|
its official....no WMDs in Iraq (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by tw1tch
What about BLTs? |
I want some BLT now :p mmmmmm yummy bacon lettuce and tomato :D |
|
|
| loca |
| quote: | Originally posted by starsearcher
Funding for terrorism, and such is another reason... |
I may be wrong but i do believe there are people in many different countries (yes, even in the *omg* USA) who fund terrorism... Is Mr. Bush going to bomb them all? |
|
|
| Pettiscool |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
Imagine the potential transfomation of an entire continent if the U.S. spent a fraction of the money they did on Iraq to help control the AIDS and malaria epidemics and civil unrest in Africa. |
+1
too much wasted money on b.s. |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by loca
I may be wrong but i do believe there are people in many different countries (yes, even in the *omg* USA) who fund terrorism... Is Mr. Bush going to bomb them all? |
Hey I'm just answering his question...don't shoot the messenger :p
Well Saddam was quite open about giving $25,000 US to families of (for example) Palestinian suicide bombers as a reward for their actions (don't shoot the messenger again...I'm just suggesting...) |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by Pettiscool
+1
too much wasted money on b.s. |
See that's where you're wrong...this money isn't wasted cause...are you ready?...(and i'm sure you've heard this many many times...)
WAR IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS! ;) |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by dEsidEL
there were other reasons ? |
Sure. A base region of US-influenced stability in a region that is responsible for the success of global economic development. |
|
|
| MarkT |
^^^ very true...extended wartime = stimulated economy (AFAIK)
RJ...WMD may not be the ONLY reason they invaded (in fact, it's not even a "real" reason that they invaded)...but it most certainly was the main reaason that the administration used to "sell" this war to Americans (to ensure public support), to their own gov't (to secure funding), and to the world/U.N. (to drum up int'l support).
the fact that WMD were not found undermines their entire position...regardless of other, more peripheral, reasons for going.
so either:
1. The Bush administration outright LIED to everyone.
2. They genuinely "thought" there were WMD, and they're are none...and then I think the U.S. gov't should be found LIABLE for an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation (although the continued mess there will be "punishment" enough to make them think twice before doing something so f***ing stupid again).
3. They thought there were WMD, and Iraq hid/got rid of them. In which case, the U.S. gov't still looks foolish and should be "on the hook" for their invasion.
any way you look at it...they f'd up LARGE...and any future similar scenarios, however legit on the surface (eg. Iran, N. Korea, etc) is going to require MUCH more "proof" before the U.N. or int'l community is going to pay attention or support the U.S.
That Bush has been re-elected, despite this fiasco, is truly disconcerting.. |
|
|
| Funkyfun |
| quote: | Originally posted by starsearcher
Funding for terrorism, and such is another reason... |
Or maybe to speed up the economic recovery, that was nowhere close to their liking, by offering bizness oppurtunities to american corporates ONLY....:whip: |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
but it most certainly was the main reaason that the administration used to "sell" this war to Americans (to ensure public support), to their own gov't (to secure funding), and to the world/U.N. (to drum up int'l support). |
It's called politics my friend.
Bush explained the ~real~ reason (regional stability) to the leaders when he was trying to get support (France/Russia didn't care because they were already ignoring the embargos on oil sales and knew that a US-based stability in Iraq would cause them to loose business [$] and thus they drumed up non-support to keep their oil contracts).
Unfortunately most of the world (people in the world) don't think "big" enough to understand what solid, rooted stability in Iraq (mid-east) means. If they did, this "no WMD" news wouldn't be news to begin with, because people would have already extrapolated what an Iraq without Sadam, with a democratic gov't, means to economic stability.
WMD was a part of many reasons to get a democratic stable country in the mid-east. Was it the only reason? No. What it the most important reason? No. But it was the reason that most of the world would easily digest and understand. |
|
|
| loca |
| quote: | Originally posted by muzzybear
Ha ha.. this is silly, but I am Cleopatra, Queen of da Niall (my husband's name is Niall)!! :D |
Hahahaha i totally didn't see that until now! That's hilarious :stongue: :tongue2 |
|
|
| loca |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
^^^ very true...extended wartime = stimulated economy (AFAIK)
RJ...WMD may not be the ONLY reason they invaded (in fact, it's not even a "real" reason that they invaded)...but it most certainly was the main reaason that the administration used to "sell" this war to Americans (to ensure public support), to their own gov't (to secure funding), and to the world/U.N. (to drum up int'l support).
the fact that WMD were not found undermines their entire position...regardless of other, more peripheral, reasons for going.
so either:
1. The Bush administration outright LIED to everyone.
2. They genuinely "thought" there were WMD, and they're are none...and then I think the U.S. gov't should be found LIABLE for an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation (although the continued mess there will be "punishment" enough to make them think twice before doing something so f***ing stupid again).
3. They thought there were WMD, and Iraq hid/got rid of them. In which case, the U.S. gov't still looks foolish and should be "on the hook" for their invasion.
any way you look at it...they f'd up LARGE...and any future similar scenarios, however legit on the surface (eg. Iran, N. Korea, etc) is going to require MUCH more "proof" before the U.N. or int'l community is going to pay attention or support the U.S.
That Bush has been re-elected, despite this fiasco, is truly disconcerting.. |
I believe the first point you made was the right one. There _were_ no WMDs. I don't think Iraq was able to hide/get rid of them. All i think is Mr. Bush decided to finish what daddy had started but didn't get a chance to end.
(just my opinion though :D) |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
That isn't the only reason why Iraq was invaded. |
cause his daddy told him to |
|
|
|
|
