News Flash: No Wmd In Iraq

[PLATO]

Re: Re: Re: News Flash: No Wmd In Iraq

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Erm, please explain Mr. Powell's presentation to the UN, then. Or Mr. Bush's State of the Union address. Or the countless times Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, etc. went on the talkshow circuit and claimed that the war was precisely about all these things.

Powell was for international consumption. Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Rice were for domestic. Each had to play to the audience that they were addressing. There was enough evidence to suspect things in Iraq weren't quite right and the administration made the choice to run with it to accomplish their greater goals. Deception, stupidity, or just simply justification for an agenda? Each individual's political stance will determine the answer to that question. Probably a little of all of it.

[bipolarbear]

nor has the GOP or bush or kerry (was he anti war?)

Whne I was protesting Bush when he came to my area, a rude Bush supoorter (they were all quite rude actually, and that's just b/c I'm liberal, but b/c they were) after flipping me off told me that Kerry was pro-war, however, I think that was an earlier Kerry comment that he later flip flopped on.
Last time i heard, he was anti war.

[PLATO]

Re: Re: Re: News Flash: No Wmd In Iraq

Originally posted by MrFun

How come you never share whatever it is that you're smoking??

I didn't want to disappoint you. Besides, it comes from North Carolina, not Jamaica.

[MrFun]

Re: Re: Re: Re: News Flash: No Wmd In Iraq

Originally posted by PLATO


I didn't want to disappoint you. Besides, it comes from North Carolina, not Jamaica.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by bipolarbear

Whne I was protesting Bush when he came to my area, a rude Bush supoorter (they were all quite rude actually, and that's just b/c I'm liberal, but b/c they were) after flipping me off told me that Kerry was pro-war, however, I think that was an earlier Kerry comment that he later flip flopped on.
Last time i heard, he was anti war.

Kerry's real position may never be know. It appears that he supported a military posture with hopes that it would not be used except as a last resort. In his opinion there were still options left. In the admins, there wasn't. I don't believe that he was as inconsistent in his thinking as he was in his his talking. However, I suppose, we judge the man on what he does and says, not what he is supposedly thinking.

[PLATO]

Re: Re: Re: News Flash: No Wmd In Iraq

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


Wow. Disconnect from reality and any sense of recent history much?

Not at all. I choose to look beyond the propoganda and look at the real issues and implications. The one thing that it appears the admin was successful on was concealing the real reason we are at war.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


really? so then what were the reasons for war, if it wasnt any of those? interesting that some in america are so blind to the obvious.

Blind to the obvious is an interesting phenomenon.

[PLATO]

Okay, now that I think I hit a reply to everybody, I will expand on my reasoning a bit.

US influence and economic power in the Middle East had been diminishing for close to a decade. While we saw some benefit from the coalition that "liberated" Kuwait. (I use liberated loosely since we restored an autocratic government). The overall influence of the US was beginning to be overshadowed by France, Germany, and Russia. (Funny how those are the ones that really opposed the war the strongest.). Iraq was rejoining the international economic community through back channels managed mainly by the French.

Iran was beginning to see more activity with French, Russian, German, and even British economic contacts. The Saudi's, while professing to be our friends, were following a decidely anti-American agenda and were financing it in other countries. Even Egypt was drifting farther from the US despite our annual $3 billion bribe. The US had politically isolated itself from Iraq, Iran, and to a large extent Pakistan. We had poor relations with Yemen. About the only countries in the Middle East that we could really count on were Kuwait, Bahrain, and to some large extent Qatar.

The new Russia combined with the old Europe was weakening the US ability to determine direction in a part of the world that was definately in our national interest (It really is all about the oil ).

With these factors in place, combined with an almost total lack of democracy in the region, set the stage for a US powerplay. We had the ability both militarily and politically to gain the foothold for a great experiment. Not only would we try to crush the anti-US elements and bring "friendly" democracies to power, but we would be able to drastically diminish our "allies" influence as well. We would be able to have a large US troop presence on the ground which is a major political influence for weaker countries. We would be able to reshape the economic picture once things settled down.

If the goal of the US President is to maintain US power in the world, then I submit that Bush persued that goal in the most expediant way possible. Weather or not it was the most prudent will be for the next generation to reflect back on and decide.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Blind to the obvious is an interesting phenomenon.

i agree.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


i agree.

Well we have to start somewhere don't we?

[Seeker]

"The one thing that it appears the admin was successful on was concealing the real reason we are at war."

i.e keeping christian zionist nutballs happy by taking out israels bogeyman "bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you" and all that bs.

when does the us get to see all that positive recriprocal crap out of the special relationship they (usa and israel) share?

EDIT: I hope you cant tell but im so ****ing trashed right now I just spent 80 dollars on rum and coke I even tried to karaoke in a bar ina hick southwestern ontario I just heard the worst ****in version of 'the day the music died' I EVER heard in my life it was like hell on earth ****in heelll on earth

EDIt EDIT there was this hottt blonde who got pawed by her ******* boyfriend and left the place she was hot but i'm glad she freed up the pool table

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by PLATO
Still dissapointed?

Yes, because your response indicated you didn't grasp the meaning of the original post...i.e., LoA was making a point that all those supposed reasons were obviously false, and we can prove that now by the lack of any substantiation for them.

That you found it "interesting" that so many people still seem to think those reasons were valid is interesting in itself. A tacit acknowledgement to the effectiveness of the administration's lie machine.

[self biased]

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PLATO
The war in Iraq was about two things:

1.) Political power (on a nation-state level), and
2.) Reshaping the face of the Middle East ( in the end analysis, #2 is the same as #1)

I am glad that you admit that the Bush admin were a dirty lying bunch, as we lefties long held.

The real reason is oil, though. The Middle East would be a nothing place, if not for the fact that it has oil, lots of oil.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
really? i dont think ned has realized yet . . . nor has the GOP or bush or kerry (was he anti war?)

Yeah, rank me right up there with the GOP, Bush and Kerry.