Victory - Iraqi Freedom

[bevin]

Quote:

---

I'd like to see the quote.

---

Why do think I provided links to reputable newspapers?

GO AND READ THEM FOR YOURSELF.

/Bevin

[there buster]

Bevin, you keep asserting that George Bush was "certain" about WMD's.

I keep asking for the quote.

Bevin:

Quote:

---

Why do think I provided links to reputable newspapers?

GO AND READ THEM FOR YOURSELF.

---

So I read all the links you supplied. Here is a sampling of what I found.

Quotes by Hans Blix:

Quote:

---

Another matter - and one of great significance - is that many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for.

---

Quote:

---

"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it," Blix told the council. "It is not enough to open doors. Inspection is not a game of catch-as-catch-can."

---

Quote:

---

In his report, Mr Blix said Iraq had largely given inspectors prompt access to suspected weapons sites.

But he highlighted a number of outstanding concerns:

* Iraq has not produced proof it destroyed stocks of anthrax

* Baghdad has failed to account for up to 300 rocket engines

* there was evidence it had not destroyed all its VX nerve gas

* Its weapons declaration last month contained no new material

---

After reading your summary, it was quite a shock.

The only quote by George W. Bush was this:

Quote:

---

“If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long,”

---

None of the reports quoted him as to certainty, none of the reports attributed certainty to him without a quote, none of them described the administration as certain.

So RATHER THAN SHOUT AT ME,

Where is the quote that Bush was certain?

Pretty please.

[bevin]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html

Quote:

---

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments [:"red"]leaves no doubt[/] that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

---

They didn't have any

Quote:

---

And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.

---

and there was no evidence found of training terrorists

Quote:

---

Today, no nation can possibly claim that Iraq has disarmed.

---

and they had destroyed all the WMD that they had been given by the American's, except for a first rusty artillery shells that got missed

Quote:

---

In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors,

[:"red"]no more poison factories[/]

---

and there were no poison factories.

There you have it. GWB lying in an official speech to the whole country, still available on the White House's own website

/Bevin

[bevin]

You should also read this

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/eveningnews/main560449.shtml

and this

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,144437,00.html

and this

http://www.armscontrol.org/pressroom/2003/adminstmtsiraq_july03.asp

Quote:

---

Vice President Dick Cheney

August 26, 2002

Veterans Of Foreign Wars 103rd National Convention

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors-confrontations that will involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will continue to develop with his oil wealth.

---

Rumsfield:

Quote:

---

His regime has large, unaccounted for stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, including VX, sarin, mustard gas, anthrax, botulism, and possibly smallpox, and he has an active

---

[there buster]

O.K. I only have this one little bit of time to spend on this.

Quote:

---

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

---

The intelligence turned out to be mistaken, but every government in the world believed that it was correct.

A mistake is not a lie.

As for terrorists. There was indeed a training camp north of Baghdad, where an airliner was parked for training terrorists. Abu Nidal, a notorious terrorist, had lived in Baghdad for years, and just before the war he died of multiple self-inflicted wounds. Worst case of suicide the M.E. had ever seen.

So that was correct, and you are mistaken. Or would you prefer to call it a lie?

As to having destroyed everything, I just cited to you from your own sources Hans Blix pointing out that some of these were unaccounted for. And we still don't know. There are reports that some of this may have been smuggled into Syria. I don't claim that it is. I claim that we don't know.

As to your assertion that there were no poison factories. Perhaps you should explain to the Kurds that their people were not gassed. Saddam had access to a poison factory somewhere.

Quote:

---

There you have it. GWB lying in an official speech to the whole country, still available on the White House's own website

---

Lying requires either intentionally falsifying, which I've demonstrated did not happen. Was he mistaken? Was the rest of the world? The answer to both is yes. Did this amount to a lie? No.

Another form of deceit is stating the truth in a manner to deceive, or leaving out salient facts in order to leave a false impression.

I leave it to the readers who saw what you cited from your sources and what I did to come to their own conclusion.

Class over.

[there buster]

This via ABC (Australian Broadcasting)

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1295734.htm]

MARK WILLACY: That's right, Tony. The Iraqi police have investigated a case in the village of al-Mudhariya, which is just south of Baghdad. The villagers there say that before the election insurgents came and warned them that if they voted in last weekend's election, they would pay.

Now the people of this mixed village of Sunni and Shia Muslims, they ignored the threat and they did turn out to vote.

We understand that last night the insurgents came back to punish the people of al-Mudhariya, but instead of metering out that punishment the villagers fought back and they killed five of the insurgents and wounded eight. They then burnt the insurgents' car. So the people of that village have certainly had enough of the insurgents.

TONY EASTLEY: Do you think that is a one off, Mark, or is it a sign perhaps that some Iraqis are no longer sympathetic to the insurgents' cause, or at least no longer willing to turn a blind eye?

MARK WILLACY: It would appear that people are getting sick of the insurgency. I understand, though, that this is the first report of Iraqis confronting insurgents and actually fighting back in such a way.

But certainly many people here see the insurgency as the work of foreigners who want to turn their country into some sort of Islamic state, like Afghanistan under the Talbian.

And a couple of days ago we spoke to some voters in central Baghdad and every one of them basically said that they'd like the insurgents to stop their bombing and shooting attacks. Some even said they'd voted just to send a message to the insurgents that they would not be frightened any more.

(Guess they didn't get the memo about supporting the insurgents)

[bevin]

Quote:

---

A mistake is not a lie.

---

The intelligence was wrong. That was a mistake.

The lie was to say that the intelligence 'leaves no doubt'.

Quote:

---

there were no poison factories

---

At the time Bush was speaking, there were no factories. There is no doubt the Iraqi's had manufactured and used gas in the Iran/Iraq war - twenty years earlier. However the UN inspectors did not find any factories in or after 2002. The evidence shows Saddam had probably closed and destroyed them.

The LIE that GWB told the American people is that THERE WAS NO DOUBT. There was doubt. The US Intelligence community themselves was expressing doubts. The UN Weapons Inspectors were not finding anything. BUSH DID NOT HAVE PROOF, AND HE TOLD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT HE DID.

GWB got caught lying.

/Bevin

[there buster]

I've got it .

USE MORE CAPS. WON't REMOVE ASSUMPTIONS AND CONCLUSION JUMPING, BUT IT's KIND OF IMPRESSIVE.

YUP. I LIKE IT.

[Dr. Shane]

Bush didn't lie and wasn't imcompentant. He simply trusted the people the President of the United States is suppose to trust: the CIA and our allies. And they were wrong. Clinton trusted the same people and came to the same conclusions.

We have had terrible intelligence. If our intelligence would have been good it could have prevented 9/11 in the first place. Those that have a tiny bit of objectiviety can admit that it was an intelligence problem and not an Administration problem. The Bush Adminsitration acted responsibly with the information it had. Was Bush certian? Of course he was. George Tenant told him the case against Saddam was a slam dunk. And Bush trusted Tenant just like Clinton had.

Since the invation we have learned Saddam didn't have WMDs but we have learned in greater details the extent of the Oil-for-food scandel and how Saddam was bribing UN members to get sanctions lifted, oppose the US and how he had plans to resume his WMD programs.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

George Tenant told him the case against Saddam was a slam dunk.

---

Interesting, the Discovery Military History channel tonight had a fascinating program on the failure of intelligence.

They even discussed this meeting and Tenant saying this. The conversation apparently went like this

CIA Analysts: George, we have all these conflicting reports. We have this evidence for, this against, these caveats, these provisos

George: You mean that is all you have, all these ifs and buts? That's it???

Tenant: George, the case is a slam dunk.

George does not like to be told things he doesn't want to hear. He was told the truth, and didn't like it, so they told him what he wanted to hear. This is not the kind of person I want in charge of my country and my military. I want someone who sees through the misinformation and bad analysis, not someone who encourages it.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

George does not like to be told things he doesn't want to hear.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

That is a judgement call. If you want to sit in judgement of him you can do so. I don't see the evidence as being conclusive enough to make that accusation. I don't believe that this President wanted to send our boys into battle but did so as a last resort. I suspect you think he somehow twisted President Putin's arm into telling him Saddam was about to attack us with WMDs. I think I will let Jesus be the judge of the President's motives and not try to guess myself.

[there buster]

It's actually just bevin's conclusion, which is actually contradicted by the evidence he quoted.

I've seen this kind of paranoid behavior before-- putting the worst possible reading on every situation, conflating issues to confirm conspiracy. It can't be remedied. It must run it's course. Sometimes the fever breaks, mostly it doesn't.

[Planey]

Bevin states his belief:

Quote:

---

George does not like to be told things he doesn't want to hear.

---

Shane reproves him for being judgmental:

Quote:

---

That is a judgement call. If you want to sit in judgement of him you can do so.

---

Then Shane staes what he believes:

Quote:

---

I don't believe that this President wanted to send our boys into battle but did so as a last resort.

---

Now how is it that Bevin is judgmental for stating an opinion but Shane is not? Confusing.

Graeme

[Dr. Shane]

That is an easy one, Brother Graeme.

You see words have meaning and should be choosen carefully.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I don't believe that this President wanted to send our boys into battle but did so as a last resort.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

My statement is not one of fact but one of belief. I stated what I believe (or don't believe). Of course I am subject to be wrong.

Now look at Bevin's statement:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

George does not like to be told things he doesn't want to hear.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

This is a statement of fact. Brother Bevin doesn't say. "I believe..." or "It seems..." but outright declares his conclusion as being fact.

[bevin]

I notice you did not discuss the evidence that I put into the reply above that conclusion.

GWB was given all the if/but/maybe and then went ahead and told the nation anyway that a falsehood was undoubtably true.

The man lied, and you don't want to admit it.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Your view is quite unbalanced. No intelligence is ever 100% (there are always "ifs", "buts" and "maybes"). The enemy not only is trying to hide things but purposely trying to mislead us. Bush came to the same conclusion as did Clinton and our allies. In my opinion, he ascted responsibly.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

No intelligence is ever 100% (there are always "ifs", "buts" and "maybes").

---

Close to true, but not quite.

Good photographs, actual samples, information gathered from trustworthy sources - ANY of these would have significantly raised the level of certainty.

But Bush said case was UNDOUBTABLE even while his own analysts told him of their doubts.

EVEN YOU know his evidence had problems. He also knew.

He lied.

When he said UNDOUBTABLE we assumed, and he implied, that he had knowledge he could not share with us.

The world will never again assume that an American president will not lie about such an important matter. Never again will the US president be assumed to be telling the truth when he says "this is important, I am telling the truth, trust me".

From now on the world will look back to this gaff as a definitive instance of a US president lying to try to persuade people to do what he wants them to do.

He has permanently damaged the credibility and prestige of this great country.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

If you think US Presidents haven't lied to the world in the past, you are sorely lacking in a knowledge of US history. GW Bush is a saint compared to some previous presidents.

You make assumtions and draw conclusions about things that only God knows. When we get to heaven and open the books we can come to such hardfast conclusions.

President Bush had sound reason to invade Iraq. He did all he could to avoid the war but with members of the UN Security Council taking bribes from Saddam, that was almost an impossible task.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

He did all he could to avoid the war

---

I disagree.

The Weapons Inspectors were working.

He simply pulled the plug too soon, and he was told at the time that he was pulling it too soon.

That is why he had to lie. To justify doing what he wanted to do anyway.

/Bevin

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

If you think US Presidents haven't lied to the world in the past, you are sorely lacking in a knowledge of US history. GW Bush is a saint compared to some previous presidents.

---

whoa! If GWB is a saint, then I wonder what you will say when you review what Lucifer said to get Jesus' job as God?

Wow! If you are so easily led, and can gloss over the errors that he as made, you should be fairly easy to manipulate....Just put a republican slant on it, with a good set of religious values, and make sure that the abortion issue is correctly positioned, and you should follow that boy anywhere!

Quote:

---

President Bush had sound reason to invade Iraq. He did all he could to avoid the war but with members of the UN Security Council taking bribes from Saddam, that was almost an impossible task.

---

Now, how did you put this...."I am not a top...Don't spin me." Yeah, I believe that is what you said....You might want to take some of your own advise, Shane....

[Dr. Shane]

I am a straight-talker - little doubt about that. Now if you compare Bush to LBJ, Polk or Wilson, Bush starts looking pretty good. Don't forget FDR tried to pack the Court. Consider what a scandel that was and he skated on it. There is simply no evidence that Bush lied. Congress had the same information Bush did and the majority of them (including Kerry) came to the same conclusion. Remember former President Clinton supported the action at the time too.

Hindsight is 20/20. We now know there were no WMDs (at least not stock piles) which means the matter wasn't as urgent and President Putin was wrong. However we also now know about the oil-for-food scandel which places an entire different prespective on it too.

The weapons inspectors found a banned weapon just shortly before the invation. The inspectors admitted that Saddam was not being forth coming. We now know Saddam was just playing with them. He was doing what he needed to get the sanctions lifted so he could resume his WMD programs.

It is really not that hard to admit the US did a good thing. You just have to let down your intellectual pride and blind partisanship. I guess it is easy for me to say since I am a moderate with no alligance to either party.

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

It is really not that hard to admit the US did a good thing. You just have to let down your intellectual pride and blind partisanship. I guess it is easy for me to say since I am a moderate with no alligance to either party.

---

Heheheheh...let me guess...you want me to give you my $20.00 bill for your two $6.00 and two $4.00 bills? Yeah, right!

Quote:

---

The weapons inspectors found a banned weapon just shortly before the invation. The inspectors admitted that Saddam was not being forth coming. We now know Saddam was just playing with them. He was doing what he needed to get the sanctions lifted so he could resume his WMD programs.

---

That's a real selective memory that you've got there, Shane. Real selective...

Quote:

---

However we also now know about the oil-for-food scandel which places an entire different prespective on it too.

---

And how much was he makin' off all those hundreds[?] of oil tankers that were shipping oil to all the countries? What were his expenses? Two boys whose palace was filled with decadent items...Wife and daughters with thier palaces...His cabinett who had thier palaces....Then there was the common man, warlords who kept the tribes in order, republican guard [oh, I forgot, they had to pay for thier own boots from thier meager pay], and then there is the goverment employees....Oh, and I forgot the money that he hid in various neighborhoods with the cashe of arms for the continued resistance against the american soldiers....And the nuclear weapons program that he financed and the other goverment progams that were financed. Have I left anything out????

Any guess as to how much he was importing and how much he was paying cash and how much money he was bringing in? Anyone want to guess?

And I thought you were some sort of an accountant....Oh, that's right...You are an archetect....Or sumptin' like that, eh?

[Neil D]

Ed, Shane....

Here are actual quotes from the press regarding WMDs. Of course, this is from the political cartoons and they aall have some element of truth to them....See if you can find it.....

[]http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/WMDsNo/images/bateman.jpg[/]

[Dr. Shane]

You are not making sense, Brother Neil. It sounds like babbling.

I am a construction manager. It is quite involved to describe it all here. To make it simple there are three groups involved in each project: design team (architect & engineers), Contractor (general and subs) and an owner (public or private). I am the general contractor. I do have to crunch a lot of numbers (acounts payables/recievables, change proposals/orders, bidding, etc.)

The oil-for-food scandel, measured in dollars, is the biggest scandel in history. It was bad. Saddam was hiding more than his boys' porno collection. He was making plans for something big and had some bad bedfellows.

[Dr. Shane]

Now if you want to be balanced and not just a puppet for the radical Left you can quote the quotes from Kerry, Clinton, Gore and other Democrats making the same claims.

Your call. Be your own man or be a puppet.