Wolfowitz is either a liar, an idiot or both...

\'The Guardian\' article...

...and you all that chappy was a wacky funster for suggesting Goerings quote was way out of line...

We are now closer to fascism than we have ever been....you righties happy now?

BTW....Pmartin.....WHERE IS THE PUDDING!?

54 days and counting - where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction that posed such a threat to us? What a sick joke this administration has made of foreign policy! I remember when Ronald Reagan was called the Teflon president - Bill Clinton certainly survived some really dumb decisions - but I have a feeling that GW may be able to teach them both some lessons.

The Guardian Unlimited? Geez you guys will believe anyone. Its all about context.

I am just guessing here but I think the "swimming in a sea of oil" quote may have related to the money Sadam was able to generate to promote his brutal dictatorship and finance terror. I almost hate to say it but this is so party-line that it is beneath both of you...Go to your rooms and get your fly rods! And for heaven's sake stay away from those bongs. geeeeez

So Racerdan, what is the context that I should look at? Secretary of State Powell went to the UN and stated that we knew Iraq had WMD. If we knew, why haven't we found credible evidence of their existence? Don't get me wrong, Sadaam Hussein was/is a monster, him being out of power is a good thing. I believe however, that we were lied to either consciously or by really sloppy intellegence work - and I am mad about that. Brave US Soldiers have died in the name of that lie and continue to die even today. I'm old enough to remember the term credibility gap back in the Vietnam era. When our Government lies to us a little piece of what makes this Country great is killed and those who believe that our system of representative democracy is a sham gain more power. That's a damn shame.

grandpa-

Your continued attempts at discrediting the direct quotes from Wolfowitz in the article by casting aspersions on me shows that you have absolutely no counter point, other than spin of course. Discredit the thread by discrediting me, eh? Nice tactic....haven't I seen that somewhere before?

If you could find a way to work the Cheech and Chong references in there so that they were actually humorous, slightly amusing even we'd get along much better....

If you have a couple of more sources than ill take what they say(see above) seriously. Untill then its just left wing spin as far as im concerned. And no im not a republican.

My counterpoint h2o is that you are simply a parrot for the party line...the NO WMDs FOUND deal is all over the news every day coming from partisan Democrats seeking the achilles heal to nail Bush on something..very lame indeed. The quotes you are hanging your hat on are snippets completely out of context taken out to try to make it appear that the real reason we invaded Iraq was so we could steal their oil. Not a bad idea actually...maybe we can take over Saudi Arabia next and dry up some of this oil money going to the potentates and bring it back here to give away to the homeless ...We could buy tanker loads of MD 20/20....give health insurance to everyone free...houses free...entitlements for everyone!! Except those rich bazterds...of course.

It really wouldn't make any difference what the "reason" was we went to Iraq..you would rail against it as you are anti-Bush and that is your mission...very transparent this time. What else was it? Oh yeah Facists now too....like HItler. Mussolini...boy I think you really have it all figured out.

Not about fish?

...i hope you're happy in whatever world you live in...

...and your party line isn't to play down the deception/intelligence ineptitude involving the 'selling' of the war to the American people? To play down the fact that the only justification the Bush administration had for going to war was WMD and 'ties to Al Qaeda'...?



Pretend for a minute that you don't know I think Bush is a...censors self...ahem...less than spectacular intellectual specimen.

If I asked you before the war why we went to war with Iraq, might not the first things you said be WMD and Al Qaeda? I don't want to search out the thread and get into qouting war or anything, but didn't we discuss this pretty much before the war started? Weren't these the primary reasons for going to war?

I mean for like three months they just drilled the same mantra over and over again into the American peoples heads via the media...you know, the 'liberal media'...WMD, Al Qaeda, WMD, Al Qaeda...ad infinitum, ad nauseum, yada, yada, yada...

That their justifications turned out to be unfounded doesn't mean anything to you?

I'm betting that because of the relative ease with which we accomplished the mission in Iraq that most people flat just don't care or won't remember.

I think the Bush administration is hoping that most Americans are just as quick to forget. All the better to rely on a convention in NYC...I'm telling you right now I'll bet every penny I have (currently $1.31 cents) that when the balloons fall, there will be at least three firefighters within ten feet of Dubya...any takers?

" NO WMDs FOUND deal is all over the news every day coming from partisan Democrats"


Right...who else is going to talk about it? Bush??

I can see it now....

(Doing worst Fonzie impression ever...) I was wr, wr, wrrrrr....I was wrrrrrrrrrr...We were wrr, wr

So your a Bush hater, so what, you think your special? I personally think hes a decent man, although i dont agree with alot of his views, that doesent make me special does it? Besides this is a fishing forum. Why dont you write a op-ed piece to your local paper.

First, I do not side with either party...... They are all a bunch of lying, self-serving jerkoffs....

Now concerning the above quote. Are some of you really that stupid? How many months were we trying to get the war approved by the UN? Do we really think Saddam was so stupid as to not know that war was inevitable? That he would not get rid of them before he got caught with them?
And you, Steelhead (wonder why you have that name? LOL), We could have gotten their oil by simply selling the UN a story about how he was compliant, then get the oil export ban lifted, then make an under-the-table deal with him to get the exclusive on that oil.....
You want to tell me the war was to keep the $Zillions$ flowing to the arms makers, then I would buy that one (Let's see.... $1,000,000.00 for each Cruise missle..Hmmm).
But the rhetoric of war for oil is BS.... If it were, then I guess we would kick their ass and take the oil fields. Maybe they will go conquer Mexico next? They have more oil than most mideast countries....

You liberals crack me up........ Go get your Fly-rod and chill out!

I didn't hear any of the same things from either one of you in any of the ra-ra posts that were pro-war.

BTW...where I come from someone that is 'special' rode the short bus to school.

This where anyone who doesn't understand that NFR means 'NOT FISHING RELATED' belongs, therefore you might not want to click on them moving forward. A good logical conclusion to draw from seeing those letters next to a thread is that if you click on it, you might see something that is not related to fishing.

Hope that helps.

There is a bill in congress right now that is attempting to do precisely that. At the risk of taking this off topic, there was a measure introduced by the republicans just this past month that ties reform of immigration laws regarding Mexaco to allowing US oil companies to buy shares in Pemex, despite Mexico not wanting to sell. So you could say that we are trying to do just exactly what you suggest. We're just using blackmail rather than bombs.


The story can be seen here.

I believe they would prefer you call it 'diplomacy'....

....HA!

Next weeks headline in the GA:

Alein gives birth to Elvis look alike, father believed to be Michael Jackson!

October 1998: Senate Democrats Signed Letter

Urging Clinton to Attack Saddam Over WMDs!

June 5, 2003

Before you even read this piece, I want you to open a new e-mail and send the link to everyone in your address book. Yes, it's that big - and it's the kind of news you never would have heard about without the so-called new media. I've posted here a letter from the Senate Committee on Armed Services to President Bill Clinton on October 9, 1998. It reminds the president of the February resolution authorizing military force if Saddam failed to comply with UN Security Council resolutions "concerning the disclosure and destruction of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

The letter concludes: "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." You can see who signed the letter in the attacked copy, but among them are the following Senate Democrats: Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry.

I guess this letter has to be a forgery - either that or the senators who signed the letter must be lying because Clinton wanted to bomb Iraq to distract from impeachment. If you liberals are to be consistent on this, that's what you have to say. This letter doesn't leave a grain of doubt (neither do Clinton's speeches from the era, which we've posted here), as to whether or not Saddam had and sought these weapons. Many of these same people are out there mindlessly parroting the mantra that President Bush lied about WMDs, made up intelligence data and dragged the nation into war under false pretenses.

Yet they are on record urging the use of force based on what? The very intelligence data they now say is total B.S. manufactured by the White House! Not one of them called it a fake at the time. In fact, they were ready to go to war because the information on Saddam's weapons scared the quorum out of them. You would not be told this before the EIB Network came along, and started doing the job the mainstream press used to do in the old days. The left thinks they can still get away with burying the past and changing what they believe from one day to the next, because they have all the news sources in their back pocket. But they can't - not anymore, not with us here.

Well, it IS NOT the same as going to war, now is it?!
I think we should get some of their oil, as we seem to have no problem supporting 1/4 of their population in this country. We should get something from them for that......... If any other country were to take over a state the way that they have California (42% of Ca. population is now Mexican), we WOULD go to war. My point was exactly what you support (not intentially I assume), that we could have done it "diplomatically" if we had wanted. I myself think it was all about Arms sales and keeping that machine alive and well, and also to support Israel by making a point that "we can kick the arse of mideast countries if we want to". Notice how all the Arab countires are now so willing to talk and the Israelis and Palestinians are making progress???? Did the kicking of Iraqs butt have any thing to do with that...... You bet it did.

MC

Grandpa - I think the heat and the blazing speed of your new internet connection has given you heat stroke. This really must be a big deal and a large potential liability for the GOP if Rush and his EIB network is dredging this up. A letter written 5 years ago is not particularly germane to the discussion at hand. Certainly in my industry (technology) 5 years is a lifetime. Have things changed in your life over the last 5 years? Has the Political climate and the World changed in the last 5 years? How are we to know that Sadaam didn't buckle under the pressure from Bill Clinton and destroy his WMD at that time? BTW, that is more of a rhetorical question, I am not suggesting that actually happened, just trying to illustrate that 5 years is a long time.

My issues are this:

1. President Bush used the WMD arguement as his centerpiece for going to war. As a result of that, and the fact that WMD's have not been found, we are letting our staunchest ally - Tony Blair - slowly twist in the wind and right now we need every friend that we can get.

2. If President Bush chose other reasons for selling this war to the American public, I could have gone along with them. Some that I would not: "We need to free the Iraqi people from this brutal dictator" This is a nice, feel good arguement, but there are (unfortunately) even more brutal dictators in the world causing more heartbreak and misery to their people.

"There is a tangible link between Sadaam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks" Even GW couldn't sell this one.

"We need to have regime change in Iraq" - This one gets closer to something I can support, but has one big problem. Once we legitimize regime change as a reason for going to war - the genie is out of the bottle. My guess is that there are several countries that have the willingness although thankfully not the means to execute regime change in the US.

Finally, one reason that I could have absolutely supported. "We need to show the Islamic Extremists that we are not cowed by their actions. We shall go into a large Arab nation and show them that we are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." I truly wish that GW had used this logic. I believe the American people would have supported him. His seemingly bogus arguement about WMD reminds me of the Democrat's scare tactics over Social Security. Play on someones fear and you will gain their support. Certainly intellectually dishonest and maybe even more sinister than that. I find it hard to believe that intellegent, clear thinking people such as yourself bought the WMD arguement in the first place. I believed then, and I believe now, that North Korea still offers the greater threat. Even more so now that we have announced a pullout from the DMZ in Korea.

So, a long winded post - but serious none the less. My intention is to try and let you know that even though I am a liberal and I generally vote Democrat, I love my country and am very concerned about what I consider bogus arguements for going to war. It's probably even money that Blair will lose his job over this. And, like the boy that cried "Wolf", GW's credibilty and by extension the credibility of the US has suffered a very damaging blow.

Having said all this, if WMD are found in Iraq, I shall post here that I was wrong. Hell, I might even vote for the son of a buck in 2004!

Take care my friend, catch some fish, and keep cool.