioned (=illegal) 10 year bombing campaign of Iraq, which is us attacking them. A couple years ago a poll showed 70% of US troops falsely believed Saddam had something to do with 9/11. Are you one of those fools?
Let's forget your loser comment about "one or two years" about a surge that is only fully in place 5 months.
By the way, the NY Times supported the war, and you should never think they are _my_ paper.
Cassie,
You should learn some history. Militaries, according to greats like William Gibbon or James Madison, destroy liberties and Republics. That's Federalist #39 or $41, I forget. They are both worth reading.
Cassie, what if I decide you are an idiot (FYI, I have decided you are an idiot). By your logic I should kill you to get you off the planet. What if everyone went around making war on everyone who they thought was an idiot?
Why are you folks even on this blog. You are giving your own side a bad name. People as suicidal as you folks need to get a life. Didn't you know suicide is a sin? Stop thinking it!
Say NUT JOB did I say Saddam attacked us FIRST.. NO! Suggest either you clean your eye glasses, get new prescriptioin.. have a brain transplant in order to understand the written word or go back to suck your thumb in your constan Stupor of being Stuck on Stupid... and whatever you do DON"T EAT YOUR CHILD!
More importantly, would _you_ sit idly by if your country was being occupied by a foreign power and the death toll was, proportionately, as bad as it was in Iraq in 2005?
Allegedly, the same person, eponym "redahwk", made both these remarks, in this order:
"TRY living in the REAL time world.. We are at war? YES!
We are THere? YES!
We Were attacked first? YES!"
and
"Say NUT JOB did I say Saddam attacked us FIRST"
Being attacked first is, if we all ask ourselves, a top answer for just wars. The top argument against this is that threats amount to a reason to attack, e.g. Iran's President Ahmenidejad statements about ending U.N./U.S. created Israel* as a political entity. We can say that Bush's statements about the top six terrorist states (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria) are threats, in the same mold. Does that give Sudan the right to attack the interests of the U.S.?
You are eneemy! Theenk of eet! Hee wants Amerikee attackkeee!
, and that's the best reason to protect whoever is attacked violently
* Note: The President of Iran does not have a foreign policy role, that is reserved by the Oligarchic-Theocratic known as the Guardian Council.
I would leave the US but I can't get a flight out because I'm on Bush's no-fly list.
Consider walking across the Southern Border in reverse. Millions of other illegals seem to have no problem avoiding any “no fly list” that way.
Sending US troops to fight and die for a lie is about as bad as it gets.
Excerpts:
“We live in an age of documents. There are no more secrets, only deferred disclosures. Saddam Hussein's secret documents are measured by the shelf-mile and stored inside a secure but dusty facility near U.S. Central Command Headquarters in Doha, Qatar, and in several subsidiary sites. Armed guards protect the unread dossiers. Three shifts of two hundred translators each work around the clock. Perhaps 5% of these captured documents have been studied so far, but their contents are about to shatter much of the conventional wisdom concerning Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.”
“Today, four years after the invasion of Iraq, Saddam's secret files are beginning to emerge from the long-neglected warehouses in Kuwait and Qatar. According to Iraqi intelligence files, in January 2003, the Chinese Prime Minister told German Chancellor Schroeder that Chinese Intelligence "says that Iraq has moved it weapons of mass destruction to Syria." Even two months after Iraqi intelligence filed this report about the Chinese tracking their movements to Syria, Saddam continued with the WMD evacuation. In March 16, 2003, - only weeks before the war - the Iraqi Army Chief of Staff ordered the transfer of "Special Ammunition" from the Najaf military depot.[31] "Special Ammunition" is what Saddam called chemical weapons when he ordered the gassing of the Kurds.[32]”
“It must be emphasized that no one document mentions both the possession of WMD and the movement to Syria. Moreover, many of Saddam's own tapes and documents concerning chemical and biological weapons are ambiguous. When read together as a mosaic whole, Saddam's secret files make a persuasive circumstantial case of massive WMD deception right up to the end, but not that there were any CW or BW remaining inside Iraq on the day the war started. We know that huge quantities were produced, and there is no record of their destruction. But absence of evidence is not evidence. Therefore, at least as to chemical and biological weapons, no individual document or audiotape contains a smoking gun.”
“There is no ambiguity, however, about tape ISGQ-2003-M0007379, in which Saddam is briefed on his secret nuclear weapons project.[33] This meeting clearly took place in 2002 or 2003: almost a decade after the State Department claimed that Saddam had abandoned his nuclear weapons research.”
“On a personal note, as a Democrat, it gives me no pleasure to concede that Bush and Blair were right. As a lawyer, I must conclude from this new documentary evidence and my own interviews that the leaders of the Coalition were completely ignorant of the underground Iraqi WMD facilities, but, in hindsight, I must concede that the discovery of Saddam's secret nuclear program now provides sufficient legal justification for the use of force. Bush and Blair may have blundered into Iraq based on false evidence and exaggerated analysis, but looking back with the benefit of Saddam's files; it turns out that they may have done the right thing for the wrong reason.”
John Loftus, President of the International Intelligence Summit
Shattering Conventional Wisdom About Saddam’s WMD’s – 11/16/2007
No, Lew, they did the wrong thing for a mixture of reasons.
Afghanistan & Pakistan should have been vaporized immediately after the Gd'd Abomination. The rest of the 'slime world should have been put on notice that they can live in peace or cease living; their choice.
Invasion & occupation is the Acme of Cretonism. All the 'slime infesting the world ain't worth the blood of one Marine!!!
And, "when did Iraq attack us?" April 19, 1995. And every Gd'd time they sent a $25,000. check to the mother of a splodydope who murdered American tourists and expatriots along with Jews in Israel.
Hi Nut Job..you Postulating with less than a full Loaf is really a boring waste of mine and other people's time.
Let's just say that INVASION of Kuwait really started this whole Ball of Wax.. and WHO Invaded Who???
Who "convinced the Un tha He had WMD? Who atatcked Us and British planed in the NFZ??? Read on Reid/Pelosi ass Sniffer.. read on and Quit your emptiness of logic
Lew, and if you keep believing it, it will come true. Close your eyes and wish real hard. One sec, almost there... nope, keep trying!
Redahwk, if you wanted to talk about the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait all this time (the Powell point) then you should have brought it up before. Let's pretend that Kuwait wasn't really stealing Iraqi oil. Let's pretend that April Glaspie didn't really give Saddam's minister the impression that America didn't care about Iraq invading Kuwait... are you REALLY saying Canada is justified in invading America because the US invaded in 1812? It was a clearcut war of aggression (to save Canada from the same monarchy we had recently freed ourselves from).
The UN was never convinced he had WMD, liar. Who _tried_ to convince the UN? The US did, with no physical evidence. Of course Iraq shot at US/UK (you suck) planes overflying Iraq, are you some sort of wimp that would sit on your ass while a foreign military buzzed you?
We had one legit reason to take out Saddam Hussein, and that was because we were, in part, responsible for bringing him to power. But, at best, that made him a candidate for the Noreiga treatment.
When you get to high school maybe some of this will become clearer.
Poor Children of The Corn. Still beguiled and ignorant.
And yet oddly sexually attractive. Go figure.
This thread started with photos of prez. bush smiling and shaking the hands of wounded american soldiers. Soldiers who Volunteered to fight with the known risk of being wounded.
Who is willing to stand and be photographed with wounded Iraqi women and children? the innocent victims of an obscene power-play? What about all the Iraqi mothers (and fathers) trying to get medical care for their wounded children? Hospitals that are woefully under staffed and under equiped and lacking in medical supplies. No schools, no clean water, or electricity. The use of depleted uranium and who knows what else means the suffering will continue for generations to come.
Oh and what about the grim chore of sifting through bodies at the morgue looking for a lost relative. Who want to shake his or her hand?
Nothing good will come of this atrocity. Everything the bush administration touches turns to shit.
Clarity, indeed.
When did Shrub touch yer brain?
Would you like to be photographed with the men Saddam fed to shredders, leached in acid or heaved from roofs? Perhaps you'd like to converse with one whose tongue was cut out or shake hands with one whose fingers Saddam cut off.
The war was avoidable. Saddam refused to take the simple steps required to avoid it. Anytime between 1991 and 2003 he could have complied with the terms of cease fire and numerous U.N. Security Council resolutions. No dead, no displaced. No way. Every Goddamn tinhorn dictator of every accursed Istan from Indonesia to Turkey dreams of ascending to the Caliphs throne on the march to ruling the entire world.
Nothing short of death will deter or stop them nor stay their progress toward their goal.
The blame for suffering imposed by war lies with them, not with us.
The demand of the Bush administration was that Iraq get rid of all weapons and weapons related programs. "If only he would have complied" you suggest.
But it was a trick demand. It was impossible to fulfill! Let's say aliens came down and said they would invade America unless we declared all our weapons of mass destruction and their related programs. Do you think Bush could save America? It would be impossible. When the Department of Defense *audits itself* it comes about 1,000,000,000,000 - 2,000,000,000,000 dollars short. How would Bush ever be sure he'd revealed everything. Imagine that, America destroyed because the Department of Defense doesn't have adequate books and records. At least I get to blame the President.
If, as 100% of the physical evidence revealed in the last 4.5 years indicates, Saddam had no weapons or delivery systems, then he was in compliance.
He was in compliance, and rigorous U.N. inspections must have been a major, if not essential part of preventing him from reconstituting those programs, and Saddam from using those weapons on the invading troops.
Three Cheers to the United Nations for doing the job to keep WMD out of the hands of Saddam's Iraq.
Sorta.
You completely ignore Saddam's cheat & retreat strategy; his blocking of the inspectors at every turn. Likewise you ignore the air and ground traffic into Syria, reported to include Saddam's chemical weapon stocks.
Lots of people were fleeing into Syria, too, you know. They still do. America is a behaving criminally by not allowing Iraqi refugees into America. Syria and Jordan are the only two countries that were allowing unrestricted flow of people out of Iraq, and now even they are clamping down on the MILLIONS of refugees created by America's war in Iraq (more refugees than created by Sudan in Darfur! Woot! America is #1)
Not one Iraqi, interviewed by the David Kay and the Iraq Survey Group or since, has said that Iraq had WMD. NOT ONE! Considering that 100s of people were involved, you believe in some HUGE conspiracies.
I can never prove that there are no Iraqi WMD in Syria (just like Saddam could never prove that there were no Iraqi WMD in Iraq). Yet, until you can point to a shred of evidence, why don't you lock yourself in your cave and gnash your teeth and stop bothering sane people with your ramblings.
Thank you,
Me
Your remarks best describe your own irrational position.
Islam being our enemy, we have a moral obligation to admit their fifth column onto our own shores? That is the Acme of irrational hysteria!
As opposed to the idea that an entire religion and all its 1 billion followers are "our enemy"? No, I'm pretty sure it's you who are buying your irrational hysteria from the Acme company, as recommended by Wile E. Coyote. P.S. the giant rubber bands and rocket boots make great Christmas presents.
The fact that Islam is the enemy is supported by critical evidence found in the following sources:
1. Allah's revealed book--Qur'an
2. Moe's excellent example--hadith
3. Fiqh: Sharia found in Reliance of the Traveler.
Do you need to see the Book, Chapter & verse?
Ben
Do you ever wonder what the Trolls "ingest" or Inhale before they Post???
For the FAT head Riding "DA BOMB"
Cause and Effect my fat Rider.. cause and effect.. Kuwait.... No fly zone violations.. Un Sanctions Violationd.. Drugs for Oil violations.. lies to the Inept Bubba administration After allthey are the ones who passed on the WMD Positive Knowledge thereof to the W administration or have you "missed this piece of Historical FACT?) and the equally Inept Un Idiots.. Results are what we GOT!!
Ben: so there's like an owner's manual for all 1 billion Muslims, and you've read it and now you understand everything there is to know about them, because clearly reading a couple of religious texts (or selective highlights from same) tells you exactly how adherents of that religion will behave.
It is too bad that the proponents of the "peaceful" relogion only read the Komic Book Version isn't it????
Haloscan rejected my response, bitching about too many line feeds. I will therefore publish it in html format at anewtone.com under the title: Response to WIIIAI
Don't make me come over there and quote Leviticus at you.
8:12 explicitly commands terrorism.
8:39 explicitly commands perpetual war against Pagans until only Allah is worshiped on a global scale.
9:29 explicitly commands perpetual war on Jews & Christians until they are subjugated and pay extortion.
Jesus never issued any equivalent commands.
In any case. argumentum Tu quoque is a diversion, not a defense.
But he did issue a lot of commands that are obeyed no more faithfully by alleged Christians than the ones you cite are obeyed by the more than one billion Muslims. Are you, in fact, suggesting that all one billion Muslims are engaged in perpetual war with pagans, Jews & Christians, and if so, how are you proposing to respond to this dire situation?
I suggested nothing; I made a direct statement of fact. Moe quoted Allah commanding perpetual war against specified classifications of disbelievers. The combination of those commands and Moe's excellent example became Sharia, which Muslims are obligated to obey.
If the average Joe Camel neglects that obligations its no skin of your nose. If he performs it, your head may be removed.
You can not, absent a significant level of obedience, explain the conquests of Arabia, Africa, India & Eastern Europe in which millions lost their lives & liberty.
The commands remain, the sunna remains, the law remains, and they can not be abrogated.
Ghazwat is fard kifaya, not fard ayn. Jihad is only binding on those called to fight unless Dar ul-Islam is invaded, then the obligation is universal.
Muslims may participate by the tongue, pen, heart or purse as well as the sword.
Ben, redhawk - why don't you just come out and say it straight: you are a pair of supremacist shitheads who have been given a quasi-legitimate outlet for your irrational hatred by Bush et al.
Your sort would have been talking about the Jewish conspiracy before, now it is a Muslim conspiracy. You would have been talking about the need to kill the sub-human niggers before, now you talk about the need to kill the sub-human Arabs.
Oh hang on Ben, it seem you are Jewish. Well, at least now we know the reason for your irrational hatred of Muslims; you want to drive them into the sea.
Only Terrorists Paul.. Only Terrorists.. Not all Arabs are Terrorists but those who are , unfortunately are giving a BAD image for those who are NOT. And until the Good Ones Rise up against The BAD ones .. Well who's to know who's what??? So keep your tutus from twisting into Knots and Think it over and don't let facts really Confuse you!
redhawk, come back after you have risen up against all of the Christian terrorists in the world, then we can talk. Until then, you are still a racist supremacist asshole in my opinion, who only has strawman arguments to back up his hatred.
Yer full projection & Tu Quoque, Paul.
Your analencephalopathy is obvious, and Christianity neither sanctifies nor mandates terrorism. The scope and scale of so called Christian terrorism is extremely small. Only Islam sanctifies and mandates terrorism and is engaged in Jihad on a global scale.
Amusing from someone whose website is called "Crusader's Armory."
My response was rejected as too long. I will publish it at http://snooper.wordpress.com
http://snooper.wordpress.com/200...onse-to-wiiiai/
Commenting by HaloScan
