Bush: Top Two Advisors - No WMD Found means nothing

[dmcowen674]

1-9-2004 Bush war advisors: unfound Iraqi weapons matter little

WASHINGTON - Two of President George W. Bush's military advisors said that the US inability to find illegal weapons in Iraq means little.

"I don't think that you can draw any conclusion from the fact that the stockpiles were not found," Pentagon advisor Richard Perle said at the American Enterprise Institute.

Perle said he did not fear that the United States would lose credibility after Bush used Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction as his principal justification for going to war.

"If others are going to take the view that, because these weapons weren't found, nothing that the United States says can be trusted -- there's not much we can do about that," he said. "It would be a foolish conclusion to draw."

Perle appeared with Robert Frum, the former Bush speech writer who coined "Axis of Evil." They were two of the hardline members of the administration who argued the need to topple Saddam Hussein.

Perle and Frum's book, "An End to Evil," promotes the so-called neo-conservative use of military force to pacify the world.

They take aim at Saudi Arabia, US politicians, journalists and France -- all of whom they said stand in the way of Bush's "War on Terror."

"All we ask from France is that, in the construction of Europe, Europe think of itself as a partner with the United States in the protection of Western civilization. That's not a lot to ask."

"I think France runs the very great risk of becoming isolated."

 

[SuperTool]

So basically they are saying it's OK to lie if it fits their neocon agenda.
First they lie, then they blame everyone else for not getting over them lying.

 

[Gaard]

"So what if I can't prove what I said? You got a problem with that?"

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Gaard
"So what if I can't prove what I said? You got a problem with that?"

"Bring Em On"

 

[tallest1]

" in the protection of Western civilization. "?!?!

"all of whom they said stand in the way of Bush's "War on Terror.""?!?!

"the so-called neo-conservative use of military force to pacify the world. "?!?!


Spoken like a true warmonger

Edit: Sorry about all the edits. posted too soon.

 

[Czar]

these two are indeed scary

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: tallest1
" in the protection of Western civilization. "?!?!

"all of whom they said stand in the way of Bush's "War on Terror.""?!?!

They make it sound like the fate of humanity itself depends on their warmongering

It does, remember, they are going to end all Evil.
These guys are ideological idealists who are diluding themselves, but also found a president to dilude.

 

[tallest1]

Bush must have a world map over his bed with all the country names replaced with "good" or "Evil". Israel good!, France BAD!, Iraq BAD! Pakistan GOOD!

I mean, its that simple right?

 

[SuperTool]

I think he has a red and blue map of the world

 

[DealMonkey]

The red states are the commies, right?

 

[dahunan]

Where are the AT Neocon Spinmeisters??

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Of course it's good and bad . . . putting the names on countries would be a waste of ink.

Perle and Frum would be perfectly at home as policy wonks for the Mullah Omar, Mao, Stalin, or Pol Pot. But not all zealots are bad. Mother Teresa was clearly a zealot for the Army of God; the best of her religion and the best of humanity with unbridled passion. Unfortunately (some) Christians, (some) Jews, (some) Muslims, and (some) atheists exhibit a zeal for power measured in money and weapons. Only total control will satiate their appetite for dominion and if they cannot control you they will destroy you. If men like Perle and Frum have the ear (and in Frum's case . . . mouth) of the US President . . . the entire world is in peril.

Pride
Gluttony
Anger
Greed

 

[Turkz]

George Bush's 2004 election platform: Give me four more years to find Iraq's WMD.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Perle and Frum would be perfectly at home as policy wonks for the Mullah Omar, Mao, Stalin, or Pol Pot.

You forgot Hitler, Amin and and Kim Chong-il. If you're gonna post this kind of stupid sh!t don't do it half assed.

 

[Zephyr106]

Hehehe the lack of any physical evidence of WMD matters not because it was never a major reason to go to war. The Pentagon's "Office of Special Plans", aka "The Cabal" cooked and spun the questions regarding Iraqi WMD up to look like it was an imminent threat. What Pearl and Frum (if Frum even matters?) care about is, will "OIF" change the nature of the Middle East for the better for US interests (and don't forget Isreal); that was one of the real reasons to go to war. The scary part is does Bush even know this?

Zephyr

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

You know what UQ, eat a cow pie as far as I care.

"Sometimes the right answer, when a person has a grievance against you, is to say: 'You're completely mistaken; that grievance comes out of a completely wrong way of looking at the world and you're just going to have to get over it'," Frum said.
"We're not going to change."

Fascist regimes and pseudo-Marxist regimes use the same language. Hitler, Stalin, Usama, and now Neocons want to remake the world in their image. Unfortunately, America has a weak-minded chief executive that allows unelected wanks to set policy. IMHO, these policies will kill by omission and commission far more people than they will protect.

The neowanks make such statements but the irony is that any regime that uses identical language will face the economic +/- military wrath of the US government. It is entirely conceivable that the Perles and Frums running our government are right about some things. But it's entirely certain they are not right about everything. The lack of insight by such men and our President is a danger to the entire world.

Pride - there's a pandemic of this stuff in America but bumper stickers to crappy country songs (granted that's not a new phenomenon)
Gluttony - essentially synonymous with American foreign, domestic, and personal policy (we weren't suppose to mourn after 9/11 . . . we needed to go buy something)
Anger - Bush parlayed residual pain and anger over 9/11 into a repetitive clarion call against Saddam
Greed - whether greed drives our gluttony or gluttony drives our greed (oil) is open to debate but either iteration is bad for America

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: tallest1
" in the protection of Western civilization. "?!?!

"all of whom they said stand in the way of Bush's "War on Terror.""?!?!

"the so-called neo-conservative use of military force to pacify the world. "?!?!


Spoken like a true warmonger

Edit: Sorry about all the edits. posted too soon.

Wacko extremists like them belong in a compound in Montana. It is too dangerous to have them so close to the president.

 

[Jhhnn]

"I don't think that you can draw any conclusion from the fact that the stockpiles were not found,"

Which is to infer that they actually exist, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Perle basically claims that they're there, we just didn't find them...

Much the same case can be made for space aliens living among us, or faeries in Ireland, or the existence of Santa Claus...

 

[XZeroII]

Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

Bush and Blair are playing Poker, oh that's it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

Obviously Bush took the calculated risk that misleading the American Public will not have any significant blowback. Seems that he might (actually his handlers) might be right!

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Obviously Bush took the calculated risk that misleading the American Public will not have any significant blowback. Seems that he might (actually his handlers) might be right!

But it's the American public that will face the consequences of significant blowback . . . which has already happened throughout the world (not to mention the morasse in the Middle East). If one of the Demoncredits gets elected Bush spends the next decade touring the country making millions off lectures (OK babbling) about renewing America and changing the world. The rest of the country will be busy paying off his markers for the next century.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

Bush and Blair are playing Poker, oh that's it.

Saddam was playing poker with the world.
The pot was WMD inspections.

Until all cards are put on the table, one does not know if a hand is a royal flush or a bluff.
When it is your turn as the cards are dealt, you have the choice of calling, upping or folding.

Russia, France, Germany folded.
The US & England called Saddams hand instead of upping the ante.
Now once all the cards were on the table, it turned out that Saddam did not have the hand that everyone thought.
He may have only been bluffing or had a hole card hidden that he did not show.

Now that circumstances seem to show that he was only bluffing, everyone is saying that we should not have called him on it.

No-one seems to be looking at the fact that he spent 10 years setting up this possible bluff. He was playing footsies with the UN inspectors for many years.

Had we not called him, he may have been able to pull out the hole card (WMD).
Or, he may have had the time to develop them again.

One can not handle rational people the same as irrational people. Rational logic does not work. Irrational people do not always act rationally.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

Bush and Blair are playing Poker, oh that's it.

Saddam was playing poker with the world.
The pot was WMD inspections.

Until all cards are put on the table, one does not know if a hand is a royal flush or a bluff.
When it is your turn as the cards are dealt, you have the choice of calling, upping or folding.

Russia, France, Germany folded.
The US & England called Saddams hand instead of upping the ante.
Now once all the cards were on the table, it turned out that Saddam did not have the hand that everyone thought.
He may have only been bluffing or had a hole card hidden that he did not show.

Now that circumstances seem to show that he was only bluffing, everyone is saying that we should not have called him on it.

No-one seems to be looking at the fact that he spent 10 years setting up this possible bluff. He was playing footsies with the UN inspectors for many years.

Had we not called him, he may have been able to pull out the hole card (WMD).
Or, he may have had the time to develop them again.

One can not handle rational people the same as irrational people. Rational logic does not work. Irrational people do not always act rationally.

Son, war is not a card game nor is it a sport. People die, and some live that wish they have not. Before one commits to a shooting war, the aggressor needs to be correct in the action taken. There is no second chance or recall. When the bullets start to fly, the ultimate outcome is always uncertain, even if military victory is assured. In both World Wars, we have been able to hold our collective heads high and say the reasons we fought were clear before and after. No spin was needed in either. That was not true in VN, and not so now. We justify after the fact because the stated primary premise was flawed. That ought not to be needed. We went to war on a guess, and a bad one at that.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: XZeroII
Although it's been said about 500 times now, you morons still haven't listened. So let me put it in bold and highlight it and MAYBE one or two of you will actually read it.

Ready?

HINDSIGHT IS 20/20

In this world, you take risks. You calculate out what the costs and benefits are and you take a risk based on the information you have available. Or is your blind hatred so deep that you can't understand even a simple concept as calculated risks? Play some Poker and you'll find out exactly what I'm talking about.

Bush and Blair are playing Poker, oh that's it.

Saddam was playing poker with the world.
The pot was WMD inspections.

Until all cards are put on the table, one does not know if a hand is a royal flush or a bluff.
When it is your turn as the cards are dealt, you have the choice of calling, upping or folding.

Russia, France, Germany folded.
The US & England called Saddams hand instead of upping the ante.
Now once all the cards were on the table, it turned out that Saddam did not have the hand that everyone thought.
He may have only been bluffing or had a hole card hidden that he did not show.

Now that circumstances seem to show that he was only bluffing, everyone is saying that we should not have called him on it.

No-one seems to be looking at the fact that he spent 10 years setting up this possible bluff. He was playing footsies with the UN inspectors for many years.

Had we not called him, he may have been able to pull out the hole card (WMD).
Or, he may have had the time to develop them again.

One can not handle rational people the same as irrational people. Rational logic does not work. Irrational people do not always act rationally.