BF2S Forums Obama's 'Hot Spot' Envoys

usmarine wrote:

yes richard is great...you all should love him.
-------------
Holbrooke spoke about Iraq during his farewell press conference as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations on January 11, 2001. There he said, "Iraq will be one of the major issues facing the incoming Bush administration at the United Nations." Further, "Saddam Hussein's activities continue to be unacceptable and, in my view, dangerous to the region and, indeed, to the world, not only because he possesses the potential for weapons of mass destruction but because of the very nature of his regime. His willingness to be cruel internally is not unique in the world, but the combination of that and his willingness to export his problems makes him a clear and present danger at all times."[24]

On February 24, 2007 Holbrooke delivered the Democratic Party's weekly radio address and called for "a new strategy in Iraq", involving "a careful, phased redeployment of U.S. troops" and a "new diplomatic offensive in the Gulf region to help stabilize Iraq."

Sounds like he did well in Yugoslavia though, and that was even less...clear cut than Iraq.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

And your point is?

"change"

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

And your point is?

let me go get some crayons

Ah, so brave these marines, chuck in a grenade, then run away.

But, I'm afraid this one's a dud, mate.

usmarine wrote:

ya sorry i was yelling at yerded.

where was i.

oh ya, it seems he agreed with the iraq war yes?  a good thing right?  but that seems to be bush talk no?  well then it seems he agreed with bush and the war.  and obama hired him.

odd i say

I don't see anything in the quote given that even mentions sending troops into Iraq.

Learn to comprehend.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

usmarine wrote:

ya sorry i was yelling at yerded.

where was i.

oh ya, it seems he agreed with the iraq war yes?  a good thing right?  but that seems to be bush talk no?  well then it seems he agreed with bush and the war.  and obama hired him.

odd i say

I don't see anything in the quote given that even mentions sending troops into Iraq.

Learn to comprehend.

To be fair, he didn't sound overly fond of Iraq

the dude wrote:

"Iraq will be one of the major issues facing the incoming Bush administration at the United Nations." Further, "Saddam Hussein's activities continue to be unacceptable and, in my view, dangerous to the region and, indeed, to the world, not only because he possesses the potential for weapons of mass destruction but because of the very nature of his regime. His willingness to be cruel internally is not unique in the world, but the combination of that and his willingness to export his problems makes him a clear and present danger at all times."

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

I don't see anything in the quote given that even mentions sending troops into Iraq.

Learn to comprehend.

yes i know.  but he agreed with it and supported it.  learn to comprehend.

Again, I don't see anything in the quote given to that effect.

Learn to make your point better.

"...makes him a clear and present danger at all times."

no i guess not.

i r knot gud at reeding

usmarine wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

usmarine wrote:

yes i know.  but he agreed with it and supported it.  learn to comprehend.

Again, I don't see anything in the quote given to that effect.

Learn to make your point better.

"...makes him a clear and present danger at all times."

no i guess not.

i r knot gud at reeding

Acknowledging that he was a danger is not the same as supporting the invasion.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Acknowledging that he was a danger is not the same as supporting the invasion.

sigh...go look up his quotes if you please.

Finally, any resolution must "make clear the job is not over simply if Saddam is replaced by someone else," he said. "Chaos could follow. We do not want to see Iraq become a safe haven for other forms of terrorists."

Americans should begin the war soberly with the expectation it will be costly, "wasteful and bloody," Holbrooke said.

Holbrooke has praised the Bush speech at the U.N., and the goal of a regime change in Iraq, which he called the only way to eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction.

"Inspections are not foolproof," he said.


If at any point in this process, and the U.S. will give a very short notice, I would think 48 hours, if at any point in those 48 hours the French, the Russians or anyone else says we're going to muster strong opposition, the U.S. and the British will pull that resolution and the war will start within a matter of days or a handful of weeks. I would also add one last critical point, as Charlie Kupchan surely remembers. In Bosnia, in Kosovo, and in December of 1998 with Operation Desert Fox in Iraq, the Clinton administration used air power without any new Security Council resolution for Iraq and none at all in Kosovo and Bosnia, and we did that because we knew we couldn't get it through the Security Council.

Last edited by usmarine (2009-01-22 17:03:40)

usmarine wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Acknowledging that he was a danger is not the same as supporting the invasion.

sigh...go look up his quotes if you please.

Finally, any resolution must "make clear the job is not over simply if Saddam is replaced by someone else," he said. "Chaos could follow. We do not want to see Iraq become a safe haven for other forms of terrorists."

Americans should begin the war soberly with the expectation it will be costly, "wasteful and bloody," Holbrooke said.

Holbrooke has praised the Bush speech at the U.N., and the goal of a regime change in Iraq, which he called the only way to eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction.

"Inspections are not foolproof," he said.


If at any point in this process, and the U.S. will give a very short notice, I would think 48 hours, if at any point in those 48 hours the French, the Russians or anyone else says we're going to muster strong opposition, the U.S. and the British will pull that resolution and the war will start within a matter of days or a handful of weeks. I would also add one last critical point, as Charlie Kupchan surely remembers. In Bosnia, in Kosovo, and in December of 1998 with Operation Desert Fox in Iraq, the Clinton administration used air power without any new Security Council resolution for Iraq and none at all in Kosovo and Bosnia, and we did that because we knew we couldn't get it through the Security Council.

OK.

Thankyou.

That does make your point.

(assuming he did say those things (I honestly cba to check)) Conceded.

See, that wasn't so difficult, now was it?

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2009-01-22 17:06:21)

usmarine wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

No issues with Mr.Mitchell then?

if that is the douche who wasted time worrying about steroids in baseball then worrying about the real problems in this country....then yes i have issue with him also.

Steroids in baseball is an important problem. If pros take them, athletes at all levels may end up taking them. College athletes will have to take them if they want to make the pros. High school athletes will take them if they want to play in college, or just because taking steroids seems normal. And steroids can really harm kids.

There are definitely more important issues in the world, but fighting steroid use in sports is a worthwhile effort.

Your damn straight it is San, finding out if baseball players use dope(duhhh) is way more important then little things like the economy and war. Get your priorities straight!