Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: michael97123 who wrote (215101)	1/26/2007 6:20:07 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) of 281500

>> Facts. Few...see below >> There were apparently few or no wmds in iraq. True. This was the view of the UN inspectors. But the Dick camp called them incompetent for not finding the nonexistent weapons. Why? >> Everybody in the world leadership community believed there were and the only real question was how far along on nukes they were. Not at all! Absolutely nobody wanted to see a nuclear armed Saddam. The sheer difficulty of getting UN resolutions against Iraq and convincing the world indicates the fallacy of above statement. In fact you contradict it yourself further down. >> This all was a huge intel debacle. Nope! Do you really believe this? Do you remember how easy it was to discover the Niger yellow cake document was a poor forgery? How come the Dick party didn't figure it out? Could it be because they did not want to? Or are you saying they were criminally incompetent? Do you remember the outdated student paper that was plagiarized and tauted as the best and greatest intel on Iraq? Did you hear anyone pay the price for that debacle? Could it be that there was no interest in finding the truth and the whole thing was a propaganda rather than fact...after all, nobody punishes his propagandists for lying for the cause! >> Some folks got it right, guessing that saddam was a blowhard. A lot of people got it right. Some were highly decorated intelligence and military experts. How come they were demonized instead of taken seriously? >> Some iraqi expatriates deceived the US govt. Debatable. It is more likely that like the Niger report, the admin was willing reward anyone who'd help them make the case for the war. >> ome folks who say they got it right in fact could care less about wmds and were obsessed by US "imperialism" and "bush" and thus didnt get it right at all. Perhaps. Doesn't really change the facts about the nature of the invasion and the way the "intelligence" was shaped around it. >> Some folks think that getting rid of saddam was a good thing and that the real failure is fighting the post war civil war. By far most people did not like to see Saddam in power. The issue was whether or not he should be toppled via an invasion or some other means or in fact if it should be the US to do it or the Iraqi people themselves. There were also plenty of people who did not like Saddam but felt that was the Iraqis problem and that Bush should mind the business of the American people rather than the Iraqis. >> Problem was that iraq was seen as low hanging fruit and was chosen to make an example to the islamic world of US strength. And therein lies the rub! There he was. And ugly brutal SOB that not even his mother would morn. What is more, he had a lot of oil, a great strategic location, and not a single tooth to bite us back on the rear with. A low hanging fruit indeed! So the intelligence was shaped to justify picking it. Now since you are smart enough to see this, why do you still peddle the other statements as "fact"? ST

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next