Is the COLD WAR really over? - Page 4 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #46 03-28-2006, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Owa tigu siam.

You're much too hard on yourself.

Botnst · #47 03-28-2006, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I'm jumping into this thread late, so excuse me if this looks like a hijack or repetitive. It's not meant that way.

Does anyone else find it odd that the administration has been so quiet about Russia feeding our military secrets to Saddam before and during the invasion? How is that not a big deal?

Here's hypothetical without any basis in fact.

Switch-on Al foil guard

A possibility is that a mix of factual, unimportant information was fed with plausible, innaccurate information to provide Saddam with an erroneous impression given weight by having come from his allies, the Russians. That is a classic counterintelligence method.

The reason why gov doesn't make a big deal is that means, methods, and personnel would be revealed.

Switch-off Al foil guard.

B

cmac2012 · #48 03-28-2006, 05:07 PM

I wouldn't say the Russians are right or wrong in feeding intel to Saddam. Just that it's naive of us to expect people to meekly acquiesce to our every ambition. In this age of fungible assets, why should we expect another nation to allow us to corner any portion of any market?

Honus · #49 03-28-2006, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peragro

Why are you concerned about this. The documents that assert that the Russians did this come from the same cache of documents pointing out relationships with Saddam and Al Qaeda. As you have pointed out vociferously they haven't been authenticated.

I didn't point out any such thing. I never commented on the authenticity of the documents concerning the Russians infiltrating our military command and feeding information to Saddam. Unlike the document purporting to link Saddam to Bin Laden, these documents are corroborated by facts that our military command knows to be true. By comparison, the Saddam/Bin Laden documents contradict the other available evidence. That contradiction doesn't prove anything, but it also doesn't provide the corroboration enjoyed by the documents about Russia's involvement with Saddam. Plus, if the authenticity of the documents about Russia is in question, why doesn't the administration say so?

Quote:

The Russians claim this assertion is false. Why would the Whitehouse make noise regarding this?

You might have a point there.

Quote:

Now, hypothetically of course, if this were true it would shed new light upon UN involvement in Iraq prior to the war and why the Bush admin. would never have received support from Russia and France no matter the circumstances.

That's true, and it illustrates the tragedy of Bush's dishonesty on Iraq. If they hadn't been caught in so many other lies, mistakes, and deceptions, they might be in a position to make a comment either for or against Russia. As it is, few people outside our country believe a word our administration says. And that sucks.

Quote:

Not to mention what the other documents have to say about WMDs and operational ties betwixt Al Qaeda and Hussein's Iraq. But that's a great big "if".

Some ifs are bigger than others.

Honus · #50 03-28-2006, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Here's hypothetical without any basis in fact.

Switch-on Al foil guard

A possibility is that a mix of factual, unimportant information was fed with plausible, innaccurate information to provide Saddam with an erroneous impression given weight by having come from his allies, the Russians. That is a classic counterintelligence method.

The reason why gov doesn't make a big deal is that means, methods, and personnel would be revealed.

Switch-off Al foil guard.

B

I don't know what you see in those aluminum foil hats. That sounds like a plausible explanation to me.

peragro · #51 03-28-2006, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I didn't point out any such thing. I never commented on the authenticity of the documents concerning the Russians infiltrating our military command and feeding information to Saddam. Unlike the document purporting to link Saddam to Bin Laden, these documents are corroborated by facts that our military command knows to be true. By comparison, the Saddam/Bin Laden documents contradict the other available evidence. That contradiction doesn't prove anything, but it also doesn't provide the corroboration enjoyed by the documents about Russia's involvement with Saddam. Plus, if the authenticity of the documents about Russia is in question, why doesn't the administration say so?You might have a point there.That's true, and it illustrates the tragedy of Bush's dishonesty on Iraq. If they hadn't been caught in so many other lies, mistakes, and deceptions, they might be in a position to make a comment either for or against Russia. As it is, few people outside our country believe a word our administration says. And that sucks.Some ifs are bigger than others.

Ok, as always, thank you for the balanced analysis.

Lebenz · #52 03-29-2006, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

...It is not something that can be objectively proven.

Bot

History proves time and again that fear is a thorn tipped whip used to drive entire populations. Because it is so easy. All it takes is a leader who frames some grievous atrocity as justified. Corruption of the truth is the ante for the worst kinds of kleptocracy… Beyond that, the only thing that varies is the scale.

Botnst · #53 03-29-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lebenz

History proves time and again that fear is a thorn tipped whip used to drive entire populations. Because it is so easy. All it takes is a leader who frames some grievous atrocity as justified. Corruption of the truth is the ante for the worst kinds of kleptocracy… Beyond that, the only thing that varies is the scale.

Beautifully written turn of phrase.

Zeitgeist · #54 03-29-2006, 12:23 PM

ditto

Lebenz · #55 03-30-2006, 10:41 AM

Thanks, one can’t help but draw inspiration from the group…

BTW, you guys get the checks?