A chronicle: Media question honesty of Bush administration

[Ornery]

"...how does that justify the U.S. killing and maiming thousands of innocent men, women, and children whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time?"

Nothing to justify. I doubt it could have been handled with less collateral damage. The blood is on his hands. First, he could have complied with the UN. Second, he could have given up the weapons and third, he could have ran off to Syria and lived out the remainder of his POS life while the civilians went about their business.

Edit: Good night, tomorrow's another day...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Sorry, in my book, two wrongs don't make a right. Yes, Hussein was scum, but how does that justify the U.S. killing and maiming thousands of innocent men, women, and children whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time? Saddam was evil, but his people paid the price. Even if the net effect is fewer Iraqi deaths over the next ten years, that blood is on our hands. Of course, if we can't stabilize the situation in Iraq and it degenerates into a civil war, there may be hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis.

Time was on our side. There was no imminent danger. There was no reason to rush to war. (IMO, of course.)

Flap...Flap...Flap go the gums.

Yeah - we just decided that since Saddam kills his own people then we should kill them too?

No blood is on our hands except the splatter of Saddam's regime. You people don't have any idea if there was immenent danger to the US or not, but we ALL know there was immenent danger to our ally Isreal and other nations in the region.

And for Pete's sake QUIT TALKING ABOUT A "RUSH TO WAR" If anything we waited too damn long. That SOB had 12 years to own up to his end of the bargain and didn't! We tried many things to get him to comply WITH HIS OWN AGREEMENT!

IMO - Anyone who uses the "rush to war" argument is just plain ignorant.:|
But you are right on one thing - time is/was on our side - history will know that we gave Saddam 12 years to disarm and history will see that we were justified in taking him out.

CkG

 

[Moonbeam]

CAD, you have no idea what history will say. You don't send American soldiers to die for Israel without running it by the people. You don't lie about why Mother's sons come home in a bag. You do lie when your motives are corrupt. Bush lied.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
CAD, you have no idea what history will say. You don't send American soldiers to die for Israel without running it by the people. You don't lie about why Mother's sons come home in a bag. You do lie when your motives are corrupt. Bush lied.

True, it may be that I don't KNOW that history will see it that way but by studying history I don't think my statement will be wrong.

Now as for your claims about Bush lying....what exactly did he lie about? Hmmm... you can't prove HE lied about anything, all you have is tin foil hat accusations.

Come on Moony, I expected a better response from you

CkG

 

[Moonbeam]

Iraq was crushed in three weeks. They were not only not an immediate threat, they weren't a threat at all. The gabillion tons of WMDs, the nukes, it was all a lie.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Iraq was crushed in three weeks. They were not only not an immediate threat, they weren't a threat at all. The gabillion tons of WMDs, the nukes, it was all a lie.

I sure hope you have a big plate I'll go feed the crows to fatten them a tad for you

I've said before and I'll say it again: If we don't find clear evidence that Saddam possesed Chem/Bio weapons, I'll take my place in line for a big 'ol steaming plate of crow. But....I don't think I'm the one who's going to be eating it Lest you forget....Saddam admitted to possessing these weapons

Good dodge of the lie question though

CkG

 

[Alistar7]

Couple of AL queda camps in northern iraq taken out.
Couple of wanted internation terrorist in custody
Documents about Al Quedia /Iraqi goverment meetings.
Payments for palastenian suicide bombers
Hundreds of suicide bomb vests discovered

But I know none of this will convince you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Links?

For someone who claims to have such great access to unbiased news I can't believe you are not aware of these developments in the war. Maybe you should rethink your sources.

 

[HappyGamer2]

"Payments for palastenian suicide bombers"
this is about the only statement that holds much weight at this point.

Couple of AL queda camps in northern iraq taken out."
most of these camps were in kurds area not saddams area

"Couple of wanted internation terrorist in custody"
so what, there are wanted terrorist in the USA too, look at all the war criminals that run and hide in the USA

Documents about Al Quedia /Iraqi goverment meetings.
means nothing, I am sure Al Quedia meet with lots of people, including the CIA

Hundreds of suicide bomb vests discovered
so what, how many were used, hey it's war, coward way of fighting maybe but what differents does make if your shot dead with a gun or blown up by a guy wearing a vest. PS: I guess these are the WMD that we went after.

 

[LunarRay]

Quote by Cadkindaguy

I sure hope you have a big plate I'll go feed the crows to fatten them a tad for you

I've said before and I'll say it again: If we don't find clear evidence that Saddam possesed Chem/Bio weapons, I'll take my place in line for a big 'ol steaming plate of crow. But....I don't think I'm the one who's going to be eating it Lest you forget....Saddam admitted to possessing these weapons

Good dodge of the lie question though

CkG[/quote]


We know Saddam had WMD we sold him some... but, knowing that shouldn't we have expected him to use them? Considering the fate that awaited if he used them or not edged my thoughts toward he probably will... But, yet we pushed forward with our troops... if he had them and Bush knew it he was putting so many in harms way or he lied and knew the risk was minimal... or Bush didn't care either way and considered the price was worth the effort... and hoped for the best...
Now then... if he had them and got rid of them they are not there or he buried them because he felt he could win the war without them and they exist somewhere... But, it seems crazy to think Saddam was looking for victory when he knew the '91 campaigne could have unseated him... he was stronger then and we now..
What is the Bush agenda.....?????? That is what we will only be able to wonder about.... the truth about that is so well hidden or he is so open and honest that it defies belief..
Make sure the crows don't have West Nile Disease.... attempting to serve it then would be sick bird... ill eagle.

 

[HappyGamer2]

"What is the Bush agenda.....?????? "

Re-election
revenge for his daddy's mistakes
OIL

 

[Moonbeam]

HJD1, that's it and it was staring me right in the face the whole time. All through the war in the scenes of every battle I saw birds flying in and out of trees and stuff every time a bomb went off. No wonder we can't find the WMD, they're right out in broad day light. They're the West Nile infected Iraqi Stealth Pigeon. If I hadn't of had my mouth open, I'd of gotten it right in the face.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
HJD1, that's it and it was staring me right in the face the whole time. All through the war in the scenes of every battle I saw birds flying in and out of trees and stuff every time a bomb went off. No wonder we can't find the WMD, they're right out in broad day light. They're the West Nile infected Iraqi Stealth Pigeon. If I hadn't of had my mouth open, I'd of gotten it right in the face.

You crack me up Moony

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
HJD1, that's it and it was staring me right in the face the whole time. All through the war in the scenes of every battle I saw birds flying in and out of trees and stuff every time a bomb went off. No wonder we can't find the WMD, they're right out in broad day light. They're the West Nile infected Iraqi Stealth Pigeon. If I hadn't of had my mouth open, I'd of gotten it right in the face.

Good grief... it just occured to me.... perhaps there is some kind of BIO/CHEM thingy that will take long term to manifest itself... look for the actions of the birds... do they watch the troops as they meander hither and yon..?? Are any of the troops growing beards???? a sure sign of shrunkenheaddisease....

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Several Op-Ed pieces identify some of the distortions and misinformation used to justify the war, start questioning Bush's honesty and the way it may affect America and the world. Here are short excerpts; read the whole pieces if you want something to think about:

From the L.A. Times, Are We Dumb or Just Numb?
Forget truth. That is the message from our government and its apologists in the media who insist that the Iraq invasion is a great success story even though it was based on a lie.

In the statement broadcast to the Iraqi people after the invasion was launched, President Bush stated: "The goals of our coalition are clear and limited. We will end a brutal regime, whose aggression and weapons of mass destruction make it a unique threat to the world." To which Tony Blair added: "We did not want this war. But in refusing to give up his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam gave us no choice but to act."

That claim of urgency - requiring us to short-circuit the U.N. weapons inspectors - has proved to be a whopper of a falsehood.
[ ... ]

From the Miami Herald, Did our leaders lie to us? Do we even care?
[ ... ]
Just a few weeks ago, any statement from me that Bush's case for war was riddled with inconsistencies and illogic would have brought swift and fierce condemnation from this fellow.

Now, basking in the glow of military conquest -- and confronted by a thus-far futile search for chemical and biological weapons -- this hawk breezily conceded the point while also waving it away as inconsequential.

Have we become a country that wears its hypocrisy openly and proudly?
[ ... ]

From the NY Times (thanks, Moonie), Matters of Emphasis
We were not lying," a Bush administration official told ABC News. "But it was just a matter of emphasis." The official was referring to the way the administration hyped the threat that Saddam Hussein posed to the United States. According to the ABC report, the real reason for the war was that the administration "wanted to make a statement." And why Iraq? "Officials acknowledge that Saddam had all the requirements to make him, from their standpoint, the perfect target."

A British newspaper, The Independent, reports that "intelligence agencies on both sides of the Atlantic were furious that briefings they gave political leaders were distorted in the rush to war." One "high-level source" told the paper that "they ignored intelligence assessments which said Iraq was not a threat."
[ ... ]

I find the Bush and Blair quotes in the L.A.Times article especially damning. YMMV.

Is it okay to criticize Bush?

 

[Athanasius]

Athanasuis, You postulate a query with a difference... Clinton action was legal... Bush action illegal... if you agree to the rule of international law and the UN... The outcome of an illegal act is subordinated to its illegality... think about the holder in due course of some benifit or other that originally was illegaly taken from the original holder... It gets a bit sticky but the rule of law must prevail over anything here on Earth..

What international law did the US break?


Moobeam Quote:

Athanasius, There is a huge difference in destabilizing a government by helping it's citizens overthrow a dictator than killing them to set them free, no?. What is the moral obligation of a people whose leader is a killer? Didn't Clinton bomb to get rid of a leader up front and public. Is that different than killing by fraud as you seem to claim happened in Iraq? I can't accept praying for our leaders. I think they need to be exposed and held accountable. I'm rather right winged and old fashioned in that way.

To the first question: is there a big moral difference? How many Kurds and inhabitants of Basra died because we encouraged the citizens to overthrow a dictator but backed away from military intervention when that dictator crushed them under his ruthless hand? Did washing our hands of them absolve us from bloodguilt? I guess Pontius Pilate thought so, all the while hiding behind the sophistry of , "What is truth?" I am not arguing one side or the other here. I am saying it is a perilous moral decision one way or the other. So pray for those people who are actually making those decisions.

As far as the moral obligation of a people whose leader is a killer, I think it is a case by case basis. Apparently Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a brilliant theologian who spoke out against racism in America in the 30's, was part of a plot to assassinate Hitler. Was he wrong? I think so, though I admire his work and cannot say what I would have done in his place.

I don't think the U.S. killed by fraud. I think unelected individuals who are brilliant (but sometimes Machiavellian) spend their lives trying to envision what is truly threatening free markets, representative republics, and their own particular vision of what is best for the world came to the conclusion that the combination of radical Islamic fundamentalism and a dictator who views himself as a reincarnation of Nebuchadnezzar was a combination that could not be allowed to continue. Hence the goal of regime change. Therefore they are seeking every palatable/lawful means for accomplishing that. In short, they are trying to enforce a "Pax Americana." Have you read the three U.N. Resolutions that are of merit (1441, and the 8-somethings before them?). Simply by those three resolutions, the first Persian Gulf War never really ended. Saddam never complied as he should have, and that compliance was the means by which he was supposed to be allowed to stay in power. So why was he still in power? The fact of non-compliance was enough legal ground to give those who believe in a "Pax Americana" the ammunition they needed to drive him out by force.

I am not villifiying such people. Though Machiavellian, I think they really believe that a "Pax Americana" is the path that leads to the greatest level of international peace and stability. I think much of what you see from France, Russia, and Germany (strange bedfellows indeed) is a tactical move to resist this Pax Americana. Weeks ago there was this thread, "France Has the Moral High Ground." I do not think "Moral High Ground" has much of anything to do with this. "Moral High Ground" is simply the way some people manipulate the masses to rally them behind their cause.

This is my opinion about what is really going on. It is all very troubling to someone such as myself, who really thinks that the "Moral High Ground" is the not merely a tool for manipulating people but is something that has a life of its own. It does not exist for us. We exist for it.

There are competing visions, or "memes," for the future of this world. Memes are powerful things.

I don't think humans are able to handle power well. In fact, I don't think any society has handled it well for long. Now the USA's is in the batter's box. I hope we do better than those who have gone before us. There is little precedent to guide us. We did seem to manage the Cold War pretty well, but there were huge atrocities along the way. The political handling of Vietnam and the excessed of McCarthyism come to mind.

But what is the political alternative? If it had been left to the UN, Saddam's atrocities would have never been stopped. The UN is a powerless veneer masking a multinational battle for eminence. The Franco-German-Russian trinity would have kept Saddam in power no matter what he did. Then we would have his even more lunatic sons after him. The Anglo-American "Pax Americana" was convinced he needed to go. And let's not even try to figure the Chinese connection to this.

There is no political solution, because there is no one with enough integrity, wisdom, and power to negotiate the mess without being corrupted, deceived, are despotic.

Over time:
Our integrity gets corrupted
Our wisdom is insufficent and we end up deceived.
Our power is either impotent or becomes malignant and despotic.

Meanwhile we are stuck in a mess that we cannot wash our hands of. We are all Lady MacBeths. We need Plato's "Philosopher King."

We need the "Divine Sage" that Confucius spoke of. In the Analects, one of Confucius' students came to him and said: "If a ruler compassed the salvation of the entire state, surely you would call him Good? The Master said, "It would no longer be a matter of "Good." Without doubt he would be a Divine Sage."

Of course I believe we had that Divine Sage. But he shut him up as demon-possessed and insane and crucified him. You ask what Jesus would do? that gets into beliefs about Jesus. I believe that Jesus will by his time and work on redeeming individuals because I believe that individuals are eternal. Systems and politics are not. When the systems are trulyt beyong functioning, I believe he will return. meanwhile we do the best we can, we look to our heavenly country, and we act as Daniels in Babylon. We give the best advice we can, we sincerely seek the good of the leaders we have, we pray for them, and we recognize how vulnerable they are.

 

[YellowRose]

Well if we don't find any WMD's I'm quite sure we will plant some.

 

[Moonbeam]

Athanasius: What International law did the US break.
-----------------------

Link 1

Charity link 2

The plot thickens 3

4 our further edification
--------------

Of course I believe we had that Divine Sage. But he (we?) shut him up as demon-possessed and insane and crucified him. You ask what Jesus would do? that gets into beliefs about Jesus. I believe that Jesus will by his time and work on redeeming individuals because I believe that individuals are eternal. (not a sentence as far as I can tell and don't really know exactly how to read it, but am guessing I get the idea) Systems and politics are not. (? are not what, redemptive, or more probably, Divine) When the systems are trulyt beyong functioning, I believe he will return. meanwhile we do the best we can, we look to our heavenly country, and we act as Daniels in Babylon. We give the best advice we can, we sincerely seek the good of the leaders we have, we pray for them, and we recognize how vulnerable they are.
--------------------------

That sort of reminds me of the 'physician do no harm' thing. I, of course deeply appreciate your view here and more particularly the whole tone and tenor of your post. If you don't mind me saying so, I see a very fine mind and soul grappling with a very challenging problem from within a very profound belief system. The sad part for me is that it is a belief system to which I died and lost my way. I can never take comfort in the notion that all those beautiful children that we have killed and all those soldiers who die are anything but dead forever. "This little dew drop world. It may be only a dew drop. And yet, and yet." The pain I feel about this is inexpressible and seemingly without bottom." I found an answer for me, but it will never be as comforting as yours.

And there are all those who would have died had we not acted. I deeply appreciate the precipice on which our judgment stands. And perhaps because I am a fool, I'm willing to think a Pax Americana is a step up for the Middle East. Heaven help me. I abhor such judgments. But we should have been frank about our goals. On that issue I was not in conflict on what we did in old Yugoslavia and in Iraq. But the debate should have been on those issues, not a fraud.

But war is a failure. It is a failure of all human systems, religious, philosophical, and governmental to stem the tide of human insanity. The reason, I think, is because they are all fundamentally in error. It is not good enough to me simply to pray. I believe it is time to grow up and face the real source of our insanity, the fact that we have been taught to hate ourselves, that this self hate is now so deeply buried and expresses itself only as our externalized hatred, phobia, and contempt for everything that challenges the false self we donned in place of what was real. We are on the road to extinction because we cannot feel. We would rather die than know the truth, the truth that there is nothing wrong, that we are and were always perfect and whole. Your God takes you to that, I think, when the
Way is properly understood. But it's a transcendence that steps across a chasm that forever divides the me from the thou, that draws a distinction.

I don't know much. I don't know what would happen in a world where such a view prevailed. We are victims of the will not to see. We distort and destroy every real door. Clearly our extinction can't be stopped except by a tremendous awakening. I don't see how that could occur. The Divine Dictator is within, I think, but he seems to be off line. I did have the pleasure of knowing someone once now gone, who had recalled his life and knew he was OK. To express his deepest truth he's sit and smile, he's sit and smile and nod his head, he's sit and smile and nod his head and look form person to person one by one deep into your eyes. I can still see him but it's been a long long time.

He made a curious remark, one time. He said he had the feeling he's been alive forever. Maybe there's more than one kind of immortality.

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Athanasius: What International law did the US break.
-----------------------

Link 1

Charity link 2

The plot thickens 3

4 our further edification
--------------

Of course I believe we had that Divine Sage. But he (we?) shut him up as demon-possessed and insane and crucified him. You ask what Jesus would do? that gets into beliefs about Jesus. I believe that Jesus will by his time and work on redeeming individuals because I believe that individuals are eternal. (not a sentence as far as I can tell and don't really know exactly how to read it, but am guessing I get the idea) Systems and politics are not. (? are not what, redemptive, or more probably, Divine) When the systems are trulyt beyong functioning, I believe he will return. meanwhile we do the best we can, we look to our heavenly country, and we act as Daniels in Babylon. We give the best advice we can, we sincerely seek the good of the leaders we have, we pray for them, and we recognize how vulnerable they are.
--------------------------

That sort of reminds me of the 'physician do no harm' thing. I, of course deeply appreciate your view here and more particularly the whole tone and tenor of your post. If you don't mind me saying so, I see a very fine mind and soul grappling with a very challenging problem from within a very profound belief system. The sad part for me is that it is a belief system to which I died and lost my way. I can never take comfort in the notion that all those beautiful children that we have killed and all those soldiers who die are anything but dead forever. "This little dew drop world. It may be only a dew drop. And yet, and yet." The pain I feel about this is inexpressible and seemingly without bottom." I found an answer for me, but it will never be as comforting as yours.

And there are all those who would have died had we not acted. I deeply appreciate the precipice on which our judgment stands. And perhaps because I am a fool, I'm willing to think a Pax Americana is a step up for the Middle East. Heaven help me. I abhor such judgments. But we should have been frank about our goals. On that issue I was not in conflict on what we did in old Yugoslavia and in Iraq. But the debate should have been on those issues, not a fraud.

But war is a failure. It is a failure of all human systems, religious, philosophical, and governmental to stem the tide of human insanity. The reason, I think, is because they are all fundamentally in error. It is not good enough to me simply to pray. I believe it is time to grow up and face the real source of our insanity, the fact that we have been taught to hate ourselves, that this self hate is now so deeply buried and expresses itself only as our externalized hatred, phobia, and contempt for everything that challenges the false self we donned in place of what was real. We are on the road to extinction because we cannot feel. We would rather die than know the truth, the truth that there is nothing wrong, that we are and were always perfect and whole. Your God takes you to that, I think, when the
Way is properly understood. But it's a transcendence that steps across a chasm that forever divides the me from the thou, that draws a distinction.

I don't know much. I don't know what would happen in a world where such a view prevailed. We are victims of the will not to see. We distort and destroy every real door. Clearly our extinction can't be stopped except by a tremendous awakening. I don't see how that could occur. The Divine Dictator is within, I think, but he seems to be off line. I did have the pleasure of knowing someone once now gone, who had recalled his life and knew he was OK. To express his deepest truth he's sit and smile, he's sit and smile and nod his head, he's sit and smile and nod his head and look form person to person one by one deep into your eyes. I can still see him but it's been a long long time.

He made a curious remark, one time. He said he had the feeling he's been alive forever. Maybe there's more than one kind of immortality.

I found this post most insightful. Do you feel that the cause is just, but the delivery was wrong? I would agree that it is a shame that a leader feels that he has to leave out certain motives for what he is doing.

It is an insult to our intelligence for Bush to say that the war is ONLY about liberating Iraq, or ONLY about WMD's. I believe there are half a dozen other reasons that it came to war. But I don't believe that this war was ONLY for oil or ONLY for the euro as some suggested, or ONLY to dodge the economy problem. People are more complicated than that, even Bush...even Saddam Hussein is more complicated than people polarize him to be (sick...and a detriment to the people...but complicated). What's simple in my mind is that some good will come out of this war, maybe not on short terms, but in the long-run. This is where I draw my conviction. I don't care if Bush gets re-elected, I like things to switch up now and then anyway, but I feel conviction from the fact that something HAD to be done to get the Middle East moving in a positive direction, and I think the absence of Hussein is going to help that. Nobody wanted innocent people to die, pro-war or anti-war, nobody, I hope.

War is a failure, but it can produce positive results if it is followed-up appropriately. Nothing is going to give back the lives of the innocents that died, or the soldiers that died, but at this the only thing that we can put in their place is the hope that things will be better for the living...and for the future generations.

Very interesting posts from Athanasius and Moonbeam...thanks guys...

 

[Red Dawn]

My contention is that Dubya isn't intelligent enough to be able to decieve a whole nation. Those who work for him might be but not the "Dubya"

 

[Moonbeam]

Furthermore, D Sorry) I was not expecting the eternity angle is what would Christ do. Silly me, that was pretty obvious but outside my box so I forgot. I raised the issue with Corn who's all for a kill um to save um approach. Personally, I'm just like Corn and that's what worries me. He is the center of the universe. He knows the truth and when to act. He is the Law of Might makes right, the Certain One who Knows. He is the Secular Humanist whose inner fantasy is the Ultimate Truth.

The reason I was thinking of as to why Jesus didn't raise an Army was that His was a message of Love, that God is Love. An army is the external manifestation of the refutation of that claim. Love needs no army because it is the Truth, the one and only Eternal Truth. Until I enter into that state completely, and I'm not holding my breath,, until every act that flows from my being is His will, is sourced in Pure Love, i will make no determinations as to what is right and what is wrong involving the lives of thousands. i have met the enemy and he is me. I have felt my hate. I know what is loose in me. Make me not a judge and keep me from the button. I would be only to happy to oblige. I am insane. Naturally, I'm not quite as insane as those who don't see themselves in me. I'm maybe just slightly less delusional than most. Maybe.

The problem I have is with this thing called 'Certainty'. I will determine and I will act, and all the while that 'I' is not the healthy part of man but man at his sickest, the I that is the block on memory, the protector from the experience of the remembrance of pain. He knows what justice is. It is that which keeps him asleep, keeps him from pain, he who can justify the death of others if it stops his pain and keeps him from re-experiencing the source of his anxiety, the death of his true self in childhood.

So my problem with Christianity is that whereas it uses a different vocabulary and different frame of view, it does something very similar. I believe that the true Christian is he who surrenders this commanding, sick 'I', the one who can never know peace, for a surrender, a collapse of that 'I' into a state of trust, a sudden and perhaps immense realization of Love. That Love creates a whole different kind of "Certainty" a certainty in which the 'I' is not. But for those who use and find in religion a way to strengthen that other, evil 'I', to claim that that "I" knows God, we have not a saint, but a fanatic, a psychopath of the first magnitude. Whatever he does he justifies as the will of God. So religion is a dangerous double edged sword. In my approach, the collapse of the 'I' through remembering how it came to be, the seeing of its lie, I'm not sure what kind of delusions a pretender to realization could take. "I am the truth of psychotherapy? My will is the will of psychotherapy?" It seems the damage would be more modest.

That brings me to one final point. The 'I' that is sick, according to psychological investigations into its properties shows that that 'I' is forever seeking to heal itself but in a sick way. Whatever the nature of our trauma, however it was that we were screwed over, we seek to reenact it for the rest of our lives, we seek to keep it fresh like picking at a scab. We reenact the loss of the mother with an endless series of bad romances, etc etc etc. And we do this without conscious recognition that we do just that till we seek a path of insight, if indeed we do. We are, in short, drawn like moths to the flame of fear. Whatever it is we fear we will cause to materialize so we can experience it, rather than the real memory on which our compunction is based. What about the fear of nuclear war? He who lives by the sword dies by it, right. Not a very happy thought. Naturally, and that's why nobody is thinking of it.

And we have this matter in Christianity called Armageddon. Undoubtedly a projection onto the world of exactly what I said happened beyond memory in childhood... I hear there are some Christians in Texas, wouldn't you know, who are trying to breed a red bull. When a billion people or so start longing for an end, fearing it, I mean, there can develop a certain unstoppable force that tends to bring it to fruition. That is why it seems vital to me to realize that every thing we fear, our worst nightmares have already happened to us. There is nothing whatsoever to fear now but conscious memory and the re-experience of that old old pain. We need to find a way to do that, not pray. Edit: or, and pray too.

 

[HappyGamer2]

yes, Dubya himself isn't smart enough to run the show.

 

[Moonbeam]

It doesn't take a lot of brains to believe in yourself, your false self. All it takes is protection from that realization. Not that hard, trust me.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ornery
"...how does that justify the U.S. killing and maiming thousands of innocent men, women, and children whose only crime was being in the wrong place at the wrong time?"

Nothing to justify. I doubt it could have been handled with less collateral damage. The blood is on his hands. First, he could have complied with the UN. Second, he could have given up the weapons and third, he could have ran off to Syria and lived out the remainder of his POS life while the civilians went about their business.

Nothing to justify. I doubt it could have been handled with less collateral damage. The blood is on his hands.

Given that we attacked Iraq, I agree that we killed surprisingly few civilians (and kudos to our military for that). That's not the point. Because we did choose to attack Iraq, we killed and maimed thousands of innocent people. Like it or not, their blood is on our hands. The only question is whether their blood was justified. In my opinion, the answer is no.


First, he could have complied with the UN. Second, he could have given up the weapons

For the record, Iraq claimed that it did both these things. Based on what we've (not) found so far, they were telling the truth. If we eventually find WMDs, then we can reconsider your first two points. Until then, it's a red herring. We had inspectors in Iraq who could have verified this if Bush hadn't been in such a hurry to start a war.

(Speaking of red herrings, don't give me the crap about the al Samoud missles. If they were a violation at all - in dispute - they were an insignificant technical violation. In spite of this, Iraq was complying by destroying these missles. Bush launched a war to prevent a "mushroom cloud" and "thousands of liters" of biological warfare materials. Bush was plainly lying.)


third, he could have ran off to Syria and lived out the remainder of his POS life while the civilians went about their business

That's a pretty arrogant presumption. Why should he leave? What right do we have to unilaterally eject the leader of another country? In spite of rhetoric from the White House, we aren't the king of the world.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Flap...Flap...Flap go the gums.

Yeah - we just decided that since Saddam kills his own people then we should kill them too?

No blood is on our hands except the splatter of Saddam's regime. You people don't have any idea if there was immenent danger to the US or not, but we ALL know there was immenent danger to our ally Isreal and other nations in the region.

And for Pete's sake QUIT TALKING ABOUT A "RUSH TO WAR" If anything we waited too damn long. That SOB had 12 years to own up to his end of the bargain and didn't! We tried many things to get him to comply WITH HIS OWN AGREEMENT!

IMO - Anyone who uses the "rush to war" argument is just plain ignorant.:|
But you are right on one thing - time is/was on our side - history will know that we gave Saddam 12 years to disarm and history will see that we were justified in taking him out.

CkG

My, you're really on a roll. No content, but lots of digs and distortions. Let's take a look at what you wrote:

Flap...Flap...Flap go the gums.

Gratuitous dig

Yeah - we just decided that since Saddam kills his own people then we should kill them too?

Lie - I said nothing of the sort

No blood is on our hands except the splatter of Saddam's regime
Wrong - of course their blood is on our hands, we killed them. The question for debate is whether it was justified.

You people don't have any idea if there was immenent danger to the US or not,
That's wrong too - we have a very good idea based on all sorts of evidence. Iraq obviously did NOT have the massive quantities of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons Bush claimed they had. We may still find small amounts, but they're hardly a significant danger to the country. His military was certainly no danger to us; we proved that in a scant three weeks.

but we ALL know there was immenent danger to our ally Isreal and other nations in the region.
False - we don't all know this. In fact, there is no reason to believe he posed any imminent danger to anyone other than his own people. Did he want to become dangerous again? Probably. Would he have eventually posed a danger? Maybe. Was he an imminent dnager? Get real. You need to look up the word "imminent".

And for Pete's sake QUIT TALKING ABOUT A "RUSH TO WAR" If anything we waited too damn long.
Statement of your opinion - the U.N. and most of the world disagreed.

That SOB had 12 years to own up to his end of the bargain and didn't! We tried many things to get him to comply WITH HIS OWN AGREEMENT!
Speculation. So far, we've found no evidence he was in material non-compliance, with the possible exception of the al Samoud missles which may have exceeded U.N. range restrictions by a small margin. We had inspectors in the country to determine whether Iraq was in compliance or not, and to bring Iraq into compliance if/where they weren't, but Bush wasn't willing to wait for objective professionals to do their jobs.

IMO - Anyone who uses the "rush to war" argument is just plain ignorant.:|
Another gratuitous dig.

But you are right on one thing - time is/was on our side - history will know that we gave Saddam 12 years to disarm and history will see that we were justified in taking him out.
Your opinion. In my opinion, history will show that Bush was one of the worst presidents in U.S. history, doing untold damage to this country, specifically in the areas of international cooperation, civil liberties, and the environment. He has also screwed up the economy, but he's only in the top three or four in that category (so far).

 

[chrisms]

Some people are morons..

What, did you think we'd roll into Baghdad and see a sign on the highway labeled "Weapons of Mass Destruction, Next Right"? It hasn't even been a month since the end of the war and there are many who already believe the WMD claims to be false.

Iraqi insiders will claim that there were no WMDs because they are protecting themselves. Obviously if you admit to knowing about these weapons, you're going to be in trouble for being one of the most powerful people in the regime. By claiming ignorance, you look as if you were just another one of Saddam's pawns and could get off much easier.

Right now, however, I disagree with how the coalition is handling the search. They put out reports of "possible discoveries," which offer hope that some weapons materials have been found. All those who read about these discoveries do not always read how they turned out to be simple pesticides, so it is very misleading to the American people.