BF2S Forums Interrogator: Invasion Surprised Saddam

sergeriver wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Words don't kill people.  Bad decisions certainly do.

You make decisions off of intel given to you.  One man / country can not do it all.

He had the same intel than Clinton, yet he decided on his own to invade Iraq.

That is speculation Serge and you know it. The same shit could be said about Clinton from a different angle. Clinton had intel on Bin Laden and his whereabouts as well as his potential to do great harm and Billy boy didnt do shit. First the USS Cole and then 911. And don't even get me going on Somalia. Sure, "international incidents" were avoided but at what cost. The president of his country is not a fucking diplomat. That is why nations have designated diplomats. The presidents job of any nation is to protect his constituants.

deeznutz1245 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

You make decisions off of intel given to you.  One man / country can not do it all.

He had the same intel than Clinton, yet he decided on his own to invade Iraq.

That is speculation Serge and you know it. The same shit could be said about Clinton from a different angle. Clinton had intel on Bin Laden and his whereabouts as well as his potential to do great harm and Billy boy didnt do shit. First the USS Cole and then 911. And don't even get me going on Somalia. Sure, "international incidents" were avoided but at what cost. The president of his country is not a fucking diplomat. That is why nations have designated diplomats. The presidents job of any nation is to protect his constituants.

Clinton admitted he failed at least.  And pls don't blame him for 9/11.  Read Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke.

This is why im becoming more and more tired of this community: almost every thread worth discussing becomes a shit-slinging carnival.  They always end the same, but then I suppose its to be expected.  You will probably be too busy taking shots at each other to even notice this post!

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The invasion surprised Saddam - interesting.  It still doesn't give credit to the fact that the "evidence" in going to war was weak, misrepresented, and there was a definite agenda in the push for war.

How many countries supported it and gave us intel?  How many democrats including Clinton said Saddam must be taken out?  Jesus you think it was just Bush or something.

Does that make it ok?  Not in my book.  Regardless of party or platform, people (including U.S. citizens and media) were duped into a war that has had massive repercussions for many involved.  The "Coalition of the Willing" does not equal the international community.  Do you know how many countries joined up because of the threat of refusal of aid?

Where have I blamed Bush only?  Where have I given Democrats the benefit of the doubt?  The dog and pony show that is Congress is at least as much to blame as the media and the Bush Administration.  The agenda for invasion was there, the misrepresentation of facts was there, the refusal to allow the international community due time to deal with the perceived threat of Saddam was there.  That is my point - there is a definite agenda belonging to the political powers involved - and they manipulated intelligence gathering and public opinion - both through intelligence avenues and the media/popular sentiment.

Personally, I think it would be great if you actually put forth an opinion instead of just combating others'.  You remind me of Bubbalo in that way, simply dismissing other people's arguments without offering up an opinion of your own.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-01-27 18:02:47)

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

How many countries supported it and gave us intel?  How many democrats including Clinton said Saddam must be taken out?  Jesus you think it was just Bush or something.

Does that make it ok?  Not in my book.  Regardless of party or platform, people (including U.S. citizens and media) were duped into a war that has had massive repercussions for many involved.  The "Coalition of the Willing" does not equal the international community.  Do you know how many countries joined up because of the threat of refusal of aid?

Where have I blamed Bush only?  Where have I given Democrats the benefit of the doubt?  The dog and pony show that is Congress is at least as much to blame as the media and the Bush Administraion.  The agenda for invasion was there, the misrepresentation of facts was there, the refusal to allow the international community due time to deal with the perceived threat of Saddam was there.  That is my point - there is a definite agenda belonging to the political powers involved - and they manipulated intelligence gathering and public opinion - both through intelligence avenues and the media/popular sentiment.

You know you live in nice plush OC because of agendas and such right?

I live here because my parents decided to move here before I was born, and since I have been able to steer my own destiny I have enjoyed living here.  I live here because of my own agenda - fair enough.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-01-27 18:05:03)

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I live here because my parents decided to move here before I was born, and since I have been able to steer my own destiny I have enjoyed living here.  I live here because of my own agenda - fair enough.

Nope.  More to our riches in this country then that.

Where I choose to live has little to do with our country's riches.  That is like saying I am alive because of the Revolutionary War.  If you really want to look that deep into it, I am here because I survived the lottery that is being born on Earth.  I am here because there were thousands of babies born into Sub-Saharan Africa right before I was - I win the lotto of where to be born at any given time.

The most important factor regarding where I live is myself, and previously, my family.

Back on topic bud

Wow. Page three and it was completely derailed. Nice technique.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I saw the one-liner deal.  Amazing, to be honest.

yes

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

The invasion surprised Saddam - interesting.  It still doesn't give credit to the fact that the "evidence" in going to war was weak, misrepresented, and there was a definite agenda in the push for war.

How many countries supported it and gave us intel?  How many democrats including Clinton said Saddam must be taken out?  Jesus you think it was just Bush or something.

Does that make it ok?  Not in my book.  Regardless of party or platform, people (including U.S. citizens and media) were duped into a war that has had massive repercussions for many involved.  The "Coalition of the Willing" does not equal the international community.  Do you know how many countries joined up because of the threat of refusal of aid?

Where have I blamed Bush only?  Where have I given Democrats the benefit of the doubt?  The dog and pony show that is Congress is at least as much to blame as the media and the Bush Administration.  The agenda for invasion was there, the misrepresentation of facts was there, the refusal to allow the international community due time to deal with the perceived threat of Saddam was there.  That is my point - there is a definite agenda belonging to the political powers involved - and they manipulated intelligence gathering and public opinion - both through intelligence avenues and the media/popular sentiment.

Personally, I think it would be great if you actually put forth an opinion instead of just combating others'.  You remind me of Bubbalo in that way, simply dismissing other people's arguments without offering up an opinion of your own.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I wonder why nobody on the left gets this speech.

lowing wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Wow. Page three and it was completely derailed. Nice technique.

Ya can't blame for this one

I blame this thread on lowing

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-01-27 19:40:46)

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

simply dismissing other people's arguments without offering up an opinion of your own.

I have given my opinion thank you.  It is somewhere burried in the typical bf2s pile of shit the occurs in threads.

Fair enough.  I will take your failure to address the rest of my post as evidence that you agree with my opinion.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

simply dismissing other people's arguments without offering up an opinion of your own.

I have given my opinion thank you.  It is somewhere burried in the typical bf2s pile of shit the occurs in threads.

Fair enough.  I will take your failure to address the rest of my post as evidence that you agree with my opinion.

Cognitive Dissidence in action! Funny you said i was the Master of it.

David.P wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

I have given my opinion thank you.  It is somewhere burried in the typical bf2s pile of shit the occurs in threads.

Fair enough.  I will take your failure to address the rest of my post as evidence that you agree with my opinion.

Cognitive Dissidence in action! Funny you said i was the Master of it.

Haha.  It is cognitive dissonance.  Read up on it to get a better grasp.