Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lorne who wrote (11848)	4/3/2004 3:35:09 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 81568

Yes, when Powell got up in front of the U.N. and said that we had positive proof that there were stockpiles of wmds in Iraq, I believed him. I also thought, however, that Saddam had no means or intention of using weapons against us and I knew that he and the Islamic terrorists were deadly enemies. I didn't understand what the rush was and why we couldn't wait longer to avoid war. I still don't. Hans Blix has stated that at the time of the inspections HE believed that Iraq had some stores of wmds. He has stated that his basis for that opinion was that there had been no sound documentation of the destruction of chemical and biological stores and also that he was getting strong affirmation from the U.S. and Great Britain. He has also said, however, that he was confident that if given time he could have confirmed or debunked that belief and had a realistic chance of securing the destruction of such weapons in the event they were found to exist. He was begging for time and he didn't understand the "emergency" when he was doing inspections, supervising the destruction of the non-compliant missiles and had no restrictions on where and when he could inspect. Perhaps the most interesting question you ask is: "I do not believe there were intentional lies ....mistakes possible yes. but lies NO. whoever lied knew the lies would be found out. Correct? so why do it?" That is the really scary part of the whole debacle. I think it's clear that although there were indications of some wmds, there was no basis for saying that we "knew" of them and there was absolutely no basis for saying that Saddam's Iraq constituted some kind of grave threat to the U.S. or its interests in the region. The reason that was said is quite simple; there was no possibility of gathering enough political support for war without the FEAR that those lies generated. Whatever underlying purpose those that secured the support of Bush for the war had, it was important enough that they were willing to risk losing the White House in 2004 in order to invade and let the chips fall where they might afterwards. What scares me is that the "opposition" party made very little noise about the whole operation and did little or nothing to raise the level of the debate beyond shallow scare tactics. I suspect that the real reasons for the war are well known to the Kerry's and Kennedy's of the world and that they silently went along with the use of our military to secure control over the unimaginably valuable oil reserves in the Gulf countries. A second answer to your question of why they lied when they knew they'd be found out is that I suspect they understand that the average American is Attention Deficit Disordered. We have short memories and we can be led around like sheep with the latest distraction and a rewriting of history. How many of us who once said that there were wmds and that was why we supported the war, now say that we support the war because we wanted to protect Iraqi women, or because we thought he might support terrorists, or because we needed to teach the other Arab countries a lesson, or because the Democrats screwed up somehow, or....? The unfortunate truth is that they are right; we bend over backwards to believe in our country and our Government, even when they are laughing at us for doing it. If you want a different view, however, take a look at what many smart Europeans have been saying from the very inception of the Bush foreign policy doctrine and what they are saying now, including writers and politicians who have previously been our loudest and staunchest supporters. The fact is that the public statements of the Bush administration have never been consistent with the evidence or most of their actions. These are people who, whatever their motives, have proven over and over that they are incapable of deft governance in a complex and changing world. Simple solutions to complex problems may not be the best fixes. Being wrong is one thing, sending young men and women back home in body bags and leaving lives unlived, and lived lives with blackness in them, is another thing entirely. I won't forgive them for that, ever! Especially when not one of them, with the notable exception of Powell, ever showed any willingness or the courage to sacrifice their lives or the lives of their own when it was their time. We need to get some better brainpower and better understanding of these issues in place. It may not be Kerry, but it definitely isn't Cheney/Bush. It's time to kiss another frog and see if we get a prince. The last frog is giving us all warts.