Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Answering nonsense, so...

 

Was the Iraq War a mistake? 

 

Of course it was a mistake, and Biden was a huge advocate. 

I don't blame him.

 

The US and other countries intel concluded that there was a real threat of WMD, with a lunatic at the watch.

They were wrong, and there was nothing political about that assessment.

It was simply wrong.

 

Still, the reality was that is was not possible to keep enforcing no fly zones and other nonsense regarding Iraq's failure to abide by their ceasefire agreement.

Their failure to abide doomed that regime.

 

The US Congress agreed with that assessment, and the rest is history. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

Of course it was a mistake, and Biden was a huge advocate. 

I don't blame him.

 

The US and other countries intel concluded that there was a real threat of WMD, with a lunatic at the watch.

They were wrong, and there was nothing political about that assessment.

It was simply wrong.

 

Still, the reality was that is was not possible to keep enforcing no fly zones and other nonsense regarding Iraq's failure to abide by their ceasefire agreement.

Their failure to abide doomed that regime.

 

The US Congress agreed with that assessment, and the rest is history. 

Bush should have let the inspectors continue the job instead of pulling them out. Bush pulled out the inspectors, Saddam didn't tell them to leave. 

 

The intel was hyped. Condi talking about mushroom clouds? No way Saddam was going to make a nuke anytime soon. The mobile weapons labs? That sounded silly at the time and they of course never existed. Colin Powell implied he was lied to about them. 

 

The intel was totally hyped. Most Americans believed Saddam had something to do with 9-11. Now where did they get that idea? They simply lied about it. Like Donald Trump level of lying about it. 

 

But anyway, WMD was only the reason advanced, because it was the easiest to hype. And even there the politicians pushing for war did not say that there were disagreements, gaps in info and total guess work going on between intelligence agencies. And Bush used that crap about uranium purchases in Africa to build the case for war, but that turned out to be false. He was warned, but stated it anyway in the mad rush to war 

 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Bush should have let the inspectors continue the job instead of pulling them out. Bush pulled out the inspectors, Saddam didn't tell them to leave. 

 

The intel was hyped. Condi talking about mushroom clouds? No way Saddam was going to make a nuke anytime soon. The mobile weapons labs? That sounded silly at the time and they of course never existed. Colin Powell implied he was lied to about them. 

 

The intel was totally hyped. Most Americans believed Saddam had something to do with 9-11. Now where did they get that idea? They simply lied about it. Like Donald Trump level of lying about it. 

 

But anyway, WMD was only the reason advanced, because it was the easiest to hype. And even there the politicians pushing for war did not say that there were disagreements, gaps in info and total guess work going on between intelligence agencies. And Bush used that crap about uranium purchases in Africa to build the case for war, but that turned out to be false. He was warned, but stated it anyway in the mad rush to war 

 

 

 

Ignorant.

So Biden didn't see through this US intel failure?

 

Posted
22 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Bush should have let the inspectors continue the job instead of pulling them out. Bush pulled out the inspectors, Saddam didn't tell them to leave. 

 

The intel was hyped. Condi talking about mushroom clouds? No way Saddam was going to make a nuke anytime soon. The mobile weapons labs? That sounded silly at the time and they of course never existed. Colin Powell implied he was lied to about them. 

 

The intel was totally hyped. Most Americans believed Saddam had something to do with 9-11. Now where did they get that idea? They simply lied about it. Like Donald Trump level of lying about it. 

 

But anyway, WMD was only the reason advanced, because it was the easiest to hype. And even there the politicians pushing for war did not say that there were disagreements, gaps in info and total guess work going on between intelligence agencies. And Bush used that crap about uranium purchases in Africa to build the case for war, but that turned out to be false. He was warned, but stated it anyway in the mad rush to war 

 

 

 

The inspectors were not granted the access that was part of the agreement.

There were many UN resolutions involving this.

There were many cease fire violations.

There was the impracticality of a continued demand to maintain a no fly zone, and there were Iraqi offensive efforts within that, and they were increasing.

There was the CIA, British intel and a host of others that concluded the same thing.

You know.....The "Slam Dunk" from George Tenet.

 

The executive and both houses were briefed on the exact same intel, which was not a White House product or conclusion.

The White House doesn't have that ability.

 

Further, and something I am quite sure that you know nothing about, there was a time issue.

If sending US troops to battle in the middle east, timing is everything.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, sherpa said:

 

The inspectors were not granted the access that was part of the agreement.

There were many UN resolutions involving this.

There were many cease fire violations.

There was the impracticality of a continued demand to maintain a no fly zone, and there were Iraqi offensive efforts within that, and they were increasing.

There was the CIA, British intel and a host of others that concluded the same thing.

You know.....The "Slam Dunk" from George Tenet.

 

The executive and both houses were briefed on the exact same intel, which was not a White House product or conclusion.

The White House doesn't have that ability.

 

Further, and something I am quite sure that you know nothing about, there was a time issue.

If sending US troops to battle in the middle east, timing is everything.

I would know nothing about? Nice of you to throw a petty insult in. 

 

My point was there was hype used. There was. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I would know nothing about? Nice of you to throw a petty insult in. 

 

My point was there was hype used. There was. 

 

It's not petty.

It's sincere.

You have no idea what intel was presented or where it came from, and the White House did not originate it. 

They don't have that capability.

 

Both houses of Congress were presented the same info and they voted how they did.

 

It all came from our significant intel "industry," and having no reasonable humint in the middle east, which has been a significant problem for years, they relied way too much on defectors, and they were wrong.

You have demonstrated no acknowledgment of understanding that, similar to your "weapon of the week" posts re the Ukraine.

 

If you are insulted by that, so be it.

 

 

Posted
Quote

 

IZYUM, Ukraine — About 10 days before Ukrainian forces retook the city of Izyum last weekend, Russian troops stationed here were so demoralized that they drafted letters begging their superiors to dismiss them from their roles.

The 10 handwritten letters, dated Aug. 30, were left behind in a two-story residential house where Russians were squatting and later found by Ukrainian soldiers who provided the letters to The Washington Post for review. They paint a portrait of dejected troops desperate for rest and concerned about their health and morale after months of fighting.

“I refuse to complete my duty in the special operation on the territory of Ukraine due to lack of vacation days and moral exhaustion,” wrote a man who identified himself as the commander of an antiaircraft missile platoon from the Moscow region.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/15/letters-left-behind-by-demoralized-russian-soldiers-they-fled/

Posted

It is always easy to underestimate the staying power of democracies. They are noisy, contentious and open. They air all their anxieties, doubts and critiques in public. When there is a sense that the struggle is not central or that the goals chosen by leaders are fundamentally flawed — as in Vietnam and Iraq — there are constant calls for course correction.

But when the stakes are high and the cause is just, democracies can stay the course. They did it for almost five decades during the Cold War. And they will do it for a couple of winters in this pivotal struggle.

 

By Fareed Zakaria

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/15/ukraine-democracy-society-morale-advantage-russia/

Posted
1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Genius? More like mass murdering terrorist 

 

 

Why do you think genius and ethics or morals are related? Putin is a brilliant man, with zero ethics and is willing to do anything to maintain power, including kill his own. 

Posted (edited)
On 9/14/2022 at 5:35 PM, Tiberius said:

 

That awkward moment while in prison for speaking out against the war in Ukraine you're recruited to fight in the war in Ukraine.

Edited by Warcodered
  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...