Michael Moore's letter to General Welsey Clark

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
damn. i accidentally got rid of my huge-long post.
anyway, the summary is:

moving slow is ok. like you said, we'd be trying for years. i think we should have kept trying.
and i dont like the question about "how much longer" becuase it seems like one of those questions designed to shut the opposition up (much like the "how many more are acceptable losses?" question). the truth is, we did wait a long time and if this were such a ticking time bomb, why didnt bush act 7 months before, when he started to get wind of this stuff? so...i dont think it was a matter of time before saddam just started attacking us.
i think the war would have gone more smoothly if we werent constantly being given some song and dance rather than the facts. maybe there were weapons or maybe saddam just wasnt going to be bullied by the US.
i dont see any of the stuff we were told about in iraq actually going on. where is the iraq-terrorist connection? its like a big game of three card monte with bush manning the table...the backs of the cards have images of 9/11 so no one notices where the cards are moving.

I see your point, however the question of 'how long' is a valid one IMO. It's meant to get you thinking about how long we have already been waiting on this guy (which you did). You ask why not act 7 months prior? Well, we wanted (keyword) to have support from our allies. It was the job of the UN to make sure that Saddam was complying with the terms of his surrender and they were not doing that. We decided that if they wouldn't do it, we would. Before we went in though, we wanted to urge the UN to give us some assistance (because it's their job), but they refused. Finally, we had to just go in ourselves.
I also don't believe that we were given a song and dance. I think that most people [who are against the war] were already bitter and refused to listen closely to the facts and thus misinterpreted them. Was there bad information given? yes. But if you were given information that your house was on fire, you would probably drop what you were doing and rush home to make sure. After the fact, you might look foolish speeding 110mph on the highway when your house was actually fine, but that's how life is. You never have all the information. When you're the president, you are given lots of information that isn't given to the press, and he had to make a decision based on that information. He had no way of knowing if it was true or false, but like you running to the fire, he didn't want to take the chance.
Everyone was yelling at him after 9/11 that the world is unsafe and something has to be done to make the world a better place. Well, here we have this guy who is not supposed to have weapons, and he won't let us verify that he doesn't have them. Sounds pretty suspicious if you ask me. Everyone was asking how 9/11 could have happened. Why didn't the gov't do something to stop it beforehand? Well, now our gov't is trying to prevent this stuff from happening in the first place, and he gets all sorts of flak for it. As it turns out, Iraq didn't have these weapons. If Bush could go back in time with the knowledge he has now, he might not sent us in.

I guess my point is that I think we gave saddam enough chances to come clean. He kept dinking around with us and now he is suffering the consequences. I believe that the UN is useless and waiting on them would take years and by that time, it may be too late.

 

[Gaard]

Before we went in though, we wanted to urge the UN to give us some assistance (because it's their job), but they refused.

How can they refuse if we never asked them? Remember, we were going to ask for a vote for another resolution authorizing force but decided not to when France said that they would veto it.

I think that most people [who are against the war] were already bitter and refused to listen closely to the facts and thus misinterpreted them.

Great. Now it's those who were against the war who misinterpretted information. And yet, in your very next sentence you say this...Was there bad information given? yes.

When you're the president, you are given lots of information that isn't given to the press, and he had to make a decision based on that information. He had no way of knowing if it was true or false, but like you running to the fire, he didn't want to take the chance.

And yet he went to war...

...and he won't let us verify that he doesn't have them.

Are you under the impression that the inspectors were denied access to places?

As it turns out, Iraq didn't have these weapons.

Wow, that's the first time I've heard anyone that was for the war say that.

I believe that the UN is useless...

Except for making resolutions important enough to go to war over?

 

[XZeroII]

Before we went in though, we wanted to urge the UN to give us some assistance (because it's their job), but they refused.

How can they refuse if we never asked them? Remember, we were going to ask for a vote for another resolution authorizing force but decided not to when France said that they would veto it.

The resolutions would not have passed.

I think that most people [who are against the war] were already bitter and refused to listen closely to the facts and thus misinterpreted them.

Great. Now it's those who were against the war who misinterpretted information. And yet, in your very next sentence you say this...Was there bad information given? yes.

There was a wide range of information. The misinterpretations are the reasons why people claim that bush lied, when he did not. A lie is when a person knows that the information given was false. The information that I said was bad was found out to be false after the statements were made, so it was not a lie that was told.

When you're the president, you are given lots of information that isn't given to the press, and he had to make a decision based on that information. He had no way of knowing if it was true or false, but like you running to the fire, he didn't want to take the chance.

And yet he went to war...

Yes. Think about it...

...and he won't let us verify that he doesn't have them.

Are you under the impression that the inspectors were denied access to places?

They were denied access. Of course, they were eventually let in, but that was after months of stalling. Why did they stall? The only reason I can think of is because they had something to hide.

As it turns out, Iraq didn't have these weapons.

Wow, that's the first time I've heard anyone that was for the war say that.

Yes, we are all not as inflexible as you would think. You only ask direct questions, which are answered. You think you know all of us, but you dont.

I believe that the UN is useless...

Except for making resolutions important enough to go to war over?

What good is making resolutions if you aren't going to enforce them?

 

[Tab]

If anyone wants to go see why Micheal Moore is a idiot go watch Bowling for Columbine and then The Truth About Columbine.

The Truth About Columbine > Bowling for Columbine

 

[PatboyX]

Well, we wanted (keyword) to have support from our allies.
1. then why didnt we ask for it right away?

Everyone was yelling at him after 9/11 that the world is unsafe and something has to be done to make the world a better place.
2. as carville said when he came to the eastern shore last year: after 9/11 the US was ready to make sig. changes in their lives, in their world and all the president asked us to do was shop.


I guess my point is that I think we gave saddam enough chances to come clean. He kept dinking around with us and now he is suffering the consequences.
3. we are all suffering the consequences.

 

[XZeroII]

Well, we wanted (keyword) to have support from our allies.
1. then why didnt we ask for it right away?

We did. Only the UK was willing to help.

Everyone was yelling at him after 9/11 that the world is unsafe and something has to be done to make the world a better place.
2. as carville said when he came to the eastern shore last year: after 9/11 the US was ready to make sig. changes in their lives, in their world and all the president asked us to do was shop.

I don't understand how that relates to what I said. Please explain more.

I guess my point is that I think we gave saddam enough chances to come clean. He kept dinking around with us and now he is suffering the consequences.
3. we are all suffering the consequences.

Yes, we are. Sucks how the world works. Someone acts irresponsibly and everyone else has to pay the price.

 

[PatboyX]

We did. Only the UK was willing to help.
1. from my understanding, we waited a really long time before going to ANYONE which is a reason that people were not jumping to help us. we waited until it seemed like "we must go into action soon" instead of starting a plan months before.

I don't understand how that relates to what I said. Please explain more.
2. what i was saying was that yes, people were looking to him for answers and for guidance but we recieved very little more than vague abstractions on the difference between good and evil. and that america didnt deserve This. ok...then what?

3. i agree completely! although we may be aiming at different someones.