Call your shot...Iraqi end game predictions

[Mr. Belvedere]

Prediction: Iraq will be partitioned, into Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd sections. The Shiites section will end up absorbed by Iran, and the Kurd section will be threatened by Turkey.

All three sections will be utter shitholes - like all of Afghanistan is now.

The US will stave off a Turkish invasion, and our focused presence there will finally lead to oil production by multinationals.

what's my prediction? PAIN.











pretty good call by PSUfan by the way.

[Goober McTuber]

50 years from now, historians will mention W like they now do Harry Truman.

Absolute horseshit. He will be remembered as The Worst President Ever.

[Felix]

50 years from now, historians will mention W like they now do Harry Truman.

Absolute horseshit. He will be remembered as The Worst President Ever.

except of course by morons spouting sound bytes like "he's still my president"....

[ElvisMonster]

Off topic, the chick to the left looks like Seinfeld.

SHE'S MY FAVORITE ONE, BITCH!!!1 TAKE IT BACK!

[PSUFAN]

War Wagon...

I find it odd that you advocate a glass parking lot approach in Iraq, yet in a subsequent post, you claim that W is "your" President. You don't really appear to understand that the current approach has been framed by "your" President, and that approach is "nation-building", not the indiscriminate murder of ragheads you long for.

Basically, because you're unable to understand the situation, you revert to fantasy in which you just kill whoever you want based on the kind of hat they're wearing. That isn't "your" President's approach, nor will it ever be the approach the US will ever take... it wasn't even the approach taken by our leaders in the WWII conflict.

It's blatantly obvious that comparing WWII with this current conflict reveals numerous overwhelming dissimilarities...none of which can penetrate your urineLite-soaked overripe melon.

[Tom In VA]

It's blatantly obvious that comparing WWII with this current conflict reveals numerous overwhelming dissimilarities...

Not the least of which include in WWII, Allied media outlets didn't provide propaganda for the Axis. The 24 second news cycle notwiithstanding, I don't think FDR would have put up with about 90% of the naysaying and intelligence leaking that has occurred throughout this campaign.

In order of importance to national security and global economies, it is very similiar. Perhaps even moreso now. After WWI, when Great Britian inherited the task of babysitting the former Ottoman empire, and WWII when Great Britian was decimated to the point of being unable to continue to do so the U.S. inherited that task. I think it would be a lie to suggest that overall we as a country have not benefitted from that strategic position of power. When the country benefits, so do we.


We get to sit in our comfy little chairs in our air conditioned rooms and arm chair quarterback an effort and decry that effort while enjoying the luxuries it provides.

FDR, would have had the jack boots kicking down doors to anyone who would harm morale and the overall war effort.



Bye Bye
Buy Bonds




BTW, if you live in the United States of America, George Bush is in fact, YOUR president. Haji and the Muj wouldn't ask you whether or not you voted for him or care for him.

[PSUFAN]

A few points, Tom:

No one is pretending that the Iraq conflict isn't important. You should scroll back up and read what I'm addressing in War Wagon's admonition. Once you do, you'll understand the nature of my disagreement with his WWII comparisions a little more readily.

Specifically, in WWII, we lined up against clearly defined territory, both geographical and from a human perspective. You shot the bad guys who were wearing the unis you recognized as bad. Once you shot enough of them, they shook your hand and conceded defeat.

Nothing remotely similar is possible in this conflict.

We can't simply murder all of the folks in the middle east and be done with it. We're not at war with Iraq or any other nation, we're at war with terrorists and religious extremists. We can't just go to where they are and slay them efficiently as we did in WWII...because they're everywhere, even here.

We get to sit in our comfy little chairs in our air conditioned rooms and arm chair quarterback an effort and decry that effort while enjoying the luxuries it provides.

We all benefit from the economic position our nation enjoys. I think we seem to disagree about whether the Bush team strengthened or weakened that position with the approach that they chose to take.

We're all on board with defending our liberties and our favorable economic position...but some of us are dubious of the approach taken by the Bush team, and wish they had taken a more intelligent, long-sighted approach...and there was no lack of folks suggesting such approaches, even from close political quarters.

So grow a pair and make that distinction - no one wants to give up our position in the world, we want to defend it, and we want to defend it well. If we complain about Bush not getting the job done well, we are not "giving up" on a defense of our nation, we're demanding a better one.

[Tom In VA]

it wasn't even the approach taken by our leaders in the WWII conflict.

Sure it was. Are you completely unfamiliar with our Strategic Air Campaign?

I thought they concluded that Dresden was due to a guard falling asleep in a Flaktürme with a lit cigarette.

[Tom In VA]

A few points, Tom:

No one is pretending that the Iraq conflict isn't important. You should scroll back up and read what I'm addressing in War Wagon's admonition. Once you do, you'll understand the nature of my disagreement with his WWII comparisions a little more readily.

Specifically, in WWII, we lined up against clearly defined territory, both geographical and from a human perspective. You shot the bad guys who were wearing the unis you recognized as bad. Once you shot enough of them, they shook your hand and conceded defeat.

Nothing remotely similar is possible in this conflict.

We can't simply murder all of the folks in the middle east and be done with it. We're not at war with Iraq or any other nation, we're at war with terrorists and religious extremists. We can't just go to where they are and slay them efficiently as we did in WWII...because they're everywhere, even here.

We get to sit in our comfy little chairs in our air conditioned rooms and arm chair quarterback an effort and decry that effort while enjoying the luxuries it provides.

We all benefit from the economic position our nation enjoys. I think we seem to disagree about whether the Bush team strengthened or weakened that position with the approach that they chose to take.

We're all on board with defending our liberties and our favorable economic position...but some of us are dubious of the approach taken by the Bush team, and wish they had taken a more intelligent, long-sighted approach...and there was no lack of folks suggesting such approaches, even from close political quarters.

So grow a pair and make that distinction - no one wants to give up our position in the world, we want to defend it, and we want to defend it well. If we complain about Bush not getting the job done well, we are not "giving up" on a defense of our nation, we're demanding a better one.

Solid post.


My argument here PSUFAN, is that the folks that were providing alternative strategies and tactics were doing the responsible thing. We agree. My issue is that we are ignoring that it is hindsight that is allowing us to conclude that those alternative strategies and tactics were potentially the correct or the better ones.

That's all I'm saying my man.

[Risa]

Dresden was a squirt of piss in the ocean. We "murdered" literally millions of German and Japanese civilians.

Not that I give a fuck, it was necessary, but we shouldn't sugarcoat it either. The only way to beat fanatics like these Islamists is to make the civilians who support and enable their efforts pay the price.

If we hadn't, we would still be fighting them.

I thought the war ended because Hitler was going crazy and his own people wanted less to do with him. If Rommel and crew could have assassinated Hitler and brought about a peace that would have allowed Germany to hold her head up while still admitting defeat, they would have done so in a heartbeat, correct?

It was the Japs who had a mission from God regarding the war. Hitler was crazy; but the Emperor was God. The double atom bombings gave the Emperor and the Japanese people a way out, while still being able to hold their heads up in defeat. Or have I misread the Second World War?

Italy... I don't know what was going on in Italy. Italy was still playing Punic War games, while little boys sold their own sisters for chocolate.

The war ended because no one's heart was in it anymore. Right?

Russia was a bigger problem to the US, the UK and Germany.

[Risa]

It's blatantly obvious that comparing WWII with this current conflict reveals numerous overwhelming dissimilarities...

Not the least of which include in WWII, Allied media outlets didn't provide propaganda for the Axis. The 24 second news cycle notwiithstanding, I don't think FDR would have put up with about 90% of the naysaying and intelligence leaking that has occurred throughout this campaign.

FDR couldn't have done a damn thing about it. The man lived in a time when he had to pretend to have two working legs. The Second World War saved FDR's ass... which, for the sake of the lady Eleanor, I'm cool with.

FDR, would have had the jack boots kicking down doors to anyone who would harm morale and the overall war effort.

And Bush hasn't? Didn't ho-loving Bill Moyers have a piece on PBS recently outlining and condemning media complicity in Bush-Cheney strong arm tactics when it came to disseminating information?

And didn't Bush have Democrat help in jack booting, because Democrats wanted to be re-elected, too?

Maybe Edward Murrow could have teamed up with Anderson Cooper to take the boots off :\ But a people have to want those boots to come off.

BTW, if you live in the United States of America, George Bush is in fact, YOUR president. Haji and the Muj wouldn't ask you whether or not you voted for him or care for him.

You're right. There's a .sig somewhere in that. The internal squabblings within the US are irrelevant to an outsider. Which is why the Towers came down. And why both Bush and Sylvester Reyes can get away with not knowing the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite. It doesn't matter to 'us'; our shit doesn't matter to them.

Symbolisms matter. Figureheads do, too. Not details.

[PSUFAN]

Another important difference between WWII and the current conflict: The POTUS wasn't listening to idiots like Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld.

[Risa]

The war ended because no one's heart was in it anymore. Right?

That'll happen when 11 million of your people are killed, your economy is totally destroyed and your cities all lie in ruins.

Germany's economy was already fucked. They were still able to be the biggest juggernaut in Europe; if they could have enlisted Russia to their side along with Italy and Japan, there could have been 20 million dead, and Vatican City could have been utterly destroyed......... and Europe's ruling heads (except the Danes and the Brits) would have fallen all over each other to lick Russo-Teuton boots.

If the US had caved in to what US capitalists wanted (Germany's money), the UK would have been fucked. I don't know what would have happened to Russia. Somebody would have found a way to propagandize how Japan having the West Coast, Polynesia and Australia as a 'good thing' -- cuz you don't want them dominoing to China and Russia. I don't know where the Jews would have fled. Probably South America. Argentina wins the arms race.

Ignore all that. What I'm saying is, heart matters even more than millions dead and cities destroyed. If the other guys give up, you win. The South won the real civil war. Germany chose to lose World War 2. Vietnam won their war -- against the French and the US. Never give up.

[PSUFAN]

The South won the real civil war.

Lord help me...but WTF are you talking about?

[Risa]

The South won the real civil war.

Lord help me...but WTF are you talking about?

Don't act like that. The 100 years between Lincoln's assassination and Johnson's ascension... with current times meaning abortion and marijuana saying they lost, and gay rights and capital punishment saying they won.

[Neely8]

The war ended because no one's heart was in it anymore. Right?

That'll happen when 11 million of your people are killed, your economy is totally destroyed and your cities all lie in ruins.

Germany's economy was already fucked. They were still able to be the biggest juggernaut in Europe; if they could have enlisted Russia to their side along with Italy and Japan, there could have been 20 million dead, and Vatican City could have been utterly destroyed......... and Europe's ruling heads (except the Danes and the Brits) would have fallen all over each other to lick Russo-Teuton boots.

If the US had caved in to what US capitalists wanted (Germany's money), the UK would have been fucked. I don't know what would have happened to Russia. Somebody would have found a way to propagandize how Japan having the West Coast, Polynesia and Australia as a 'good thing' -- cuz you don't want them dominoing to China and Russia. I don't know where the Jews would have fled. Probably South America. Argentina wins the arms race.

Ignore all that. What I'm saying is, heart matters even more than millions dead and cities destroyed. If the other guys give up, you win. The South won the real civil war. Germany chose to lose World War 2. Vietnam won their war -- against the French and the US. Never give up.

So how much for a young, strong black slave these days??

[Y2K]

The South won the real civil war.

Lord help me...but WTF are you talking about?

Think of Annie's ramblings as a Message Board type Rubik's Cube, She Spins and Spins but she still can't make any of her thoughts match up into a pattern.

[Risa]

Neely, the price of a college scholarship. Y2K, are you disagreeing out of reason, or out of spite?

[Luther]

We're drifting...

I need predictions, end game predictions.

By Nov. 2008 will there be:

Any new McDonald's franchises in the Anbar province?
Will Gen. Petraeus be heralded as a genius?
Of all the Iraqi names we've heard for years, will they still be breathing?
Muqtada al-Sadr, and his army...good or bad?

Can mvscal answer me a legit question, please? I can remember back in 2003 at some time and I was watching Dan Senor, who was the senior advisor to Paul Bremer. We'd see him giving briefings all the time on TV. I remember when this Cleric was brutally murdered after leaving a mosque. I think the Cleric was a Sunni. Anyway, Dan Senor basically was saying that there were "Murder warrants out for al-Sadr and he will either be arrested or killed." WTF happened with all of that? Looks like it to me is, in the spirit of Shi'a/Sunni love fest and reconciliation that they just let this guy slide?

Does anybody believe that had we actually took sides, say with the Shiites (majority) and basically went after the Sunni insurgents that this situation would have been better. Anybody believe we should have sided with the Sunni's?

You know, I've seen some small blogs or documentaries about some families in Iraq. Families who just want what we all want for our loved ones...Safety, food, water, electricity, a means to work, the ability for our kids to go to school, a future. Many have stood up and have signed up to be cops or soldiers. Then a truck filled with explosives drives by and detonates in the courtyard of the police station and kills fitty young men. Many times that has happened.

Call your shots.

Rip City

[Mr T]

The war ended because no one's heart was in it anymore. Right?

That'll happen when 11 million of your people are killed, your economy is totally destroyed and your cities all lie in ruins.

Haha...rack it

Germany's economy was already fucked. They were still able to be the biggest juggernaut in Europe; if they could have enlisted Russia to their side along with Italy and Japan

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...well you would probably be fatter. Do you know why Russia wasnt on their side?

If the US had caved in to what US capitalists wanted (Germany's money), the UK would have been fucked. I don't know what would have happened to Russia. Somebody would have found a way to propagandize how Japan having the West Coast, Polynesia and Australia as a 'good thing' -- cuz you don't want them dominoing to China and Russia. I don't know where the Jews would have fled. Probably South America. Argentina wins the arms race.

What the hell is this....what are you rambling about?

Ignore all that.

Shouldve put it at the top of your post labled "Ignore this..."

The South won the real civil war.

How is that? Years and years of poverty and poor education? States rights being lost? Still getting taxed out the ass on farm products but this time w/o slaves?

Germany chose to lose World War 2.

What? They got buttfucked and invaded. Hitler killed himself because he knew it was over.

Yeah they chose to lose in the sense you chose to lose your job by getting fired from mcdonalds

[Mr T]

The South won the real civil war.

Lord help me...but WTF are you talking about?

Don't act like that. The 100 years between Lincoln's assassination and Johnson's ascension... with current times meaning abortion and marijuana saying they lost, and gay rights and capital punishment saying they won.

So the civil war was about green, coat hangers and fags?

The north was for abortion and shrubbery
The south was for gay rights and capital punishment

I dont see it....maybe....

The north was for abortion and gay rights
The south was for greenery and capital punishment

[Risa]

Mr. T, the 'what if' was just that -- a 'what if' -- that followed thinking about the circumstances in which a people will say 'fuck it',and circumstances in which a people will say 'keep rolling' in spite of apparent collapse. The 'ignore this' was an admission that that 'what if' was not pertinent to the question. But the sidetracking existed anyway, so there it is.

The South won the civil war because of the North was more eager to reconcile with the traitors than it was in ensuring that all members of the nation -- regardless of skin color or ethnicity -- received equal justice. Anti-lynching measures were defeated because of strong State's Rights sentiment. The federal income tax was pushed through in spite of State resistence. One dealt with human lives. The other dealt with cash money. Who won? The South won. Jim Crow won. Segregation won. States won... and then Bobby Kennedy became Attorney General.

What State's rights were lost, after the civil war, beyond the State's right to own and sell another human being as property? States had the right to choose how and whom they were going to segregate against, and no federal government was going to tell Woolworth's they had to serve blacks at the same counter as whites at the same time. No federal government was going to tell States that it is illegal to spend so much money on different restroom facilities and drinking fountains and doors so that the races would never interact except in a master-servant fashion if at all possible. No federal government was going to tell States that having hospitals receiving government money providing different services (or no service at all) depending upon the color of the patient, is illegal.

The South won. They even wrote the history books afterwards.

Germany was invaded by whom? they had that war won. They owned everybody. They cowed everybody. They had sympathizers in ever major country, including the US and the UK. The US continues to play Switzerland while taking Nazi money, different outcome. They get those revolutionary jets up and running that after the war the US and Russia were modifying plans to, different outcome. They get the bomb first, doesn't matter how many lives were lost before, they would have had The Bomb and the bomb's present would have trumped the lives lost and destruction of past.

That war was not a done deal. But heart was lost. That's all I'm saying. Heart trumps numbers.

What I meant by abortion and marijuana and gay marriage is that the feds have laid the law down that abortion will be legal in every state. Certain places like South Dakota can make noise, but their restrictions don't mean illegality. State's rights win what they can, but they lost the right not to allow abortion period. Meanwhile certain places like Massachusetts and Vermont can approve gay marriage within their state. The feds won't recognize it, but Massachusetts and Vermont will, right? No half ass 'domestic partner' measures, you can be married if you're gay. State's rights won when it came to Gay Marriage, after all. But there is no state where you can smoke out just to smoke out and get away with it. State's rights lost with marijuana. Texas capital punishment is not Minnesota capital punishment is not Utah capital punishment. State's rights won.

That's all I meant. If my understanding of state's rights is off, ok.

[War Wagon]

Allied media outlets didn't provide propaganda for the Axis. The 24 second news cycle notwiithstanding, I don't think FDR would have put up with about 90% of the naysaying and intelligence leaking that has occurred throughout this campaign.

Of course not. One of the first things he did was establish The Office of Censorship by Executive Order 8985 on the 19th of December, 1941. All radio broadcasts, all newsreel footage, all print media, mail and international cables were subject to military censorship by an agency of over 14,000 people.

FDR would have shut down this mesage board, tracked down PUS, greenie, LTS, etc. and thrown their seditious, soon to be plungered asses in Fort Leavenworth for the duration

The Bill Maher's and Michael Moore's would've been hanged for treason.

[poptart]

Of all the Iraqi names we've heard for years, will they still be breathing?

I'm not sure about them, but I wager $4.39 that our favorite ace of spades will still be posting here.

[RadioFan]

Allied media outlets didn't provide propaganda for the Axis. The 24 second news cycle notwiithstanding, I don't think FDR would have put up with about 90% of the naysaying and intelligence leaking that has occurred throughout this campaign.

Of course not. One of the first things he did was establish The Office of Censorship by Executive Order 8985 on the 19th of December, 1941. All radio broadcasts, all newsreel footage, all print media, mail and international cables were subject to military censorship by an agency of over 14,000 people.

FDR would have shut down this mesage board, tracked down PUS, greenie, LTS, etc. and thrown their seditious, soon to be plungered asses in Fort Leavenworth for the duration

The Bill Maher's and Michael Moore's would've been hanged for treason.

Good to see you guys not having the terrorists winning or anything.

Jesus.

[RadioFan]

Btw, as to the premise of this thread ...

I've posted this before, but I'll post the short version of it. Iraq is a goddamned mess, no thanks to Bremer's idiotic "I'm in charge now" decisions of

1. Disbanding the Iraqi military -- effectively putting 200,000 guys out on the streets with weapons and no jobs and

2. His de-Baathification policy -- effectively putting teachers, clerical workers and technocrats on the streets. (Everybody in "government," including schools and making the busses run had to belong to the party under Saddam, for the most part.)

Yeah, WWII, indeed. We did the exact same thing after beating Nazi Germany, right tards? :roll:

I agree with mvscal in the sense that I don't think Iraq will be partitioned.

We'll still be there in 2009. It will still be a mess.

I posted when we first went in that I had my doubts about any Arab state and democracy. It's never worked before and hasn't worked so far.

My prediction: The next president will get the UN involved, we'll pull out, and it will remain a country like Kashmir is a region, sadly, for at least 5 years after we're gone. Many more people are going to die there before either A) The Iraqis themselves wake the fuck up and decide to run their own country, or B) An Iran-style theocracy takes over. And if it's the second option, a LOT more people will die.

[War Wagon]

We're drifting...

That's what we do here. Tell me you knew.

I need predictions, end game predictions.

I predict that you'll need a colonoscopy in the next two years. What do I win?

Oh, end game predictions about Iraq? Checkers or Chess?

If chess, Bush will advance a pawn onto his opponents last row, despite fierce resistance within the ranks, and turn it into a Queen.

Game Over.

[Jack]

In July 2009, there will still be at least 80,000 American troops in IRAQ with no end in sight. We will have made aerial attacks against IRAN and possibley will have ground troops also in IRAN. There will be 2 major terrorist attacks against the US. The next attacks will be truck and car bombings.

A Democrat will be President of the US (Obama or Clinton). T1B will still be in operation. The Red Sox will have won the last 2 World Series.

Gas will be close to $5.00/gallon.

[Goober McTuber]

In July 2009, there will still be at least 80,000 American troops in IRAQ with no end in sight. We will have made aerial attacks against IRAN and possibley will have ground troops also in IRAN. There will be 2 major terrorist attacks against the US. The next attacks will be truck and car bombings.

A Democrat will be President of the US (Obama or Clinton). T1B will still be in operation. The Red Sox will have won the last 2 World Series.

Gas will be close to $5.00/gallon.

And Jack will still be a certifiable tard.

[Jack]

And Jack will still be a certifiable tard.

and Goober will still be a Goober!

[Goober McTuber]

And Jack will still be a certifiable tard.

and Goober will still be a Goober!

Good one!

[Felix]

I thought this was a "War on Terror" and that we were "winning"....opening up the local newspaper this morning and I'm hit with this headline....

Government Report Concludes Al Qaeda Now as Strong as in Summer of 2001

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289028,00.html

so lets see, the war is currently costing us 10-12 billion a week, we've been there for over four years, and now it's reported the enemy that attacked us is as strong as they were before we began this insanity.....so much for the prediction that Iraq would be the place where all terrorists go to die (s'up mvs)

We're drifting...

I need predictions, end game predictions.

I'm withholding my end game prediction until after the Bush press conference this morning.....

[Mikey]

It's in their interest this week to convince us that we are not winning the war on terror and that we're in imminent danger of attack. What better way to get the nation's collective mind off of their domestic failures, cancellation of the constitution and imperial attitude in snubbing Congressional subpoenas, and shame the Republican Senators and Congressmen who are jumping the ship on Iraq?

It is a fine line though, they'll have to be able to convince "us" again next week we're winning the "War on Terror" and that the surge is working.

[Mikey]

Oh.... back to predictions.

I have a gut feeling that Chertoff will still look like a sniveling little jackass.

[Y2K]

Well we should keep hope alive, at least our new Congress is shaping up to be as big a failure as the current Administration has been.

[PSUFAN]

No one's in a position to judge the strength of our muzzie radical opponents.

On 9/10, did we judge them capable of 9/11? When a group of 20 or so can spend 10+ years planning and executing something like that, it's tough to be confident in our ability to assess their strength.

We can say, "the Taliban's less strong", or "OBL's on the run" or "Saddam's dead"...but that doesn't really cover the bases, unfortunately.

[Felix]

so lets see, the war is currently costing us 10-12 billion a week, we've been there for over four years, and now it's reported the enemy that attacked us is as strong as they were before we began this insanity.....

Pure fantasy.

so are you saying the war isn't costing us 10-12 billion a week or that AQ has not reconstituted itself to 2001 levels.....

and if you'd be so kind as to indicate exactly what you base this assessment on.... I hope it's something more substantial than Micheal "The Mouthpiece" Chertoff's regurgitation of Bush sound bytes....

exactly what insight you possess that are not available to the 16 intelligence agencies that make up the NIE....

[Felix]

Pardon me if I'm not particularly impressed by their conclusions.

honestly mvs, I hope you're right on this.....

[Dinsdale]

No, they have certainly not.

So even mvscal admits the Bushies are lying to promote... whatever it is they serve.

Yes, the same 16 intelligence agencies which concluded it was a "slam dunk" that Saddam had large stockpiles of proscribed weapons.

Pure fantasy. Those 16 intelligence agencies all had a copy of the white-paper, the catch is that only one country's intelligence failed to recognize it as a complete fabrication-for-profit.


This account is a COMPLETE fabrication.

Only ONE country concluded "slam-dunk"... and those associated with the people who made that conclusion immediately started making billions of dollars.


There were even people in the US intelligence community that tried to remind the less-than-cool heads involved that the vast majority of international "white papers" in regards to intelligence are fabrications, designed to be sold for profit by rogue intelligence freelancers.

And fabricated white papers are all fun and games, until some rube actually believes one, and invades a country over it... OOOPS!



Dude... the IAEA fucking Googled information in that "slam dunk" document to disprove it...with fucking Google. They didn't even have the names of the "Nigerian officials" right. I mean, I understand there's a lot of profit to be had by rogue "intelligence sources" fabricating reports and selling thwe white papers... but they didn't even know the names of the Nigerian officials who help the relevant positions, so they just made some up. How fucking humiliating is it that US intelligence(although in fairness, most US intelligence officials called the report bullshit, as well... didn't stop Chenron) couldn't look at thosr documents, and immediately see that it didn't even refer to the correct names of these alleged uranium-suppliers? That the "author" of the white paper didn't even know the correct dates of "Iraqi businessmen" visiting Niger might have been a red flag, too, eh?


Rocco Martino has BODE.

[Luther]

Dins, my friend, call your shot. We've all argued all the "going to war points," but I want to see what the dinster sees in his west side crystal ball. Will Greg Oden get gray hair like Moses and spread the word? Will Baroid flex his muscles and champion strength in hitting a fast ball or bring about peace? Will Conan move up a slot in the late night talk shows?

Predict anything...the next type of terrorist attack, will the FBI come back with another failed fingerprint result while tromping around in Beaverton? Call your shot.

Rip City