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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (756757)	1/13/2007 11:11:28 AM
From: BEEF JERKEY	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"So, if you thought that Bush was shortsighted about going into Iraq, then how come you didn't post your comment at the beginning of the war?" Actually I was was probably slightly in favor of the Iraqi war at first. Although I am not a fan of War in principle - It kills and destroys nations - I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed the TV the first Gulf war provided and I was glued to CNN in 1991. Obviously we were in the right in that war and had also been in the right going after the terrorists in Afghanistan. Also I trusted the reasons for going to War a second time with Saddam. If you recall Rice for instance stated that if we didn't remove Saddam there would be "mushroom clouds". I often watch "Meet the Press" and Cheney repeated that Atta had met with Iraqi security agents linking Saddam and 9/11 in my mind. He also asserted that Saddam had mobile chemical labs as a hard FACT. Otherwise the whole "imminent nuclear Iraq/yellow-cake" story was pushed pretty hard by Bush and Powell. I honestly thought Iraq was a vipers nest of WMD's. Also I assumed due to the light force being sent in it would be a cake walk. I don't meet with the head of the CIA everyday so I took them at their word. However a few things have occurred and a few facts surfaced since back when the Iraq war was originally "sold". Briefly there were no WMDs, no nuclear program, no mobile chemical labs etc. Sources for a lot of this information were "manufactured" for instance it was revealed that an alcoholic relative of Chalibi no less was the key source! It has become common knowledge that immediately after 9/11 there was a "get Saddam" mentality at the White House. Now Looking back why? Bin Laden was in Afganistan. In retrospect it seems to me that they might have well as gone after Japan or Germany because they were once our great foes. Cheney, who it has been revealed has enormous influence, obviously always thought they should have gone all the way to Baghdad in 1991 but using 9/11 as an excuse to re-fight a war 12 years later is a bit pathetic. I and most of the American people could have probably forgiven these lies if Iraq had gone well but it hasn't. It is now PAINFULLY APPARENT these guys didn't know which end is up before going into Iraq and they still don't. Iraq is a quagmire that is making the US look like a its being run by nincompoops. Of all the dumb things about the situation in Iraq is that we have spent 2 trillion dollars STRENGTHENING IRAN'S position in the Middle East. Bush has just realized that, after 4 years, and has now sent a carrier battle group to the Gulf. The problem is that Iraq is the problem and whats making Iran stronger not the gulf. Bush and Cheney's heads are obviously full of neo-con catch phrases and concepts rather than any thing approaching reality. For instance Maliki doesn't buy into this troop surge for even one second - EVEN I KNOW THAT - yet Bush appears not to realize it. I am in pain over the mess in Iraq and that is why I bitch - I am thoroughly disappointed in Bush. The good thing is that this non-reality based neo-con crap way of thinking will soon be buried by the American public for a long time to come.