Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

To those of you left that tried so hard to convince us we needed in invade Iraq


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
27 replies to this topic

#16 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,822
  • Reputation: 2,540
SUPPORTER

Posted 11 July 2013 - 06:52 PM

What the hell venom, you are still making no sense.

 

I'm OK with giving you a pass though as you thought the world was going to end, then get taken over by aliens, then anarchy, or whatever, so many times over so many years that you probably checked out mentally a long time ago.

 

Instead of coming on message boards, if I were you I'd just drop out Lebowski style and enjoy yourself a bit for a while.



#17 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 11 July 2013 - 07:20 PM

What the hell venom, you are still making no sense.

 

I'm OK with giving you a pass though as you thought the world was going to end, then get taken over by aliens, then anarchy, or whatever, so many times over so many years that you probably checked out mentally a long time ago.

 

Instead of coming on message boards, if I were you I'd just drop out Lebowski style and enjoy yourself a bit for a while.

 

Typical. How am I not making any sense? Would you care to elaborate? The point we're making should be pretty clear.



#18 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,822
  • Reputation: 2,540
SUPPORTER

Posted 11 July 2013 - 07:51 PM

No not at all. You are trying to make a different point for some reason.

 

To try and compare drone strikes against Al Queida (the group that you know, killed a lot of Americans a while back) targets with invading Iraq which had nothing to do with Al Quieda and involved thousands of dead Americans for no reason whatsoever, well. thats the kind of thinking that makes people think you are living in la la land.



#19 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 12 July 2013 - 09:29 AM

No not at all. You are trying to make a different point for some reason.

 

To try and compare drone strikes against Al Queida (the group that you know, killed a lot of Americans a while back) targets with invading Iraq which had nothing to do with Al Quieda and involved thousands of dead Americans for no reason whatsoever, well. thats the kind of thinking that makes people think you are living in la la land.


...talk about living in la la land.

 



#20 rippadonn

rippadonn

    Since 2006

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,018
  • Reputation: 200
HUDDLER

Posted 12 July 2013 - 10:59 AM

No not at all. You are trying to make a different point for some reason.

To try and compare drone strikes against Al Queida (the group that you know, killed a lot of Americans a while back) targets with invading Iraq which had nothing to do with Al Quieda and involved thousands of dead Americans for no reason whatsoever, well. thats the kind of thinking that makes people think you are living in la la land.


I think he's referring to the same gang that forcibly took over the US in 2000 and is still in power today ( see the recent trip to Africa). Unfortunately most Americans are still oblivious to the criminal empire we've been turned into.

He's saying there was no "change" and control is in the same hands. We have not left Iraq and will not until real "change" happens despite all the lip service. W and O have been hand in hand. The view from outside this country is a lot clearer than from inside so viewpoints other than the mainstream are valuable right now.

The Vatican is even in the process of purging (which I could never imagine) as are many other countries. The complete takeover of our media in the eighties has produced the desired result, a completely unaware thus complicit society that has no interest in what it's government is doing in their name, only fake news and Justin Beiber.

I hope we all wake up before it's too late for us. War is often the cover for more nefarious acts, slight of hand, stealing and such, that's what it was all about. Pulled off by the same players who have their hands on everything and everybody. That's why our buddy Venom sees no difference. I'd agree.

#21 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • Joined: 09-November 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,569
  • Reputation: 2,114
HUDDLER

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:11 PM

I think he's referring to the same gang that forcibly took over the US in 2000 and is still in power today ( see the recent trip to Africa). Unfortunately most Americans are still oblivious to the criminal empire we've been turned into.

He's saying there was no "change" and control is in the same hands. We have not left Iraq and will not until real "change" happens despite all the lip service. W and O have been hand in hand. The view from outside this country is a lot clearer than from inside so viewpoints other than the mainstream are valuable right now.

The Vatican is even in the process of purging (which I could never imagine) as are many other countries. The complete takeover of our media in the eighties has produced the desired result, a completely unaware thus complicit society that has no interest in what it's government is doing in their name, only fake news and Justin Beiber.

I hope we all wake up before it's too late for us. War is often the cover for more nefarious acts, slight of hand, stealing and such, that's what it was all about. Pulled off by the same players who have their hands on everything and everybody. That's why our buddy Venom sees no difference. I'd agree.

 

I agree that our nation's never ending interference in Middle East affairs is alarming, often counterproductive and will continue regardless of which major party is in office.  You also make an excellent point that the consolidation of our nation's media into the hands of a few powerful organizations has resulted in an woefully misinformed public.

 

However, CWG makes a valid point.  A major ground conflict and UAV attacks are worlds apart in their long term effects on our nation and the world in general.  Also the Iraqi invasion had nothing to do with the War on Terrorism, unlike the UAV issue.  Members of GWB administration were discussing the invasion of Iraq prior to 9/11 and just used that day's events to justify a war they desperately wanted to have.

 

That leads me to my final point.  There is an important difference between the two main political parties when it comes to the willingness to engage in large scale conflict.  Members of the previous administration and the last GOP Presidential candidate were in favor of military action against Iran and questioned the loyalty and wisdom of those who weren't.  The Obama administration has resisted a lot of political pressure from the right to use the military option.  Imagine the military and economic quagmire of starting yet another large conflict in the Middle East. 

 

Also, isn't it interesting to note that now that the election is over, the impending threat of Iran seems to have subsided?



#22 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 12 July 2013 - 05:28 PM

The miscommunication going on in this thread comes down to the basic premise of why we're over there in the first place. One of which being that we're there to fight "terror" (cwg's view); and the other being that we're there to essentially take over and westernize the middle east (my view), as outlined in PNAC and in written works by the CFR's Zbigniew Brzezinski...which is funny considering he is Obama's senior advisor.



#23 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • Joined: 09-November 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,569
  • Reputation: 2,114
HUDDLER

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:45 PM

The miscommunication going on in this thread comes down to the basic premise of why we're over there in the first place. One of which being that we're there to fight "terror" (cwg's view); and the other being that we're there to essentially take over and westernize the middle east (my view), as outlined in PNAC and in written works by the CFR's Zbigniew Brzezinski...which is funny considering he is Obama's senior advisor.

 

No matter how the US and European nations try and rationalize it, we will continue to interfere in the region until the oil runs dry.



#24 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,822
  • Reputation: 2,540
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:51 AM

The miscommunication going on in this thread comes down to the basic premise of why we're over there in the first place. One of which being that we're there to fight "terror" (cwg's view); and the other being that we're there to essentially take over and westernize the middle east (my view), as outlined in PNAC and in written works by the CFR's Zbigniew Brzezinski...which is funny considering he is Obama's senior advisor.

 

You were wrong starting with the first thing you said.



#25 venom

venom

    oneinfiniteconsciousness

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,931
  • Reputation: 536
HUDDLER

Posted 13 July 2013 - 10:04 AM

You were wrong starting with the first thing you said.

 

Ok. Again, would you care to elaborate?



#26 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • Joined: 16-March 09
  • posts: 18,507
  • Reputation: 3,471
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 July 2013 - 10:06 AM

No matter how the US and European nations try and rationalize it, we will continue to interfere in the region until the oil runs dry.

 

What is funny is China got all the oil contracts in Iraq and we got almost nothing



#27 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,707
  • Reputation: 3,071
HUDDLER

Posted 13 July 2013 - 10:50 AM

I have said this for years. WMD's were talked about long before W was in office.
Iraq was the fulcrum for the entire ME. Like dominoes each country began to change after Iraq "stablized". THAT was the entire goal that I doubt any politician will admit on the record. Not all about oil that the left defers to for talking points. The more "westernized" that region is the less likely of a training ground for uber terrorists. Yes you will still have terrorism but you also have a chance at a decent way of life that reduces a sense of detachment and hopelessness that creates a perfect candidate to recruit for terror.
Iran has subsided due to a new leader and a poker match that went on for several years with them.

My fear now is the unintended consequences of a new region and the next response for anything the US has done good or bad.
Let's also be real. If Clinton were in office on 9/11 he would have a hard time not caving in to invade somewhere. A major response was needed.
When you have 2 parties one or the other will snipe and downplay when the other does well or makes the right call. Its such a stupid system we put up with every 4 years.
We are leaving and that's good. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. We now have a new devil.

#28 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,822
  • Reputation: 2,540
SUPPORTER

Posted 13 July 2013 - 11:23 AM

Thats funny, as Cheney and Wolfie wrote a letter to Clinton asking him to invade Iraq, describing all the great things that would happen if we did, which he completely ignored as the craziness it was.