Go Obama! - Page 28 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-13-2009, 05:20 PM   #406
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
The Iraq thing that Clinton wouldn't have minded having justification for. 9/11 was plenty, we were going back in one way or another. Torture has nothing to do with how we got to Iraq.



what did Iraq have to do with 9-11?

torture has everything to do with the "intelligence" that "justified" the war in the minds of the Bush administration.

"how we got into Iraq"? you make it sound like we were tricked or something.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 05:41 PM   #407
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 02:48 PM
The groundwork for going back into Iraq was around before Bush, 9/11, and torture. Iraq had nothing to do with that particular day, I just mean it's easy to see it as a catalyst when we declared we would go after terror anywhere. Saddam was no angel, 9/11 or not.
__________________

__________________
HyperU2 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 06:08 PM   #408
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
The groundwork for going back into Iraq was around before Bush, 9/11, and torture. Iraq had nothing to do with that particular day, I just mean it's easy to see it as a catalyst when we declared we would go after terror anywhere. Saddam was no angel, 9/11 or not.


and everyone thought that invading Iraq would be a massive mistake -- the whole "Pottery Barn Rule" brought up by Powell -- until Bush came along and fabricated a sense of crisis and urgency around Saddam Hussein.

he was as much of an angel in 2002 as he was in 1998 or in 1995. all that changed was a massive tragedy in New York that was exploited by the Bush administration who also sought to fabricate intelligence -- through WMDs or the torture of detainees to admit to the non-existent link between Saddam and Al Qaeda -- that would justify the invasion to the American public and to world opinion.

it's quite clear by the administration's actions that they were enormously insecure about their rationale for invasion. after all, if they were so secure, why the massive intelligence failure? why the torture? why the need to make Saddam and his weapons out to be a threat to people living in the US?

it's because no one ever wanted to invade to begin with. because it was a bad idea. and it was a bad idea because of what we've seen unfold since 2003.

now, some will say that either you invade, or you let Saddam ride a tank into Jerusalem and capture the Saudi oil fields. but that's a false choice. that's bad thinking.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 06:19 PM   #409
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 02:48 PM
He harbored a terrorist from the first WTC bombing, we were only 8 minutes away from going back into Iraq in 1998. Anyone brought to Gitmo from Afghanistan being tortured would hardly have bearing on the Invasion of Iraq.
__________________
HyperU2 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 06:31 PM   #410
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperU2 View Post
Anyone brought to Gitmo from Afghanistan being tortured would hardly have bearing on the Invasion of Iraq.


then why was Zubaydah waterboarded 83 times?

waterboarding was approved in 2002 specifically to force confessions of links between AQ and Saddam Hussein.

remember the whole "yellow cake" issue? the British dossier?

they were desperate to magnify the threat from Saddam.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 06:33 PM   #411
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 02:48 PM
I know we brought a ton of yellowcake out of Iraq. That? We didn't need to vilify Saddam anymore than he already had been. He was the poster child for evil during all of the 90's. Didn't you see the South Park movie?
__________________
HyperU2 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 07:32 PM   #412
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:48 PM
According to Roger Simon over at Politico:
Quote:
A member of the Republican National Committee told me Tuesday that when the RNC meets in an extraordinary special session next week, it will approve a resolution rebranding Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party.”

When I asked if such a resolution would force RNC Chairman Michael Steele to use that label when talking about Democrats in all his speeches and press releases, the RNC member replied: “Who cares?”
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 07:53 PM   #413
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 02:48 PM
^ oh, go for it GOP.

it's amazing how they don't realize that Obama has helped them hang themselves by turning them into the party of Cheney and Rush.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 07:58 PM   #414
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 02:48 PM
It must be seriously embarrassing to be a Republican these days.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 08:29 PM   #415
Refugee
 
zooropop40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Interference is called Interference because it interferes on my ability to live a normal life...
Posts: 1,583
Local Time: 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
It must be seriously embarrassing to be a Republican these days.
mostly because intelligent ideas have been replaced with bafoons like Rush.
__________________
zooropop40 is offline  
Old 05-14-2009, 12:00 AM   #416
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Carlisle PA
Posts: 818
Local Time: 02:48 PM
I'm glad that he's at least willing to be reasonable.

Obama seeks to block release of abuse photos
__________________
HyperU2 is offline  
Old 05-16-2009, 05:15 PM   #417
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Obama - good for Pro-Life ?




Gallup Poll: Obama Collides with Public Opinion on Abortion -- Politics Daily
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-16-2009, 06:33 PM   #418
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:48 PM
I think it's too early to conclude what, if anything, that poll decisively points to.

A CNN poll in April (just under twice the Gallup poll's sample size) asking the same question found the results 49% pro-choice, 45% pro-life, 3% 'both/mixed/neither,' and 2% 'unsure/unsure about terms.' A Quinnipiac poll also from April (more than twice the Gallup poll's sample size) asking the rather more useful question "Should abortion be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases?" yielded the results 15% always legal, 37% mostly legal, 27% mostly illegal, 14% always illegal, and 7% unsure. The Gallup poll you (deep) just cited also asked the question, "Should abortions be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances?" and for that question, the results were 22% legal under any circumstances, 53% legal in certain circumstances, 23% illegal in all circumstances, and 2% unsure. As Gallup noted in their press release, "the dominant position on this question remains the middle option, as it has continuously since 1975." So it may be that the most noteworthy shift here (assuming there is one, i.e. that the Gallup poll isn't an outlier) pertains to self-labeling preferences rather than policy preferences, in something like the way the term "liberal" has become increasingly stigmatized over the last several years despite what election results would seem to suggest. Further polling should clarify.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 05-16-2009, 07:11 PM   #419
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
clearly, this was such a compelling justification for war, and so convincing, and so accurate, that the administration felt as if needed no other justification for the invasion and did not feel as if it needed to torture detainees so they would spit out "information" about the non-existent relationship between Saddam and Al-Qaeda.

because that's what they did. let's not fool ourselves. torture became a policy in order for Cheney to dig up more "information" so he could justify to the American public the invasion of Iraq.



Which line of the congressional resolution on Iraq passed on October 13, 2002, talks of a relationship between Saddam and Al-Qaeda obtained from controversial interigations methods?

After October 13, 2002, the Bush administration had all the approval it needed from the country to go to war. Another vote of any kind was not needed. By the way, nearly every Republican Senator and the majority of Democratic Senator's voted for the resolution. A huge contrast from the 1991 Gulf War congressional resolution when the vast majority of Democrats opposed the use of military force to remove Saddam's military from Kuwait.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 05-16-2009, 07:16 PM   #420
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

torture has everything to do with the "intelligence" that "justified" the war in the minds of the Bush administration.

"how we got into Iraq"? you make it sound like we were tricked or something.

How about what the Clinton administration said about Iraq:


"The hard fact is, that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that THREAT, once and for all, is with a new Iraqi government. A government ready to live in peace with its neighbors."

President Bill Clinton - December 16, 1998

Removing Saddam from power as a way to deal with the serious security chalenges in the region was not something invented by the Bush administration!
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com