Bush Administration Lying To America Again

[Bravus]

Hmm: accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy versus intentional invasion and unintentional but foreseeable destruction of Iraq.

One of these bucks is not like the other.

[there buster]

Quote:

perhaps in 2150 - it will be possible for Republicans to make an argument without talking about Clinton.

The damage he did to this country will not be repaired even then.

[there buster]

Quote:

Hmm: accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy versus intentional invasion and unintentional but foreseeable destruction of Iraq.

One of these bucks is not like the other.

Your cavalier conflation of honest mistakes and intentional deception renders this point meaningless.

[bevin]

What damage did Clinton do to the country?

/Bevin

[Bravus]

Quote:

Your cavalier conflation of honest mistakes and intentional deception renders this point meaningless.

Huh? Are you saying Clinton intentionally bombed the Chinese embassy and claimed it was a mistake? Any evidence for that?

Otherwise I'm not quite sure what you're saying.

[Dr. Shane]

In war there is always "unintentional but foreseeable destruction". We see it in Iraq and Afghanistan and we saw it in Bosnia. It is not fair to hold either President Bush or President Clinton responsible for individual mistakes that are made in the course of war. Wars are fought by erring humans and our enemies are trying to foil our best made plans. It is quite a bit more complicated than a Sunday afternoon football game.

[Bravus]

Absolutely: war is like that by definition. Which is why you don't even start wars unless absolutely necessary. There were plenty of people who knew, and said loudly, that this war was not necessary before it began. But it was begun anyway. On any sort of cost-benefit analysis, financial, humanitarian or (sorry Ed) moral, it is a catastrophe, as it was doomed to be from the beginning. Mistakes were made in the prosecution of the war, sure, but they pale into insignificance in the face of the mistake of starting it[1] at all.

[1] Or, if you prefer, turning the single war that began when Saddam invaded Kuwait back into a shooting, boots on the ground war after a decade.

[Bravus]

Quote:

The damage he did to this country will not be repaired even then.

That at least is true: Clinton paved the way for Dubya, and y'all will still be paying off his bills by then.

[bevin]

Quote:

Are you saying Clinton intentionally bombed the Chinese embassy and claimed it was a mistake? Any evidence for that?

There were rumors at the time in the US defense community that the Chinese had been supplying intelligence, and that the intelligence dept was exactly where the bomb hit. I remember hearing about this over lunch at a DoD-heavy trade show I was attending

/Bevin

[Woody]

Quote:

There were plenty of people who knew, and said loudly, that this war was not necessary before it began

You will always have a small minority that speaks out against a war. And that was the case here. But, if you let the anti war crowd rule ... then you would Never go to war. So ... why let them control policy?

And Laz ... where are you? We need you in this discussion. OR are you still in space?

[bevin]

In this case the small minority was the vast majority of countries in the world, and a majority of the voters in most of the countries that did participate, and about 50% of the USA population

/Bevin

[there buster]

Not that mere facts will have any impact on the various anti-Bush memes.

Quote:

Iran's Smoking Guns

Now Austrian sniper rifles show up in Iraq.

Friday, February 16, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

Following the weekend intelligence disclosures about Iranian-supplied weapons killing GIs in Iraq, we predicted Tuesday. that "a large part of Washington will pretend the evidence doesn't exist, or suggest the intelligence isn't proven, or claim that it's all the Bush Administration's fault for 'bullying' Iran." Sure enough, President Bush faced a barrage of questions Wednesday wondering whether senior Iranian leaders were really aware of the weapons transfers, whether he was using "faulty intelligence," and whether the disclosures were part of a strategy designed to "provoke Iran."

So here is the state of our public discourse: American military officials present prima facie evidence of Iranian weapons implicated in killing 170 U.S. soldiers and wounding 600 more, and Washington's main concern is not for the GIs but in refighting the last intelligence war.

Well, here's an item that doesn't seem to have been manufactured by Dick Cheney. According to a report in Britain's Daily Telegraph, U.S. forces in Baghdad have recently discovered 100 high-powered sniper rifles made by Austrian gun-maker Steyr-Mannlicher. The .50-caliber Steyr can accurately fire an armor-piercing round at a range of 1,500 meters. The weapon is good against Humvees, helicopters and body armor.

In 2004, Iran purchased some 800 Steyrs, allegedly for use against drug traffickers. At the time, both U.S. and British officials urged the Austrian government to bar the $15 million sale, fearing the weapons would fall into enemy hands. Former Austrian Chancellor Wolfang Schüssel thought otherwise, and let the deal go forward. To better grease the skids, then-Steyr-Mannlicher CEO Wolfgang Fürlinger made the case that the weapons were basically harmless and that Tehran had signed "end-user certificates" guaranteeing they would not be re-sold, according to the German newsweekly Der Spiegel.

[Woody]

In this case the small minority was the vast majority of countries in the world, and a majority of the voters in most of the countries that did participate, and about 50% of the USA population

/Bevin

First of all ... I would totally discount the other countries. They have their own priorities and corruptions.

But, I would love to have you cite your belief that 50% were opposed to the war. My memory was that some 80% supported the war.

[Woody]

I wonder if I pulled a switch and titled this Obama Administration Lying Again to America ... if I could get away with it?

[bonnie]

I wonder if I pulled a switch and titled this Obama Administration Lying Again to America ... if I could get away with it?

Not for long

[olger]

That sounds like a bias may exist..??!! What's up with that?

ger

[bonnie]

That sounds like a bias may exist..??!! What's up with that?

ger

Not biased in my reply. Most topics that have even a hint of political speak goes quickly where it can not be seen.

While I have never seen proof Bush lied,in a way I don't believe Obama has been dishonest either.

I just don't think most people cared about his ideology that was plain when he was campaigning.

He is a socialist in his approach. He explained this quite clearly or at least I felt he did.

Everyone that has mentored,associated with or had influence over him from early childhood has been at the least socialist and at the worst a liberal dose of communist and marxist ideology.

Most people surround themselves with those that they at least share core values with.I believe Obama did just that.

Now so many seem surprised and his ratings are going way down.Trust in him is down and surprise at the direction we are headed.

[BobRyan]

The Bush administration is painting the Iranian government as

Quote:

The officials displayed fragments of some of the weapons involved, claiming that those at the "highest levels" of government in Tehran were involved in arming Iraqi militants.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2264671.ece

Now, apart from the obvious lack of convincing evidence that the Iranian government is involved, there is another issue here...

An EFP is not the "sophisticated weapon" that the Bush Administration is labelling it as.

They are no more sophisticated than a 6" x 12" bullet. It could be made in anyone's home workshop, using designs that are widely available on the internet.

/Bevin

I too find it hard to believe that the Iranian government would support Iraqi militants or do anything amiss in anyway.

I believe it must be the evil Bush administration making the Iranian government "look bad".

I was not sure that anyone out there felt the same way -- but apparently I am luck.

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

I wonder if I pulled a switch and titled this Obama Administration Lying Again to America ... if I could get away with it?

Not for long

I believe it is more politcally correct to say that "someone in the Obama administration made an error without Obama's permission".

[Tom Wetmore]

Red,

I think the origin of this thread likely predated the agressive political filtering on this forum that shifts all political poo to the appropriate receptical for such stuff... I suspect that you resurrecting it will bring it up on the radar to be appropriately dispatched to the poo pile.

Wait for the sounds of flushing...

[Woody]

Yes. I agree. It was tolerable when Bush was on the receiving end. Now that Obama is on the radar ... we do need to be more politically correct.

[Guest]

That sounds like a bias may exist..??!! What's up with that?

ger

Yeah, whazzup widdat

[Woody]

I dunno that it's a bias ... it's just that the squeeky wheel gets the grease.

[Tom Wetmore]

No it's more like whack-a-mole. But in this case it is whack-a-troll. Stick your head out of your hole, you get whacked...

[bonnie]

No it's more like whack-a-mole. But in this case it is whack-a-troll. Stick your head out of your hole, you get whacked...

I am assuming this was meant to be humorous with only a touch of sarcasm.While humor can be found in a lot of things,the path Obama is taking this country down is far from humorous.

I am still always surprised when I hear SDA's champion socialism.

I know some progressive SDA's that have a far different view of end time events and the events leading up to that than I do. Their choice.

But how conditions in this country and the stated intention of Obama can be ignored in light of the instruction on this issue has been is hard to understand.

I doubt whether the sky will fall in tomorrow morning but we are in a not so slow slide in losing the freedoms we have always taken for granted.

When I was a whole lot younger and would ask my dad how the things we have been warned about could possibly happen here he always told me to be more aware of those sitting in the pew than those outside. When economic collapse and government control were right around the corner some in the pews would be making merry. Not yet,now is not the time would be what would be heard. Socialism or government control cannot happen in a booming economy.That will only happen when many will look to government to save them and care for them SDA's,knowing better will embrace it as enthusiastically the world.

This seems to be pretty much what is happening. Take a look at our wonderful looming health care. I have little doubt it will pass,at least to get a foot in the door.

Very little in that bill has anything to do with health and all to do with control. Right down to prison if you do not purchase the forced insurance coverage.

We will just have to disagree as to maybe what will be coming our way someday if not sooner. What socialism will mean to this country and how much of it you or others want.

For me it is on the downward slide. Whether that is a year,ten years or twenty I have no idea,but I do believe certain things must happen first to take away our rights and freedoms. Government must be able to exercise control and punish those that do not cooperate