RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war?

RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

SirKenin -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 1:41:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin The American people spoke, Bush and team are in, deal with it as far as I am concerned. As a computer professional I would think you would acknowledge that each time Bush won there was at least the potential of widespread computer fraud. http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ There are real issues with the voting process in the states, and particularly in the case of Bush Jr. whose first term was not won but rather obtained by being appointed prez by the SCOTUS. Yeah, but putting things in perspective there is also a possibility that the government is dissecting aliens in Area 51, the US did not land on the moon and Elvis is still alive and well.

JohnWarren -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 1:43:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chaingang As a computer professional I would think you would acknowledge that each time Bush won there was at least the potential of widespread computer fraud. http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ Here in Florida we are encountering enormous problems in getting a system that allows some sort of audit trail to confirm what entries have been made in the voting machines. Much of this resistence is coming from Jeb Bush who is insisting the systems his administration is trying to foist on the counties are "fool proof." Interestingly, the most favored system by the governor is Dibold. (check out the website recommended by Chaingang.) A large number of us here in Florida have decided to vote by absentee ballots just to make sure there is some record about how we boted.

DelightMachine -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 1:45:57 PM)
No disagreement here.

SirKenin -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 1:52:34 PM)
Now, I just thought of something. On CBC television the other day the TV show "22 Minutes" was interviewing Americans about various Canadian factoids. Two of the most priceless were them buying into the fact that our Prime Minister's name was Tim Horton and he just achieved a double double in Parliament, so all these Americans were going "Congratulations to Prime Minister Tim Horton on his double double". hahaha. It was great. These were Princeton students and professors he was doing this to. Priceless. The other one was convincing them that the Prime Minister's name was Peter Man and that he had a bridge built called the Peter Man's Bridge. Peter Mansbridge is an exceptionally well known Canadian news anchor and has been for years and years. He told them that people were up on this very tall bridge protesting a new government policy and was asking them if they should be up there protesting, to which people responded that it was too high up to be protesting on, or protesting there was their right, etc. With thinking like that, do you really believe that it was a faulty computer system that got Bush two consecutive terms? I sure do not.

Chaingang -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 1:55:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JohnWarren A large number of us here in Florida have decided to vote by absentee ballots just to make sure there is some record about how we boted. That's exactly what I do also. A very good point John!

meatcleaver -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 2:02:24 PM)
The whole point of having overwhelming military might is not to use it, other than to scare the shit out of people that you might use it. The problem when you use military is to let your enemy know that behind all the weaponry your soldiers are human too and die when you shoot them. Wars are stupid, unnecessary wars are just plain dumb. The invasion of Iraq was dumb because it was unnecessary, the lid was shut firmly on Saddam and he couldn't make a move. Hell, Swartzkopf said, the American army in Iraq would be like a mamouth in a tar pit. How right he was and how dumb Bush was to ignore the advice of military people who know their profession. A war opens pandora's box and even if one wins, one doesn't know what the consequences will be for the future.

DelightMachine -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 2:13:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver The invasion of Iraq was dumb because it was unnecessary, the lid was shut firmly on Saddam and he couldn't make a move. Nonsense. He could have made WMDs -- biological weapons, for instance, and he could have given them to terrorists, and they could have smuggled them out of the country and over here. The UN was wobbly on continuing sanctions. quote: Hell, Swartzkopf said, the American army in Iraq would be like a mamouth in a tar pit. How right he was and how dumb Bush was to ignore the advice of military people who know their profession. Well, not much meat here, meatcleaver. You could've said the same thing about Lincoln and some of the advice he was getting from his generals. He wasn't afraid to switch generals when he felt he needed to. Good thing, too. We have the resources to sustain ourselves in Iraq. The only question is whether we have the will.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 2:49:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin Now, I just thought of something. On CBC television the other day the TV show "22 Minutes" was interviewing Americans about various Canadian factoids. Two of the most priceless were them buying into the fact that our Prime Minister's name was Tim Horton and he just achieved a double double in Parliament, so all these Americans were going "Congratulations to Prime Minister Tim Horton on his double double". hahaha. It was great. These were Princeton students and professors he was doing this to. Priceless. The other one was convincing them that the Prime Minister's name was Peter Man and that he had a bridge built called the Peter Man's Bridge. Peter Mansbridge is an exceptionally well known Canadian news anchor and has been for years and years. He told them that people were up on this very tall bridge protesting a new government policy and was asking them if they should be up there protesting, to which people responded that it was too high up to be protesting on, or protesting there was their right, etc. With thinking like that, do you really believe that it was a faulty computer system that got Bush two consecutive terms? I sure do not. LOL, why should americans know such things? Canada isn't a threat to us or a factor in us politics. I'm unclear why we should know more about canada other than it's to the north, and they aren't going to attack us. Now If you asked about mexico, well, we probably should know more about them, as they are borderline enemy. So, we sorta need to keep an eye on them. I understand why Canada would watch the US, because we are involved in everything it seems around the planet some good some bad. So, it's interesting and has a major global impact. But Canada well they just seem to try and stay to themselves.

meatcleaver -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 2:50:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DelightMachine Nonsense. He could have made WMDs -- biological weapons, for instance, and he could have given them to terrorists, and they could have smuggled them out of the country and over here. The UN was wobbly on continuing sanctions. [quote/] He didn't have any WMD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Even Blair has apologized (OK in a very meally mouthed way) and admits there weren't any! As for making WMD, with the definition Bush and Blair had of WMD my daughter could make some with her chemistry kit! There is absolutely no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with terrorists. If you are refering to Al queda terrorists they were the enemy of Saddam! In fact the Reagan administration had given far more weaponry to terrorists than Saddam and there is not much evidence he has given anything to terrorists. Well, not much meat here, meatcleaver. You could've said the same thing about Lincoln and some of the advice he was getting from his generals. He wasn't afraid to switch generals when he felt he needed to. Good thing, too. We have the resources to sustain ourselves in Iraq. The only question is whether we have the will. Lincoln was fighting a civil war and not invading another country, though maybe southerners think he was. You had the resources to sustain yourselves in Vietnam but there comes a point when even the dumbest of the dumb realise they are that, just plain dumb! Iraq is fucked up and it has been fucked up by the invasion, not by Saddam who had fucked it up enough but he wasn't a threat to the west. I know American brass thought the invasion was dumb or at least that was the reports we received over here and I know the British military thought the invasion was just plain dumb because there was no idea what to do about Iraq once they had it.

Level -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 2:57:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver The invasion of Iraq was dumb because it was unnecessary, the lid was shut firmly on Saddam and he couldn't make a move. Much of the world was blaming the U.S. for those sanctions being responsible for much death in Iraq. Makes me wonder what people think should have been done.... "why do you have the Iraqi people in a box? You're killing them...."...... "why did you go to war with Iraq? You had them in a box, there was no need.... "

meatcleaver -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 3:24:18 PM)
I have to agree with you there. With the bleeding heart squad you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. They refused to acknowledge that Saddam was making martyrs out of his own people to prove how evil the west was and America inparticular.

DelightMachine -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 7:31:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: DelightMachine Nonsense. He could have made WMDs -- biological weapons, for instance, and he could have given them to terrorists, and they could have smuggled them out of the country and over here. The UN was wobbly on continuing sanctions. He didn't have any WMD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Even Blair has apologized (OK in a very meally mouthed way) and admits there weren't any! As for making WMD, with the definition Bush and Blair had of WMD my daughter could make some with her chemistry kit! What were all those scientists in Saddam's WMD programs doing? He had a program for WMD and if he didn't have it when we invaded, he would have had it later. No one disputes that he didn't want it and didn't spend money on putting together a program for it. At the time our intelligence organizations and those of France, Russia, Germany and Britain all thought he actually had it. How many times do I have to repeat these facts for you to remember them? quote: There is absolutely no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with terrorists. If you are refering to Al queda terrorists they were the enemy of Saddam! Sorry, your information is out of date. And you must've been ignoring my previous posts on other threads, because I've gone into this before and provided Web links to articles about it: They've been going over records from Saddam's regime. Many have been destroyed, but many are still around. They're slowly being translated. We already know that there were contacts and that Saddam's regime wasn't averse to working with Al Qaeda. quote: In fact the Reagan administration had given far more weaponry to terrorists than Saddam and there is not much evidence he has given anything to terrorists. Cute. Please provide more details. Try to make it look credible. quote: Lincoln was fighting a civil war and not invading another country, though maybe southerners think he was. Completely irrelevant to my point, which was that a president needs to make his own decisions, even on top military matters, and can't just rely on generals. There's plenty of evidence that there was military advice in favor of the invasion. I think the disagreements became sharper after we took over. quote: You had the resources to sustain yourselves in Vietnam but there comes a point when even the dumbest of the dumb realise they are that, just plain dumb! There comes a point when the public realizes the policymakers aren't doing a good job of it and causing unneccesary deaths, which is what happened. If that's what you mean, I agree, but you're a little vague here. And it's not that we couldn't have won, that should be obvious. quote: Iraq is fucked up and it has been fucked up by the invasion, not by Saddam who had fucked it up enough but he wasn't a threat to the west. I know American brass thought the invasion was dumb or at least that was the reports we received over here and I know the British military thought the invasion was just plain dumb because there was no idea what to do about Iraq once they had it. I answered much of this above, but I'll add that I think the post-invasion planning seems to have been poor and overly optimistic. That's entirely different from the question of whether or not we should have invaded.

Gauge -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 7:39:42 PM)
I want you to do something. Go outside and walk across the street and come back. Now... if you did as I suggested and are back then you can look back on your experience and say it was a nice little stroll. However, if you had gotten run over by a bus and lived, you could look back and say that it wasn't a very good idea to go out in the first place. My point being is that history has a way of clarifying things. The reasons for WW2... let's see... a megalomaniacal madman, a motivated population under his control, a strong determination to invade Europe and seize control, Japan attacking us on our soil. OK... I may have missed a few points but I think you got the idea. Taking into account the results of WW2, we have the luxury of hindsight. Hindsight is always 20/20... always. We had a reason to enter the war. We had an objective and we had an exit strategy. In the Gulf War George Bush Sr. made a grave mistake. He had support from the majority of the country, the support of the UN and we went in there and pulled out leaving the job half done. A march into Baghdad then would have been largely supported. Oh... Iraq also invaded Kuwait... that is what got the whole thing started among various other things. This current fiasco was started on the pretext that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was funneling things to terrorists. We get there... oops... no WMD. And if I recall the UN may have been wobbly on sanctions but they were pretty clear that we didn't have full support for a war. (please correct me if I am wrong... I do not always remember things with entire clarity) The American people were lied to. The world was lied to by the American government. The US launched an all out attack on terrorism post September 11th 2001. Iraq was convenient. What has been revealed thus far about the actions of this president is quite telling and history will not forget the blunder. In hindsight to this point, did the US have good reasons to invade Iraq? Were there large amounts or even small amounts of WMD? What was our stated objective? What is our stated exit strategy? The answers are there if you care to see them

skosterow -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 7:42:57 PM)
My post will be short and sweet: MARINES DIE - BECAUSE BUSH LIES! - S.S. Kosterow, Gunnery Sergeant, USMC

puella -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 7:51:53 PM)
True, skosterow... and so do soldiers, and the women and men in the navy, and our National Guard.. who are supposed to be defending our actual homeland.. and... aid workers, and people working for the 'rebuilding effort'... But what we discredit and never pay attention to is all the people who more than anyone else shouldn't be dying.. because they didn't sign up for this, and they didn't support any faction of a government which brought this upon them... the innocent Iraqi people... We watch the death tolls of our troops and don't even blink an eye at the hugely disproportionate numbers of civilians being killed , and which have been killed as a direct result of our 'efforts'. And we don't even have all that lovely oil he promised us...

Level -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 8:10:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gauge In hindsight to this point, did the US have good reasons to invade Iraq? Were there large amounts or even small amounts of WMD? What was our stated objective? What is our stated exit strategy? The answers are there if you care to see them Did the government under President Clinton believe that there were WMD in Iraq? According to him they did. So, was the lying going on before Bush ever came into office? I tend to think it was a colossal intelligence blunder, not deceit, that got us into Iraq. Level

juliaoceania -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 8:17:15 PM)
Plain and simple... war is a failure of diplomacy. People can always justify starting a war, but the ironic thing is those who start it do not die in it. It is always those with the least to gain that actually die in wars. Take the soldiers we have in Iraq, most are not from affluent families. Most will not profit from this war, yet they die in it. Then take those who pushed for war, none of their kids are over their dying for oil.. its the middle class, lower middle class and the poverty stricken that die... To me there is no justification for this.

puella -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 8:17:31 PM)
Come on Level, You can not blame this War we brought to Iraq on Clinton, no matter how badly you may want to... Blame him for getting head in the Oval Office.. okay.. sure.. but GW did this, solicited and fabricated the information to get us there and decided before he went to congress that this was going to happen (remember the Downing Street Memos). Clinton advocated the weapons inspectors... he did not invade a country which did not attack us in any way. GW wanted this war.. well, he fought to get it and got it, and he now has to own up to all that means.

Level -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 8:21:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: puella Come on Level, You can not blame this War we brought to Iraq on Clinton, no matter how badly you may want to... Blame him for getting head in the Oval Office.. okay.. sure.. but GW did this, solicited and fabricated the information to get us there and decided before he went to congress that this was going to happen (remember the Downing Street Memos). Clinton advocated the weapons inspectors... he did not invade a country which did not attack us in any way. GW wanted this war.. well, he fought to get it and got it, and he now has to own up to all that means. You misunderstood, puella. I don't "blame" Clinton at all......I blame our intelligence agencies. I watched Clinton on tv as no WMD were being found, I watched him say something to the effect of "well, we had the same reports as Bush, that there were weapons."

puella -> RE: Incompetent administration, criminal war? (5/13/2006 8:25:15 PM)
Yeah, but Clinton didn't invade a country without the support of the United Nations, forcing out the weapons inspectors, who.. by the way, were reporting that there was no evidence of weapons, as did the IAEA, and a large portion of our own intelligence... Only W did that..

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125