PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: luckee on July 10, 2003, 09:33:43 AM
-
The U.S. administration has abruptly revised its explanation for invading Iraq, as Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asserted that a changed perspective after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks — not fresh evidence of banned weapons — provoked the war.
"The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq\'s pursuit of weapons of mass murder," Mr. Rumsfeld testified yesterday before the Senate armed services committee.
"We acted because we saw the evidence in a dramatic new light, through the prism of our experience on 9/11."
It was an about-face from a man who confidently proclaimed in January: "There\'s no doubt in my mind but that they [the Iraqi government] currently have chemical and biological weapons." (He was seconded in March by Vice-President Dick Cheney, who said of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein: "We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.")
And in London Thursday, the BBC reported senior British government sources saying that Whitehall had virtually ruled out finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which they now believe were destroyed or hidden permanently before the war began.
Mr. Rumsfeld\'s reversal came as the administration scrambled to defend itself from accusations that it deliberately used false or misleading information to bolster one of its primary justifications for the war.
On Monday, the White House acknowledged that U.S. President George W. Bush was wrong when he said in his State of the Union address in January that Iraq had recently tried to purchase large quantities of uranium from Africa to build nuclear weapons. He cited British intelligence reports of documents that purported to show an Iraqi attempt to buy a form of raw uranium known as yellowcake. The documents were later discredited as forgeries.
While the White House justified the invasion to topple Mr. Hussein on the ground that his biological, chemical and nuclear weapons posed a threat, no such arms have been uncovered in the 10 weeks since the war ended.
Mr. Bush unapologetically defended the war while in the middle of his five-day, visit to Africa.
"Saddam Hussein was a threat to world peace. And there\'s no doubt in my mind that the United States, along with allies and friends, did the right thing in removing him from power," he said yesterday at a joint news conference with South African President Thabo Mbeki.
Questioned for the first time about the uranium, he said: "There\'s going to be a lot of attempts to rewrite history. But I am absolutely confident in the decision I made."
White House officials said information that the documents may have been forged had not reached top-level policymakers before the public statements.
Mr. Rumsfeld said he found out "within recent days" that the information had been discredited, but he defended the U.S. intelligence throughout the Iraq conflict as "quite good" and said Iraq "had 12 years to conceal" weapons programs. "Uncovering those programs will take time," he said.
Several Democrats heightened calls for a full-scale investigation on whether intelligence was manipulated.
"It\'s bad enough that such a glaring blunder became part of the President\'s case for war," Senator Edward Kennedy said. "It\'s far worse if the case for war was made by deliberate deception. ... We cannot risk American lives based on shoddy intelligence or outright lies."
With U.S. and British forces facing almost daily assaults, he and other senators grilled Mr. Rumsfeld on whether more troops were needed in Iraq.
Mr. Rumsfeld told the committee that talks were under way to increase NATO involvement in Iraq peacekeeping efforts. He maintained that most of Iraq is safe after the war, with most of the recent attacks against U.S. and British forces concentrated in Baghdad and surrounding areas.
Mr. Kennedy expressed skepticism, saying he was "concerned that we have the world\'s best-trained soldiers serving as policemen in what seems to be a shooting gallery."
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030710.urums0710/BNStory/International/
-
I love the fact that Bush kept swearing that he had intelligence and proof that Saddam and his company was purchasing mass amounts of urmanium from Africa and now he turns about face and says it was a mistake, but that the is still sure that there are weapons of mass destruction.
In my opinion, this war was a whole blunder. They kept pushing that weapons of mass destruction would be found and yet none have been found. There is no smoking gun in Iraq and Bush knows this.
We lost American lives for nothing. Yeah, the Bush supporters will tell you that we went to liberate a country, but that is bullsh!t. There are many other countries that needed liberated before Iraq. Not to mention the idea of liberating Iraq did not come around until the American public realized that these so-called "weapons o mass destruction" may not be found.
-
THey are definitely backpedaling now. I am all for what we did, but I really am annoyed by what has transpired since the war. We have lost far more men since the war than during the war.
Every day I log on to MSNBC and it says two men dead. Hard to know if it\'s the same or new story.
Ugh.
-
They are new stories. During the ten weeks since the war has ended we have came under more attack than while the war was goin\'. And what do we have to show for it? Nothing. No weapons of mass destruction. No Saddam. No order in Iraq. Nothing.
-
how about a big fat round of: I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!
(not to sound offensive or anything...)
-
i would\'nt careless if the U.S invaded iraq coz saddam wiped his ass the wrong way. the way i see it, saddam was always a threat and it was about time he was taken careoff.
one more thing i\'d like to add like L-I-C said
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
During the ten weeks since the war has ended we have came under more attack than while the war was goin\'.
the reason for these attacks are to make the American soldiers leave iraq so i say why not listen to the iraqis demand and leave the country (ruined and all) let them kill each other and then when another ruthless regime takesover they\'ll come crawling back begging the U.S to rescue them.
-
Originally posted by Tyrant
the reason for these attacks are to make the American soldiers leave iraq so i say why not listen to the iraqis demand and leave the country (ruined and all) let them kill each other and then when another ruthless regime takesover they\'ll come crawling back begging the U.S to rescue them.
that\'s exactly whty they\'re staying, if they\'d leave, all would be for nothing
-
Come on. They never begged us to go over there in the first place.
And this whole - let\'s not leave because the Iraqi\'s want us to. What the hell? It is their country. If they don\'t want us there, we shouldn\'t be there. I\'m sure if someone invaded us and destroyed our goverment, we wouldn\'t want them there.
I\'m surprised just how far Bush supporters will go to justify this war.
-
I agree, if the Iraqi\'s don\'t want us there. They should make them leave, and if they decide to wipe each other out then let them be. It\'s their mistake, it\'s their country, it\'s their problem.
The only reason I see the soldiers are being kept there is just to emphacize that the US isn\'t going to abandon them as they did with Afghanistan. I shouln\'t say US, I should say Bush and his friends.
-
It says a lot that someone so close to the situation feels exactly the opposite of the people who are furthest away.
And plotiepet, tyrant was being sarcastic.
-
The troops are going to have to stay there for a long time. That was one of the things many opponents said about this war. The war itself was short but it takes a while to build stable country.
I didn\'t agree with going into Iraq in the first place but now that we are there it would be worse for us to just (grab our oil and) go.
Anyone that was against attacking Iraq "For the good of the Iraqi people" should know that having troops there is the best thing for them until a policing body and judicial system can be implemented. Even though they are REALLY taking their time getting these things in place.
-
I\'m sure if someone invaded us and destroyed our goverment, we wouldn\'t want them there.
So your saying that you were ok with Saddam government right? A group that murders you and your family for wiping your ass the wrong way. Ok then, how bout you move to a country like Iraq was and see the torchure and inhumane lifestyles these people had to suffer. They didnt disserve that and what was done was very justified. So please dont b!tch about a war when it goes far beyond chemical weapons, it goes out to the cry\'s of the thousands of innocent people that were murdered under Saddams regime. It was the right thing to do, regardless if there are chemical weapons are not. You sit in the comfort and security of your own home, but you havent had to live like these people...you havent had to see what they have seen. So damnt, if we have to destroy one government to build a better one then we should do it...it\'s for the good of Iraq and for the good of the human race.
Most of the country wants America there, and wants help restructruing the government. Why cant we leave? Well we cant face another tyrant taking over, simple as that. Also, remember how Iraqis felt betrayed in the first Gulf War when American troops pulled out early...this is the same scenario, many in Iraq are real concerned that Saddam is still lingering around. I\'d like just as much as you for the millitary to come back home but they just cant simply do that.
-
thing is we don\'t stay, we\'ll get bad mouthed for leaving too early, I just about had it with the Middle East it seems to be becoming or has been a big waste of time and man power for ignorant hard lined son\'s of b*tches who in the next 1000 years we\'d be lucky to change 2-3 of their descendents views. I hate the fact that our men our over there, I support the ideals we went over for, but in the same respect it all seems like a huge big waste of time no matter where we go, name me 1 place in the past 15 years we\'ve gone and helped out that has done good, or for that matter turned out good in our favor??? I can\'t think of any, or I am just too tired to try.
-
Originally posted by politiepet
how about a big fat round of: I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!
(not to sound offensive or anything...)
I\'ll second that.
(to sound offensive ;) )
-
I think allied forces should pull out and forget about them.
We went into an un-justified war and killed more of our own than they did, finding nothing of importance along the way and they don\'t seem to want us there anyway, what a waste of time and $90b (or more) :rolleyes: .
Next time they want help in any way, f*ck the ungrateful sods, they\'ve got guns and seem to be able to help themselves.
-
WHo is "they"???? Most of the people want us there. Most of the people are happy that we are doing something about their country. It\'s just the vocal few with friggen guns and bombs that get heard.:banghead:
And no they can\'t help themselves. They tried that and thousands upon thousands were killed for trying.
-
WHo is "they"???? Most of the people want us there. Most of the people are happy that we are doing something about their country. It\'s just the vocal few with friggen guns and bombs that get heard.:banghead:
And no they can\'t help themselves. They tried that and thousands upon thousands were killed for trying.
-
With all the desire to question the government along with the arm chair politicians we have here, I sort of wish this country had a dictatorship. Personally I could care less about the living conditions of Iraqi\'s, people in the UK or the rest of the world for that matter.
Call me selfish, ignorant, whatever... all that matters to me is the safety of the US and all those that reside in this country. Destroying Saddams regime was in the best interest of THIS country. It has nothing to do with being patriotic, rather it is self preservation in a sense. 9/11 was reason enough to go after Iraq and I still find it reason enough to go after Iran and N. Korea.
This global idea of a utopian society is a farce. In our lifetimes we will never see a world without war, famine, genocide, etc... One question I have for those that say other countries were more deserving of liberation than Iraq... name them and describe the reason as to why it would be in the United States best interest to do so. As much as some would like to believe that the US is the well of plenty and should help all underdeveloped nations, I totally disagree. Unless it servers our interest, to hell with them.
In some respects I agree with those that say we have problems here we should address, but at the same time we should also deal with external threats whether it be through preemptive means or just keeping a watchful eye.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Call me selfish, ignorant, whatever... all that matters to me is the safety of the US and all those that reside in this country. Destroying Saddams regime was in the best interest of THIS country. It has nothing to do with being patriotic, rather it is self preservation in a sense. 9/11 was reason enough to go after Iraq and I still find it reason enough to go after Iran and N. Korea.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Green Meanie
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Nice reply... figures... :rolleyes:
-
I hate to be the one to break it to you but, you\'re nuts.
I won\'t even outline my reasons, we had enough arguments about it whilst the blinding power of American sunlight stormed Iraq and blew everything up!
I just think you need to get with the real world, it\'s not a nice place, never will be, but that doesn\'t mean you can just re-shape it to your liking.
-
Originally posted by Green Meanie
I hate to be the one to break it to you but, you\'re nuts.
I won\'t even outline my reasons, we had enough arguments about it whilst the blinding power of American sunlight stormed Iraq and blew everything up!
I just think you need to get with the real world, it\'s not a nice place, never will be, but that doesn\'t mean you can just re-shape it to your liking.
How ironic... from my perspective you are not living in the real world. My question is why do you care about a war that has already happened and hasn\'t affected you in a negative way at all? Are you saying Saddam and his regime were not a threat or a future threat to Western society (not to mention Iraqs neighbors)? The policy of appeasement doesn\'t work and citizens in the UK should know this most of all.
-
Saddam wasn\'t a threat, he was contained until we could clean him out of any non-existent WMD.
I care now because I\'m sick of the powers that be taking us voters to be stupid, it seem like we only matter around election time. We WILL matter around election time next go round.
He wasn\'t a threat to his neighbours until we gave him reason, then he threw over a few decade old missiles before doing what we all knew he\'d do, disappear underground as harmless as a baby, like he was when we knew where he was.
You\'ll come back at me with the humanitarian thing, but why wasn\'t somthing done in \'96 (I think it was \'96 the last horror of his).
This argument will run and run, the only thing that will satisfy me will be the end of GWB and Blairs careers and an investigation into the farce behind intelligence.
-
Saddam wasn\'t a threat? Tell that to Kuwait, Iran and Israel.
Sorry to break it to you Green, but voters like you won\'t matter... Radical leftists rarely matter in democratic elections.
As for the humanitarian issue, no I won\'t even bring it up as I don\'t care, but since you bring up 1996 - ask Clinton, who most of the anti Bush people seem to idolize.
You are right about this argument, it will run and run, but the only outcome will be the continued whining from the anti US/anti Bush/Blair camp.
-
:banghead:
So far in a poll on the BBC news website this is how it\'s going,
VOTE RESULTS
WMD evidence: Time for an independent inquiry?
Yes
87%
No
13%
21084 Votes Cast
Link - http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/default.stm?displayresult=1&subject=141671&profile=iraq&category=news&ref=%2F1%2Fhi%2Ftalking_point%2Fdefault.stm&choice=1
I think we can matter, we just need a poll like this on the other aspects of this whole sorry mess.
I\'ll pass the baton to someone who thinks this argument is worthwhile. We can do nothing but wait for the outcome and may as well hold our opinions back.
Edit: If you feel like voting you\'ll need to go to the front page and select \'Have your say\', it should be in the same place but with tick-boxes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news
Actually, no you don\'t, I\'ve just spotted that they\'ve moved it to the front page.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Saddam wasn\'t a threat? Tell that to Kuwait, Iran and Israel.
Sorry to break it to you Green, but voters like you won\'t matter... Radical leftists rarely matter in democratic elections.
As for the humanitarian issue, no I won\'t even bring it up as I don\'t care, but since you bring up 1996 - ask Clinton, who most of the anti Bush people seem to idolize.
You are right about this argument, it will run and run, but the only outcome will be the continued whining from the anti US/anti Bush/Blair camp.
Didn\'t you say that the reason for this war was for the US OWN interest, and the hell with the rest? So, in other words if this war was to get rid of the threat to Iran, Kuwait, and Israel. Which of course you said they didn\'t matter. Why do they matter? What are we going to get from them? Money, power, oil....?
So this war was fought just b/c it was to our best interest? For 9/11? But Kuwait, Iran, and Israel had nothing to do with 9/11 and they didn\'t help at all. So why did we help them? Was it really for 9/11 that this war was fought?
Anyways, it\'s funny how people change huh? I said it once already but like we all know, 9/11 was no excuse for this war. They focused on the WMD issue. They forged that into our heads and the rest of the world. The 9/11 war was fought in Afghanistan. As I recall Laden was never captured, killed, or anything. How can this war in Iraq be to get rid of terrorism when the first war to ger rid of the terrorist that caused all this mess isn\'t over?
-
Who cares about an inquiry? Why shouldn\'t they have one? Nothing has turned up yet so why not start one? That doesn\'t tell me a darn thing.
Nevermind. These threads are useless.
-
Originally posted by Living-In-Clip
Come on. They never begged us to go over there in the first place.
that\'s because they couldn\'t...
Why are people still debating about this. What came out of the war? A country freed from a guy with a golden shitter. He imprisoned children because they wouldn\'t join his politcal party, come on.
But I agree we should pull out of Iraq, see how things turn out too.
-
Months before the war strarted I talked with my father about it, being the wise man he is (and a war veteran) he said if they go in there they would lose 1 man a day. So far his words are correct. Hopefully it wont get as bad as Vietnam where they lost 50 a day
Tell me, do you feel safer?
You freed the Iraq people? Only to let them be ruled by Religious extremists? To live in a lawless city? To have all thier belongings looted? To have friends or family killed?
-
Give me a break. They are not free. They are just under a new oppression. One lead by the US goverment.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/sprj.irq.wmdspeech/index.html
I wonder what else was a mistake on the president\'s speech?
-
This is an anti Bush/anti American crusade that is getting way too much attention. Notice I said anti American and not unAmerican for those who continue to rant over this technicality and are US citizens. So what if the CIA was wrong in their intelligence regarding the supposed Iraqi attempt to acquire "yellow cake" in Africa? Its not like they haven\'t been before.
The point is Saddam Hussein\'s regime was a threat to this country and would have been a bigger one in the future. I have seen some discussion of N. Korea here, but not nearly as much as post Saddam Iraq. I surprises me that we don\'t put our effort into discussing a more critical problem rather than debate the finer points of a war that is over.
SirMisty, try reading what I post before replying. Israel and Iran should have helped? The Iran Iraq war happend in the 80\'s and Israel was attacked during the Gulf War. If you knew even the slightest thing about the Middle East you would know Israel couldn\'t help without drawing other Arab countries into any conflict against Iraq. Kuwait lent its support as a launching point for this past war.
The US has the right to strike any threat as they see fit post 9/11. This goes back to what was debated prior to the war. Is it going to take a mushroom cloud over a US city or the the spread of some biochemical weapon to get some of you to realize that hindsight is 20/20?
The US government oppressors? That is the prime example of an anti American attitude. Our government is no where near perfect, but to label it as oppressive is wrong. Maybe its the so called "Green" party members here... I dunno... If some of you hate the policies of this country, can\'t find work, etc... just leave.
That being said, is there a point in which we US citizens will feel safe from terror or unstable 3rd world countries? I wish I knew... but to put the blame for the unstable situations in the world on the shoulders of the President is myopic. Why not blame the people who actually carry out these crimes against civilization. Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden, the government of N. Korea? It still leaves me stunned when I see Americans and EU citizens state that Bush is a bigger threat to our civilization than the previously mentioned group.
-
I just want to know how Saddam was a threat when we can\'t find any weapons to threaten us.
Face it, this war was based on a lie that the President told us American\'s.
People cry about Clinton lying about Monica and a blowjob. Yet, when the President lie\'s to support his own war, it\'s A-OK.
And I\'ll say it once more. The only threat to America is George W. Bush! He is the only one who sent soliders over to get killed. Saddam didn\'t come over here and kill our soliders. Saddam didn\'t run UN inspectors out. Instead, he let them look around. Bush was the one who ignored inspectors and the UN. He is the one who led this crusade for a "smoking gun" and he is the one who is backtracking now that nothing has been found and things are leaking out about his lies.
-
Gimme a break, you can\'t defeat terrosism by fighting wars, You can defeat terrosim by increasing security. This war was just a bunch of bullcrap, our current govermants a joke.
-
The U.S. does have the right at anything that may be a threat. It doesn\'t give it the right though to lie about it in order to get support.
That\'s not the point Giga. You said that the US doesn\'t give a damn about anyone else, except it\'s own interest. I shouln\'t even say US b/c it\'s just Bush and his government. If that\'s true Giga, then instead of saying to the world it\'s trying to rid the WORLD from threats and terrorism. They should say they\'re trying to rid the WORLD of the threats and terrorist against the US. I don\'t hate the Policies of this country, I hate the policies that Bush has implemented. I hate the fact that he has shown his true face, yet people still support him. Why? Im not sure, it might have to do with the fact that since 9/11, being against Bush is Anti-american. Sure, we can blame Saddam, Laden, and the governent of N.K. We already blamed Saddam, none of the nukes that the world was hoping for were found. What happened to them? For all we know he could have sold them to some other terrorist group. Does Bush care about that? No, as long as Hussain is out of power. We all hate Laden, but where is he? Is HIS threat really over? Aren\'t people already bitching at NK for what they\'re saying? Bush, isn\'t doing anything about that. He decided to have peace and trust instead of facing the threat. People say that NK is just bluffing, there is no way in hell we can be sure.
Why not blame Bush? Sure, It\'s all good he decided to attack Afghanistan. But everything else going on in this country is because of him. If it isn\'t then he isn\'t doing his job. It\'s his job to keep this country straight. If it isn\'t, he is the boss, he gets the blame.
-
This war was nothing more than to prove that we aren\'t going to take any bullshit post 9-11 and countries harboring known terrorists are going to get pounded. The WMD was obviously something that they thought they could use to get in there and it worked.
Thre were known terrorist camps in Iraq and we found them and destroyed them. Well I should say we have found some. WHo knows how many there are.
Countries will think long and hard about harboring known terrorist groups now. And if you think that\'s not true then why did Syberia send the Hussein boys back into Iraq when they made it across the border?
Nevermind. This thread is still useless.
-
yet you keep comming back........
-
Originally posted by videoholic
This war was nothing more than to prove that we aren\'t going to take any bullshit post 9-11 and countries harboring known terrorists are going to get pounded. The WMD was obviously something that they thought they could use to get in there and it worked.
Thre were known terrorist camps in Iraq and we found them and destroyed them. Well I should say we have found some. WHo knows how many there are.
Countries will think long and hard about harboring known terrorist groups now. And if you think that\'s not true then why did Syberia send the Hussein boys back into Iraq when they made it across the border?
Nevermind. This thread is still useless.
Maybe b/c they feared gettting bombed and destroyed just like Iraq?
-
Exactly.
-
SirMystiq
..... what the hell are you doing
-
Originally posted by ViVi
SirMystiq
..... what the hell are you doing
Attempting to swim up a waterfall methinks!!
:banghead:
-
Originally posted by Green Meanie
Attempting to swim up a waterfall methinks!!
:banghead:
^^^ :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
-
Oh and one more thing.
17 Standing ovations!!!
Do you wanna keep Mr Blair on your side of the pond, we don\'t want him any more.
:wave:
-
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/07/18/uk.kelly/index.html
And so the plot thickens.
-
Hmmm, this is incredibly suspicious.
Suicide? Shot himself in the head eight times maybe.
-
I bet 10 bux on assassination!
-
It\'s incredibly suspicious, I didn\'t really think our government would go in for that sort of thing, I thought it was only places like Russia that got away with it.
Remember the Kursk, the frantic parent and the syringe?
Edit : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/894597.stm
Apparently he wasn\'t used to the limelight, wouldn\'t make me kill myself as was being reported on the TV at lunchtime.