Was listening to the Stern Replay this morning from 03/07/03. It's funny to listen back and hear people pimping the Iraq war as a solid idea, when now everyone bashes the shit out of it on a daily basis.
OCmike wrote:Was listening to the Stern Replay this morning from 03/07/03. It's funny to listen back and hear people pimping the Iraq war as a solid idea, when now everyone bashes the shit out of it on a daily basis.
What is 'funnier' is to listen to people still pimping it today.
That's what happens when you screw with the hortas.
THE BIBLE - Because all the works of all the science cannot equal the wisdom of cattle-sacrificing primitives who thought every animal species in the world lived within walking distance of Noah's house.
Mikey wrote:Believe it or not there were some people who were bashing the shit out of it from day one.
"Cut and runners" every one.
Depends on their motives. A lot of the bashers were doing so because it was a Republican administration making the move and not because they thought that the war was necessarily a bad idea. To those people, I say "Booooooooooo...". I have no problem with those who thought it was a bad idea because it might cause civil war between Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis, but most of those types were Monday morning quarterbacks.
Mikey wrote:Believe it or not there were some people who were bashing the shit out of it from day one.
"Cut and runners" every one.
Depends on their motives. A lot of the bashers were doing so because it was a Republican administration making the move and not because they thought that the war was necessarily a bad idea. To those people, I say "Booooooooooo...". I have no problem with those who thought it was a bad idea because it might cause civil war between Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis, but most of those types were Monday morning quarterbacks.
Some people supported the Afghanistan invasion and thought that going into Iraq was dumb from day one, and not just because it was a Repbulican administration.
I think most that opposed from day one are pretty well split between honestly thinking it was dumb and being against anything done by bush.
Trouble is, most were actually on the wagon from day one, but, the second that wagon hit a bump they jumped quickly onto the other side using the "we were misled" card.
Damn, I'm glad we didn't go into WWII with the crowd we have now running things.
mvscal wrote:The only precious metals in a SHTF scenario are lead and brass.
smackaholic wrote:
Trouble is, most were actually on the wagon from day one, but, the second that wagon hit a bump they jumped quickly onto the other side using the "we were misled" card.
smackaholic wrote:Trouble is, most were actually on the wagon from day one, but, the second that wagon hit a bump they jumped quickly onto the other side using the "we were misled" card.
Exactly. Well said.
Misled? What were they misled about?
WMDs?
Saddam plotting with al Qaeda?
We will be greeted as liberators?
Mission accomplished?
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
smackaholic wrote:Damn, I'm glad we didn't go into WWII with the crowd we have now running things.
Yeah, it's OK to murder several million civilians, lie to family members of soldiers killed in action, completely muzzle the press and execute American citizens designated as enemy combatants as long as there is a Democrat in the White House. In fact, it was even considered patriotic to do so.
I'm pretty sure that nobody around now was part of that.
I'm curious as to how many of the "we were misled" crowd were in favor all the way through our last exercise in butting into another country's affairs, the bombing of the serbs.
Yeah, we didn't put troops on the ground, but, we sure as hell put more than a little ordinance on the place. And what exactly was the reason for that?
I guess ole slobo musta had WMDs?
nope.
Well, he was supporting alqueda, right?
nope
You mean we pretty much went in there just because the guy was an assbag that needed a litttle slapping around?
sorta, but not really.
If you can make for our interference in the balkans, you can make a much, much, much better case for taking out sadaam.
There is only one way you can explain support for taking out slobo and not sadaam. that would be who was giving the order to do so.
Somebody please 'splain otherwise.
mvscal wrote:The only precious metals in a SHTF scenario are lead and brass.
The extrication process in Serbia was simple enough to make it worth the cost of going in.
Congress may or may not have had the same intel on Iraq as the WH, but they sure as hell had enough intel to know it was a bad idea. Shame on anybody who thought it was a good idea.
mvscal wrote:Go fuck yourself, tard. Check back in when you get a fucking clue.
How about you check in when you can defend yourself. It's no fun beating down the defenseless. It's kinda what separates me from the Mike Vicks of the world.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
mvscal wrote:Yeah, you must have. Good thing you aren't on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.
The Bushites won't even tell Congress IF they are spying on people until someone calls them on it. What makes you think they would allow unfettered access to the data said programs provide?
mvscal wrote:The only reason to go in anywhere is to defend our strategic interests. Here's a clue, dumbfuck. We have no strategic interests in Serbia.
Yes and No. To protect a small interest at a large price is foolish. To protect a large interest at an even larger price is also foolish.
Our interest in Serbia was small (you say zero, but only a complete fool believes that) but so was the price. The price in Serbia was zero service-people and less than 100billion cash. 100bil is a lot, but at least an argument can be made that it was worth it.
The human cost alone (>3,700 KIA, >15,000 Wounded) in Iraq is not worth what we are getting back in any improvement in out interests.
Even if the cost to interest ratio could work out as you claim, only a dunce would ever believe that Bush would be able to pull it off. For that reason alone invading Iraq was a bad idea.
mvscal wrote:
They don't have to tell Congress, you fucking tard.
I don't think he is saying they do have to tell all. In fact his point seems to be that they don't have to and that they didn't which means that the WH knew more than Congress.
You seem to be saying they don't have to tell all and didn't tell all, but that Congress had the same intel as the WH. How does that work?
mvscal wrote:They don't have to tell Congress, you fucking tard.
I don't think he is saying they do have to tell all. In fact his point seems to be that they don't have to and that they didn't which means that the WH knew more than Congress.
That is exactly what I've been saying.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
mvscal wrote:The National Intelligence Estimate that the Intelligence Committee gets is the same NIE that the White House works from.
You never do get tired of plungering yourself.
The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), prepared by or at the direction of the National Intelligence Council [1], is defined by the U.S. Department of Defense as a "strategic estimate of the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and probable courses of action of foreign nations produced at the national level as a composite of the views of the intelligence community. Also called NIE."
So again, what I said to begin with remains valid. Congress had a report. They did not have access to the raw data from which the report's conclusions were allegedly based.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
mvscal wrote:{3,700+ dead isn't} a pisshole in a snowbank.
mvscal wrote:The decision that had to made in 2002 was whether or not that was an acceptable state of affairs {after 3,000 Americans were killed on 9-11} given his past and present support for terrorists not to mention any future connections he might make down the road.
mvscal wrote:Nobody works from raw data, you fucking moron. The White House and Congress were both working with the same fixed intell reports.
Period. End of motherfucking story.
FTFY
Link?
What? You don't read your own damn posts anymore? You were the one who said "nobody works from raw data". If nobody works from raw data, then I am left to assume that the Administration just made shit up.
Make up your fucking mind.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
OCmike wrote:...and we all know how unbaised your "assumptions" are when it comes to the Bush Administration. Gimme a break, already.
This has nothing to do with the Bush Administration and everything to do with mv shooting himself in the foot. He's the one that admitted "nobody" uses raw data.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
mvscal wrote:{3,700+ dead isn't} a pisshole in a snowbank.
mvscal wrote:The decision that had to made in 2002 was whether or not that was an acceptable state of affairs {after 3,000 Americans were killed on 9-11} given his past and present support for terrorists not to mention any future connections he might make down the road.
You were saying?
wow! great point except OHHH i'm sorry you forgot that variable called time. 3000 in one Sept. morning compared to 4 yrs.
not quite what you portray, but thanks for playing, jackoff.
Because it was a pisshole in a snowbank it required Two wars, The Patriot act, More spying, 3K+ lives, Billion$, Homeland security agencies and more? All for a pisshole in a snowbank? What will happen if 'they' do some real damage? You are unhinged.