Anti-kerry Film Sparks Dnc Response

[USAir757]

Why do you cite ignoring the UN when that's exactly what WE did in starting the war?

Simply because diplomacy did not work with the Iraq situation. We're certainly not ignoring the UN now with regard to the Axes of Evil, but we will again if we have to, regardless of whether Kerry or Bush is president, right?

 

[AgMedallion]

Why do you cite ignoring the UN when that's exactly what WE did in starting the war?

[post="191110"][/post]​

Post Details Saddam's Global Friends
Washington Post - Many Helped Iraq Evade U.N. Sanctions On Weapons


BERLIN, Oct. 7 -- As part of its stealth effort to evade U.N. sanctions and rebuild its military, the Iraqi government under President Saddam Hussein found that it had no shortage of people around the world who were willing to help. Among them: a French arms dealer known only as "Mr. Claude," who made a surreptitious visit to Iraq four years ago to provide technical expertise and training.
Mr. Claude worked for Lura, a French company that sold tank carriers to Iraq, according to documents recovered by the top U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq. The mysterious Frenchman may have also helped the Iraqis attempt to acquire military-related radar and microwave technology, despite a U.N. ban on such trade with Iraq since the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Other French military contractors came to Baghdad with offers to supply the Iraqi government with helicopters, spare parts for fighter aircraft and air defense systems after 1998, when U.N. weapons inspectors withdrew under pressure, according to a report issued this week by Charles A. Duelfer, the chief U.S. weapons inspector. The report cites evidence that contacts between the French suppliers and Hussein's government continued until last year, less than one month before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

It never ceases to amaze me why anyone would consider the U.N. relevant in any way, shape or form to anything involving our national security. Sure, Bush can use Iraq's flouting of the various U.N. sanctions, directives, resolutions, whatever, but it's just icing on the cake for the basic reason we had to get rid of Saddam. Any politician who would trust the word of a ruthless despot like Saddam must have some genetic material passed down from Neville Chamberlain. Along those same lines, any politician (like Kerry) who would give a rat's as* about or seek permission from (or want to get a passing grade on some "global test" from) the likes of Jacques Chirac or any of his crooked bribe and kickback-taking cronies on the U.N. Security Council isn't to be trusted to look out for America's best interests. Apparently Kerry and his Kool-aid sipping supporters haven't been reading the news as to the U.N. Oil for Food scandal. They live in some dream world where they assume the French and others who were getting millions from Saddam in that program would be willing to kill the goose that was laying the golden eggs. Shame on them for their naivete.

 

[delldude]

And what you refuse to believe is that with the 500 tons of "Yellowcake" and the remaining equipment, Sadam could have started up his program at the drop of a hat or the turned back of the UN.

[post="191102"][/post]​

FRED-did you notice in the debates,IRAN has yellowcake its a big issue and bush's fault...however IRAQ has it and its a non-issue..WTF?
MEDIA BIAS

 

[KCFlyer]

Simply because diplomacy did not work with the Iraq situation. We're certainly not ignoring the UN now with regard to the Axes of Evil, but we will again if we have to, regardless of whether Kerry or Bush is president, right?

[post="191125"][/post]​

Ummm...Saddam had destroyed most of his weapons, starting around the time of the end of the first gulf war...so it would appear that diplomacy WAS working, even though Saddam was bluffing about it. That's in the CIA report that just came out. Who knows what kind of help we might have had from the rest of the world going into Iraq if we had the patience to work with the UN for even one month before telling the "to hell with you". Who knows...it may have given this administration just enough time to actually question some of the intelligence that came out very shortly after the initial invasion that said that WMD's weren't the big problem we thought they were. But that goes against the Bush credo of Ready....FIRE....Aim.

 

[KCFlyer]

FRED-did you notice in the debates,IRAN has yellowcake its a big issue and bush's fault...however IRAQ has it and its a non-issue..WTF?
MEDIA BIAS

[post="191132"][/post]​

you know...I'm just looking for some consistancy in the Bush administration. We've got the "fer us or agin us" doctrine, yet Iran does have the stuff....and we aren't doing anything about it. Yet North Korea already POSSESSES nucular (in honor of GWB) weapons, yet we aren't doing anything about it. Yet Pakistan has sold nuclear information....yet they are our allies....yet the Saudi's say they don't support terrorist groups, yet they offer them amnesty....and we haven't done anything about that.

Seems we've got our hands full in Iraq, while a terrorist organization might (that word the Bushies use to justify things) be planning, plotting, developing or acquiring the necessary components to stage another attack. And WE have basically turned the UN against us. Sorry folks, but with all that on the plate, and the "fer us or agin us" strategy, we're lacking the manpower to take care of that without getting troops from somewhere. You find the UN and the countries represented to be useless, then there's only one place to get that manpower to address the other threats to our security....reinstitute the draft.

 

[NWA/AMT]

guess we don't need the first amendment anymore.......

[post="191032"][/post]​

Oddly enough, it was Sinclair Broadcasting who refused to air the Nightline editon where Ted Koppel read the names of some of those soldiers bodies that you brought home.

[post="191068"][/post]​

I guess it's only a first amendment problem when you agree with it, huh?

Perhaps Roger Powell should have read the FCC regulations about 'editorial advocacy' for political candidates.

 

[AgMedallion]

you know...I'm just looking for some consistancy in the Bush administration. We've got the "fer us or agin us" doctrine, yet Iran does have the stuff....and we aren't doing anything about it. Yet North Korea already POSSESSES nucular (in honor of GWB) weapons, yet we aren't doing anything about it. Yet Pakistan has sold nuclear information....yet they are our allies....yet the Saudi's say they don't support terrorist groups, yet they offer them amnesty....and we haven't done anything about that.

I just love it when the Dems use this meaningless mantra. Always pointing the finger elsewhere and whining "How come we're not going to war against so-and-so?" The all-or-none theory of defending our country. Either go to war simultaneously against all enemies, potential or real, throughout the world at the same time (as if we have the resources for that or it's the smart thing to do from a military tactical/strategic standpoint) or do nothing. Then, OTOH, they whine that we shouldn't be the "world's policeman". Well which is it? Or do you just throw stuff against the wall to see what sticks?

 

[delldude]

Yet North Korea already POSSESSES nucular (in honor of GWB) weapons, yet we aren't doing anything about it.

AH...GUY...BILLY'S WATCH. :down:

 

[delldude]

I guess it's only a first amendment problem when you agree with it, huh?

you are wrong.

 

[NWA/AMT]

Because NWA/AMT, TWAnr, KC, etc can put up all the links to all the websites they want.

[post="191078"][/post]​

I have the truth coming out first hand right here at home. My eldest son, a Marine Captain, recently returned from Iraq quite disgusted with the whole mess. Yet when I have tried to include his evidence, or that of my other son a Marine First Lieutenant, in our discussions it has been ignored.

I have, from the very beginning of our discussions here, stated several points, including my belief that unconventional warfare forces were precisely the way to deal with the Al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan rather than large unit operations. They are precisely the sort of forces most capable to operate in that terrain and accomplish that mission. I would much rather have seen the Marines Force Recon troops in Tora Bora than the Northern Alliance we used, many of whom fight against us when the mood strikes them.

I respect the work that people like Busdrvr do for our nation and have made it very clear that my decision not to support the war in Iraq does not equate to not supporting our troops. It was with pride that I watched one of my old regiments, the 5th Marines, roll into Baghdad, but I do not think they should have been there in the first place.

I know where those boxes that Busdrvr brings home go. Our local VFW members attend all funerals in our area for those servicemen and women who are killed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Thirty-five years ago I attended my first funeral when I was asked to serve as 'body escort' for one of my friends who was killed in action and found myself unable to explain to his young widow exactly what he died for, and it is no easier today. What I do not see at these events, however, is any of those people who argue so vehmently for war yet chose not to serve themselves.

 

[NWA/AMT]

And what you refuse to believe is that with the 500 tons of "Yellowcake" and the remaining equipment, Sadam could have started up his program at the drop of a hat or the turned back of the UN.

[post="191102"][/post]​

You mean the thoroughly discredited reports of 'yellowcake' that British Intelligence is vigorously disavowing now?

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/karon/a...,465087,00.html

 

[NWA/AMT]

you are wrong.

[post="191155"][/post]​

So you support selective censorship?

 

[USAir757]

Saddam had destroyed most of his weapons, starting around the time of the end of the first gulf war...so it would appear that diplomacy WAS working, even though Saddam was bluffing about it. That's in the CIA report that just came out.

Key words: the CIA report that JUST came out.

Who knows what kind of help we might have had from the rest of the world going into Iraq if we had the patience to work with the UN for even one month before telling the "to hell with you". Who knows...

Can't imagine anything was going to change there, KC. You think suddenly after more than ten years Saddam was going to have a change of heart?

I have the truth coming out first hand right here at home. My eldest son, a Marine Captain, recently returned from Iraq quite disgusted with the whole mess. Yet when I have tried to include his evidence, or that of my other son a Marine First Lieutenant, in our discussions it has been ignored.

First, thank you and your son for your service. Apparently, different people see this same situation in two completely different ways. And they are the ways that either Bush wants you to believe or Kerry wants you to believe. We're making progress and things are looking up - versus - it's a complete disaster and things are getting worse instead of better. I have to imagine the truth lies somewhere in the middle of those two arguments.

But that goes against the Bush credo of Ready....FIRE....Aim.

I believe that was Clinton's mantra too... remember the blue dress? 😉

 

[KCFlyer]

AH...GUY...BILLY'S WATCH. :down:

[post="191150"][/post]​

And I love the way the Bushies point to "Billy's watch" when asked why we aren't doing to Korea what we did with Iraq. After all, y'all have been jumping and pointing and yelling "Billy's watch" about Iraq. If Iraq happend during "Billy's watch" (when it is being discovered that Saddam was destroying his WMD's during "Billy's watch) and it was worthy for attack, then why isn't a country that POSSESSES and is a far more imminent threat than Iraq ever was being treated in the same manner as Iraq whether it happened on "Billy's watch" or not? Yer fer us or agin us. North Korea ain't fer us, so they must be agin us....where's the worry there????

 

[KCFlyer]

Key words: the CIA report that JUST came out.

Yep and...we haven't had any Iraqi funded attacks on US soil...doubt we would have in just over a year, since this report shows that almost all of his WMD's were destroyed in the last decade. But we had to go....wasted time is a ticking bomb.

Can't imagine anything was going to change there, KC. You think suddenly after more than ten years Saddam was going to have a change of heart?

Who's talking about Saddam? I'm talking about the rest of the world that we alienated with our "times-a-wastin" attitude. Gotta wonder what a differance a day made.

First, thank you and your son for your service. Apparently, different people see this same situation in two completely different ways

They sure do...the marines are the guys being shot at while they take cover in a shelled out building. The rest are the ones who can listen to Fox news at home in the comfort of their easy chair. That's why I say that the article posted by Fred yesterday even said that the respondents to that poll (and less than 20% responded) were older, higher in rank, or career military. I wish there was a way to poll guys like NWA/AMT's son. MIght open some eyes.