If no WMD found; will Bush be made out to be a liar?

[raghar]

Nobody with brain would believe to inteligence service.
This means... I listened in Kenedy's dead body wasn't breain. They said it was stolen. If B. would believe his inteligence service we should say his head is somewhat resistant to bulet's penetreation.

Conspiracy? IIRC Things on alt conspiration said he was moron and dumb , so no need for conspiracy.
Yes there was forget document, if you'd believed Iraq you'd know it was forget from start. And if responsible persons would use brain or eyes they could find it by themselves.

^_^

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Ned

That was the real reason for the invasion of Iraq as well.

Is this what you would have said before the war, that WMD weren't the 'real' reason? I'm sick of people suddenly saying when WMD aren't found that liberation was the main goal; it sounds like nothing more or less than backtracking to me.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Darius871
Um, Batista wasn't 'installed', he rose to power in Cuba decades after the war. Can you spell D-E-C-A-D-E-S?

Sure we supported Batista, so you're half right, but after the war (well, after the three military occupations to quell dissent in the decade after it) the Cuban government was relatively decent.

Relatively decent for wealthy mafiosos who spent their vacation in Cuban cabarets, not for the cuban people. If Batista was so good, why was there another revolution made to topple him??

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Master Zen


Relatively decent for wealthy mafiosos who spent their vacation in Cuban cabarets, not for the cuban people. If Batista was so good, why was there another revolution made to topple him??

When did I say Batista was good? I was talking about the governments between the end of the U.S.' last occupation and his coup. Also I don't even think they were 'good'; I said 'relatively decent', which means preferable to Spanish and U.S. military occupations, and preferable to many of the other Latin American regimes at the time.

[axi]

Ok all this conversation is quite witty and full of arguments, but I'm missing one thing: what's the point? As someone above has already mentioned, few people care if Bush has lied about Iraq. Those who are with him are with him and those who are against him, regardless of the lie. To me f.e.:
1) Possession of WMDs is no reason for invading a country.
2) A statesman who pursues such an invasion doesn't need to be proven a liar too, to make me despise him.

And I really feel that one can only support such a thing if one only has such material or ideological interests that wouldn't need a lie on top of them to stand.

As for the people who are too weak or scared to voice their own feelings on the matter, a lie can only help them feel better, but in the long run, it wouldn't affect their actions, simply because such people wouldn't ever take any action.

[Edan]

To me, a country that fails to abide by the conditions of a cease-fire agreement agreed to by both sides is a reason to war. (Not necessarily always a good one, but a reason)

[Darius871]

Originally posted by axi

Those who are with him are with him and those who are against him, regardless of the lie.

There still are millions of swing voters in the U.S. who would definitely take this into consideration in the next election. If WMD are found, then (whether fortunately or unfortunately) his reelection will be a lock. If they aren't, believe me when I tell you a lot of people in the center will vote against him that otherwise wouldn't have.

Originally posted by Edan
To me, a country that fails to abide by the conditions of a cease-fire agreement agreed to by both sides is a cause for war.

That's the case I wish they would have made all along, but we both know the American people wouldn't have supported a war unless they were convinced there was some sort of threat.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Master Zen


... and the installment of some equally brutal ones. Can you spell B-A-T-I-S-T-A?

Are you suggesting that Fidel is not just as brutal?

Cuba really has to get rid of this guy and perhaps actully become democratic and stable. The problem is, if he is overthrown, the guys who overthrown him will themselves, typically, rule as dictators. I have a feeling that the US simply has to get involved to guarantee democracy in Cuba.

[Master Zen]

I never said anything about Castro. I am talking about Bastista. Sorry to bust your bubble but claiming that the next guy is a dictator is no exucse to have supported the previous one.


Ned you seem to think that the US must be involved in everything up to what I must buy in the supermarket tomorrow. Sadly, you will find most people around don't think the same. It is unwise to think for people.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Master Zen
I never said anything about Castro. I am talking about Bastista. Sorry to bust your bubble but claiming that the next guy is a dictator is no exucse to have supported the previous one.


Ned you seem to think that the US must be involved in everything up to what I must buy in the supermarket tomorrow. Sadly, you will find most people around don't think the same. It is unwise to think for people.

What I see is one bad government after another in Latin America. I think we have to get more involved rather than less.

What did you think of our removing Noriega. He was our boy too. But we took care of him. We virutally did the same thing with Batista. We pulled the rug and virtually supported Castro in the end.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Ned


What I see is one bad government after another in Latin America. I think we have to get more involved rather than less.

You don't know squat about Latin America and this post just proved it. It doesn't matter what YOU see, or even what the US sees. What matters is what the Latin American people see and trust me, they don't want the US sticking its nose. You should actually visit and talk to people before assuming what is best for them.

What did you think of our removing Noriega. He was our boy too. But we took care of him. We virutally did the same thing with Batista. We pulled the rug and virtually supported Castro in the end.

Supported Castro??

yes, the embargo, the assasination attempts, bay of pigs... oooooh, thats what I call support!!!

[Ned]

Master Zen, you really do not know much about the history of those events. Castro, initially, was very popular in the US. What killed his popularity was the executions and the alliance with the USSR. He turned from a golden boy into a pariah overnight. None of this was necessary, of course. But he chose the path of brutal dictatorship on his own when he could have installed a liberal democracy. But such is history.

True, Kennedy tried to get rid of him, first with the Bay of Pigs and then with poison pens. But Castro got Kennedy first, didn't he?

[Sava]

OMG, you thread jacking bast4rds are arguing about Batista here too?

anyways, Ned, I also saw the photos of supposed "chemical weapons facilities" that looked like normal buildings with "chemical weapons" put in with photoshop... some 3D graphic of a hypothetical mobile weapons factory doesn't impress me. God knows the US has had a bazillion fricking satelites on Iraq, but yet all of a sudden, we can't find these weapons facilities? in the real world, this is what's known as BULLSH1T... but since you've been saturated with so much of it on FOXnews, I'm not surprised you don't know it when you see it.

[Edan]

anyways, Ned, I also saw the photos of supposed "chemical weapons facilities" that looked like normal buildings with "chemical weapons" put in with photoshop...

You think if the CIA is gunna make up falsified sattelite photos, they're gunn ause photoshop so you can tell?

. God knows the US has had a bazillion fricking satelites on Iraq, but yet all of a sudden, we can't find these weapons facilities? in the real world, this is what's known as BULLSH1T...

No, that is what is known as 20+ years of experience on the part of the Iraqis to hide this stuff so they don't have the same thing that happened the last time they openly displayed the stuff for all to see.

Thats why, after the first Gulf War, inspectors found three times as many weapons sites than they had originally suspected of being, and continued to find a lot more stuff after they thought they had uncovered nearly everything.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Ned
Master Zen, you really do not know much about the history of those events. Castro, initially, was very popular in the US. What killed his popularity was the executions and the alliance with the USSR. He turned from a golden boy into a pariah overnight. None of this was necessary, of course. But he chose the path of brutal dictatorship on his own when he could have installed a liberal democracy. But such is history.

And do you know why he allied with the USSR??? Yes, because he couldn't ally with the US. Why? BECAUSE THE US HATED HIM FROM THE START. Why? not because of executions but because of EXPROPRIATIONS, it's a big word, I know, in Cuba's case it means taking away the land of foreigners (i.e. US citizens) who had been given that land by the Batista ass-kissing regime.