Hypocrisy Watch: Iraq War vs. Global Warming

[LaDairis]

And what do his conventional forces have to do with his being a threat? AQ had nothing compared to that prior to 9/11. Were they neutered in the 90's? What about the IRA or other terrorist groups? And what about state-sponsors of terrorism with relatively weak militaries, such as Libya during the 80's and 90's.

 

For a neutered threat, Hussein knew how to play the game. He was always pushing the boundary in the 90's - blocking inspections, moving troops in contravention of the cease-fire agreement, targeting and firing upon UN planes, sponsoring proxy-fighting among the Kurdish groups... For a guy supposedly under the UN thumb, that's chutzpah. And the smashing of Iraq's military didn't stop the regime from attempting to assassinate Bush in Kuwait in 1993. Or do you believe that Clinton fabricated the whole thing?

 

Maybe neutering doesn't mean the same thing to you that it does to me.

 

 

 

You have bought the Zionist blurring of AQ into "the terrorists" hook line and sinker. AQ in 2001 was a small rag tag group based in Afghan. They had no relationship with Iraq. Iraq's only connection to "terror" was Saddam's very public giving of money to Palestinian suicide bombers. Saddam did that because Saddam and especially his kids did NOT live the Islamic Lifestyle. AQ's manual says such leaders should be overthrown. Saddam knew that. The gifts to the Palestinian families were an attempt by Saddam to say "see, I'm with you even if I don't live the lifestyle."

 

As for his disputes with the UN, that was a UN problem, and the UN was completely correct that he had no active WMD program.

 

The assassination attempt on Bush 41 appears to have happened. However, it was not one of the stated reasons why we invaded. All of those reasons turned out to be 100% BS, and here you are trying to invent new ones to cover for it, because you were one of the MORONS who believed every lie the Zionists told you to bait us in to Iraq.

 

 

As a fighting force, the Iraqi military was neutered, despite your attempts to change the subject. AQ was never a country either.

[finknottle]

You have bought the Zionist blurring of AQ into "the terrorists" hook line and sinker. AQ in 2001 was a small rag tag group based in Afghan. They had no relationship with Iraq. Iraq's only connection to "terror" was Saddam's very public giving of money to Palestinian suicide bombers. Saddam did that because Saddam and especially his kids did NOT live the Islamic Lifestyle. AQ's manual says such leaders should be overthrown. Saddam knew that. The gifts to the Palestinian families were an attempt by Saddam to say "see, I'm with you even if I don't live the lifestyle."

 

As for his disputes with the UN, that was a UN problem, and the UN was completely correct that he had no active WMD program.

 

The assassination attempt on Bush 41 appears to have happened. However, it was not one of the stated reasons why we invaded. All of those reasons turned out to be 100% BS, and here you are trying to invent new ones to cover for it, because you were one of the MORONS who believed every lie the Zionists told you to bait us in to Iraq.

 

On the contrary, I think you have bought into the habit of knee-jerk pontification. I have never said that Hussein had an AQ connection. In fact, I have argued to the contrary from the very beginning.

 

The assassination attempt was offered as evidence that Hussein could not be relied upon to be a responsible member of the international community once he obtained WMD. For many, this was the clinching argument - not whether he had them in 2003, but what happens three years after sanctuions are lifted.

 

And for the record, yes AQ was ragtag (but well-funded) group in 2001. But they accomplished some pretty spectacular things up to 9/11 - a dozen bombings, hitting the WTC twice and destroying them the second attempt, attacking a navy ship... It just goes to show you how vulnerable the world is to motivated individuals.

 

As a fighting force, the Iraqi military was neutered, despite your attempts to change the subject. AQ was never a country either.

 

Perhaps reading comprehension is the issue, for the topic was pre-emptive action to prevent the acquisition of WMD by unstable players. There was no change of subject.

 

As an aside, you are a walking billboard for my first post - thanks!

 

The problem with the selling of the Iraq War was that a million different arguments were allowed to float, regardless of their veracity, each resonating to a different segment (Saddam gassed his own people, Saddam has WMD, Saddam has AQ or 9/11 ties, Saddam will cause mischief when the sanctions are lifted. etc). This allows the detractors to pick the strawman argument, even those that were patently false such as involvement in 9/11.

 

Ignore the many motives, agenda's and arguments for the war and just keep insisting that all those who supported it did so because they thought Hussein was behind AQ. He obviously wasn't, ergo there was no reason to go to war.

[Adam]

Ignore the many motives, agenda's and arguments for the war and just keep insisting that all those who supported it did so because they thought Hussein was behind AQ. He obviously wasn't, ergo there was no reason to go to war.

Al Queda HATED Saddam!

[finknottle]

Al Queda HATED Saddam!

 

And vice versa. He was a nationalist, and the militant groups he supported in Palestine and Iran were nationalistic rather than religious in character. He wanted to be seen as the leader of Arab nationalism, and theocratic movements represented a philosophical threat.

[LaDairis]

"for the topic was pre-emptive action to prevent the acquisition of WMD by unstable players. "

 

 

 

No, that is the last gasp effort to justify this disaster. Indeed, not only did Saddam not have WMDs, but we were intentionally misled about that. The documents from Niger were forged.

 

WHO FORGED THEM?

 

Hint: nobody in the media is the slightest bit concerned who forged them, because the media was 100% for dumping the US into the Middle East to perpetually slug it out with all of Israel's enemies, and the media did not care how or why that happened. The best example of this is left wing NYT reporter Judy Miller going to prison to protect Cheney. HELLO....

 

 

You could potentially justify the invasion of dozens of countries over the BS fearmongering "they might get WMDs." Indeed, the falsehood of the "Hannity List" of why we needed to get 4000 kids killed in Iraq was

 

 

1. WMDs

2. dictator

3. genocidal murderer

4. oppressor

5. aggressor/menace

 

instead of ACT OF WAR...

 

 

As W goes to Chine to watch the Olympics, just remember that China actually is in violation of all of the "Hannity List," and W could have stayed home and watched the Games here if he cared ONE BIT about those issues, which he doesn't...

[OCinBuffalo]

yes that china which is doing more about other sources of energy than we are. you talk in circles and not in serious way. Why do you even bother

I talk in circles? Al Gore's version of Global warming isn't concocted? I'm not serious? hahahahaha! This board is great for a laugh some days.

 

The simple fact is for all of your twisting and spinning and obfuscation, only Finknottle has acknowledged the undeniable truth. Both issues are the same in that we have questionable information to go on, and therefore a tough decision has to be made. Tough decisions are what they are, and only a giant hypocrite or blind fool, thinks making a tough decision and being wrong = lying.

 

Now, if man-made Global Warming is the hoax that it's shaping up to be = new evidence from ships' logs from the 1600-1700s talking abut increased storms and unusual sudden warming in the 1730s.......I wonder if that will mean it's OK for people to have bumper stickers that say:

 

"Democrats Lied" or

"Environtology, the new BS religion/science" or

"Green People Took My Money" or

"Where's the GW, Al?"

 

I don't think it will be OK. I would think that anybody who had those bumper stickers was a petty, agenda-driven drone, who was more concerned about "being right" and/or gaining power, than the welfare of the country or his/her fellow citizens. It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out....

[Fingon]

The same people who want us to leave Iraq want us to go into Darfur... talk about hypocrisy.

[OCinBuffalo]

The same people who want us to leave Iraq want us to go into Darfur... talk about hypocrisy.

Hey, dammit, that was my next installment of this thing.

[HBSS151]

There were other options besides invading Iraq. The nature of the supposed WMD were known - they'd get as far as Israel and that's about it...maybe to Greece on a good day.

 

Neville Chamberlin thought they would be satisfied at Slovakia

[HBSS151]

Al Queda HATED Saddam!

 

He skimmed too much

[DC Tom]

Neville Chamberlin thought they would be satisfied at Slovakia

 

Hitler reference. Thread's over.

[HBSS151]

Hitler reference. Thread's over.

 

Tom - of all people - you know that everything repeats

[Chilly]

Tom - of all people - you know that everything repeats

 

Godwin's law.

[DC Tom]

Tom - of all people - you know that everything repeats

 

Could you repeat that?

 

 

 

Actually, most things don't repeat. It's just the human condition to think that everything looks like something else.

[erynthered]

Actually, most things don't repeat. It's just the human condition to think that everything looks like something else.

 

 

Thats the "Change" I'm talking about! It looks like I'm a change, but I'm not. See?

 

<Obama>

[finknottle]

The same people who want us to leave Iraq want us to go into Darfur... talk about hypocrisy.

 

Actually, they don't. Not enough of them anyway. During the early debates Biden consistently called for military intervention in Darfur, arguing that one battalian of US troops would smash the Janjaweed and allow the AU peacekeepers to move in. His very emotional entreaties were coldly ignored by the other candidates and the audiences, and his candidacy went nowhere.

[finknottle]

There were other options besides invading Iraq. The nature of the supposed WMD were known - they'd get as far as Israel and that's about it...maybe to Greece on a good day.

 

And in 5 or 10 years they wouldn't improve?

 

What if, once sanctions were lifted, they increased their efforts to obtain missile technology? What would you do, other than have sharp words for them? The UN would clearly not be an option at that point, nor would sanctions. What leverage would you have at that point?

[John Adams]

The same people who want us to leave Iraq want us to go into Darfur... talk about hypocrisy.

 

Darfur would take 15 minutes. Those people fight with machetes.

 

This is just an aside. I see Iraq had a 79 Billion dollar surplus. I'm sure that money is going to us for our services right? Ahahaha.

[Fingon]

Actually, they don't. Not enough of them anyway. During the early debates Biden consistently called for military intervention in Darfur, arguing that one battalian of US troops would smash the Janjaweed and allow the AU peacekeepers to move in. His very emotional entreaties were coldly ignored by the other candidates and the audiences, and his candidacy went nowhere.

So, we leave Iraq and create a genocide... and go to darfur to stop one?

[DC Tom]

So, we leave Iraq and create a genocide... and go to darfur to stop one?

 

Pretty much. It doesn't matter if we cause them ourselves, only that we stop other people's.

 

 

 

And apparently Darfur won't be a "distraction from Afghanistan and al Qaeda", either.

 

 

 

And don't forget to ignore the fact that we - yes, the United States - backed a African Union's Sudan mission with funding, support, and training. That's apparently bad, and we should occupy Darfur unilaterally...which is bad in Iraq, where we should be supporting a coalition.

 

 

 

And what would our exit strategy be? Somalia established a lower bound of 800-1600 African lives being equivalent to an American soldier (200-400k dead in the Somali Civil war for 31 US deaths), Rwanda established that 800k African dead aren't worth a single American life...so do we leave Darfur after the first 10 or so American casualties?