Kay's Senate Hearings on Weapons Inspections

[Ben Kenobi]

God that is lame.

No. If you are in charge of something you need to be decisive. Better to make a wrong decision, than to fret over whether you made the right one. You can't spend forever on your decisions, you need to pull the trigger.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos




WHAT in the last 3000 years makes you think this has ever or will ever be the case for people is such positions. That sure was a good one

Hope you are not a lawyer, military member, salesmen, or basically anyone who has to comvince someone to do anything. That basically leaves you a career as a steveador.

Excuse me dipsy doodle, but I am very good at convincing people.

Now, do you have anything other than the rhtorical equivalents of Potemkin villages? Cause up to this very day, I have not seen you say much of note, or of worth.

[Patroklos]

I wonder the same thing Che, why didn't all those rockets (that were operational) register on the media's radarscreen. And we are not talking about those morter rounds either.

Thats what I meant by the gun or the bullet. Not very hard to make a deady chemicals of biological agents. The thing that seperates the ametures from the pros is the delivery systems more complex than a water bottle and suicide bomber. Delivery is the HARD part as far as states are concerned (not AS true with nukes, but still aplicable).

So what I guess I am asking is do people even care that the legal code of the UN resolutions were broken intentionally and repeatedly, or do they just care that their niave limited information based concepts of what constitutes a WMD threat are not violated.

Honestly which would you rather see during Cold war disarmament? The Russians and Americans removing warheads or destroyng their billion dollar missiles? Which one did the weapon inspectors of the day care more about? Once you learn to make the stuff, and Iraq knew very well how to make two out the WMB trinity, the missiles and planes are alot harder to make and maintain.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


No. If you are in charge of something you need to be decisive. Better to make a wrong decision, than to fret over whether you made the right one. You can't spend forever on your decisions, you need to pull the trigger.

Ah, so for all your claims at higher ethics, you support lying and or fearmongering as a substitute for actual policy?

But you are right Ben, when women go to abortion clinics, why spend all that time waiting, they should get on with it and pull the trigger!

[Patroklos]

That is becasue you wouldn't recognize it.

[Ben Kenobi]

you support lying and or fearmongering as a substitute for actual policy?

Was the evidence at the time conclusive? Just because we know more now, is of little value, as hindsight is always 20/20. With inconclusive evidence, I can see why Bush would choose the route he has.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
That is becasue you wouldn't recognize it.

You post something that contains any wit, or any logic, and I will be more than glad to debate with it, but today I am in no mood to handle gnomes (you aren;t even a troll)

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Was the evidence at the time conclusive? Just because we know more now, is of little value, as hindsight is always 20/20. With inconclusive evidence, I can see why Bush would choose the route he has.

And the point, given that you obviously missed it by a mile, is that bush should have been a man and said "hey, the evidence is not conclusive, but as leader, I chose.." Instead, his admin lied about the evidence being conclusive, so that he could avoid the consequences of taking a real principled stand.

[Patroklos]

GePap is secure in his ridicule because he will NEVER have to make a decision more important than what he will eat for dinner.

Thank God.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
GePap is secure in his ridicule because he will NEVER have to make a decision more important than what he will eat for dinner.

Right, Herr Kommandant!

Don't worry, I won;t forget the little people on my way up....

[Ben Kenobi]

is that bush should have been a man and said "hey, the evidence is not conclusive, but as leader, I chose.."

Part of being a leader is that your subordinates need to trust you. You should not always need to explain all the doubts and fears behind the decision.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Patroklos
I wonder the same thing Che, why didn't all those rockets (that were operational) register on the media's radarscreen.

Then media is lazy. If no one's making an issue of something, they won't either. If viable delibery systerms were found, the Bush Administration would be making a great deal about it. Even as recently as last week Cheney was talking about having found the moble weapons labs, despite the fact that seven months ago they were proven not to be weapons labs but hydrogen manufacturing trucks for use in spotter balloons. If Cheney has to resort to lying, then one must assume that nothing more substantial has been discovered. All the Prez could say during his SotU was that Iraq had programs (which is iffy). Even the Right wing has resorted to saying the primary justification for the invasion was on humanitarian grounds. IIRC, weren't the rockets found by Blix's people before the invasion?

So what I guess I am asking is do people even care that the legal code of the UN resolutions were broken intentionally and repeatedly, or do they just care that their niave limited information based concepts of what constitutes a WMD threat are not violated.

Well, you can't really claim to be upholding the UN when you ignore the will of the UN so flagrantly. Nor can you claim to be supportive of the UN when you don't enforce resolutions equally (such as the resolutions regarding Israel).

Do people care that Iraq was violating the cease fire? I think if you could prove it was substantial and repetitive, and not the equivalent of a parking ticket, yes, I think people would care. There is a strong effort that Iraq complied, if somewhat unwillingly, with the inspection and destruction regime, but finally grew frustrated by the inspectors continued meddling in places they didn't belong. Especially once it came to light that the CIA was using the inspectors to spy on Iraq. Iraq should have made a case before the UN to have the problem inspectors removed (though I'm certain the Clinton Administration would have blocked it).

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Part of being a leader is that your subordinates need to trust you. You should not always need to explain all the doubts and fears behind the decision.

And once you've been shown to have been lying, you can never get the trust back again.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Part of being a leader is that your subordinates need to trust you. You should not always need to explain all the doubts and fears behind the decision.

Man, sheesh, you are a piece of work!

The citizentry is not the "subordinates" of the president, and neither is Congress.

You need not explain all doubts or fears, but you should be honest of the situation, which is what Bush FAILED TO DO. Is this clear enough, or do i need to use brail? Pictures?

[rah]

Originally posted by GePap


when ferrets troll!

How could Bush read other minds when he is so innept at using his own?

While one instinct tells me to show why all that rah just said above is meaningless and mindless, and the other part says-why waste your time? The "why waste time" part wins!

Because you can't. You don't have proof he lied. IT"S JUST YOUR OPINION BUT YOU STATE IT LIKE IT"S GOD GIVEN FACT> It isn't. He might have, but I'm willing to have doubt on whether the pres lied or not since unless he admits it, there is no way to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt. You have no doubt, which is laughable, like most of your arguement since most of them start with, BUSH LIED. Hell, in that other thread you linked it to ORIGINAL SIN. How pathetic is that?

That's why you will never accept proof on anything else that you might, "heaven forbid" be wrong about. You don't argue, you preach, based on things that require faith, not ultimate truth. Just like religion, not everyone has the same faith you have.