Woohoo! We're "idiots!"

[Laurie]

Quote
Originally posted by: Zut50
Oh come on Rocky. Bush would have known how tenuous and dodgy the 'evidence' they were supplying was. He's either a fool for trusting poor sources of infomation, or he's spinning it as a case to go to war.

Im with Overkill on this. Politicians spin stuff all the time, and even flat out lie.

If he's a fool, then so are all of those people I just posted quotes from.

[Overkill]

Quote
If he's a fool, then so are all of those people I just posted quotes from.

Oh, for Gods sake! Just because you listed a whole string of quotes doesn't mean Bush is, or ever has been right - or wrong. You can do that on any subject from any time, over any issue. It doesn't mean that any of them were correct. A good example is tricky dicky and Watergate. There's pages of quotes from "top people" defending him before, during, and insanely after it became obvious he'd been involved. They were all wrong.    

[Zut50]

Quote
Originally posted by: Laurie
If he's a fool, then so are all of those people I just posted quotes from.

ooooh-kaaaay!

Bush isn't the ONLY person in America who wants an excuse to go to war. I dare say lots of those people work for Mr. Bush (I dont know much about American politics, and I can't be arsed to look it up!), and you know the repulicans and the democrats are hardly at totally opposite ends of the political spectrum!

There's plenty to gain from occupying Iraq; votes, oil, reconstruction and various other business deals etc... There are PLENTY of people who want Iraq in the American empire you know.

Plus, there isn't anything that remotely resembles evidence in any of those quotes you gave. In fact the ones that do discuss evidence seem pretty pessimistic about finding it!

[ric]

Kill-- please read



"Pesticides are the key elements in the chemical-agent arena," Hanson says. "In fact, the general pesticide chemical formula (organophosphate) is the 'grandfather' of modern-day nerve agents."

The United Nations was fully aware that Saddam had established his chemical-weapons plants under the guise of a permitted civilian chemical-industry infrastructure. Plants inspected in the early 1990s as CW production facilities had been set up to appear as if they were producing pesticides - or in the case of a giant plant near Fallujah, chlorine, which is used to produce mustard gas.

[Overkill]

Quote
There is a long list of charges made by the U.S. that have been confirmed, but none of this seems to mean anything because the weapons that were unaccounted for by the United Nations remain unaccounted for."

Note the first part of that statement. The US, as it is elsewhere in the World seems to be busy making up accusations and moving goalposts as it sees fit.

Organophosphates are what!!??? Blimey, better get back to my old bosses and warn them that US weapons inspectors think what they're sanctioning, is essential for WMD's................ NOT!!! The odd bag of fertilizer might be used by small time terrorist cells like the IRA's, but to attack the West? Come on.

This is getting silly. The US right seem to be labouring under the illusion that everybody in the World is conspiring to undermine poor old Bush jnr. They're not. He's quite capable of doing that for himself. Websites with "pictures" proving that Saddam had this, that, or the other, months after the invasions over smack of attempts to over-egg "possible" WMD manufacturing sites. Hard evidence, not fudges please chaps.  

[ric]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rocky
"Sorry Rocky, I've seen politicans state with conviction one thing, then later admit that in fact, yup, they were "economic with the truth" and it was quite another."


And that has to do with what?  Ive seen squirrels fall out of trees.  Doesnt mean all squirrels do.  I think Bush thought there were WMDs and he was brainwashed by his own thoughts.  Did you even read any PNAC or did you decide you are too smart to read up on teh subject and just replied to me anyways with some smartass remark?

roc- both Bush and Clinton thought there were WMDs... I guess both were "brainwashed" "


-- Weapons hunter David Kay, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that based on the pre-war intelligence, Saddam Hussein posed "a gathering, serious threat to the world." Hussein's scientists possibly misled the former dictator into believing Iraq possessed WMD, with the scientists possibly misappropriating funds. Kay also said that, based on his investigation, Iraq posed an even greater danger than previously thought.

-- Former President Bill Clinton on Dec. 16, 1998, stated, "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. . . .

-- Former President Clinton, in an appearance on "Larry King Live" on July 22, 2003, said, " . . . (I)t is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back there."

[Overkill]

It's ironic we're having this debate, as once again accusations that Bush/Blair knew there were no WMD's and misled the electorate are coming back to haunt both men.

Quote
In the Mail on Sunday, Mr Dyke accuses Mr Blair of either being incompetent or lying to Parliament about the war in Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. BBC.co.uk 28/8/04

Greg Dyke is the former director of the BBC dismissed over a BBC reporters accusations about the Kelly Affair.  The news channels over here are currently running this as the top news story......................  

[BallisticGelatin]

Scut, I wouldn't worry about what some 'durned furinner' (misspelling intentional) thinks or says about us...It's probably just jealousy they weren't born here.  

[Zut50]

Quote
Originally posted by: ric

Quote
Originally posted by: Rocky
"Sorry Rocky, I've seen politicans state with conviction one thing, then later admit that in fact, yup, they were "economic with the truth" and it was quite another."


And that has to do with what?  Ive seen squirrels fall out of trees.  Doesnt mean all squirrels do.  I think Bush thought there were WMDs and he was brainwashed by his own thoughts.  Did you even read any PNAC or did you decide you are too smart to read up on teh subject and just replied to me anyways with some smartass remark?

roc- both Bush and Clinton thought there were WMDs... I guess both were "brainwashed" "


-- Weapons hunter David Kay, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that based on the pre-war intelligence, Saddam Hussein posed "a gathering, serious threat to the world." Hussein's scientists possibly misled the former dictator into believing Iraq possessed WMD, with the scientists possibly misappropriating funds. Kay also said that, based on his investigation, Iraq posed an even greater danger than previously thought.

-- Former President Bill Clinton on Dec. 16, 1998, stated, "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. . . .

-- Former President Clinton, in an appearance on "Larry King Live" on July 22, 2003, said, " . . . (I)t is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back there."

OOOH! MORE evidence?

I especially love the first quote! Its Saddam's fault that there are no WMD then!

[Laurie]

Quote
Originally posted by: Zut50

Quote
Originally posted by: Laurie
If he's a fool, then so are all of those people I just posted quotes from.

ooooh-kaaaay!

Bush isn't the ONLY person in America who wants an excuse to go to war. I dare say lots of those people work for Mr. Bush (I dont know much about American politics, and I can't be arsed to look it up!), and you know the repulicans and the democrats are hardly at totally opposite ends of the political spectrum!

*laugh*
You want to know what 99% pf the people in that list of quotes had in common?  They are Democrats.  (Arlen Specter is not, and there may have been one or two others.)

[Laurie]

Quote
Originally posted by: Overkill

Quote
If he's a fool, then so are all of those people I just posted quotes from.

Oh, for Gods sake! Just because you listed a whole string of quotes doesn't mean Bush is, or ever has been right - or wrong. You can do that on any subject from any time, over any issue. It doesn't mean that any of them were correct. A good example is tricky dicky and Watergate. There's pages of quotes from "top people" defending him before, during, and insanely after it became obvious he'd been involved. They were all wrong.

Oh? So there were Democrats were defending Nixon during Watergate, were there?  Because, you know, the people that those quotes were from aren't exactly members of what one might call the Friends of Bush Society.

[Overkill]

Quote
Because, you know, the people that those quotes were from aren't exactly members of what one might call the Friends of Bush Society

Again, so what? Several members of the Blair govt swear blind that the Intelligence was correct, and that Saddams threat was genuine. Doesn't mean they are either A) correct B) or weren't attempting to mislead. You don't have to be a political ally of either man to follow what you summise is a national agenda. As a classic example of how meaningless such quotes are, in this country the Conservative opposition was making 100% supportive noises, until it became politicaly expedient not to. How foolish will their statements about Saddam's "threat" look in years to come, now they've done a complete policy u-turn? Hmmmm?  

[Rocky]

Ric-  You didn’t read my post completely or didn’t understand.  I know Clinton and Bush both thought there were WMDs.  The difference is, as I said, I think Bush brainwashed himself by his own beliefs that they had to get Sadam regardless of the dodgy intelligence.  His convictions were so intense that he wouldn’t let himself see the evidence without a bias.  I think that’s the problem.  

Zut-  Again I don’t think Bush knew how dodgy it was, I think he convinced himself otherwise.  Even if you think Bush did know, there are other (maybe only a few) people in the administration that wouldn’t have gone along with it if they knew the evidence was wrong.  Colin Powell would’ve not gone to the UN and gave bad intelligence if he actually knew it was bad.

Overkill- Read up on PNAC and come post.  Don’t give me smartass replies it just proves my point.

[Overkill]

Quote
Read up on PNAC and come post. Don’t give me smartass replies it just proves my point.

Tsk, tsk. I have read up on the "Project for the North American century" before. I have seen Bush's comments, it changes nothing. Try reading the manifestos for our next election, in Particular the Conservative one. You will find equally "firm" comments referring to various global and domestic issues. However, from long experience this means squat.  After the 1992 election for example all those "statements of intent" were forgotten in record time. As above, our Conservative politicans also "firmly believed" that Saddam was capable of launching an immediate attack. However, just recently they seemed to have changed their minds as if it never happened....................  

Oh, and Rocky, you're too young to be calling me out on "smartass replies". Behave young man!!

[Rocky]

Reading things about next election doesnt show what people thought 3-6 years ago sorry, at least not about this issue.  

"As above, our Conservative politicans also "firmly believed" that Saddam was capable of launching an immediate attack. However, just recently they seemed to have changed their minds as if it never happened.................... "


And that proves my point not yours.  They let themselves beleive it.  Just like they let themselves forget about it.  I dont think they knew they were that wrong.  They just choose to not take responsibility for being wrong because they felt it was appropriate at the time.  Because they brainwahsed themselves about the facts.

[JungleJoe]

i agree to a point. although I thinnk they knew deep down that they were wrong at the start, I think they convinnced them selves otherwise.

[Overkill]

Quote
Reading things about next election doesnt show what people thought 3-6 years ago sorry, at least not about this issue.

What?? So, the fact that politicans say things (in particular about Iraq) they don't mean, has no relevance despite the fact thats what the discussion was about?? I see.............

Quote
And that proves my point not yours. They let themselves beleive it. Just like they let themselves forget about it. I dont think they knew they were that wrong. They just choose to not take responsibility for being wrong because they felt it was appropriate at the time. Because they brainwahsed themselves about the facts.

Please explain how? Politicans, let themselves, believe it,............ Now i've heard it all!! Sorry, Rocky maybe now you can believe that there might be a degree of innocence about politicans beliefs, but in twenty years time come back to me. I doubt very much you'll be feeling the same. In the meantime read a few documents by politicans past who "were brainwashed into believing things" you'll find they very much weren't. Bush had an agenda, he stuck to it. The evidence came to support the statements, not the other way around. We now know, what they knew all along,  there was no evidence. He knew, it Blair knew it. They lied. It's nothing new, Politicans do it all the time.

Rocky, I respect your views on this, but they imply a degree of naivety I frankly haven't seen in years of study, work, and life experience of politicans.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.    

[Rocky]

Overkill you keep talking about politicians.  I am not.  I am talking about Bush.  I have read everything Bush had said publically his first year in office, did he have an agenda?  yes.  Did he beleive his own agenda ? yes.  I beleive the evidence for WMDs was very shaky and hence why I have posted here for years now saying they dont have them and they didnt when we attacked them.  I beleive groupthink it real, Ive studied it for years.  And yes its happened in teh past with presidents.  I think this is another case of group think where they let themselves beleive it.  You can disagree, fine, but dont call me naive again, I have studied this for years as well.  I have read everything Bush siad before the war, I have the book of his public record.  Ive read all of what PNAC has said.  Ive studied groupthink in many classes.  And Ive come to the conclusion that at least Bush and a few others were victim to that.  That doesnt mean they are innocent, its naive to think that means that.  I think they are to blame for it and should be held accountable.  But I think they are simple minded more than they are liars.  Even though most of them are both.

[Overkill]

Quote
but they imply a degree of naivety I frankly haven't seen in years of study, work, and life experience of Politicans

Quote
dont call me naive again,

*Sighs* I was referring to the politicans. Seems it's ok to say I'm a "smartass" though...............    

Quote
Overkill you keep talking about politicians. I am not.

Bush is a politican, is he not? They are a breed that displays the same characteristics the World over.

End.

[Rocky]

I beleive I said you gave me a smartass remark.  Maybe its hte language barrier, but they are different.  And you reffered to me as naive, not just Bush, and again, dont do that again.

Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overkill you keep talking about politicians. I am not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush is a politican, is he not? They are a breed that displays the same characteristics the World over.

A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isnt always a square.  You are smarter than your last post, try to show it and actually respond to the content of the thread.

[Zut50]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rocky
I beleive I said you gave me a smartass remark.  Maybe its hte language barrier, but they are different.  And you reffered to me as naive, not just Bush, and again, dont do that again.

Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overkill you keep talking about politicians. I am not.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush is a politican, is he not? They are a breed that displays the same characteristics the World over.

A square is a rectangle but a rectangle isnt always a square.  You are smarter than your last post, try to show it and actually respond to the content of the thread.

A spade isn't a shovel, but you can use both to fling sh*t about!

Come on Rocky... what makes you think Bush is unlike any other politican?

[Rocky]

Zut- I dont think he is as smart as a lot of other politicians.  Hows that for an answer.  He's stubborn as much if not more than anyoen else in the game.  I think its this trait that so many people like about him that causes him to come to conclusions like WMDs in Iraq without fully investigating with an unbias eye like most people would when considering military action.  If you think hes just like every other politican why do you think Kerrys better?  They arent the same.

[Zut50]

Don't drag me into your foreign politics Rocky!

If you must know Im not much of a fan of Kerry's; he did lie about his service record didn't he? . However, Bush and Kerry differ on policies which is where I make the distinction. If I were an american I would vote for Kerry, not because I like the man, but because he seems to be preaching from a slightly less crazy book.

[Rocky]

The only lie Kerry told about his war record is was he ever in Cambodia.  Which in teh big picture means nothing really.  
But considering no one has replied to my thoughts about Bush and WMDs Ill assume my point is not refuted.

[Overkill]

Quote
And you reffered to me as naive, not just Bush, and again, dont do that again.

I repeat, I was referring to the fact that politicans are not naive, in my experience, nothing to do with you. Read the sentance. So, please, no more thinly veiled threats. It's getting silly.

Quote
You are smarter than your last post, try to show it and actually respond to the content of the thread.

I have and i'm getting sick of you bad mouthing me when I don't agree with you. As a moderator, I expect better from you of all people. Your last post was trolling, nothing more. Check your own rules.


In fact, sod this, if you can't take a different perspective without being abusive you can argue the toss with someone else.