Why We're Fighting in Iraq

Missileer said:
One, they didn't attack us. Two, letting Korea steer the course for now is the best tactic. And three, where is the UN in the Sudan? I thought that they were claiming to have things under control.

When the US tries to gather support for a military campaign, the naysayers in France, Germany, Russia, and other usual suspects say that we are simply after control or natural resources. I would love to see every murderous dictator committing genocide as we speak, killed and their forces turned over to their countrymen for justice.

We do what we can with the help of the UK, but even then, there are too many worldwide problems to spread ourselves over. With all respect, I'll have to say, wait your turn and pray that we're not too late.
Click to expand...

Missileer
with all due respect,i don't think my country needs ANY help from the US.we may have a few problems down here, but we can take very good care of ourselves and our neighbours.
 
You sure you don't want any assistance with helping wipe out corruption or perhaps some advisors to help stamp out all those pesky internet scammers?
;)
I mean, with all due respect mate, to listen to their emails it sounds like Nigeria should be on the top of the list of countries that need help.
 
bulldogg said:
You sure you don't want any assistance with helping wipe out corruption or perhaps some advisors to help stamp out all those pesky internet scammers?
;)
I mean, with all due respect mate, to listen to their emails it sounds like Nigeria should be on the top of the list of countries that need help.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to dispute the fact that we still have a problem with corruption down here as a result of the previous military regimes and i don't expect it to disappear overnight.But our president and other govt. agencies have been doing their utmost best to rid this country of this mess,(there has been a lot of improvements,e.g the crack-down on corrupt govt officials and fraudsters,although we still have a long way to go).Just give us time and u'll see.
By the way,we Nigerians are very proud people and we'll rather use what we have to solve our problems within the country(and to some extent,that of our neighbours) than source for help outside.
So b4 ur head begins to swell,we DO NOT need ur help.period.
 
rb1651 said:
Amazing isn't?

Why did the Coalition invade? Sounds like a whole bunch of Bush bashing going on here. It wasn't just the United States that invaded, but rather a large Coalition of troops from a many number of countries. The invasion was caused by Mr. Hussein himself by not allowing unrestricted inspections, genocide of his own countrymen, and threats made to nieghboring countries. All of the coalition forces had the same intelligence that President Bush had, and all agreed that something must be done.

Now it turns out that the intelligence was flawed concerning WMD's, but all other justifications mentioned are not flawed, they are a fact. Iraq and the entire region is better off with Hussein gone.

Just the opinion of a person who served in the Marine Corps.

Semper Fi.

Ron
Click to expand...

Ron,
You can't change history or massage the truth, there was grave concern by all countries on the legality of this war prior to the invasion.

The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons."
-- George Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in a speech in Cincinnati.

LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." -- President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."

LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." -- President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."

LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." -- CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.
FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.
FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.
FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?

LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks -- if they existed -- were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." -- President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.
FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts -- including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report -- have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

Ron,
A pleasant illusion is better than a harsh reality. We were lied to. And because of those lies British and American troops are dieing.

Just an opinion of a Brit Squaddie.
 
centurion_ue said:
Missileer
with all due respect,i don't think my country needs ANY help from the US.we may have a few problems down here, but we can take very good care of ourselves and our neighbours.
Click to expand...

I wish that were true and I hope that it is but Nigeria's track record is just not the best. But things can change. Never give up hope.

Welshwarrior, are you calling President Bush a liar. Please respond with either you are or you aren't.
 
Last edited:
Missileer said:
I wish that were true and I hope that it is but Nigeria's track record is just not the best. But things can change. Never give up hope.

Welshwarrior, are you calling President Bush a liar. Please respond with either you are or you aren't.
Click to expand...

Hell yes!

The great masses of the people . . . will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one....Adolph Hitlerhttp://www.zaadz.com/quotes/Adolf_Hitler
 
Welshwarrior said:
Because those idiots in the intelligence community told those idiots in power who still believe in Santa Claus that there was WMD's there. oh somebody also mentioned that there might be some oil there too.
Click to expand...

Welshwarrior, read the forum rules before posting again (particularly the part about flaming national leaders). You will not be warned again before punitive action is taken.
 
Redneck said:
Welshwarrior, read the forum rules before posting again (particularly the part about flaming national leaders). You will not be warned again before punitive action is taken.
Click to expand...
If you would like to point out where and which national leader I was flaming then I would be more than happy to oblige. On the same topic, is it ok to flame nasty North Korean, Cuban, Iranian national leaders or are we specifically not allowed to post critical news reports about Western leaders? I do like the bit about punitive action though :p


As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air, however slight, lest be become unwitting victims of the darkness.
-- Justice William O. Douglas. (in a discussin about censorship and the loss of freedom).
 
Welshwarrior said:
...Is it ok to flame nasty North Korean, Cuban, Iranian national leaders or are we specifically not allowed to post critical news reports about Western leaders?
Click to expand...

I think you finally got the point. It can of course be ok to criticize political chairmen who were NEVER elected democratically by the peoples they disgracefully represent, precisely because criticizing those monsters who were never ever elected into power through fair and clean elections (now come tell me Iranian elections were free and fair then I'll have you talk to Phoenix or some other Iranians around the world) does not mean offending the people of those countries who are only innocent victims of those despotic regimes.
We do them a favor pointing our fingers at their presidents' crimes and flaming them. No offense at the people can ever be meant, since we know those people would get rid of them if they only could.
On the other hand, it is forbidden to flame national governments and offend regularly elected leaders. Very often has it happened here that members were temp banned or anyway warned when, say, Chirac or Zapatero were flamed.
And that is because those guys represented and reflected their peoples, and deserved respect therefore.
Makes sense?
 
Last edited:
Italian Guy said:
I think you finally got the point. It can of course be ok to criticize political chairmen who were NEVER elected democratically by the peoples they disgracefully represent, precisely because criticizing those monsters who were never ever elected into power through fair and clean elections (now come tell me Iranian elections were free and fair then I'll have you talk to Phoenix or some other Iranians around the world) does not mean offending the people of those countries who are only innocent victims of those despotic regimes.
We do them a favor pointing our fingers at their presidents' crimes and flaming them. No offense at the people can ever be meant, since we know those people would get rid of them if they only could.
On the other hand, it is forbidden to flame national governments and offend regularly elected leaders. Very often has it happened here that members were temp banned or anyway warned when, say, Chirac or Zapatero were flamed.
And that is because those guys represented and reflected their peoples, and deserved respect therefore.
Makes sense?
Click to expand...

Not very good at the geopolitics are you IG?
 
Welshwarrior said:
Not very good at the geopolitics are you IG?
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the post by IG? Are you sure this is the word you were searching for?

ge·o·pol·i·tics
  1. The study of the relationship among politics and geography, demography, and economics, especially with respect to the foreign policy of a nation.
    1. <LI type=a>A governmental policy employing geopolitics.
    2. A Nazi doctrine holding that the geographic, economic, and political needs of Germany justified its invasion and seizure of other lands.
  3. A combination of geographic and political factors relating to or influencing a nation or region.
 
Welchwarrior, you really ought to come clean and state the obvious truth: You are extremely prejudiced against George W Bush and you will inevitably say he is wrong/lied/is corrupt/whatever, in all situations that the opportunity arises. To sum up, you share the typical anti-Republican US President bias that most of Europe has, and they especially hate George W, probably more than any Republican President before him.

My dad, a History Professor, had a student this past Semester who was deeply involved in the Intelligence on Iraqi WMD's. The interesting thing is that, according to this gentleman's research, Saddam was quietly paying loads and loads of money to his weapons development experts to work on WMD's of all sorts. Because he was having to keep everyone in the world from seeing this, Saddam and his regime didn't have anyone monitering those people's work. They gave him regular updates, stating all about how they were making good progress and such. They made up details and success stories. They were also lying to Saddam the entire time, and just pocketing his money. For this reason, everyone including Saddam Hussein were 100% convinced that Iraq was developing and had WMD's. Essentially, everyone in Iraq who was asked by intelligence opperatives would have said, "No, I don't have any WMD's where I'm stationed, but I am 100% certain that _______ has them!" Everyone was sure that there were there including the Iraqis, and sadly enough, they were all the victims of a very big lie. And it never came to light until after the invasion because Saddam had the international community breathing down his neck. I just love that he got suckered!!

I will get everyone the source on this as soon as I have it.
 
So, has anyone actually read the material? Or are some of you folks just parroting what you heard last? Here is some of the material:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912.html

Sarin and Mustard gas found:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

Bad Guys still at it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html

Have the huge stockpiles of agents, or a nuke been found? No. Did Bush lie about the WMD's to gain support? I highly doubt it, GW got stuffed by bad intel, just like the UN and everyone else. We went to war with Iraq for many reasons beyond WMD's, unfortunately most of the people of the "free world", frankly have the attention span of a gnat, and have given up any kind of personal thought. WMD's were "sexy" so that's what was placed at the forefront, and Bush II got burned.

Personally, I wish the US didn't have to take this journey alone, oops misspoke, The US, Britain, and around 30 other nations. Though I did find it kinda funny that those nations that screamed "Imperialist America" and "Illegal War" before the war. were also were the nations that lost Billions of dollars in secret deals with Saddam.

The world is a big, scary place. Nothing is as clear as it seems when you really look at it. Its all about agenda's and money. Wake up, look around, and try to think for yourself. Iraq isn't the only war going on. Afganistan isn't the only "other" war. History is being played out, and being made. The people in the world had better wake up, and start asking why, and decide what side they are on based on their own research. Otherwise they and their nations will get plowed under by events.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Quit repeating what you heard, and start thinking.
 
From wad the news said, There are no WMD in IRAQ. And now Mr Bush is trying to gain support for the cause in Iraq.
 
zander_0633 said:
From wad the news said, There are no WMD in IRAQ. And now Mr Bush is trying to gain support for the cause in Iraq.
Click to expand...

By the time Afghanistan was taken and stabilized, Iraq had plenty of time to hide anything before we went into Iraq. If you were in the same position would you err on the side of caution or take the word of a murderous lying dictator?
 
Forrest_Gump said:
So, has anyone actually read the material? Or are some of you folks just parroting what you heard last? Here is some of the material:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912.html

Sarin and Mustard gas found:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

Bad Guys still at it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html

Have the huge stockpiles of agents, or a nuke been found? No. Did Bush lie about the WMD's to gain support? I highly doubt it, GW got stuffed by bad intel, just like the UN and everyone else. We went to war with Iraq for many reasons beyond WMD's, unfortunately most of the people of the "free world", frankly have the attention span of a gnat, and have given up any kind of personal thought. WMD's were "sexy" so that's what was placed at the forefront, and Bush II got burned.

Personally, I wish the US didn't have to take this journey alone, oops misspoke, The US, Britain, and around 30 other nations. Though I did find it kinda funny that those nations that screamed "Imperialist America" and "Illegal War" before the war. were also were the nations that lost Billions of dollars in secret deals with Saddam.

The world is a big, scary place. Nothing is as clear as it seems when you really look at it. Its all about agenda's and money. Wake up, look around, and try to think for yourself. Iraq isn't the only war going on. Afganistan isn't the only "other" war. History is being played out, and being made. The people in the world had better wake up, and start asking why, and decide what side they are on based on their own research. Otherwise they and their nations will get plowed under by events.

Nothing happens in a vacuum. Quit repeating what you heard, and start thinking.
Click to expand...

True. History is being made. What people forget is that without liberating Iraq and invading Afganistan we might all be dead from a Nuclear strike or Bio attack.

Have you heard about Sheron?
 
Welshwarrior said:
Not very good at the geopolitics are you IG?
Click to expand...

I got my PhD on International and Diplomatic Sciences two weeks ago with very high marks, sir. I think I know what I'm talking about, and I wasn't talking about geopolitics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top