I have long said those opposing Bush removing were looking primarily at and focused on SHORT TERM STABILITY... The problem with that is medium and long term it would have been done at the cost of the very stability it sought to protect... And change would then come in revolutionary fashion ala the French or Russian Revolution... Further it Saddam had not been removed, AQ popularity and strength would be far greater today BECAUSE of the shoet term stability provided at the cost of good governance... So yeah removing Saddam medium to long term WAS a wise and requisite move...
Now shall we discuss the problem Obama is causing by ignoring India??? That, if continued will really be a long term strategic defeat for the US... On May 20, 5:11 pm, VT VirtualTruth <[email protected]> wrote: > Saddam nuetralized Iran, now Iran has no enemy > to balanced it in the region. Yeah that was a real smart move, > and then Bush let Iran get closer to having nukes too! > > Yeah Bush did a real good job! Just like Brownie did > in NOLA during Katrina! > > On May 19, 4:31 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes Hollywood SH needed to be removed... Be thankful he was removed > > BEFORE our current problems... Please define "immediate" here... Is > > the timeframe minutes, days, or weeks??? Weeks is the time it takes > > to manufacture AND Deliver Chemical or Biological WMD... Second Bush > > by removing SH gave the UN a chance to clean it own house of > > corruption... They refused of course... > > > On May 19, 2:35 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > jgg, > > > > So, S.H's Iraq was NOT an immediate and dangerous threat that needed > > > to be removed? > > > > On May 19, 12:56 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Again, the Iraqi War was NOT principally about WMD (using your non > > > > UNSC definition)... > > > > > On May 18, 5:52 am, VT VirtualTruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > You really don;t read or pay attention to the news do you? > > > > > > You fools said the same things about WMD's > > > > > that mistake only cost 4000 US lives and maimed > > > > > only 30,000. > > > > > > When Republicans make mistakes Americans die. > > > > > Good track record you got going there. > > > > > > On May 17, 10:17 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Sean, > > > > > > > So, this is really what it boils down to, as I suspicioned. What > > > > > > you are > > > > > > really saying is, "I Hate Bush, But I Don't Know Why". > > > > > > > What transpired at Abu Gharib is not at all what transpired with > > > > > > enhanced > > > > > > interrogation techniques by the CIA. The Army has no mechanism > > > > > > other than > > > > > > the Army Field Manual to interrogate prisoners. Those individuals > > > > > > were > > > > > > prosecuted because they were outside of Army regulations. > > > > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:26 AM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > If we tried the little guys for what happened at Abu Gharib > > > > > > > then the precedent has already been set for the ENTIRE > > > > > > > Bush Administration. > > > > > > > > I believe Nixon was also Impeached for his crimes > > > > > > > during the Vietnam war. > > > > > > > > Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment for his crimes > > > > > > > while in office, and Republicans pushed all out to impeach > > > > > > > Clinton while in office about a lie over a BJ. > > > > > > > > So both your reasons for calling me a traitor have both been > > > > > > > proven false based on previous precedent. > > > > > > > > You have nothing left to say, because you have run > > > > > > > out of realistic arguments. > > > > > > > > On May 16, 4:47 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey Sean!! > > > > > > > > > Actually, I thought my post was rather witty!! > > > > > > > > > In all honesty, you seem like a bright, intelligent, (I am > > > > > > > > assuming > > > > > > > younger > > > > > > > > than me) man. It is one thing to question our governments' > > > > > > > > policies, > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > quite another to jump on a traitorous bandwagon, accusing our > > > > > > > > President, > > > > > > > > (any President!) during a time of war, of war crimes. > > > > > > > > > I have nothing else to say on the subject. Based on all of the > > > > > > > information > > > > > > > > that has been released to date, I don't believe that we ever > > > > > > > > "tortured" > > > > > > > > anyone. That this is just a hyped up term used by far left > > > > > > > > extremists > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > are either uninformed, and/or have an Anti-American agenda. > > > > > > > > One or the > > > > > > > > other.... > > > > > > > > > Until such time as more information has been released, (which > > > > > > > > initially I > > > > > > > > was opposed to, but now, because the Obama Administration chose > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > the several Memoranda by Bybee and Bradbury) I want to see > > > > > > > > everything > > > > > > > > released, including the documents from July 2004 that former > > > > > > > > Vice > > > > > > > President > > > > > > > > Cheney has requested be released. > > > > > > > > > Until such time, I can add nothing to the conversation.....I've > > > > > > > > said my > > > > > > > > piece, both here in PF, as well as that Den of Moonbats, > > > > > > > > Euwetopia. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 3:43 PM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > That was the best you could do? > > > > > > > > > > Keith you want to try again? > > > > > > > > > > On May 16, 1:38 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM, VT Sean Lewis > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The shifting denial about torture. > > > > > > > > > > > > May 16, 2009 > > > > > > > > > > > Sean Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > Torture is just one more nail into the coffin > > > > > > > > > > > for the Republican Party. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheney is just trying to protect himself and > > > > > > > > > > > doing preemptive damage control. It is clear > > > > > > > > > > > the torture policy was his decision. Cheney > > > > > > > > > > > is hoping for another terror attack so he can > > > > > > > > > > > be vindicated the same way the entire GOP > > > > > > > > > > > party wants President Obama to fail so the > > > > > > > > > > > GOP policies can be vindicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > The water down spin on torture is that water > > > > > > > > > > > boarding is not torture. Dunking someones > > > > > > > > > > > head is hardly torture, it is like getting baptised! > > > > > > > > > > > The rough questioning was needed to get results! > > > > > > > > > > > > However a few things are being left out, 98 > > > > > > > > > > > dead prisoners, the torture did not work, and > > > > > > > > > > > torture is against the both US and International > > > > > > > > > > > law. > > > > > > > > > > > > If all the CIA was doing was 'questioning' prisoners > > > > > > > > > > > why was a doctor needed to be present? > > > > > > > > > > > > I have been questioned by the police, no doctor was > > > > > > > > > > > present. > > > > > > > > > > > > In previous questioning by the FBI, no doctor was present, > > > > > > > > > > > so what changed? > > > > > > > > > > > > What changed was there was now a chance that the prisoner > > > > > > > > > > > might die from the harsh interrogation. In fact 98 > > > > > > > > > > > prisoners > > > > > > > > > > > who were being held for 'questioning died. > > > > > > > >http://opendebateforum2.blogspot.com/2009/04/98-prisoners-died-in-us-. > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > > > > > > > > > This article had 623 footnotes verifying the deaths. > > > > > > > > > > >http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/06221-etn-hrf-dic-rep-web.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > I posted one of those footnotes at the end of this > > > > > > > > > > > article. > > > > > > > > > > > > The Torture Apologists want you to believe that water > > > > > > > > > > > boarding > > > > > > > > > > > is not dangerous, problem is water boarding wasn't the > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > harsh treatment the prisoners received. A point the > > > > > > > > > > > Torture > > > > > > > Apologist > > > > > > > > > > > conveniently do not bring up. Also if it wasn't torture > > > > > > > > > > > explain the 98 dead prisoners? > > > > > > > > > > > > Next comes the issue of why the prisoners were being > > > > > > > > > > > tortured > > > > > > > > > > > and what were the results of the torture. > > > > > > > > > > > > We were told that the torture was to protect Americans > > > > > > > > > > > from future > > > > > > > > > > > attack, and that valuable information came as a result of > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > torture. > > > > > > > > > > > This was after we were told that the US does not torture > > > > > > > > > > > by the > > > > > > > way. > > > > > > > > > > > > The truth is that the CIA was torturing prisoners. not to > > > > > > > > > > > protect > > > > > > > > > > > America or Americans, but to find a connection between > > > > > > > > > > > Iraq and > > > > > > > > > > > 9/11 or a connection between Iraq and Al qaeda. This was > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > give cover to the Bush Administration after no WMD's were > > > > > > > > > > > found > > > > > > > > > > > in Iraq. > > > > > > > > > > > > The torture how ever did not work, In fact it had the > > > > > > > > > > > opposite > > > > > > > effect. > > > > > > > > > > > Prisoners who were cooperating and freely giving valuable > > > > > > > > > > > Intel > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > Al qaeda without torture to the FBI, stopped cooperation > > > > > > > > > > > when the > > > > > > > > > > > CIA began torturing them about non existent connections > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > Iraq and 9/11 or Iraq and Al Qaeda. > > > > > > > >http://opendebateforum2.blogspot.com/2009/05/timeline-history-of-hars. > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > > > > >http://opendebateforum2.blogspot.com/2009/05/report-links-cia-to-mili. > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > > > > >http://opendebateforum2.blogspot.com/2009/05/harsh-interrogation-tech. > > > > > > > > > .. > > > > > > > > > > > > The legality of torture is, there is none. The Bush > > > > > > > > > > > Administration > > > > > > > > > > > knew > > > > > > > > > > > this so in an effort to do a work around, the Bush > > > > > > > > > > > Administration > > > > > > > > > > > redefined the status of the prisoners to a classification > > > > > > > > > > > the Bush > > > > > > > > > > > Administration > > > > > > > > > > > deemed outside of the Geneva Convention. > > > > > > > > > > > > Next came the justification of 'Harsh Interrogation' > > > > > > > > > > > because of the > > > > > > > > > > > 'ticking > > > > > > > > > > > time bomb' scenario. The White House ordered White House > > > > > > > > > > > attorneys > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > write briefs not only saying that harsh interrogation was > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > torture, > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > instances when harsh interrogation was prudent and > > > > > > > > > > > advised. > > > > > > > > > > > > Two problems with this, the need for a doctor during > > > > > > > > > > > 'questioning' > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > 98 dead prisoners, also the questioning of the > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
