Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
I'm saying it is impossible to know for sure. What I do know was the inspectors who were kicked out in the Mid 90's had not documented the destruction of all of his estimated Anthrax, CS Gas stores and artillary delivery systems. Do you honestly believe Saddam would destroy them on his own? Maybe they didn't exist in the first place. Maybe they did. My point is We will never know for sure and stating that WMD's did not exist in Iraq is not a fact. It is an optimistic opinion at best.
Don't hate Bush for not finding WMD's, Hate him for rattelin his saber for a year and a half giving Saddam plenty of time to ??????? whatever with them if they did exist. He should have parked 2 carriers right off the kuwaiti coast and gone after them if he thought they were there. Not waste his time with the friggin UN.
I agree, But simply cutting and running instead of coming up with a new solution to the original problem is probably what is going to happen. Iraq is political suicide right now so the "ballless" politicians are going to cut and run.
Actually, we can be fairly confident about what happened to the weapons he DID have. I heard a talk by one of the Lawrence Livermore Labs scientists who was one of the US leading experts on WMD, and had been involved with the military assessment of the Iraq WMD threat. He pointed out that they had assumed there were WMD, but had made a simple mistake: As he stated, only a handful of countries (the primary beligerents in WWII is what he said) had ever figured out how to keep these materials stable long term. In most cases, the shelf-life is only five years. By the time of the Iraq invasion, Saddam's weapons had all expired years ago.
Does this make sense? Yeah, everything in that country proved to be dilapidated and years behind on maintenance. Saddam wasn't able to modernize anything for about a decade. According to that WMD expert, he probably threw out the last, by then ineffective, weapon back in the mid-90's. If this is correct, and the speaker was certainly more knowledgeable than current company here, then no WMD would have been around to be transferred to anybody.
Thus, there isn't anything there now, there isn't any revealed evidence that there had been any for a few years before the invasion, and there is a good reason to believe that there wasn't any for a few years before the invasion. That doesn't prove it wasn't there, but the weight of evidence favors the "no WMD" hypothesis over the "moved WMD" hypothesis.
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by szlamany
Do you really think that Bush put all our troops and those of the coalition in danger for political advance?
Yes. :thumb:
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
I agree, But simply cutting and running instead of coming up with a new solution to the original problem is probably what is going to happen. Iraq is political suicide right now so the "ballless" politicians are going to cut and run.
It is certainly a tricky conundrum. I say we let the major UN powers take turns policing it, then when it's the French turn, we all sneak away and don't return their calls. Just, make sure nobody tells them.
When they ask for the next country to step in we all look bemused at them and say "What, your still in Iraq? We got out of that place a long time ago....? Are you mad?"
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Is it really relevant to argue whether WMD's did exist or that the war was just? The past is unalterable. Both converservatives and liberals can agree that what we've done can't be changed. In either case, we've changed it and the country needs to be left in a stable condition. I don't like our troops being over there dieing for another country, but it was our choice and we have to move on. If democrats took over ever office in the US, we still will not do an imediate pull out like the no-brainers want.
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by System_Error
Is it really relevant to argue whether WMD's did exist or that the war was just? The past is unalterable. Both converservatives and liberals can agree that what we've done can't be changed. In either case, we've changed it and the country needs to be left in a stable condition. I don't like our troops being over there dieing for another country, but it was our choice and we have to move on. If democrats took over ever office in the US, we still will not do an imediate pull out like the no-brainers want.
Unfortunately, I agree.
Now, does anybody have a viable solution that doesn't include the phase "....then a miracle happens....."
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Yes, that's pretty much what I said. Does that shock you? Do you feel that you should always throw yourself on your sword? If the Dems had opposed the war at that time, they would have lost big time. If they truly felt that the Reps were harmful to the country, would you have thought it wise of them to commit particularly ineffectual political suicide? That battle was lost, but at least they were still in it overall.
If it offends you that people, especially politicians, calculate the cost/benefit ratio of their actions, you had best stay in bed, because the world is going to deliver unto you a particularly sharp disappointment.
I'm not surpised at what politicians do. I am surprised that someone who I thought was of a certain political leaning would actually see things as they are.
X
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by System_Error
Is it really relevant to argue whether WMD's did exist or that the war was just? The past is unalterable. Both converservatives and liberals can agree that what we've done can't be changed. In either case, we've changed it and the country needs to be left in a stable condition. I don't like our troops being over there dieing for another country, but it was our choice and we have to move on. If democrats took over ever office in the US, we still will not do an imediate pull out like the no-brainers want.
I 100% agree.
But, as Shaggy Hiker pointed out, can anyone come up with a viable solution?
Re: Who's going to come out on top in the US elections?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xanith
I'm not surpised at what politicians do. I am surprised that someone who I thought was of a certain political leaning would actually see things as they are.
X
I probably am of the cetain political leaning that you suggest, I really doubt you'd be mistaken about that by this time. However, I also grew up immersed in politics, so I see it on two levels. On the one level is the whole left vs right thing. Individuals have a leaning here, but it really manifests at a group level with the general trend of a series of individual issues. The other level is the personal level. This is rarely right vs left, though that certainly plays some part, and can be totally convoluted.
An excellent example of the latter was the Idaho first congressional race. It is one of the most consistently republican districts in the country, and it narrowly remained republican (by either one or three percent). The winner talks about working with the rest of the Idaho delegation, which looks likely on the face of it, since they are all the same party. But then there is the fact that our other representative offered to throw this guy out a window. Basically, Simpson hates Sali, and there is no way that they will be able to work together harmoniously. Instead, they will work together as unwilling partners. There isn't much chance that anything great will come of such a match.
