Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 91 to 117 of 117

Thread: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

  1. #91
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    It's also very easy to make the case that Saddam Hussein lied to his Generals and paraded the fact that he has WMD, when he didn't. That fact comes not from American sources that have a political aim, but from Tariq Aziz under questioning when he was captured.

    So, either join the flat-earth society of Iraq war conspiracy theorists about suppressing information, or give up this asinine position that Only George Bush and his people controlled information. Seriously. I've posted enough examples myself to disprove what your saying, and I'm not the only one.



    Ain't that the truth.
    Good posting Preach.

    http://www.steelersuniverse.com/foru...is-a-cult-quot Last post

    By the way did you realize that you were a nutty cult leader?
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  2. #92

  3. #93
    Senior Member Array title="SteelerEmpire has a spectacular aura about"> SteelerEmpire's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    3,271

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    I dont shut out any views, I read all responses and all links posted by someone im debating. I have not responded with vitriol you asked for a link I gave you 2 theres many more. If you dont want to read them, then dont i dont really care the fact remains that the committe investigated the matter and that was the conclusion, im sorry if it doesnt agree with your syria theory but thats how it is. Its hard to make a case that we knew he had stockpiles of WMDs but then he suddenly moved them without anybody noticing.
    I think Saddam duked "George Bush himself" (and his intelligence staff) into believing he had WMD's (or Bush flat out lied. EITHER scenario was reprehensible). And Bush ran with it full speed. Thus, it was Saddam's "suicide bombing" of the Bush legacy and all associated with that legacy. After all, and once again, I wonder why NONE (or close to none) of his own party enlisted him to campaign for them in 08', 10', and the 12' elections ? Maybe it's some "inside thing" of his party ??? I don't know...

    Yep. He had chem. and bio. weapons before the war (as he used them on his own people). So there was "nothing new" here. But unless he was working on nuclear, I still see no reason to make the "off the wall" commitment that we did ? Israel could have taken care of him (Israel wanted to, Saddam was well aware that Israel had nukes and he was afraid of Israel. The US discouraged Israel to attack Saddam. Til this day, Israel "could" wipe out ALL of Arabia, IF they wanted to).

    But, God forbid, don't want to risk contaminating the fields, road, towns, and ports that helps pump the oil. US wanted to protect its "precious" Arabian oil flow, thus, no "major" middle-eastern war. Hell, there was just a "hand-ful" of people in Kuwait. Thus, why did we liberate these a-holes ? Oil. Don't want to drive up the price of oil to record highs.

    But ! Here's the catch: The US was "supposed" to have Iraq, and the ENTIRE middle east, pay them back for stabilizing their region for removing Saddam (via their oil reserves). What did the American people get in return ? A VERY few rich oil (and related to oil) companies, and $4-5.00 a gallon gas ! Where did a BIG percentage of this money go ? PROFITS for the oil companies (they've made RECORD profits the last decade... look it up) True story....

    But what's a shame, is that a LOT of people will disagree and rep for the oil companies ???????? Even though "their" (more than likely, or not too far off) living from paycheck to paycheck ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????

  4. #94

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelerEmpire View Post
    I think Saddam duked "George Bush himself" (and his intelligence staff) into believing he had WMD's (or Bush flat out lied. EITHER scenario was reprehensible). And Bush ran with it full speed. Thus, it was Saddam's "suicide bombing" of the Bush legacy and all associated with that legacy. After all, and once again, I wonder why NONE (or close to none) of his own party enlisted him to campaign for them in 08', 10', and the 12' elections ? Maybe it's some "inside thing" of his party ??? I don't know...

    Yep. He had chem. and bio. weapons before the war (as he used them on his own people). So there was "nothing new" here. But unless he was working on nuclear, I still see no reason to make the "off the wall" commitment that we did ? Israel could have taken care of him (Israel wanted to, Saddam was well aware that Israel had nukes and he was afraid of Israel. The US discouraged Israel to attack Saddam. Til this day, Israel "could" wipe out ALL of Arabia, IF they wanted to).

    But, God forbid, don't want to risk contaminating the fields, road, towns, and ports that helps pump the oil. US wanted to protect its "precious" Arabian oil flow, thus, no "major" middle-eastern war. Hell, there was just a "hand-ful" of people in Kuwait. Thus, why did we liberate these a-holes ? Oil. Don't want to drive up the price of oil to record highs.

    But ! Here's the catch: The US was "supposed" to have Iraq, and the ENTIRE middle east, pay them back for stabilizing their region for removing Saddam (via their oil reserves). What did the American people get in return ? A VERY few rich oil (and related to oil) companies, and $4-5.00 a gallon gas ! Where did a BIG percentage of this money go ? PROFITS for the oil companies (they've made RECORD profits the last decade... look it up) True story....

    But what's a shame, is that a LOT of people will disagree and rep for the oil companies ???????? Even though "their" (more than likely, or not too far off) living from paycheck to paycheck ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????


    In case you missed it, France, Russia, and Germany were trying to block the war SPECIFICALLY because they WERE getting kickbacks from the Oil in Iraq through the UN. Furthermore, production was severely cut short by a US led UN force due to human rights abuses and other things.

    If we cared about their stupid oil that much, we would have simply blocked the Oil for Food program in the UN and then told Saddam to turn the spigots on or we were coming back in. Seriously. Where do you get this stuff?

    Another swing and a miss. One more strike and your out.


  5. #95
    Senior Member Array title="SteelerEmpire has a spectacular aura about"> SteelerEmpire's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    3,271

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post


    In case you missed it, France, Russia, and Germany were trying to block the war SPECIFICALLY because they WERE getting kickbacks from the Oil in Iraq through the UN. Furthermore, production was severely cut short by a US led UN force due to human rights abuses and other things.

    If we cared about their stupid oil that much, we would have simply blocked the Oil for Food program in the UN and then told Saddam to turn the spigots on or we were coming back in. Seriously. Where do you get this stuff?

    Another swing and a miss. One more strike and your out.
    Yep. So I guess that explains the $4-5 a gal. gas ? Did I also mention we STILL have to pay back the $2 Trillion that we borrowed for the war on top of it ? I'm still trying to find out how this war was worth starting, for dollar and life wise, for the US. And also, like it or not, the points I made in the previous post still stands.
    Whatever you (or someone else) might be saying, I (as well as at least 53% -the majority- of the American people) don't see what you see ??????????

  6. #96
    Formerly TheWarden86 Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of"> NJarhead's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Gender
    Posts
    2,766

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelerEmpire View Post
    I think Saddam duked "George Bush himself" (and his intelligence staff) into believing he had WMD's (or Bush flat out lied. EITHER scenario was reprehensible). And Bush ran with it full speed. Thus, it was Saddam's "suicide bombing" of the Bush legacy and all associated with that legacy. After all, and once again, I wonder why NONE (or close to none) of his own party enlisted him to campaign for them in 08', 10', and the 12' elections ? Maybe it's some "inside thing" of his party ??? I don't know...

    Yep. He had chem. and bio. weapons before the war (as he used them on his own people). So there was "nothing new" here. But unless he was working on nuclear, I still see no reason to make the "off the wall" commitment that we did ? Israel could have taken care of him (Israel wanted to, Saddam was well aware that Israel had nukes and he was afraid of Israel. The US discouraged Israel to attack Saddam. Til this day, Israel "could" wipe out ALL of Arabia, IF they wanted to).

    But, God forbid, don't want to risk contaminating the fields, road, towns, and ports that helps pump the oil. US wanted to protect its "precious" Arabian oil flow, thus, no "major" middle-eastern war. Hell, there was just a "hand-ful" of people in Kuwait. Thus, why did we liberate these a-holes ? Oil. Don't want to drive up the price of oil to record highs.

    But ! Here's the catch: The US was "supposed" to have Iraq, and the ENTIRE middle east, pay them back for stabilizing their region for removing Saddam (via their oil reserves). What did the American people get in return ? A VERY few rich oil (and related to oil) companies, and $4-5.00 a gallon gas ! Where did a BIG percentage of this money go ? PROFITS for the oil companies (they've made RECORD profits the last decade... look it up) True story....

    But what's a shame, is that a LOT of people will disagree and rep for the oil companies ???????? Even though "their" (more than likely, or not too far off) living from paycheck to paycheck ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????????
    Saddam remained illusive about the WMD's because he couldn't admit to what he had/didn't have on the world stage as he feared aggressive action from Iran if he appeard vulnerable.
    He later admitted to retaining full capacity for mass production of WMD's and stated that he fully intended to produced them.

    I've posted the link twice, but you appear to want to remain ignorant of any facts that don't support your bullshit version of things.

  7. #97

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelerEmpire View Post
    Yep. So I guess that explains the $4-5 a gal. gas ? Did I also mention we STILL have to pay back the $2 Trillion that we borrowed for the war on top of it ? I'm still trying to find out how this war was worth starting, for dollar and life wise, for the US. And also, like it or not, the points I made in the previous post still stands.
    Whatever you (or someone else) might be saying, I (as well as at least 53% -the majority- of the American people) don't see what you see ??????????
    Your moving the goal posts. Let's go back to exactly what you said.
    I think Saddam duked "George Bush himself" (and his intelligence staff) into believing he had WMD's (or Bush flat out lied. EITHER scenario was reprehensible)
    This has nothing to do with money borrowed for the war, nor lives lost in it. It also has nothing to do with 53% (I'd love to see where you got that number) not seeing, something. I'm not clear at all what "See what you see" is in reference to).

    It has everything to do with the fact that you believe it is Bush's fault that the Saddam Hussein was able to pull the wool over the world's eyes. You have yet to explain WHY you believe that George Bush is responsible for six national intelligence agencies of world powers, including what is (or was) three of the greatest agencies to exist (Germany, Russia, and Israel). You have yet to explain why it is George Bush's fault that Hans Blix, the lead weapons inspector in Iraq, believed he had WMD. You have yet to explain why it is George Bush's fault that the CIA under Bill Clinton believed Iraq had WMD.

    Don't give me this hindsight crap.

    Answer the question finally, don't dance around it: why is it George Bush's fault that all these agencies and people believed Iraq had WMD?


  8. #98
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    It's also very easy to make the case that Saddam Hussein lied to his Generals and paraded the fact that he has WMD, when he didn't. That fact comes not from American sources that have a political aim, but from Tariq Aziz under questioning when he was captured.

    So, either join the flat-earth society of Iraq war conspiracy theorists about suppressing information, or give up this asinine position that Only George Bush and his people controlled information. Seriously. I've posted enough examples myself to disprove what your saying, and I'm not the only one.



    Ain't that the truth.
    Who cares if saddam lied about weapons he had, its our responsiblity to verify something like that before we go to war, so your saying we just took his word that he had WMDs, thats just as dumb as us taking the word of an evil dictator saying he doesnt have WMDs. The reports out on it the senate commitee believed bush used intelligence he knew was wrong and unverified and in some cases even went against what the intelligence reported, that too me is a lie. If you believe we went to war on the word of a madman, fine go ahead but dont talk too me like you have the truth and anyone who doesnt agree with you is an idiot. Your arguement for "bush didnt lie" is "saddam lied", and that does not absolve bush from the damage that was done nor does it make the war worth the lives that were lost and the money that was spent.

  9. #99
    Senior Member Array title="43Hitman has a reputation beyond repute">
    3 Reel Treasure Slots Champion!

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    7,211

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Who cares if saddam lied about weapons he had, its our responsiblity to verify something like that before we go to war, so your saying we just took his word that he had WMDs, thats just as dumb as us taking the word of an evil dictator saying he doesnt have WMDs. The reports out on it the senate commitee believed bush used intelligence he knew was wrong and unverified and in some cases even went against what the intelligence reported, that too me is a lie. If you believe we went to war on the word of a madman, fine go ahead but dont talk too me like you have the truth and anyone who doesnt agree with you is an idiot. Your arguement for "bush didnt lie" is "saddam lied", and that does not absolve bush from the damage that was done nor does it make the war worth the lives that were lost and the money that was spent.
    If the shoe fits....


  10. #100
    Formerly TheWarden86 Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of"> NJarhead's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Gender
    Posts
    2,766

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Who cares if saddam lied about weapons he had, its our responsiblity to verify something like that before we go to war, so your saying we just took his word that he had WMDs, thats just as dumb as us taking the word of an evil dictator saying he doesnt have WMDs. The reports out on it the senate commitee believed bush used intelligence he knew was wrong and unverified and in some cases even went against what the intelligence reported, that too me is a lie. If you believe we went to war on the word of a madman, fine go ahead but dont talk too me like you have the truth and anyone who doesnt agree with you is an idiot. Your arguement for "bush didnt lie" is "saddam lied", and that does not absolve bush from the damage that was done nor does it make the war worth the lives that were lost and the money that was spent.
    We tried and tried, thought we had, and Saddam was defiant the entire time about letting inspectors in key areas.

    In a perfect world....

  11. #101
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by NJarhead View Post
    We tried and tried, thought we had, and Saddam was defiant the entire time about letting inspectors in key areas.

    In a perfect world....
    Ask any military historian if there's every been a war fought where no mistakes were made due to faulty intelligence at some point or other? Pearl Harbor probably could have been prevented if the tea leaves had been read properly. McCarthur never loses the Phillipines if he had more accurate intelligence. Patton made some terrible decisions in Africa that cost hundreds of G.I's lives in his first real incursion into WW II.

    By Dawg's standards Roosevelt should have been impeached for allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, and McCauther and Patton would have lost their commisions right at the outset of American involvement in WWII and we'd all be speaking German now.
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  12. #102
    Senior Member Array title="SteelerEmpire has a spectacular aura about"> SteelerEmpire's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    3,271

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Who cares if saddam lied about weapons he had, its our responsiblity to verify something like that before we go to war, so your saying we just took his word that he had WMDs, thats just as dumb as us taking the word of an evil dictator saying he doesnt have WMDs. The reports out on it the senate commitee believed bush used intelligence he knew was wrong and unverified and in some cases even went against what the intelligence reported, that too me is a lie. If you believe we went to war on the word of a madman, fine go ahead but dont talk too me like you have the truth and anyone who doesnt agree with you is an idiot. Your arguement for "bush didnt lie" is "saddam lied", and that does not absolve bush from the damage that was done nor does it make the war worth the lives that were lost and the money that was spent.
    This ^^^. Took the words right out of my mouth. As I stated above, Bush and Co. got dupped by Saddam, and then drug everyone else down the abyss with him. Bush is at the top of the chain of command, ultimately it's his fault.
    If you were doing 40 mph in a 25 mph school zone, you get pulled over and say you "thought" that the speed limit was 40 mph, your still at fault and still get a ticket.

    Ok guys. You can now post your next "excuse". Excuses, excuses...

  13. #103
    Formerly TheWarden86 Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of"> NJarhead's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Gender
    Posts
    2,766

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by zulater View Post
    Ask any military historian if there's every been a war fought where no mistakes were made due to faulty intelligence at some point or other? Pearl Harbor probably could have been prevented if the tea leaves had been read properly. McCarthur never loses the Phillipines if he had more accurate intelligence. Patton made some terrible decisions in Africa that cost hundreds of G.I's lives in his first real incursion into WW II.

    By Dawg's standards Roosevelt should have been impeached for allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, and McCauther and Patton would have lost their commisions right at the outset of American involvement in WWII and we'd all be speaking German now.
    I am a military historian actually and I agree.

    It's like Cowher always liked to say, "Hindsight is 20/20." I'm not a fan of Monday Morning QB's myself.

  14. #104

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Who cares if saddam lied about weapons he had, its our responsiblity to verify something like that before we go to war, so your saying we just took his word that he had WMDs, thats just as dumb as us taking the word of an evil dictator saying he doesnt have WMDs. The reports out on it the senate commitee believed bush used intelligence he knew was wrong and unverified and in some cases even went against what the intelligence reported, that too me is a lie. If you believe we went to war on the word of a madman, fine go ahead but dont talk too me like you have the truth and anyone who doesnt agree with you is an idiot. Your arguement for "bush didnt lie" is "saddam lied", and that does not absolve bush from the damage that was done nor does it make the war worth the lives that were lost and the money that was spent.
    Amazing. You actually believe Hollywood that the CIA is the all-encompasing, all powerful, omniscient entity they portray it to be.

    You still don't get it. We DID verify. We DID seek the truth. The problem is that everything we could use to verify, everything we could use to understand, and everything we could use to covertly identity the truth, came up to "HE HAD WEAPONS." Why? Because Saddam Hussein put it in motion. He set the pieces at every level that made it look like he DID have weapons. And then, he played games with the inspectors, which only further exacerbated the situation.

    And as for your "senate committee reports," your wrong. The first conclusion is that the NIE, which is an intelligence estimate PROVIDED TO THE WHITEHOUSE AND SENATE "overstated, or were not supported by, the underlying intelligence reporting. A series of failures, particularly in analytic trade craft led to the mischaracterization of intelligence.

    Let's take a quick little gander at this conclusion. NO WHERE in it does it point to the white house mischaracterizing data or intelligence. The information he was PROVIDED already had the problems in it. Furthermore, and this is rich, it condmened the intelligence community for not developing human sources intelligence inside Iraq. HUMINT - after the same body of lawmakers gutted the CIA in the late '70s and set rules to expressly deny much of their HUMINT ability (See Church Committee). That little fact amazingly left out of the report. As was the fact most of the stuff they were looking at was already skewed by post-action intelligence.

    In other words, hinsight is twenty-twenty, and anyone foolish enough to judge another's actions by hindsight is too foolish to be a good judge of action.


  15. #105

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by zulater View Post
    Ask any military historian if there's every been a war fought where no mistakes were made due to faulty intelligence at some point or other? Pearl Harbor probably could have been prevented if the tea leaves had been read properly. McCarthur never loses the Phillipines if he had more accurate intelligence. Patton made some terrible decisions in Africa that cost hundreds of G.I's lives in his first real incursion into WW II.

    By Dawg's standards Roosevelt should have been impeached for allowing Pearl Harbor to happen, and McCauther and Patton would have lost their commisions right at the outset of American involvement in WWII and we'd all be speaking German now.
    Zu made a great comment, concerning Pearl Harbor. Let's take a deeper look at what happened there, and you'll see just how asinine your comments are.


    1. Radar picked up the incoming flight of bombers. It was called in, but dismissed as a flight from the mainland. Nine messages were intercepted out of Tokyo to the Japanese embassy, including one that stated, "it is absolutely necessary that all arrangements for the signing of this agreement be completed by the 25th of this month. (November). And again, on Nov. 11, "The imperial government has made maximum concessions she can in drawing up it's final proposal, I explained . . . if unfortunately, the United States refuses to accept those terms, it would useless to continue the negotiations " The most damning one that was intercepted however, came to Honolulu and it too, was intercepted by MAGIC (American code breaking of Japanese communications program).

      With regard to warships and aircraft carriers, we would like to have you report on those at
      anchor (these are not so important), tied up at wharves, buoys and in docks. (Designate types
      and classes briefly. If possible, we would like to have you make mention of the fact when
      there are two or more vessels along side the same wharf.)
    2. Beyond that, Billy Mitchell, in 1924, had already identified exactly how the war would begin.

      " In an official report submitted after his trip around the Pacific Ocean in 1924, Mitchell warned that Japan's expansionism would lead to conflict with the United States, and he foretold how a war would start. He stated that the war would begin with a surprise attack by Japanese forces on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, in conjunction with an assault on the Philippines. Attack will be launched as follows: Bombardment, attack to be made on Ford Island (in Pearl Harbor) at 7:30 a.m. ... Attack to be made on Clark Field (Philippines) at 10:40 a.m. On Dec. 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor at 7:55 a.m. and Clark Field just hours later.

    3. Ambassador Grew, our Japanese ambassador even passed on information about an upcoming attack. According to him, the Peruvian minister informed the US embassy of a surprise attack. British intelligence had also given warning of a coming attack. The information came from Dusko Popov, a British double agent. He was sent to the US by Germany to create a network of spies to collect information on "military assets in Hawaii." Specifically, torpedo attacks of Pearl Harbor.


    4. Let us not forget the message that was sent to Navy forces int he Pacific specifically warning about the coming war.



    Based on that information, many have done exactly what you're doing, lambasting the president for actions when in hindsight, those actions didn't line up with intelligence. However, the "group think" that the American intelligence community was accused of before the Iraq war by the senate committee hearing, the "unfounded presumptions" they were accused of, the dependence on what was later considered a "bad source" are aall reflected exactly the opposite in the Pearl Harbor bombing. Group think in the military community caused them to completely dismiss an aerial attack when Mitchell first mentioned it (based on the U.S. Army's desire for ground war and dismissal of aircraft), it also caused the intelligence community to not believe Japan was capable of that type of thing, so they completely dismissed it out of hand. That leads to the unfounded presumptions that were based on pre-conceived notions of who the Japanese were an thus, why they wouldn't be able to pull off an attack. In short, their own presumptions caused them to completely miss the connections. The "bad source" is even more fascinating, because the source from the Peruvian Minister came from their Japanese cook, and thus, was dismissed. The result, was that the attack on Pearl Harbor happened EXACTLY because the US government made the exact same mistakes, but in the opposite direction (except for the last one).

    May I suggest that you give up your fantasy about the all-encompasing, all powerful CIA. Especially when they were gutted by the Church Committee, then in the Clinton years, were barred from sharing information with the FBI (a mistake that allowed 9-11 to happen, and was implemented by, surprise surprise, one of the people who actually sat on the 9-11 commission. Yeah, no politics there).

    To spin a series of common mistakes into "Bush Lied" is politics. Pure and simple. It's dancing in the blood of our soldiers with glee so that you can score political points, and it is disgusting.


  16. #106
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    Amazing. You actually believe Hollywood that the CIA is the all-encompasing, all powerful, omniscient entity they portray it to be.

    You still don't get it. We DID verify. We DID seek the truth. The problem is that everything we could use to verify, everything we could use to understand, and everything we could use to covertly identity the truth, came up to "HE HAD WEAPONS." Why? Because Saddam Hussein put it in motion. He set the pieces at every level that made it look like he DID have weapons. And then, he played games with the inspectors, which only further exacerbated the situation.

    And as for your "senate committee reports," your wrong. The first conclusion is that the NIE, which is an intelligence estimate PROVIDED TO THE WHITEHOUSE AND SENATE "overstated, or were not supported by, the underlying intelligence reporting. A series of failures, particularly in analytic trade craft led to the mischaracterization of intelligence.

    Let's take a quick little gander at this conclusion. NO WHERE in it does it point to the white house mischaracterizing data or intelligence. The information he was PROVIDED already had the problems in it. Furthermore, and this is rich, it condmened the intelligence community for not developing human sources intelligence inside Iraq. HUMINT - after the same body of lawmakers gutted the CIA in the late '70s and set rules to expressly deny much of their HUMINT ability (See Church Committee). That little fact amazingly left out of the report. As was the fact most of the stuff they were looking at was already skewed by post-action intelligence.

    In other words, hinsight is twenty-twenty, and anyone foolish enough to judge another's actions by hindsight is too foolish to be a good judge of action.
    Heres just some of the conclusions from the report:

    The Committee’s report cites several conclusions in which the Administration’s public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:
    •Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qaeda had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qaeda with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.
    •Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.
    •Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.
    •Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.
    •The Secretary of Defense’s statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.
    •The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

    And how about a statement by the chairman of the commitee “Before taking the country to war, this administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence,” said committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV, D- W. Va.

    Oh and another“There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate,” Rockefeller said in a statement.

    So ya it points it out on several occassions that they delibertaly misused intelligence.

  17. #107
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    Zu made a great comment, concerning Pearl Harbor. Let's take a deeper look at what happened there, and you'll see just how asinine your comments are.


    1. Radar picked up the incoming flight of bombers. It was called in, but dismissed as a flight from the mainland. Nine messages were intercepted out of Tokyo to the Japanese embassy, including one that stated, "it is absolutely necessary that all arrangements for the signing of this agreement be completed by the 25th of this month. (November). And again, on Nov. 11, "The imperial government has made maximum concessions she can in drawing up it's final proposal, I explained . . . if unfortunately, the United States refuses to accept those terms, it would useless to continue the negotiations " The most damning one that was intercepted however, came to Honolulu and it too, was intercepted by MAGIC (American code breaking of Japanese communications program).

    2. Beyond that, Billy Mitchell, in 1924, had already identified exactly how the war would begin.




    3. Ambassador Grew, our Japanese ambassador even passed on information about an upcoming attack. According to him, the Peruvian minister informed the US embassy of a surprise attack. British intelligence had also given warning of a coming attack. The information came from Dusko Popov, a British double agent. He was sent to the US by Germany to create a network of spies to collect information on "military assets in Hawaii." Specifically, torpedo attacks of Pearl Harbor.


    4. Let us not forget the message that was sent to Navy forces int he Pacific specifically warning about the coming war.



    Based on that information, many have done exactly what you're doing, lambasting the president for actions when in hindsight, those actions didn't line up with intelligence. However, the "group think" that the American intelligence community was accused of before the Iraq war by the senate committee hearing, the "unfounded presumptions" they were accused of, the dependence on what was later considered a "bad source" are aall reflected exactly the opposite in the Pearl Harbor bombing. Group think in the military community caused them to completely dismiss an aerial attack when Mitchell first mentioned it (based on the U.S. Army's desire for ground war and dismissal of aircraft), it also caused the intelligence community to not believe Japan was capable of that type of thing, so they completely dismissed it out of hand. That leads to the unfounded presumptions that were based on pre-conceived notions of who the Japanese were an thus, why they wouldn't be able to pull off an attack. In short, their own presumptions caused them to completely miss the connections. The "bad source" is even more fascinating, because the source from the Peruvian Minister came from their Japanese cook, and thus, was dismissed. The result, was that the attack on Pearl Harbor happened EXACTLY because the US government made the exact same mistakes, but in the opposite direction (except for the last one).

    May I suggest that you give up your fantasy about the all-encompasing, all powerful CIA. Especially when they were gutted by the Church Committee, then in the Clinton years, were barred from sharing information with the FBI (a mistake that allowed 9-11 to happen, and was implemented by, surprise surprise, one of the people who actually sat on the 9-11 commission. Yeah, no politics there).

    To spin a series of common mistakes into "Bush Lied" is politics. Pure and simple. It's dancing in the blood of our soldiers with glee so that you can score political points, and it is disgusting.
    Great post!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Heres just some of the conclusions from the report:

    The Committee’s report cites several conclusions in which the Administration’s public statements were NOT supported by the intelligence. They include:
    •Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qaeda had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qaeda with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.
    •Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.
    •Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.
    •Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq’s chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community’s uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.
    •The Secretary of Defense’s statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.
    •The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.

    And how about a statement by the chairman of the commitee “Before taking the country to war, this administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence,” said committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV, D- W. Va.

    Oh and another“There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate,” Rockefeller said in a statement.

    So ya it points it out on several occassions that they delibertaly misused intelligence.
    Bullshit! Selective proccessing of information after the fact. Phony self serving after the fact bullshit!
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  18. #108
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by zulater View Post
    Great post!

    - - - Updated - - -



    Bullshit! Selective proccessing of information after the fact. Phony self serving after the fact bullshit!
    Also why would saddam want to trick us into believing he had WMDs especially since he knew we were going to invade and take him out of power?


    But not all the intelligence was wrong. Information from two highly-placed sources close to Saddam Hussein was correct.

    Both said Iraq did not have any active WMD.

    [...]

    Ex-CIA man Bill Murray was not happy with the way the intelligence from these two highly-placed sources had been used.

    “I thought we’d produced probably the best intelligence that anybody produced in the pre-war period, all of which came out – in the long run – to be accurate. The information was discarded and not used.”

    It wasn’t used because it wasn’t politically convenient to an administration hellbent on war.

  19. #109
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    Zu made a great comment, concerning Pearl Harbor. Let's take a deeper look at what happened there, and you'll see just how asinine your comments are.


    1. Radar picked up the incoming flight of bombers. It was called in, but dismissed as a flight from the mainland. Nine messages were intercepted out of Tokyo to the Japanese embassy, including one that stated, "it is absolutely necessary that all arrangements for the signing of this agreement be completed by the 25th of this month. (November). And again, on Nov. 11, "The imperial government has made maximum concessions she can in drawing up it's final proposal, I explained . . . if unfortunately, the United States refuses to accept those terms, it would useless to continue the negotiations " The most damning one that was intercepted however, came to Honolulu and it too, was intercepted by MAGIC (American code breaking of Japanese communications program).

    2. Beyond that, Billy Mitchell, in 1924, had already identified exactly how the war would begin.




    3. Ambassador Grew, our Japanese ambassador even passed on information about an upcoming attack. According to him, the Peruvian minister informed the US embassy of a surprise attack. British intelligence had also given warning of a coming attack. The information came from Dusko Popov, a British double agent. He was sent to the US by Germany to create a network of spies to collect information on "military assets in Hawaii." Specifically, torpedo attacks of Pearl Harbor.


    4. Let us not forget the message that was sent to Navy forces int he Pacific specifically warning about the coming war.



    Based on that information, many have done exactly what you're doing, lambasting the president for actions when in hindsight, those actions didn't line up with intelligence. However, the "group think" that the American intelligence community was accused of before the Iraq war by the senate committee hearing, the "unfounded presumptions" they were accused of, the dependence on what was later considered a "bad source" are aall reflected exactly the opposite in the Pearl Harbor bombing. Group think in the military community caused them to completely dismiss an aerial attack when Mitchell first mentioned it (based on the U.S. Army's desire for ground war and dismissal of aircraft), it also caused the intelligence community to not believe Japan was capable of that type of thing, so they completely dismissed it out of hand. That leads to the unfounded presumptions that were based on pre-conceived notions of who the Japanese were an thus, why they wouldn't be able to pull off an attack. In short, their own presumptions caused them to completely miss the connections. The "bad source" is even more fascinating, because the source from the Peruvian Minister came from their Japanese cook, and thus, was dismissed. The result, was that the attack on Pearl Harbor happened EXACTLY because the US government made the exact same mistakes, but in the opposite direction (except for the last one).

    May I suggest that you give up your fantasy about the all-encompasing, all powerful CIA. Especially when they were gutted by the Church Committee, then in the Clinton years, were barred from sharing information with the FBI (a mistake that allowed 9-11 to happen, and was implemented by, surprise surprise, one of the people who actually sat on the 9-11 commission. Yeah, no politics there).

    To spin a series of common mistakes into "Bush Lied" is politics. Pure and simple. It's dancing in the blood of our soldiers with glee so that you can score political points, and it is disgusting.
    bump
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  20. #110

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Also why would saddam want to trick us into believing he had WMDs especially since he knew we were going to invade and take him out of power?
    If you don't understand why this question is silly, then I seriously doubt your ability to understand foreign relations.

    Simple, and answered in a link I provided down below. Because Saddam Hussein was trying to to play a power-game, and new that if he were to have any leverage in the middle east, he needed WMD, especially with Iran sitting on his boarder. The president of the mid-east country quoted before (Qatar? IAE? don't remember now), who had close relations to Saddam, reported that Saddam did NOT think the US would invade. The question that should be asked, is why?

    My guess? Iraq Oil for Food scandal. Germany, Russia, and France all stood opposed in the UN because they were making money. Saddam thought that he could play games an buy off nations with his oil money. Turns out, he couldn't.

    As for the "conclusions" that you posted - it's a joke. They don't even say what you intend for them to say. They don't say that Bush lied. They said that the statements made didn't line up with underlying intelligence. In other words, the ANALYSIS OF THE INTELLIGENCE was wrong.

    That's done at drone level in the recesses of the CIA, not in the whitehouse. But go ahead, find another reason to continue your irrational bush hatred.


  21. #111
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by Preacher View Post
    If you don't understand why this question is silly, then I seriously doubt your ability to understand foreign relations.

    Simple, and answered in a link I provided down below. Because Saddam Hussein was trying to to play a power-game, and new that if he were to have any leverage in the middle east, he needed WMD, especially with Iran sitting on his boarder. The president of the mid-east country quoted before (Qatar? IAE? don't remember now), who had close relations to Saddam, reported that Saddam did NOT think the US would invade. The question that should be asked, is why?

    My guess? Iraq Oil for Food scandal. Germany, Russia, and France all stood opposed in the UN because they were making money. Saddam thought that he could play games an buy off nations with his oil money. Turns out, he couldn't.

    As for the "conclusions" that you posted - it's a joke. They don't even say what you intend for them to say. They don't say that Bush lied. They said that the statements made didn't line up with underlying intelligence. In other words, the ANALYSIS OF THE INTELLIGENCE was wrong.

    That's done at drone level in the recesses of the CIA, not in the whitehouse. But go ahead, find another reason to continue your irrational bush hatred.
    Its not a power game when he loses all leverage if the united states invades his country and removes him from power, it makes absolutely no sense. Right the statements made by the bush adminstration did not line up with the intelligence that says exactly what i want it too say. The intelligence wasnt telling them weapons of mass destruction were there but that was the crap they were feeding the american public. If the intelligence was saying one thing and they were making statements not in line with the intelligence that is a lie! I dont care how you want to try and twist the words it was a lie, and judging by the comments of the chairman of the commitee they felt pretty confident he lied.

  22. #112
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Last word.
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  23. #113
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Its not a power game when he loses all leverage if the united states invades his country and removes him from power, it makes absolutely no sense. Right the statements made by the bush adminstration did not line up with the intelligence that says exactly what i want it too say. The intelligence wasnt telling them weapons of mass destruction were there but that was the crap they were feeding the american public. If the intelligence was saying one thing and they were making statements not in line with the intelligence that is a lie! I dont care how you want to try and twist the words it was a lie, and judging by the comments of the chairman of the commitee they felt pretty confident he lied.
    Dawg, I was in Military intelligence, believe it or not, And if you think there's not politics involved at the higher levels at Langley, that there's not varying opinions on gathered data, that fruitfull intelligence has 100 daddy's and bad intelligence followed is disowned by anyone who can find a way to do so. There's back stabbing going on all the time, and if someone sees a chance to insert a shiv and claim they were against it, they will. Of course that same party wont tell you about the bad lead's he followed, or the time they suggested caution when caution was ill advised.

    So quite frankly I have little respect for a politically motivated after the fact fact finding missive.

    When Bush went to war, everyone thought Hussein had WMD's and thought he was fully capable of seeing them into the hands of people who would do us harm. And they were probably right.
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  24. #114
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Quote Originally Posted by zulater View Post
    Dawg, I was in Military intelligence, believe it or not, And if you think there's not politics involved at the higher levels at Langley, that there's not varying opinions on gathered data, that fruitfull intelligence has 100 daddy's and bad intelligence followed is disowned by anyone who can find a way to do so. There's back stabbing going on all the time, and if someone sees a chance to insert a shiv and claim they were against it, they will. Of course that same party wont tell you about the bad lead's he followed, or the time they suggested caution when caution was ill advised.

    So quite frankly I have little respect for a politically motivated after the fact fact finding missive.

    When Bush went to war, everyone thought Hussein had WMD's and thought he was fully capable of seeing them into the hands of people who would do us harm. And they were probably right.
    I just cant see that everyone thought he had WMDs because there was intelligence that specifically stated he did not. Also you dont go to war on what people think, you make certain before you send our troops to battle. They were not right, even bush admitted his biggest regret as president was the iraq war, they found no weapons, they found no ties to al queada, those were the reasons we were given for the war and neither turned out to be true. You are not going to convince me that we were tricked by saddam into invading his country and removing him from power.

  25. #115
    Senior Member Array title="smokin3000gt has a reputation beyond repute"> smokin3000gt's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    3,364

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Guys, stop feeding the troll please and maybe he will take his stupid and pedal it else where.
    Quote Originally Posted by 86WARD View Post
    Tomlin is that good.



    PATRIOTS**

    BUNGLES
    Steelers - 18 Bengals - 16 #0in25 #anotherseasonBungled




    HTG ¤-

  26. #116
    Senior Member Array title="SteelerEmpire has a spectacular aura about"> SteelerEmpire's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    3,271

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney

    Recorded Sunday, 04-28-13

    Former Regan admin. Matthew Dowd on Bush legacy. Newt Gingrich and George Will (Conservative Republicans) also said the same.

    Go to 17:38 of the video.


  27. #117
    Formerly TheWarden86 Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of"> NJarhead's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Gender
    Posts
    2,766

    Re: Iraq War vet pens 'last letter' to Bush and Cheney


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •