| Author |
Message |
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 24
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 5:51 am: | |
No one apart from Americans fell for US govt propaganda, least of all the experts. Of course, that isn't stopping our lying Chicken-Hawk-in-Chief from still making the claim that Iraq had WMD's practically falling out of its ears that could even, lol, reach US soil, had terror links or was behind 9/11, as that was and is the only way he could get Americans behind this war he so desperately wanted, and that has backfired on such a catastrophic scale. The sad thing is that apparently a majority of Americans still believe Dubyas hideous lie, that Saddam was behind 9/11.
A lack of intelligence
The Sydney Morning Herald
Australia's spies knew the United States was lying about Iraq's WMD programme. So why didn't the Government choose to believe them? Andrew Wilkie writes.
'Intelligence" was how the Americans described the material accumulating on Iraq from their super-sophisticated spy systems. But to analysts at the Office of National Assessments in Canberra, a decent chunk of the growing pile looked like rubbish. In their offices on the top floor of the drab ASIO building, ONA experts found much of the US material worthy only of the delete button or the classified waste chute to the truck-sized shredder in the basement.
Australian spooks aren't much like the spies in the James Bond movies. Not many drink vodka martinis. But most are smart - certainly smart enough to understand how US intelligence on Iraq was badly skewed by political pressure, worst-case analysis and a stream of garbage-grade intelligence concocted by Iraqis desperate for US intervention in Iraq.
It wasn't just the Australians who were mystified by the accumulating US trash. The French, Germans and Russians had long before refused to be persuaded by Washington's line. British intelligence agencies were still inclined to take a more conservative position. And the chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, even went so far as to say during a late April interview that "much of the intelligence on which the capitals built their case seemed to have been shaky".
So it was no surprise in some of the more mysterious corridors of Canberra last week when news broke about the CIA investigation into the US intelligence failure over Iraq. In fact, there was probably some relief, given the importance to Australian security of having the US intelligence system work properly.
After all, the Australia-US intelligence relationship is supposed to be one of the main reasons for the broader alliance between the two countries.
The CIA had clearly lost the plot if its October 2002 report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program was anything to go by. Either that, or the agency was party to a disinformation campaign designed to encourage support for a war. How else to explain the excerpt quoted by the Prime Minister in early February: "All key aspects ... of Iraq's offensive biological weapons program are active and most elements are larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf War."
The CIA's public acknowledgement of a review smells more like early positioning for its day of reckoning than a genuine interest in continuous improvement. The CIA can't afford another serious blunder so soon after its failure to pick up the September 11 attacks.
Condoleezza Rice was smart enough to attempt her U-turn weeks ago. According to the US National Security Adviser, WMD bombs, missiles and drones are out. Dual-use technology and just-in-time manufacturing are in. Find a pesticide factory, for instance, and you find a chemical warfare facility. And don't be concerned about looters. The more the place is trashed, the more difficult will be any dispute about the evidence. More recently, the US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, has said publicly that Iraq may have destroyed its WMDs prior to the war.
The Howard Government will not be keen for an inquiry into Australian assessments on Iraq. Much better to let the whiff of US intelligence failure drift across the Pacific in the hope it implies that Australia was the victim of advice beyond its control. The last thing the Government wants is too much scrutiny of its claims about Iraq's WMDs and links to al-Qaeda, or the fact these claims were in the main contrary to advice from the Government's intelligence community.
Some in the Australian intelligence community had latched onto the dodgy American intelligence, resulting in partial contamination of assessments with an overestimation of Iraq's WMD capability. But Australian intelligence agencies made it clear to the Government all along that Iraq did not have a massive WMD program (that dubious honour remains restricted to at least China, France, India, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Syria, Britain and the US). Nor was Saddam Hussein co-operating actively with al-Qaeda. And there was no indication Iraq was intending to pass WMDs to terrorists.
There could not have been any doubt whatsoever about all this in the mind of the Prime Minister or of any member of the national security committee of cabinet. Report after report from the bureaucracy made it abundantly clear that the US impatience to go for Iraq had very little to do with WMDs and an awful lot to do with US strategic and domestic interests. John Howard's suggestion yesterday that the Government strong line on WMDs matched intelligence advice is contrary to the more moderate line contained in ONA reporting.
Yet Australia was happy to go along with George Bush. Shame it put thousands of Australian troops at risk, cost nearly a billion dollars and has increased the terrorist threat to Australia.
Howard's February statement on Iraq was like something out of a time warp - one Gulf war and 12 years of international sanctions and UN weapons inspections out of date. "Iraq has form. Saddam Hussein has without provocation invaded Iran and Kuwait. He has fired missiles at Saudi Arabia, Israel, Bahrain, and Qatar," he told Australians.
THE ONA was central in the lead-up to war. It understood months before it commenced that war was inevitable and Australia would be involved.
Despite Howard's protestations that no decision had yet been made, the ONA's people in Washington were frantically calling on their best contacts in the State Department and the CIA. Analysts in Canberra were preparing assessments almost daily; briefing teams were tramping back and forth to Parliament House constantly. Staff were gearing up to run a round-the-clock intelligence assessment function.
Now the WMD claims are unravelling. All that US intelligence garbage is on the nose. Coalition forces in Iraq have not found thousands of chemical artillery shells ready to be fired or ballistic missiles loaded with deadly bacteriological agents.
Moreover Rumsfeld's deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, has explained the WMD justification as a bureaucratic compromise, while a senior British spook has been reported as saying his country's public dossier on Iraq's WMD programme was manipulated by Downing Street to make a more compelling case for war
There is no big al-Qaeda apparatus - not even a box of plans for spiriting WMDs to terrorists. Only a broken country and a disgruntled people. Oh, and lots of oil.
That explains Howard's lurch towards his much-broader muddle of reasons for involvement in the war.
This is not to say that Iraq was of no concern or that some WMD-related materials will never be found in Iraq. Iraq had what's known in the business as a breakout WMD capability in its many dual-use facilities. The Fallujah III castor oil production plant near Baghdad, for example, was, like similar plants elsewhere in the world, suitable for conversion to a ricin toxin factory.
And Iraq, again like many countries including Australia, probably still has stockpiles of potential WMD ingredients - the chlorine needed for clean water, for example, can also be used to make deadly chemical agents.
Moreover, Iraq almost certainly had other WMD-related materials. US claims about mobile biological warfare facilities could yet prove true, though the implication that Iraq's biological weapons program relied on a handful of trailers tends to confirm the program was limited.
The trailers, and any other finds, will remain irrelevant until scrutinised by independent officials. The same goes for the interrogation reports of former Iraqi scientists, including those now detained in Morocco. With so much at stake, the possibility can't be ruled out that a zealous coalition official might attempt to tamper with the evidence.
Claims by Iraqis in custody that the WMD program was dismantled before the war could be true, especially if Saddam thought he could survive the war and achieve some sort of moral victory. But that would mean the program must have been much smaller than US assessments. Just as elusive is hard evidence of active co-operation with al-Qaeda. This was always an extraordinary proposition, not least because Saddam was a secular dictator intent on eradicating Islamic fundamentalism.
Another mystery is the Howard Government's enthusiasm for playing up the more general risk of WMD terrorism. It was well-advised, in briefing after briefing by ONA, that the risk of such an attack was - and still is - low, and that any such attack would almost certainly involve an unsophisticated device incapable of causing mass casualties. The chemical, biological or radiological device used was not likely to be a true WMD. The Government had also been advised of the many reasons countries do not pass WMDs to terrorists, not least the fear of massive US retaliation.
One of the major concerns about the war now is the way it will encourage the proliferation of WMDs. America's adversaries are being encouraged to acquire WMDs to deter US aggression. Mutually assured destruction kept the US and Soviet Union from each other's throats for decades. And, for now, Iran's and North Korea's arsenals seem to be influencing the US to back off.
Not that the US has any interest in multilateral arms control. The neo-cons in Washington think arms control doesn't work and is contrary to US interests.
Hence the US's lack of interest in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban and Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaties. Washington's determination to develop new battlefield nuclear weapons is an especially alarming development.
"This is not going unnoticed and will come back to haunt us," says Richard Butler, the former head of the UN weapons inspection team in Iraq. "It's simply preposterous for the US to take the stand that it does on other people's WMD and ask the world to believe that its such weapons are of no such concern ..."
Another big concern is the dumbing-down and politicisation of Australia's intelligence. Most junior analysts try to offer frank and fearless advice. But the process is flawed. It involves so many layers of politically astute managers that the final result is often a report so bland as to be virtually worthless, or skewed ever so subtly towards the Government's preferred line. Better that, management would argue, than a brave report prepared in good faith that contradicts Government thinking or is likely to prove wrong over time.
Not that leaving the sharp edges on the intelligence reports would make much difference if a government chooses to believe only what it wants to believe and selects from the intelligence only what best suits its political purposes. The Federal Government pays much more attention to the mush of politicians' and advisers' views, public opinion and media commentary. And it applies a good dose of pro-US sycophancy. The result can be a fine compost indeed, as this whole Iraq business has proven.
Andrew Wilkie is a former analyst at the Office of National Assessments who resigned in protest at the Federal Government's actions over the Iraq war.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/30/1054177726543.html
Of course, US intelligence experts were also fully cognizant of the fact that Bush's case was based on deceit and lies:
excerpt:
White House 'exaggerating Iraqi threat'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence
President Bush's case against Saddam Hussein, outlined in a televised address to the nation on Monday night, relied on a slanted and sometimes entirely false reading of the available US intelligence, government officials and analysts claimed yesterday.
"Basically, cooked information is working its way into high-level pronouncements and there's a lot of unhappiness about it in intelligence, especially among analysts at the CIA," said Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA's former head of counter-intelligence.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html
Best, |
John Ashburne (Jashburne)
Junior Member
Username: Jashburne
Post Number: 64
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 5:55 pm: | |
Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike
December 16, 1998
CLINTON: Good evening.
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.
I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.
Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.
The inspectors undertook this mission first 7.5 years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire.
The international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq.
The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.
For full transcript:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html
|
William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member
Username: Countachxx
Post Number: 2991
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 4:03 pm: | |
according to the Discovery Channel none of the top Nazis wanted to sign the documents for Adolf's Final Solution. Goering was the one who actually signed authorizing it. Supposedly he didnt put a lot of thought into it. Just signed it hurriedly over lunch or something like that. Bizzare |
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie
Post Number: 1478
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 7:57 pm: | |
 |
William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member
Username: Countachxx
Post Number: 2986
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 7:43 pm: | |
The majorit of US citizens dont need to be brainwashed. Our education system is not exactly the best in the world. Masses are left ignorant cus they are a lot easier to dominate & manipulate. How much international politics, finance, or intrigue do you think your avg Joe understands when he is not reading or writing at even a 12th grade level ? Sad but true |
Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member
Username: Beachbum
Post Number: 189
Registered: 9-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 7:00 pm: | |
Telson, thanks for the insightful post
there you go guys, the poster child of why i vote republican |
William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member
Username: Countachxx
Post Number: 2984
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 4:01 pm: | |
Europe is fast becoming the United States of Europe. They could become the world's most powerful economy once they work out all the bugs. Maybe they dont think the US is as important as it was before. Especially now that the USSR is a memory |
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 133
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 12:08 pm: | |
If you�re not part of the solution, you are the problem.
Both countries have forgotten their long lost friend the US.
JH
|
arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member
Username: Art355
Post Number: 2554
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 9:49 am: | |
The French and the Germans aren't willing to play with Bush on Iraq. That is exactly what I expected. This is what they had to say:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20030904/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_iraq_12 |
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 23
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 04, 2003 - 5:21 am: | |
Seeing Bush in action, and the way he has brainwashed the majority of US citizens and practically 99% of the US media into believing his evil fabrications, while working hard to turn the USA into a country of the unfree, where judicial due process and civil rights don't mean much anymore, has for the very first time allowed me to understand exactly how Hitler happened.
Americans are gullible.
They fall for Hitler's maxim on lies over and over again: "The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
Over and over and over and over and over again, the American people were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction practically falling out of his ears. The American people were told that Hussein was giving away these weapons to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda the way you and I might give away birthday presents.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." - •••• Cheney, August 26 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world." - Ari Fleischer, December 2 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." - Ari Fleischer, January 9 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."
- Colin Powell, February 5 2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes." - Ari Fleischer, March 21 2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them."
- Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22 2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad." - Donald Rumsfeld, March 30 2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found." - Ari Fleischer, April 10 2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country." - Donald Rumsfeld, April 25 2003
"I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction." - Colin Powell, May 4 2003
These are the words of administration officials who were following orders and the party line.
Yet a Democrat named Harry Truman once said, "The buck stops here." What did the man in receipt of said stopped buck have to say on the matter?
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
- George W. Bush, September 12 2002
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent." - George W. Bush, State of the Union address, January 28 2003
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." - George Bush, February 8 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." - George Bush, March 17 2003
"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them." - George Bush, April 24 2003
"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so." - George Bush, May 3 2003
"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program." - George W. Bush, May 6 2003
It has become all too clear that the horrid descriptions of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were nothing more than the Big Lie which Hitler described. The American people, being the trusting TV-stoned folks they are, bought this WMD lie bag and baggage.
Once we impeached a sitting President for lying under oath about sexual trysts. No one died, no one had their legs or arms or face or genitals blown off because of the lies of a President who had been caught with his pants down, minding his own business, and, yes, like it or not, it was his own business.
Today in America, we endure a sitting President who lied for months about the threat posed by a sovereign nation. That nation was invaded and attacked, and thousands died because of it. The aftereffects of this action will be felt for generations to come. We have turned into an isolated and vilified pariah state on the brink of bankruptcy, the sole result of our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq total chaos evident to the entire world. The very democracy which gives us meaning as a country has been put in peril by these deeds. When the smoke cleared, every reason for that war was proven to be a lie.
Best,
|
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 132
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 11:12 pm: | |
Arlie,
I couldn�t agree more. I choose those words very carefully. Wal-Mart comprises 2.5% of our GDP. If Wal-Mart was a country, it would be Chinas 8th largest trading partner.
Many Americans simply don�t value the difference in quality or don�t believe there is one. And NO the bolt isn�t grade 8, but if you can get two import bolts for the same price as one domestic, the decision is more difficult, after all it has 5 lines on the head. If you�re talking diapers or plastic widgets it�s a no brainier. Consequently why Wal-Mart has grown at break neck speed in the last 10 years, no trade barriers, thanks Bill.
Keep in mind the Chinese use the same manufacturing equipment we do CNC 3 & 4 axis machines, they only have a deficiency in their materials specifications. US companies which partner with the Chinese have solved this problem ie Boeing, Chrysler, GE. I believe within five years they will have the material problems worked out and like Japan and Germany from the forty�s onward, the Chinese will be a force to contend with.
There are 1,322,435,000 people in china not including Hong Kong, and 394,241,000 in the US, four to one.
JH
|
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie
Post Number: 1476
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 6:34 pm: | |
"They will flood our market with their less expensive goods and hurt us economically."
Note the words "less expensive" but not necessarily the words "better". Most of the garbage sold in American stores these days is cheap Chinese junk that can't hold a candle to the quality products that we use to make right here in America. But the American consumer is ultimately to blame. If they weren't turning their financial back on American products and buying cheap Chinese junk instead, then there would still be a market for quality American products. But the flood has gone on so long that many American companies have dried up, and the only choice available is cheap Chinese junk.
Do you want to bet your life that the Chinese bolt that you just purchased is REALLY grade 8???
|
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 130
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 4:40 pm: | |
Art,
Under Bush 1, the Chinese did obtain nuclear information; only thing is it was from the Russians, not us. The US feed the Chinese a rouse in order to see how much they did in fact know and buy from their Russian sources.
Agreed on the US sharing of information. The world doesn�t need to blow us up. They will flood our market with their less expensive goods and hurt us economically. Much easier to do, but a war just insures the US will cut the rebuilding check for the next 10 or so years.
Every president since FDR believed that trading with other countries made better neighbors. We learned this from the atrocities that happened after WWI. Just another Clinton attempt to claim others work, like the internet.
JH
|
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie
Post Number: 1475
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 4:15 pm: | |
A fabricated war? Were those thousands of unearthed bodies and thousands of unaccounted for Iraqi citizens also fabricated? Seems to me that they are "just as dead" as any victim of the Nazi holacaust or the Cambodian killing fields".
Imagine if the United States had taken an ECONOMIC standpoint when they decided whether or not to enter World War II? Can't you just see FDR telling Congress, "The numbers just don't add up. It isn't economically feasible or advantageous for us to retaliate against Japan because of the Pearl Harbor attack. Let's just forget about Imperialistic Japan and Nazi Germany and maybe the whole problem will go away."
Keeping in mind that more people were killed in the September 11th attacks on New York than were killed at Pearl Harbor.
Still think we had no right to chase down evil dictators who might have connections with terrorists?
|
arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member
Username: Art355
Post Number: 2552
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 4:11 pm: | |
British view:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3076976.stm
|
arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member
Username: Art355
Post Number: 2551
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 3:50 pm: | |
Arlie:
The bill for the consequences hasn't been paid yet, its just now being presented. If you recall, I predicted two thing: 1. No WMDs, 2. No assistance from other nations of consequence.
Both of those have come true. We are now engaged in a battle with crazies over essentially nothing. We don't have the men and equipment to do what we have to do, and because of Bush's behavior, not likely to get much help.
We have an economy with massive debt, increasing shortfall, and no immediate prospect of correcting those problems. What's you'll get is inflation, increased interest rates, and ultimately reduced employment. That will make it very, very difficult to earn a decent living here for those on their way up. For an old guy like me, with everything paid for, money in the bank, and other assets, it's heaven. Unless this place takes a total dump, myself and others like me will have a great time.
Having said that, this isn't going to be a good deal for this country. People here will not like what they have to deal with. Look past your nose, see what is happening, see what has happened, and you have to realize that this was a frabricated war, and its gone bad.
Art |
Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member
Username: Arlie
Post Number: 1474
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 1:35 pm: | |
"As to those of you who agreed with these idiots, enjoy, you got what you deserved."
I'm glad that Bush invaded Iraq. What was it that Franklin or Jefferson said? Something to the effect that "the best way for evil to succeed is for honest men to do nothing" or something like that. At least we didn't sit by and do nothing. We rattled their cages, destroyed their dictatorship, and we can continue to do so. It's only fair that some of these other nations share the burden for at least TRYING to keep the peace and keep the international wolves at bay. Since some of these folks are indeed "crazy" as Art said, that's all the more reason for decent people to keep them at bay.
|
arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member
Username: Art355
Post Number: 2549
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 12:27 pm: | |
JHaller:
There seems to be a disconnect here. Interestingly enough, there is a strong argument that our nuclear secrets were disclosed to the Chinese under Reagan, not Clinton. The agreements under which the Chinese got information regarding guidance systems, was formulated under Bush 1.
Bottom line, the world is moving towards the sharing of an awful lot of technology, some of which can be used for weapons. Clinton had the idea that if you traded with people, made sure that their economies were good, there'd be less strife. We've not got a government that feels differently about those issues. The result is very simple: more strife now, less before. You draw your own conclusions, I've drawn mine.
Art |
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 129
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 11:27 am: | |
Pitbull,
�the thing is Clintons presidency is history, whereas we currently have to deal with Dubya. And where with Billy we had a mere fling�
A mere fling? Are you kidding, Bill is 80% to blame for our current world situation. The technology transfer that took place during his 8 years has allowed the world to exist like we know it.
Why are jobs leaving this country? Other countries now have the technology that use to belong to Americans, CLINTON SOLD US OUT. Prior to his pres, it was illegal to export vital technology, you would face Federal time.
JH
|
MarkPDX (Markpdx)
Member
Username: Markpdx
Post Number: 359
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 11:20 am: | |
Art
The services are not having any difficulty with recruiting. Slow economy trumps war at the moment.
Hmmmm.... Maybe Bush is keeping the economy slow on purpose so more young people sign on with the military and all the new soldiers will make the ultimate fighting force W can use to take over the world....now where did I leave my tinfoil hat... |
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 128
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 11:19 am: | |
Pitbull,
Take a breath, break or whatever. The world isn�t coming to an end; turn the TV off for the weekend, step outside and get some fresh air.
"You can't say you love your country and hate your government."
Bill Clinton
JH
|
arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member
Username: Art355
Post Number: 2544
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 9:47 am: | |
Guys:
This is a done deal. Bush has finally realized that he and his little friends made a mistake. He can't provide security in Iraq and not increase the size of the US military, and still keep a rotation plan. Draft or increased recruiting (a sometimes hard thing to do when there is an active war pending). He's now going to the UN for some kind of deal. Anyubody want to bet that either the French, Germans or Russians veto anything that doesn't include exactly what they want?
Today's SF Chronicle SFGate.com has an interesting column by Scherer who lays it out far better than I about this. The point is that we're in a battle with nutcases, which Bush and his neo-conservative friends didn't account for when they started this war. Bottom line is that the war is started, we can't leave Iraq, and we're broke. Boys and girls: this means your standard of living is going to drop. Those of you who don't own Ferraris, guess what, its going to get a lot more difficult for you to buy one. We can't do a Linden Johnson here, spend, don't tax, run up the debt. We were going to pay that debt off, but now we've been sidetracked.
As to those of you who agreed with these idiots, enjoy, you got what you deserved.
Art |
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 22
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 9:33 am: | |
"There is no question that an admission of making false statements to government officials and interfering with the FBI and the CIA is an impeachable offense"
Jhaller, the thing is Clintons presidency is history, whereas we currently have to deal with Dubya. And where with Billy we had a mere fling as the basis of impeachment procedures, here we have a viciously disseminated fiction based on nothing but lies and deception to justify a war that killed thousands and thousands of people, a war based on deceit that has evolved into utter chaos totally mocking any remaining "superpower" phantasies harbored by the warmongers currently in office, has turned the USA into a laughing stock amongst first world counries and into a hated pariah nation among third world countries, and costs huge amounts of money that this nation simply cannot afford.
Not to mention the valiant efforts by this administration to turn the USA into a totalitarian regime, where judicial due process and civil liberties are fast fading into no more than fond memories.
New York Times
"The American people were manipulated," bluntly declares one person from the Defense Intelligence Agency who says he was privy to all the intelligence there on Iraq.
"The Al Qaeda connection and nuclear weapons issue were the only two ways that you could link Iraq to an imminent security threat to the U.S.," notes Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. "And the administration was grossly distorting the intelligence on both things."
The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called "a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions."
"While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes," the letter said, "never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorize launching a war."
Save Our Spooks
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
http://www.nytimes.com
Impeach Bush, lock him up and throw the key away.
Best,
|
J Haller (Jh355)
Junior Member
Username: Jh355
Post Number: 127
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 9:05 am: | |
Even Clinton believed he shouldn't be Pres.
"There is no question that an admission of making false statements to government officials and interfering with the FBI and the CIA is an impeachable offense."
Bill Clinton, Arkansas Gazette, August 8, 1974
JH
|
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 21
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:57 am: | |
expose them to freedom...
Best
|
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 20
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:45 am: | |
"We are the world"
lol
Bankrupt and failed ex-superpower, more like it.
With the difference that junior didn't even get his war right, what with the utter chaos reigning supreme in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the US running out of funds.
|
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 19
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:43 am: | |
.
|
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 18
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:34 am: | |
Jeffrey, let's not forget the sole essential fact here, that Dubya lied and deceived US citizens and the entire world on alleged Iraqi WMD's with all the consequences described below, and is turning the USA into a totalitarian land of the Unfree.
Best,
|
Jeffrey Wolfe (86mondial32)
Member
Username: 86mondial32
Post Number: 488
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:28 am: | |
BTW... we know that they will seek "revenge".. that why we need to seek out and destroy them now. Along with exposing them to freedom. I have no problem with America spreading it's influence across the globe. We are the world. IF we fall the world falls. |
Jeffrey Wolfe (86mondial32)
Member
Username: 86mondial32
Post Number: 487
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:26 am: | |
Telson, after reading your link I understand. gee stories on civil rights and "the dream". I can only appulad al the great things the civil rights movement of the 60's gave us.... If I could find any. Wait... it did make the welfare rolls bigger and create urban stresses beyond control. And lets not forget A.A. |
Telson (Pitbull_trader)
New member
Username: Pitbull_trader
Post Number: 17
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:19 am: | |
Jeffrey, yes the sex Clinton had was, is and will always be his private business, and, again, any claims to the contrary are nothing but instrumentalized hypocrisy that, if anything, demonstrates a singular lack of awareness of sexual pasttimes demonstrated by great leaders throughout the ages.
This, however, is not irrelevant:
Well, what with that warmonger Dubya in office Osama Bin Laden sure got what he wanted, didn't he, total chaos in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the US a laughing stock and / or pariah state, with lotsa new terrorists freshly graduated from Terror 101:
Go ahead. Saddam will quickly fall, but that won�t make the world safer or more secure. Your bombs will send me a new generation of recruits and fuel their hatred and desire for revenge. So go ahead. Squander your wealth on war and occupation -- America will be weaker for it. Divide your people, divide the world, isolate yourselves! Perfect! I thrive on chaos. I need an enemy. You give me both.
www.TomPaine.com
Best,
|
Jeffrey Wolfe (86mondial32)
Member
Username: 86mondial32
Post Number: 485
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 8:04 am: | |
Wow... I can't believe this. I can only hope that the comments are based in blind support instead of really accepting that it's okay for the Leader of the free world to have no moral values. IF a man is willing to sell out his marriage and then lie to protect himself what else might he do to get what he wants? No leader is above moral and ethicial codes. Gee... let's see.. I really like her ass... And , after all, I am the president. Who's gonna stop me?
And then the phone rings.... "Mr. Clinton... We here in China think you are the greatest. We would love to give you the money you need to get re-elected. How about we trade for some technology we can't buy leagally?" And since Billy has not morals or ethics he says "what the hell". Oh yea... what a great leader.
I would rather have a man that understands the need for America to be strong and destroy any enemy. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page