I was going to stay out of this but cannot resist putting in my .02c. I have a lot to say about all this but will try and keep it short.
The Dems plus many others want Bush out at all costs and are going to lie thru their teeth to try and make it happen. They are relying a lot on the fact that the general public has a very short memory and will not recall the contradictory statements they are now making.
Most of the people in the states making all the noise are what are known as useful idiots and only help the enemy. In fact, if you take a really close look at some of current crop of politicians you will find that many by their words and actions come under the category of "traitor".
In reality this whole thing about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is not about oil, politics or what ever subject you care to name. It all boils down to religion. Have LOTS to say about that but not here.
The current crop of politicians and hopefulls IMHO is going to cause the US to very soon become a non world player. They are going to cause the states to unfortunately fall from it's super power status. Watch for the UN to fall soon and the EU take it's place.
Don't think that current world events such as the death of of Ahmed Yassin will not affect the US politics and ultimately the US as a whole, because it will and in ways that the majority of the US citizens and politicians are not yet aware of.
As I have stated in the past, when it comes to religion and politics, DO NOT trust what you read in the media. The 'stories' are becoming more and more slanted and the gullible public actually believes most of what they read. The media are doing all they can to make the Dems and their friends look good because they too want Bush out at all costs, so are actively helping to promote the lies put out by these self serving politicians.
Better stop before I really get going.

 

To all the liberal minded Idiots in this country , that think the President has the power to walk in and and press the war button by himself , I have these three words GET A LIFE. There are many things that I think President Bush should concern himself with he should look at spending and jobs and immigration and areas that promote growth in manufacturing. He does not owe us an apology for using the best Intel. and advisor's he had to help our country make the decision to stop an atrocity and madman in Iraq. Also just because we do not advertise our operative in Afghanistan at this point does not mean we are not following the terrorists there. What should we do hold a press conference everyday so that the bad guy's know our next and every move part of the reason we lose our effectiveness in gathering Intel, and information is this political correctness that seems to hang over our head.

 

I normally hold a very low regard for the media.......but the camera man that filmed Billary rolling her eyes during Bush's initial 9-11 speech is my hero.

 

Not wanting the US to be the target of another attack IS THE POINT about Iraq. The war on Iraq has done NOTHING to minimize the threat; data to date states that there were no WMD, Iraq did not help plan and carry out 9/11, and Iraq did not sponsor international terrorists who are a threat to the US. Not only has the war in Iraq has diverted attention from Afghanistan, where the threat still exists, and from other parts of the world, the US has managed to isolate itself from a large part of the world.

It is obvious that the US is short on ground intelligence, and that the rest of the world has more ground intelligence than the US has. Due to the position that this administration has taken, exemplified by attitudes in this forum, do you think that a French field operative will always be willing to pass on information that he has uncovered about a possible attack on the US ? Based on the comments that I often hear in this country I'll guess that many here wouldn't, if in their shoes.

As far as complaints about 'trading with the enemy' goes, one can find pictures of Rummy paying his respects to Saddam, and a long list of US companies that did business with Iraq. Iraq's biological program got a good boost under Reagan:

Germ culture to grow the anthrax was freely imported from the US military's centre for chemical and biological research at Fort Detrick, Maryland, via civilian laboratories operated by ATCC, the American Type Culture Collection.

American investigators have established that several shipments of biological material, including 21 batches of anthrax , were licensed for export from the US to Iraq between 1985 and 1988. They were sent to the Ministry of Higher Education and the Ministry of Trade in Baghdad.


Edited by Admin

 

 

1sttruck, I think you are watching some of these concepts whiz right over your head.

First off, the war in Iraq has not diverted attention from Afghanistan, it has diverted the press from Afghanistan. We have transitioned from high intensity conflict to assisting the Afghans with rebuilding their country. There are still boots on the ground there hunting the last vestiges of the Taliban and al Qaeda. You don't hear about it unless something bad happens, because the good things happening there are not deemed newsworthy.

Trading with the enemy? Politicians, Rebublican and Democrat alike, pay their respects to foreign dignitaries whether we like them or not. China, Syria, Iran, all are treated with respect.

I have heard the speculation that the US is more isolated than at any point since WWII. Several reasons for that. First off, the EU is emerging as a major player on the world stage. Their intent is to exercise as much or more influence in world politics and economics as the US does currently. Why the hostility after so many years? Individually, each country wields little influence. Banded together in a union, they possess an economic and political influence that can rival the US.
Second, there is no longer a major threat to collective european peace. When Hitler was knocking off european countries on a monthly basis, these folks all turned to the US and Britain for help. When the USSR was doing the same thing, the US was the only power that was strong enough to counter this. Ever hear of the Marshall Plan? The US basically rebuilt all of the countries that we conquered/liberated, including those of our enemies. Looks like they forgot about that.....

As far as not finding any WMD, if Iraq can bury MiG25's on short notice, imagine what they could bury with a little time. The intelligence, ground and otherwise, from the US or its' "allies" has been coming in since long before the present administration took office. Big countries pass along information when it is in their interests to do so. If not, they don't pass it along. Unfortunately, that is how the game is played.

And as far as anthrax and other C/B weapons, it would appear that these materials were exported before the UN security resolutions and economic sanctions were enacted.
Prior to the first gulf war, before the UN sanctions, everybody did business with Iraq. The US backed Iraq because the were fighting our good friends the Iranians and our good buddy Ayatollah Khomeini. Why not let someone do the dirty work for us, as long as they were gonna do it anyway?
And why wouldn't American contractors do business with Iraq? Their money was as good as anyone else's, and Iraq was spending it.

And old saying about my enemy's enemies are my friends comes to mind....

And what of the underlying reasons why Germany and France opposed the war in Iraq? Lucrative contracts signed with Saddam in contravention of the UN sanctions. Germany and France were supplying banned materials to Iraq, this was discovered after the invasion. France and Germany had everything to gain by holding out for more inspections and negotiations, as lifting the UN sanctions would have allowed them to freely exercise these contracts they had already negotiated. Their contract was with Saddam-no Saddam, no contract.

In regard to your statement about the war in Iraq doing nothing to mitigate the threat of terrorism, I would have to disagree with you on that as well. I think it sends a clear message to other countries regarding "state sponsored terrorism". Saddam was offering a bounty for killing jews, and gave shelter (at least tacitly) to the al-Aqsa Brigade, a group known to have ties to al Qaeda. IF Saddam didn't sell weapons to terrorists, he certainly had the capability to do so. Evidence was mounting that Saddam's oil for food humanitarian shipments were turning into oil for Saddams' pocket money shipments. What happens when the cat's out of the bag and the UN shuts that down? Poor Saddam needs money so he can build more palaces. Where's he gonna get it? Sell some weapons.....


Again, like most anti-war protesters, your arguments are narrow minded, short sighted, and shot full of holes. I don't like the war any more than anybody else, I would dearly like to see all of our folks come home on their own two feet. Not all conflicts can be resolved as Clinton tried to do, by lobbing some cruise missles at it from a couple hundred miles away. As GW said, "I'm not going to fire a 2 million dollar missle at a ten dollar tent so I can hit a camel in the ***"
The UN's years of rhetoric and resolutions did nothing except push Saddam further into a corner.

Sometimes you just gotta put boots on the ground......

 

No WMD have been found in Iraq, that's a fact. No amount of 'could be' or 'would of' or wishing or praying will change that fact. The only thing that will change that fact is finding WMD in Iraq.

Bush himself has had to finally admit that there are no links between Iraq and 9/11, in spite of what Cheney and Rumsfield and others have said, see below. That is a fact, and will remain so until links are found between Iraq and 9/11.

*****************************
WASHINGTON -- President Bush, having repeatedly linked Saddam Hussein to the terrorist organization behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, said yesterday [Sept 18, 2003] there is no evidence that the deposed Iraqi leader had a hand in those attacks, in contrast to the belief of most Americans.

The president's comments came in response to a reporter's question about Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press" program that Iraq was the "geographic base" of the terrorists behind the attacks on New York and Washington.

Bush said yesterday there was no attempt by the administration to try to confuse people about any link between Saddam and Sept. 11.

"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th," Bush said.
******************

Clarke then tells Stahl of being pressured by Mr. Bush.

"The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, 'I want you to find whether Iraq did this.' Now he never said, 'Make it up.' But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.

"I said, 'Mr. President. We've done this before. We have been looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There's no connection.'

"He came back at me and said, "Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we should come back with that answer. We wrote a report."

Clarke continued, "It was a serious look. We got together all the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, 'Will you sign this report?' They all cleared the report. And we sent it up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. ... Do it again.'

 

If I remember correctly, even Saddam thought he had WMDs. Weren't the people running his WMD programs getting away with the money? He was getting ripped off and didn't even know it. And he was running the place!! What's left of Saddam's WMDs will eventually be found.

Taking Iraq out is the best thing we could ever do to straighten up the Middle East mess.

 

There was worldwide sympathy and support for the US after 9/11, but that changed with the US focus on and invasion of Iraq.

You can look somewhere else to hang your 'anti-war protester' label, as in addition to wha tappear to be lies that are finally coming out, the unnecessary loss of life, the loss of US goodwill, etc., my primary complaint has been that it's diverted resources from the real war on terror. When Bush admits that there is no link betweeen Iraq and 9/11 one has to wonder what the real reasons were for going to war.

In the last year a sister-in-law of one our neighbors spent some time with us as her husband was in the Special Forces in the mideast. When we met I commented that friends who had trained with special ops in various services had expressed admiration for the Special Forces, as they were generally older, more mature troops with a lot of experience and training. He commented that it tended to be the case, and that the '90s had been hard on special ops in most branches as the economy had done well, and they were short replacements. His retirement had been placed on indefinate hold.

 

This is true in the respect that Clinton all but decimated both our military and our ability to protect ourselves by down sizing the military. U.S. Army Special Forces are only allowed 3000 troops during peace time. The Economy has nothing to do with it.

Congress may now have changed the rule for 3000 troops since I retired, but if they have, I haven't heard of it. Not sure exactly what point you were trying to make there, but it is lost on this old Spec Op soldier. Unless you are just referring to the fact that many competent individuals leave the service for higher paying private sector jobs.

Anyone who is close to retirement when we enter into a shooting war, is at danger of not being allowed to leave the service. Blame that on the fools who attacked the US and freedom in general, and not on the man who is trying to keep the fight out of your backyard.

Haven't met a Spec Op soldier yet, that doesn't stand 100% behind President Bush's attempt at keeping America safe. But then they are only professional soldiers as you pointed out, what could they possibly know about protecting freedom

 

YEAH! WHAT TOP SAID! (Hands are clapping)

I the folks GW is sending into harms' way are going to vote for him, why shouldn't I? Those who have the most at risk are behind him (not the weekenders and the ones who signed up so Uncle Sam could pay for their education).

BTW, what makes you think Iraq diverted resources from the "real" war on terrorism? Isn't overthrowing a state that sponsors terrorism part of the war on terror? You're missing the point again 1sttruck. Taliban supported terrorism, we took 'em out. Saddam supported terrorism, we took him out. Does the fact that Iraq had no connection to 9/11 negate the fact that Saddam was a potential threat to the future security of the US? Do we sit back and wait for him to sell WMD to a terrorist group for some quick cash before we act?

The invasion of Iraq and overthrow of its' government sent a message to countries such as Syria that sponsor terrorism. BEHAVE OR YOU'RE NEXT!

 

That's great, He must have been very happy to hear your thank you for defending your freedom. It is a rare oportunity indeed to get to meet one of these guys..........You DID thatnk him right???????????????????

I have met and trained with some of these guys including a couple of Delta force members and all I can say is WOW these are some of the smartest, toughest, most intense and nicest guys you will EVER meet. I am very, very glad that these guys are on our side!

 

Thru the '90s, espcially in the latter half, the military had a hard time meeting it's recruitment goals. The Marines were generally the exception, and the Navy seemed to have the most shortages. With the military downsizing, the Navy down something 250 ships, the army down 8 (?) divisons, the Marines still holding with the 3 three active divisions and 3 air wings that they've had since Vietnam (?), and the Air Force down ? air wings, it should have been easier for the other branches and harder for the Marines to meet recruting goals. In my opinion people tend to go into the Marines for different reasons than the other branches, so the status of the job market will have less impact. See attached for what I thought was a good analysis on the impact of the economy on the issue: http://www.capitol.northgrum.com/fil...ruiting_WP.pdf

Our friend stated that the Special Forces usually drew it's recruits from the Ranger or Airborne divisions, and that they just weren't getting as many people as they previously had. He stated that it was the economy, as more were leaving instead of signing up for another hitch. I don't know how the Navy or groups fared, but in general when the military was downsized the special ops were spared. I think that there have been three Ranger battalions since after Grenada, two Airborne divisions thru the '90s, and something like 5 active Special Forces groups thru the '90s.

 

 

Oh Jan,,,,,,,,,,,