Why just one? There are so many. How about one for Bush and one for Cheney? Is that OK? For Bush, I am torn between his lie about what that report by the international atomic agency said about Saddam's nuclear capability and his lie that the reason we invaded Iraq was because Saddam kicked out the inspectors. Since you are limiting me to one lie, I will go with the second one. The first lie is nice because it was just so stupid for Bush to say that a report said something that it didn't say. Didn't he know people would check the report?

OK, I'm stupid- please quote specifically the exerpt from the uS report, and then quote Bush to illustrate how he lied about it, since you obviously READ both. Also, I believe that kicking out inspectors constituted violation of several UN resolutions and was, by the letter of the international law, sufficient to initiated "action against the regime." So how the HELL is that a lie? Or do you liberals read some other secret UN resolutions that the rest of us is not privvy to obtain??? and how come CLINTON did not do anything about? We already know that Saddam was bribing France and Russia to sit that one out.

For Cheney, I will go with the one he said to Russert about when we struck Iraq we struck the geographic base of the people who attacked us on 9/11. That one is hard to beat. It has a little of everything. It has Cheney's total disrespect for the families of the 9/11 victims, and it has the incredible nerve to say something that is so blatantly false. That one is hard to top, so I will go with it.
OK, I guess I'm stupid again- are you saying that Middle East generally, and the Afghanistan-Iraq_ Pakistan-Iran are NOT Al Qaeda's geographic base?? then what is? Cuba???? and how is that disrespectful of 9/11???? OK, I see, let me state it again- I asked for FACTS not your opinions. So far, you supplied none (other than the opinions spoon-fed to you by that fat Teddy Kennedy).

ok, to be continued

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

You jammed a lot into that segment. I do have to compliment the speech writer on that sentence from Bush's 2003 State of the Union. Bush supporters have gotten a lot of mileage out of that one, but they are playing us for suckers. That sentence from the State of the Union was preceded and followed by the most dire warnings imaginable about how imminent the threat was. Remember Condi Rice's line about not wanting the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud? How about Powell's entire presentation to the UN? That was all about imminent threat. Do you really contend that the Bush administration never said that Iraq posed an imminent threat? That's ridiculous.

Yes, I do. BTW, we conservatives DO get a lot of milage out of facts, as opposed to demagogues presenting their opinions as facts. Now, I STILL agree with Condi Rice, and Powell based his entire presentation on intell as given to him by Tenet. Whether the intel was any good, well, YOU I'm sure listened to Tenet. The administration may have created an expectation of an imminent threat, which is not the same as a lie (example of a lie:" Ihave never had a sexual relation with that woman- Monica Levinski." BTW- great speech writing, you liberals got very little milage out of this one...). The democrats in congress increased this expectation to cover their ass.


As for Bosnia, how do you know what my reaction to that was? And what does it have to do with Iraq? And didn't they have ethnic cleansing going on at the time? In other words, didn't that situation actually have a true element of imminent harm?

And Saddam was playing chess??? where you watching the Coalition digging up mass graves? videos of people being tossed from the roof tops?? did you see Gallup Poll that said 66% of Iraquis are GREATFUL to the US that Saddam was deposed? did you watch demonstrations DEMANDING death for Saddam? Sorry, I'm getting exasperated...

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

OK, one by one- if you look at the present geopolitical situation from the perspective of the last 2 years, I'm wasting my time. For instatnce, the dismembering of the CIA that resulted in this whole mess statrted 30 years ago with Jimmy Carter (he decided that CIA will not send people in the field but will buy intelligence from others) followed by Sen. Torricelli in 1991 who proposed that CIA will not buy intel from the "bad guys" (you know, like Al Qaeda members who actually may know something) followed by nomination of Mr.s Tenet in 1997, who was always highly critical of the CIA and who brought top managers that effectively limited intelligence gathering to looking at the sattellite photos. Good Job!! we now see the results.

Reckless about removing Saddam? Oh, I see, we should have waited another 12 years, and meanwhile we could blame any terrorist attack on inaction by Bush.

Again, give me direct quotes, not empty opinions

No, Kay is NOT a model of reason. I'm suggesting that even HE says we should have invaded when we did.

OK, I DONE!!

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

I didn't just read Bush's comments, I saw them on TV and then read about them in the paper. On September 7, 2002 Bush gave a press conference with Prime Minister Blair. Bush referred to what he called a report from the International Atomic Energy Commission, based on Hussein's nixing of inspections in 1998. "I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied—finally denied—access, a report came out...that they were six months away from developing a weapon," the president said. "I don’t know what more evidence we need." After the press conference, the Commission said that no such document exists. "There’s never been a report like that issued from this agency," said Mark Gwozdecky, head of the group. Asked why Bush referred to an apparently imaginary document, the White House claimed he was really talking about a report from 1991. But Gwozdecky told Reuters no paper to that effect was issued by his agency in 1991, either. When someone pointed out that the agency said no such thing Ari Fleischer wrote a letter to the editor of the Washington Post saying that Bush got the wrong agency and that he really meant this other agency’s report. Unfortunately for Ari, the report he cited came out after Bush’s press conference, so I don't see how he could have been relying on it. Admittedly, I have not read any of the Commission's reports, but I am confident that if they backed up the President's statement, then his people would not have gone to the trouble to make up two other documents that they say he was really talking about.

With all due respect Piotr, that doesn't even make sense.

No. Read the quote, he was talking about Iraq, not Afghanistan, or Pakistan or Iran or Cuba. What do those countries have to do with what I said?

Because he is lying about their loss to advance his Project for a New American Century agenda. To me, that is disrespectful and I hope I am not being disrespectful to those families by raising the point.

Boloney. You sound like Sean Hannity. Whenever someone states facts he doesn't like he attacks them and says that their facts are really opinions.

I have three responses. First, I am aware of no evidence that Saddam was engaging in mass murder when we attacked. The operative word in my previous post was "imminent" (Did I spell that right?) Second, what do the facts you state have to do with whether Bush/Cheney hyped the intelligence to make the threat look imminent? Nothing, that's what. Third, what does Bosnia have to do with Iraq? Is that your standard for determining whether Bush has acted properly? By comparing him to Clinton? An odd approach, I must say.

Who said that? Disagreeing with Bush/Cheney is not the same as saying we should have done nothing.

I have to give up on the UN report- I simply do not know enough facts to argue the point further- you win that one.
I give up on the rest- read the UN charter. then read about Saddam bribing major players to oppose intervention in Irak.
We found enough evidence of Al Qaeda operating from Iraq including a terrorist camps.
Statement about 9/11 is a pure opinion,. and I do not know what are you talking about??

And you sound like a democratic presidential candidate morphed with Ted Kennedy and Mr. Carvel and financed by Irak-Chirac. You presented one potential fact and the rest is pure speculation, plus you are showing attention span of an average liberal- two years. The rest is "ancient history" no matter how relevant today. examples
1)In 2000 it was Gore who tried to change voting laws- not Supreme Court
2) Enron happened in 1999 and 2000, NOT in 2002
3) Bush HAD to address Iraq threat based on the briefings from the previous admin
4) Osama attacked US interests in 1992, 1993, 1998, and finally in 2001 (8 month after Bush took over White House). He was NOT "created " by Bush
5) the recession started in November 2000 under Clinton- it's NOT "Bush Recession"
6) Tenet had 9 years to fix CIA, not 2
7) Jimmy Carter said in 1994 that Clinton's policies toward North Korea assured safety of the world (N.Korea crises was not created by Bush).

The above may not be strictly relevant to our discussion- just simply my comment on liberals.

Etc, etc. OK, I'm bored with this. I'm going to sleep

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

Ok, now I really give up.
A) really???? gee, UN knew about it since 1991
b)Nobody as yet showed that they did hype it
c)you've got to be kidding???

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

Cuba? Heck, it oughtta be. I'll bet there are nearly as many hardcore al quedistas in Cuba as there are in the middleast. If I get my wish, they will all end up in either a collapsed cave or in GTMO. I prefer the collapsed cave.

There was an al queda affiliated group based in the northern mtns of Iraq. The degree to which they were sanctioned by Saddam is unknown.

Lets assume for just a moment that Prez Bush I, Prez Clinton, and Prez Bush II all were beneficiaries of the same intelligence services. All three believed that Iraq was actively pursuing WMD. All of the western democracies believed the WMD threat was real. The UN acted on this info by searching for WMD and delivery systems whenever possible until Saddam finally kicked them out.

Since the fall of Iraq, nobody has found any evidence of either WMD stockpiles not of production facilities.

Since the fall of Iraq, nobody has found any evidence of the destruction or removal of WMD precursors or stockpiles.

These two facts point to some rather strange scenarios.

I. Saddam never had a WMD production and implementation system.
II. Its all gone.

If the first, OOPS! The world got it wrong since the 1980's. We accidentally deposed a murderous megalomaniac and his mad-bastard sons. We also protected the planets energy supply. Oh well, sometimes good things come of accidents.

If its #II, WTF happened to it? I think we need to assume #II and find out for sure.

Among the declared canditates, which ones will most relentlessly pursue al queda and the Iraqi WMD trail?

B

I guess you missed all of those stories and photographs and videos of mass graves and rape rooms and torture chambers and the like....

Or perhaps the rest of us just "imagined" all of that, to support our "unprovoked, illegal, unjustified, unilateral, imperialist invasion and occupation, colonization and exploitation of Iraq and its illustrious leader."

Mike

__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic

Ahem...

Ahem...

Hey, where's that picture of "Baghdad Bob" denying Americans were in the city? You know, the one with a tank rolling down the avenue behind him.

Ol' Bob was the perfect example of why we should look for evidence evidence and come to our own conclusions.

Long, long trenches of cloth-wrapped bones and bodies exhumed. Many with broken and missing limbs and bullet holes and skull fractures. In nearby buildings, details of who was in the graves and why, all documented by the former regime.

Videotapes of tortures. Many, many tapes. All ages of victims. Both sexes. Videotapes of rapes. Many tapes.

I know, I know, these people would have never been avenged in their own right. They were avenged as an accident--because the coalition went to war based on bad or misused intelligence. It is bad to go to war for the wrong reassons.

Had we waited for the right reasons, maybe Saddam would have joined a monastery, fermented good wines and ceased torturing his people.

Or maybe he would have continued his butchery unopposed. Well, unopposed at least until the French discovered what he was doing. Oh wait, they did know what he was doing. Why didn't they act? Or the Russians? Both were major trading partners and elbow deep in blood money and oil contracts and weapons supplies.


B

Thanks, B....that was a nice "part 2" to my post.

Mike

__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic