What I threw out at you was info about the use of gas on the Kurds (true) and about the fact that the US did not provide the nuclear equipment that Saddam had (true) and that Clinton signed a bill authorizing him to cause regime change in Iraq (true). Also note that the chairman of the committee was not a Republican, we have no idea of the bipartisan makeup and vote of the committee, the report was released in 2008 (the Republicans were not in charge then). Also look back on the Senate report on 9/11 and what a load of bull that one was! Why should I accept this then.
Mark wrote: > Yes it was and you decided to try a history lesson on me and throw out > some "holier than thou" Gringo bullshit > > again read the ONLY empiracal repoort done on this > http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775 then choke > mon your BS > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:31 PM, dick thompson > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > The subject was AFghanistan and Iraq > > Mark wrote: >> how about the thirty oir so thousand that died in central america >> in the same time period at thands of alzheimer ronnie. ?? US >> forces lead by Felix Rodriguez (I know, I met him there) >> >> please read the republican dominated "senate intelligence report" >> from sept 2006 that says ALL the info you are trying to feed me >> now is pure BULLSHIT.... >> >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Zebnick <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >Thedifference in time from having used and being falsely >> accused of >> having gas was 25 years..... >> >> Really?LOL! Did the thousands who died wretching deaths come >> back to >> life in those 25 years? Did Saddam act like he'd become a >> humanitarian >> in those 25 years? Oh WAIT! Thats right! Saddam insisted that >> he still >> HAD WMDs. Only when the UN sanctioned him did he say they were >> gone.....supplying no evidence of their disposal, of course. >> >> >as far as building that reactor in Iraq... the US supplied >> and built >> it AND donated the yellow cake as well..... >> >> ROTFLMAO. You are either a very bad liar or a complete idiot. >> I think >> both. Bye! >> >> On Jul 18, 3:26 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > I didn't think he ahd gas or wmd's or nukes (though I Knew >> he was >> > sitting on a research reactor and a mountain of yellow >> cake) The >> > difference in time from having used and being falsely >> accused of >> > having gas was 25 years..... >> > >> > as far as building that reactor in Iraq... the US supplied >> and built >> > it AND donated the yellow cake as well..... You are right >> the US is a >> > danger even to itself. The only deluded person/people >> seems to be you >> > and Gringolandia. >> > >> > On Jul 18, 12:07 pm, Zebnick <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > > >If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way >> we did. >> > >> > > We thought he had poison gas. Our soldiers were equipped >> to confront >> > > it. >> > >> > > Everybody thought he had WMDs, mostly because he not only >> HAD them but >> > > because he used them against his enemies. >> > >> > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear >> nation state >> > >> > > Actually, they were. Iraq had completed construction of a >> nuclear >> > > reactor (That makes you a nuclear nation state) but >> Israel immediately >> > > blew it up. (Thank you Israel). >> > >> > > Some people would say that a leader who builds a nuclear >> reactor >> > > despite worldwide protests and has and uses poison gas on >> neighboring >> > > countries and his own people was a dangerous guy. Other >> people like >> > > deluding themselves. >> > >> > > On Jul 18, 1:42 pm, Frederick The Moderate >> > >> > > <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > > > If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way >> we did. Large, >> > > > tight formations are easy targets and we know that. Not >> to mention >> > > > that we would have sent a least one division to sweep >> and search the >> > > > area where we "knew" the WMD's were for residual (or >> any other) >> > > > evidence they ever existed. We never did. Not one peek. >> I'm former >> > > > navy intel and i can assure you, even though Bush >> screwed our Humint >> > > > network fro some time to come, we still would have been >> able to find >> > > > evidence - if believed it was ever there. >> > > > But I get it. You really, really, really want to >> believe there were >> > > > WMD's there. Okay. >> > >> > > > Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear >> nation state but >> > > > again, if you really want to believe it is or was, okay >> dokey. >> > >> > > > Talk about wanting to believe lies. >> > >> > > > I've lost five friends in Iraq. All of them Psy-Ops and >> a couple Force >> > > > Recon. They've made it clear for years that Iraq will >> never appreciate >> > > > what we've done and no matter how long we're there, >> they'll regress >> > > > shortly after we leave. Two thousand years of culture. >> > > > Iraq has already made clear they view US as outsiders >> and went out of >> > > > the way to spit in Bush's face before he could get out >> of office. But >> > > > you believe what you want to believe. >> > >> > > > On Jul 18, 7:23 am, jgg1000a <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > > > > >>> We also had the certainty that there really were >> no WMD's >> > >> > > > > Not true. >> > >> > > > > >>> Urban warfare, their commitment to keep fighting >> people they viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any >> kind of >> > >> > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation. >> > >> > > > > Once again you show little understanding... Both AQ >> and the >> > > > > Americans are outsiders... As is the harsh form of >> Radical Islam... >> > > > > As is the lowland Pakistani... The question here is >> not fighting the >> > > > > outsider BUT WHICH OUTSIDER... The exit strategy? >> Stability and a >> > > > > non Radical Islamic government in a nuclear >> nation-state... >> > >> > > > > >>> I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The >> Russians border them. They had easier access and more troops. >> No success. Tactics & technology have done squat for us. Thus >> far, we've been successful only at blowing up weddings and >> killing civilians. Lots of them. It's a mess >> > >> > > > > and a mistake and we should get out. >> > >> > > > > Tactics and technology make a huge difference... As >> the fact the our >> > > > > WILLINGNESS and desire to be a long term occupying >> power is far less >> > > > > than the Russians or the Pakistanis as makes a >> difference... The >> > > > > Russian border aided in supplying their troops but >> harmed the "Soft >> > > > > Warfare" in being seen a a long term occupying power... >> > >> > > > > >>> The only upside is at least we're actually going >> after people we have truthful cause to go after. >> > >> > > > > Once again you proclaim Urban Lies... >> > >> > > > > On Jul 18, 3:58 am, Frederick The Moderate >> > >> > > > > <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > > > > > I agree with you about Iraq. We had so many >> sanctions on Iraq before >> > > > > > invading, they couldn't import dental equipment >> (because it could >> > > > > > possibly be modified for weapons use - go figure). >> We also had the >> > > > > > certainty that there really were no WMD's. So it >> was nothing to storm >> > > > > > right in. Like you said, cakewalk getting there. It >> was afterward the >> > > > > > problems started. Urban warfare, their commitment >> to keep fighting >> > > > > > people they viewed as invaders, and the complete >> lack of any kind of >> > > > > > exit strategy, created a no-win situation. >> > > > > > I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians >> border them. They >> > > > > > had easier access and more troops. No success. >> Tactics & technology >> > > > > > have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been >> successful only at >> > > > > > blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of >> them. It's a mess >> > > > > > and a mistake and we should get out. >> > > > > > The only upside is at least we're actually going >> after people we have >> > > > > > truthful cause to go after. >> > >> > > > > > On Jul 17, 11:40 pm, "d.b.baker" <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > Iraq was [almost] a cake walk, compared to what >> we face in >> > > > > > > Afghanistan. Even with enough troops (500,000 >> +/-), it'll take a >> > > > > > > generation to pacify Afghanistan - a mountainous >> moonscape the size of >> > > > > > > Texas covered with 70-million ants (nomads, >> warring tribes - barefoot, >> > > > > > > illiterate villages). There's nothing there to >> "rebuild," it's all >> > > > > > > from scratch. The people are suspicious of >> everything, even a simple, >> > > > > > > local hydro-pump to generate electricity. >> > >> > > > > > > Then there's Pakistan, blood-brother to >> Afghanistan; we'll never >> > > > > > > subdue one without subduing the other. And by >> that time we'll be >> > > > > > > broke, no longer a viable nation - which makes >> the whole surge- >> > > > > > > strategy a lethal mistake.- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > > - Show quoted text - >> >> -- >> Mark M. Kahle, , >> www.filacoffee.com <http://www.filacoffee.com/> >> >> > > > -- > Mark M. Kahle, , > www.filacoffee.com <http://www.filacoffee.com> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
