When The Pentagon Speaks ….

“When the Pentagon says, ‘Yes, Saddam’s WMD’s are real climate change is real,’ it might get people to pay attention who otherwise might be skeptical,” Haines- Stiles said.

http://www.centredaily.com/

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to When The Pentagon Speaks ….

  1. Tony Duncan says:

    Steve,

    I hate to tell you this but the Pentagon never said Saddam’s WMD were real. That was Cheney manufacturing intelligence to feed to news sources that he could then quote as confirmation.

  2. Tony Duncan says:

    No Steve,

    actually Saddam had wmd’s during Clinton’s time in office. Some idiot’s have even tried to maintain that the few chemical weapons found in Iraq after Bush 2 invaded where from a current WMD program when in fact they were left over useless relics from just after the gulf war (some probably even from the 80’s). It was The UN inspections and probably the sanctions that caused Saddam to give up his WMD programs in the mid 90’s and destroy almost all the stockpiles. Again the pentagon did not say Saddam had WMD’s before Bush 2 invaded. Cheney and co made it up, and got Powell to sign onto a bucket full of lies.

    • Justa Joe says:

      Interesting line of BS

      Weapons from the 80’s & 90’s are harmless. Every intelligence agency on the planet believed that Saddam still had WMD including Clinton’s former chief of the CIA that declared it a “slam dunk.” The WMD, which everyone was concernd about, was from his previous stockpiles. Small wonder that you’re a warmist. As warmism is just “scientific” branch of moonbat leftism.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Justa joe,

      USELESS weapons from the 80’s and 90’s. Rusted armaments with deteriorated payloads were no threat to anyone, except maybe metal scavengers after the invasion.
      Every intelligence agency on the planet did NOT believe Saddam had functioning WMD’s. UN inspectors found no weapons, no program.Every lead the US gave them turned out to be wrong. EVERY lead. I repeat EVERY lead. The German’s specifically were horrified that Bush admin took Curveballs assertions at face value. Saddam’s Brother in law who defected gave accurate intel that was all confirmed where it could be. NO WMD’s. The bush admin engaged in a total propaganda campaign where they seeded unsubstantiated stories to the press and to others who then repeated the info and then this was used as corroboration. there was NO evidence of WMD’s and the US bullied other countries to accept unverified assumptions. Even with this the US could not convince the Security council to go to war.

      I laughed when i saw you use the :”slam dunk” Quote. Tenant was telling bush that SELLING the war would be a slam dunk, he NEVER said that Saddam definitely had WMD’s. Republican, Scott Ridder, who VOTED for Bush, repeatedly said there was was no evidence of WMD’s and he was the subject of a underage sex sting that for some reason was settled out of court. he was totally ignored by the national media. ALL of the evidence Powell gave was WRONG.

      Not being a leftist, I can hardly be moonbat. But from this post you certainly seem up for the rightwing title.

      Where have I ever said anything to makes me a warmest?

  3. Latitude says:

    What about Kuwait?

    • Tony Duncan says:

      As my memory serves me, Bush 1 invaded Iraq and liberated Kuwait. The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was not a huge hoax, made up as an excuse to invade Kuwait, which is what Bush 2 pulled off.

      • Al Gored says:

        That is highly debatable. At that time the US representative, April Gillespie I believe, gave Saddam the nod and wink to invade Kuwait. They sucked him in to doing that. The rest is history.

        And the gang hit new propaganda highs then with their fake story of evil Iraqis taking babies out of incubators.

        Let’s face it. The US, like most countries who want wars, have faked the cause of all of them since the Vietnam Gulf of Tonkin fraud at least. Just like Hitler faked the Polish attacks on his poor troops that ‘made him’ invade them.

        And now the eco-crisis research-industrial complex, led by the AGW gang at the moment – the great fake extinction crisis and biodiversity is up next – has learned all the tricks of the military-industrial complex… to lie and sell fear for a living.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Al,

        In fact it is not debatable. Saddam ACTUALLY invaded Kuwait. An ambassador giving a wink is not really enough reason to indict the US for being responsible for a megalomaniac ruler invading another sovereign country with no provocation. There is no paper trail or even anecdotal that indicates the Bush admin or proxies gave Saddam any other support for invading Kuwait.
        Actually Western propaganda about the “huns” in WWl was much worse than that one story about incubators. I like the fact that she was coached by an american PR firm though.

        this is getting fun. Now you right wingers are anti American as well! The US under Bush 1 was as bad as HITLER!!!!

        And the “eco-crisis research-industrial complex” is using the per review process to pass off all this fake hoax science, whereas the good guys talk to each other on blogs, and convince an entire party to ignore actual science and believe that God would never allow the Earth to get too hot because he promised us he wouldn’t.

      • Al Gored says:

        Tony,

        Remarkable leap. I didn’t compare Bush I to Hitler. I explained that most if not all recent wars were started on false flag events.

        Peer reviewed science… LOL.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Sorry Al,

        I have been listening to too much Beck, and O’ Reilly. i forgot that only applies to leftists! I was making fun of the people who do that, nothing personal.

        And of course peer review is a joke. We should decide science on blogs. that will really rocket our scientific and technological progress to the level of Zimbabwe in a generation or two!

    • Al Gored says:

      Tony,

      The quality of peer review process depends entirely on the knowledge and OBJECTIVITY of the CHOSEN reviewers.

      So, in a pseudoscientific process like the Lysenkoist social engineering AGW project, with cherry picked reviewers and totally corrupted publishers, peer reviewed ‘science’ from the perpetrators of that are indeed a joke.

      So are most PhD and lesser degrees from certain faculties.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Al,

        Don’y let Steve catch you using the Lysenko analogy. I have done so and he gets agitated by it. Remember this is not a conspiracy. it is a religious hoax. BIG difference. Use Wegener instead, and DON’T let on that Wegener’s treatment was almost the same as Arrhenius. COmplicated rules I know, but it is all for the best.

        With all the corruption in the peer review process it is too bad the the thousands of scientists who Aren’t part of the consp… fraud don’t publish refutations of all that AGW crap, and show it is all garbage.

      • Al Gored says:

        Al,

        Sorry but the Lysenko historical analogy best fits what I see happening here.

        Another example that is emerging:

        http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/09/the-pre-climategate-issue-that-is-the-issue/

        To use another analogy, most of these ‘little people’ involved in this scam have little choice but to follow the herd for their careers and funding… like ‘good Germans.’ But the ones leading the pack are Madoffs in white coats, and their masters are worse.

        To address your deliberately naive point about skeptics publishing, two answers. Now that Climategate has begun to break the stranglehold, more is being published. And two, why didn’t all those non-good Germans – skeptical of Hitler – stand up to the good Germans? Duh.

        Here’s a question for you. What other ‘scientific’ question has ever required such a massive propaganda campaign or had so many basic errors revealed… yet still marches on like some zombie? Just follow the big money and the political agenda and you might catch on. Or, if you would rather just be an obedient serf, don’t.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Al,

        there are so many fallacies in your post it will take me time to figure out how to approach your post.
        First off, I have presented the Lysenko analogy to Steve repeatedly and he has refused to accept it. That would imply a conscious organized conspiracy, and for some reason Steve is unwilling to state that directly, though most of his posts say that implicitly.

        the major difference NOW between Lysenkoism and ACC is that there is very little likelihood of having your brains blown out and your family sent to Siberia if you publish something that does not adequately conform to the AGW propaganda campaign. I have to slkeep now. But I will try to continue this later.

      • Al Gored says:

        Tony,

        I’ll wait with baited breath for your explanation of all my errors but will sign off for now with this quick answer…

        Lysenkoism was NOT an organized conspiracy for the ‘little people’ involved. Sheep, like career climbing researchers hungry for grants, are not conspirators. They are just sheep. Very easily herded sheep, given the quality of too many faculties in too many universities. The shepherds are the first possible conspirators but they typically only know about their little herd. The real conspirators are at the Ministry of Sheep and up.

        And people who did not obey the AGW orthodoxy have been and still are sent to the career equivalent of Siberia.

  4. suyts says:

    The military is the last group of people to do climate research. Their function by definition is to follow orders. They obtain uniformity by discouraging individuality and independent thought. They will state the world is warming if that’s what they’re told to do. They will state the world is spinning backwards if that’s what they’re told to do.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      SUYTS,

      Gotta love this. Opposing ACC has turned conservatives into bleeding hearts for the poor, and hate mongers for the military. Will wonders never cease.
      Actually I have worked with someone who has worked closely with the military around getting accurate information about reality. After-action reviews, while very occasionally a white wash, are mostly detailed assessments and analysis of what actually happens in situations in order improve effective response. The Pentagon has billions of dollars that the right will never question to do their own research and come up with their own conclusions. They are professional and well trained and are not about to just ape what others say. Unless of course the vice president threatens them with a friendly hunting expedition.

      • suyts says:

        WTF? Tony, you’re taking away the wrong message. Try serving and not getting your information 3rd hand. I’m a product of the military. I was raised on military bases, and I served myself. As have many generations of my family, including one that just got back from Afghanistan. The attributes I defined are necessary for a well functioning military and isn’t a criticism. Its about applying proper tools for proper tasks. If you want something blown up, shot, or destroyed, call the military, that’s what they’re good at. That is their function towards the greater purpose. To kill things. Studying climate change by the military is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

        As to your AAR. I’m going to share with you an event that haunts me to this day……..short version.

        During a field exercise, invited Canadians in a C-130 spilled onto our runway due to ice fog. We’d just practiced a mass cal. Most personnel were out in the field. The ones assigned to base hospital were some of the few exceptions. We got everything wrong, including the placement of the manpower pool room. Head injuries wandered off to die. People pinned by wreckage froze to death in front of us. We were ill equipped and ill prepared. Although I’m not sure one can prepare for those conditions, temps were -60 F as I recall. All officers involved, both commissioned and non-commissioned received various medals. All lower enlisted received certificates of achievement. Mine didn’t make the trip home.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        I have gotten plenty of info from the military 2nd hand. from my father and my brother in law, and quite a few others.
        I do not doubt your experience, and I certainly am well aware that the military has a long history of lying and covering up, and exaggerating when it comes to military actions. this is not what we are talking about.
        I once presented a paper that was critiqued by by an analyst from the War college, and his analysis was brilliant and really improved my presentation. I know someone who has taught at the war college who is also quite brilliant.
        What we are talking about is scientists and analysts in the Pentagon, and they are NOT obligated to present a pre conceived notion, just as the CIA is not supposed to unless threatened with previously mentioned hunting trip.
        There are actually people in the military who are interested in the truth and in doing what is right. That is why you have people like Teguba who was willing to investigate Abu Graib and say there were war crimes. The fact that the political culture would not follow through is not his fault. the military IS a bureaucracy, and is subject to systematic problems specific to its situation. Lying about climate change is not an intrinsic part of that by any means.
        The same is true of things like the Army Corp of Engineers. Some very intelligent talented people with often effective execution, but bureaucratic issues often lead to rather disastrous consequences. But that often leads people to ignore all the really good work they have done and continue to do.

      • suyts says:

        Again, you’re missing the point of my statements. Did I use the word “lying”? That wasn’t what I was trying to convey. It isn’t for the military to engage in policy discussions. It is for the military to enact policy.

        I probably should have left it for more gifted presenters. Here, be sure to read the whole text. I’ve read it 100 times and still get choked reading it. But here is the pertinent point, emphasis mine.

        “Let civilian voices argue the merits or demerits of our processes of government. Whether our strength is being sapped by deficit financing indulged in too long, by federal paternalism grown too mighty, by power groups grown too arrogant, by politics grown too corrupt, by crime grown too rampant, by morals grown too low, by taxes grown too high, by extremists grown too violent; whether our personal liberties are as firm and complete as they should be.

        These great national problems are not for your professional participation or military solution. Your guidepost stands out like a tenfold beacon in the night: Duty, Honor, Country.”

        http://www.keytlaw.com/Greatwords/macarthur.htm

      • suyts says:

        Words spoken in 1962.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        SUYTS,

        it is the role of the military to enact policy. it is also the role to advise regarding issues abut policy and their role to gather intelligence to convey top makers of policy. Scientists in the military have an obligation to provide accurate information if they are involved in issues related to climate change.

  5. Blade says:

    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 3:43 am] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 5:32 am] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:32 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:33 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:30 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:54 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:39 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:56 pm] says:

    You’re like a child. A clueless child easily distracted by tangential topics. The US military is not charged with WMD Easter Egg hunts, if it were, we would have license to invade Iran right this minute.

    Why don’t you just say that Saddam Hussein should have been left in power? Say it! And say the same thing about the Jew haters in Iran. Say it! Knowing everything you know about Saddam and all the lessons of the past century about invasions and genocides you still want this particular totalitarian left alone. God help the world if people are you are ever in a position of power again.

    Too many reasons to go over, but a couple of big ones should stand out: Saddam invaded and conquered Kuwait and had his way with their people and property. For years he massacred non-loyal Iraqis and at least a quarter million graves have been located (just what is the number of bodies that need to be found before Tony Duncan gets off his fat ass and takes notice). He flooded the gulf with oil and set it ablaze. He torched a sizeable portion of Kuwaiti oil fields taking months to put out. He got closer to to nukes than any middle eastern dictator (stopped by Israel) prior to the current Iranian regime. The enriched and partially enriched Uranium and raw yellowcake wasn’t removed until after the 2003 invasion (no doubt you think it was just peachy to be left there under his control). And then there is Oil for Food.

    Americans were to patrol no-fly zones in perpetuity (precedent is Korea I guess) so that the ignorant Tony Duncan can feel good about his illogical liberalism. The same logic that keeps a murderer alive in perpetuity in prison (if we’re lucky and a liberal governor does not grant clemency or a weekend furlough).

    Hey Tony, he shot at our planes thousands of times AFTER the Gulf War cease fire right up until January 2003. That is an act of war that no amount of liberal stupidity can erase. It is reason alone for resuming the war and his overthrow.

    But knowing all this, Hussein is so damn important to the ignorant Tony Duncan that he deserves to remain in a position of power, in the POST-9/11 era. You better come to grips that the world is not unicorns and rainbows and from time-to-time evil needs to be confronted. Stick that into your crack pipe and smoke it.

  6. Blade says:

    Uggghhhh, Italics messed up! (Steve, if possible delete previous post) Try again …

    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 3:43 am] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 5:32 am] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:32 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:33 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:30 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:54 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 6:39 pm] says:
    Tony Duncan [April 9, 2011 at 7:56 pm] says:

    You’re like a child. A clueless child easily distracted by tangential topics. The US military is not charged with WMD Easter Egg hunts, if it were, we would have license to invade Iran right this minute.

    Why don’t you just say that Saddam Hussein should have been left in power? Say it! And say the same thing about the Jew haters in Iran. Say it! Knowing everything you know about Saddam and all the lessons of the past century about invasions and genocides you still want this particular totalitarian left alone. God help the world if people are you are ever in a position of power again.

    Too many reasons to go over, but a couple of big ones should stand out: Saddam invaded and conquered Kuwait and had his way with their people and property. For years he massacred non-loyal Iraqis and at least a quarter million graves have been located (just what is the number of bodies that need to be found before Tony Duncan gets off his fat ass and takes notice). He flooded the gulf with oil and set it ablaze. He torched a sizeable portion of Kuwaiti oil fields taking months to put out. He got closer to to nukes than any middle eastern dictator (stopped by Israel) prior to the current Iranian regime. The enriched and partially enriched Uranium and raw yellowcake wasn’t removed until after the 2003 invasion (no doubt you think it was just peachy to be left there under his control). And then there is Oil for Food.

    Americans were to patrol no-fly zones in perpetuity (precedent is Korea I guess) so that the ignorant Tony Duncan can feel good about his illogical liberalism. The same logic that keeps a murderer alive in perpetuity in prison (if we’re lucky and a liberal governor does not grant clemency or a weekend furlough).

    Hey Tony, he shot at our planes thousands of times AFTER the Gulf War cease fire right up until January 2003. That is an act of war that no amount of liberal stupidity can erase. It is reason alone for resuming the war and his overthrow.

    But knowing all this, Hussein is so damn important to the ignorant Tony Duncan that he deserves to remain in a position of power, in the POST-9/11 era. You better come to grips that the world is not unicorns and rainbows and from time-to-time evil needs to be confronted. Stick that into your crack pipe and smoke it.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Blade,

      fascinating reading. Of course your projections about me have nothing to do with either my views or reality. I guess you haven’t read my previous comments where I have rather roundly castigated Reagan Rumsfeld and the perennially cowardly dems for ignoring Saddam’s use of poison gas against his own people killing thousands of them. I have in fact been a vocal critic of Saddam since the 80’s as I know the person largely responsible for forcing the US government to finally admit we shouldn’t be so buddy buddy with at least the mass murderers that gas their own people.

      hard as you might find it to believe I am also not a supporter of theocratic authoritarian regimes, like the one in Iran.
      So clearly you are supporting the hundreds of thousands kill din Iraq by US sanctions. SAY it Clinton was right to have killed all those people.

      Obviously the US should have invaded Rwanda, Congo, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Uzbekistan. China, Burma, etc. and not coddled mass murderers like in Indonesia, Guatemala, Chile, Argentina, El Salvador, Haiti,.

      good to see you are a man of high moral standards who believes the US can teach morality to the world by invading any country that engages in mass murder.

      Funny you sound more liberal than the most liberal person I have ever heard.

      Actually the thing I was talking about was NOT the invasion in 2003. it was the mass deception and fabrication of evidence that Saddam had WMD’s when there was in fact NO evidence of the sort. If Bush had been man enough to say, we need to get rid of this bastard, and listed the reasons you gave, I would at least have some respect for the man.

  7. Blade says:

    Tony Duncan …

    Nice try but I call shenanigans. You are like a child for fixating on the WMD non-issue even though you now say it would be just fine if they went in to Iraq without making the wider case at the UN. You’re full of it. If this were true you would be happy Hussein was removed and simply shut up about the WMD side issue, because after all, you now say that Saddam was a bad guy and should have been removed.

    You know full well that the enormous 14 month run-up to the Iraq invasion, with all the posturing at the UN and in the court of public opinion was FOR YOUR BENEFIT and the benefit of other wishy-washy fair-weather allies. It was dotting ‘i”s and crossing ‘t”s to get everyone onboard. It was the worthless state department at work again, and the thanks that Bush 43 gets is incessant non-stop hand-wringing from the bedwetters and professional malcontents, not to the mention malicious lies.

    Personally I never thought he should have gone the diplomatic route. Most of the people he tried to convince to get onboard were in bed with Saddam with Oil for Food anyway. But worse, it gave Hussein 14-months to prepare which is tactically stupid, and shows that even the pentagon learned nothing from the first Gulf War when Hussein had a full 6-months headstart to prepare the destruction of Kuwait while we moved assets into theater.

    But now we know what not to do. The irony here is that you and your ilk with the childish obsession over WMD and all your lies about Cheney and Haliburton illustrate that there is no reasoning with you. No amount of history will penetrate your skull, no amount of appeal to logic or common sense, no amount of reality including planes full of passengers smacking into the side of your building will wake you from your idealogical slumber. No, next time, thanks to your efforts, hopefully the CiC will say f*ck the UN we’re doing what is in our best interest. F’all’ya’ll. This would suit me and most others just fine. So congratulations. You and your endless conspiracy theories may have accomplished what many of us have dreamed of.

    Obviously the US should have invaded Rwanda, Congo, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Uzbekistan. China, Burma, etc. and not coddled mass murderers like in Indonesia, Guatemala, Chile, Argentina, El Salvador, Haiti,. … good to see you are a man of high moral standards who believes the US can teach morality to the world by invading any country that engages in mass murder. … Funny you sound more liberal than the most liberal person I have ever heard.

    Yeah I said no such thing. Going into one theater, I said ONE, is not *going* into all, classic childlike reasoning. Just because the cop stops the car with hippies throwing beer cans out the window isn’t the same as stopping all cars on the road. Truth is, if you cannot make the case for the war in Iraq then you cannot make the case for any war, anywhere. We had more reason to invade Iraq than Afghanistan. Iraq was virtually a protectorate after the Gulf War, we owned the situation. We were there. Being shot at. Watching Hussein’s retibution against friendlies from afar. Watching the growing Oil for Food fiasco. Watching the inspection cat and mouse game.

    And Tony, please knock it off with crap about the USA killing Iraqi babies with sanctions. Nothing is more disgusting, especially when that was exactly the propaganda Hussein designed especially for and fed to people like you. A thousand babies a month were dying because of the regime. You should be ashamed of yourself. The countries and peoples of Europe that took part in Oil for Food were more to blame, don’t try to push it on us. Oil for Food was the biggest scam of all time (at that point) and many people cited that as a singular reason to go in and remove Hussein, who never should have survived 1991. Blame Colin Powell and Bush 41 for leaving his ass alive, blame the UN for creating Oil for Food, blame all the players for cashing in, and blame Hussein for starving babies like dictators always do. But how dare you try to blame us!

    Has it even crossed your mind that the starvation should have been completely impossible with Iraq releasing oil under UN guidance for cash and food? Did you even consider the question: how can it happen? You blame us for dead babies, not Hussein? The next thing your going to tell me is that Global Warming killed millions of Ukrainians, not Stalin.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Blade,

      WOW, what a source of wonder you are. Not sure which piece to bite into first.

      But it HAS to be the Clinton killed babies meme. YOU sure shot yourself in the foot on that one with this crowd. You have no idea how many times I have had that you thrown at me here. That is part of the right wing propaganda, and you are heretically supporting a DEMOCRAT’s actions. Of course no one else will pounce on you for that one because it would be too embarrassing.
      But i am proud of you, you almost came out and said Clinton was right for killing all those people. Of course you blame the UN and that is a much more comfortable target
      But then you bizarrely start off you email saying I am obsessed with the WMD issue. How is it that so many of you cannot actually read what I write. I was very clear that the issue is totally that Bush Cheney et al lied and fabricated EVERYTHING about WMD’s. they used those lies as justification for invasion, when there was no evidence. they went way beyond what other administrations have done who lied or distorted. They set the standard.
      And of course you are correct. If they had made the ACTUAL case for invading Iraq, they would not have succeeded, because Iraq was no threat to anyone else. Sanctions had not weakened Saddam politically, and after Dessert Storm, and Bush 1 telling Iraqi’s to rise up, Saddam killed hundreds of thousands who DID try to overthrow him as the US lifted nary a finger. Glad we agree on that one.
      And I certainly AM happy Saddam was removed. But I am rather horrified at the incompetence and ideological zeal of the Bush invasion which led to the totally avoidable level of death and destruction. Knowing people intimately involved who were there at the beginning of reconstruction, the degree of idiocy in the policies implemented is quite mind boggling. the billions wasted the strategic decisions that resulted in almost universal hatred of the US (outside Kurdistan) resulted in an order of magnitude worse situation that has made Iraq closer to Iran than anyone in the US wants to admit. And then when things are Really screwed up the US PAYS the people we are fighting that ones that had killed American soldiers that we vowed we would never relent in attacking, and they become our Allies! How Bush was able to convince the US public that we had to pay our enemies after fighting them for years is one of the great cons of all time! Very impressive.
      I wish you would enlighten me about my conspiracy theories. What have I said that is factually incorrect or that is not fully documented by publicly available information. it is all quite clear int he public record, and the only contradictions are the rather bizarre books by Bush and Cheney that ignore documented well known facts.
      Oil for food was the biggest scam of all time. That is quite amusing. There certainly was a scam there, but its scale is more mole hill than mountain. I am quite sure there was a dazzling web of corruption there, but it is a rather complicated affair, and the amounts of money involved in bribes and kickbacks while being terrible does not come close to being the biggest in history. It is certainly big black eye for the UN and for the greedy bastards from companies and individuals that were more interested in making money than in the humanitarian reason for the program.

      As for the inspection, cat and mouse game. Well there was no cheese, so not so good for the propaganda machine.

      We had MORE reason to invade Iraq than Afghanistan? because we OWNED it? As I recall the organization responsible for the attacks on the US was in Afghanistan. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with any attack on the US and was totally incapable of attacking ANYONE.
      But of course you are right, giving Saddam those 14 months to prepare for our attack was a horrific mistake. If we had not given him that warning his troops would not have been able to withstand a US assault, and he would not have been able to repel our attack and remain in power all these years. OH, wait. His preparations led to the US completely overrunning the country in a couple of weeks.

      Dude you need to look at reality and not just info from Human Events.
      As for all those other countries I mentioned, So many more people were killed by their own leaders in some of those countries than by Hussein before Dessert Storm, and quite a few with the tacit approval of the US. That wonderful Christian Rios Mott killed likely hundreds of thousands in Guatemala with a third the population of Iraq, right on our doorstep. As have numerous central american dictators with not much more than a admonition not to be so obvious about it from the US. The Congo probably holds the record for the numbers killed, certainly in the millions, and hardly anyone is aware of it. What is your criterion for invading countries? You say one theater but you don’t give any parameters for why that one, other than we were already there.

      I certainly blame Hussein for the dead babies. He ran everything in that country. the fact that OFF was corrupt certainly was to a large degree because Saddam was corrupt. The UN was a tool, and he and greedy companies happily used the system, with the help of a corrupt administrators.

      And I could tell you quite a bit about who killed Ukranians. One of my areas of interest. You are the first I have heard think someone could link it to global warming. Now that would be a fanciful conspiracy theory. I am guessing time machines would be involved.

      I look forward to your response. This has become my favorite site again. What with Steve’s continued defense of his Hansen quotes and your insistence on totally misreading what I write, it will have to be entertaining.

  8. Blade says:

    First rule of internet etiquette, don’t drink and post. But I see it’s too late, you already done it. Ah well.

    “That is part of the right wing propaganda …”

    Just what the heck do you mean by right-wing? I suspect to your kind it means anything except left-wing, correct? I am well aware of the slanderous comparison to Nazi’s as opposed to Communists, a convenient distinction without a difference promoted by leftist academics. That Hitler/Stalin propaganda has run its course, there is very little difference. It is like separating Islamic jihadists into Shiite and Sunni, two sides of the same coin. But feel free to revel in your bigotry and prejudice. I’ve never been to or even heard of a Klan rally (for me it would require a head-to-foot sheet, gloves and sunglasses ;0)), I never owned a swastika, I do not read Mein Kampf (or Marx/Engels) and have pulled levers in the voting booth for persons without regard to (D)’s and (R)’s. My religion is Freedom, my bible is the Constitution. The mental gymnastics you people must go through to place someone like me into an idealogical box is marvelous. You deserve an Olympic gold medal for effort, but since you ultimately fail that would only be affirmative action. No gold medal for you, sorry.

    “But it HAS to be the Clinton killed babies meme. YOU sure shot yourself in the foot on that one with this crowd. You have no idea how many times I have had that you thrown at me here. That is part of the right wing propaganda, and you are heretically supporting a DEMOCRAT’s actions. Of course no one else will pounce on you for that one because it would be too embarrassing. … But i am proud of you, you almost came out and said Clinton was right for killing all those people. Of course you blame the UN and that is a much more comfortable target.”

    Where did I ever mention Clinton? Who cares about that fat pervert? Certainly not me. Clinton was way too busy sodomizing Monica Lewinsky to be bothered with Hussein’s infanticide. Clinton placed Iraq on the back burner (although he did make regime overthrow a stated policy goal, big whoop), which allowed Hussein to re-consolidate his power. Clinton had other foreign policy interests, and I’ll let the Serbs and Haitians decide if he was a force for good. Try to focus Tony. I am the last person who cares about (D) or (R). I don’t know where you are from but you do not understand that (D) or (R) are merely a political containers. Parties do not drive politics, people and politicians do. Now, earlier you said this:

    “So clearly you are supporting the hundreds of thousands kill din Iraq by US sanctions. SAY it Clinton was right to have killed all those people.”

    You brought him up. Clinton did not kill the babies, Hussein, by intention or incompetence did. Whether or not Clinton worsened things with sanctions is academic. It is academic because you miss the LARGER point: Sanctions are the compromise measure used in lieu of decisive action BECAUSE of people like you. You and the leftist anti-reality cult cause them to be implemented due to your endless experimentation with coddling dictators and looking the other way. Clinton, Albright and the god-forsaken State department listen to your yapping. By doing so they pursued sanctions, DOOMED TO FAIL, because of your whining and bedwetting. Do you understand? You are the reason decisive action was not going to happen. You don’t get to slither out of this now. By setting the bar so low promoting NO INTERVENTION, while the so-called ‘hawks’ promoted decisive action, the compromise of weak sanctions results. Congratulate yourself. Take a bow.

    “Iraq was no threat to anyone else.”

    Stop right there. Now give me a list of people who *are* a threat.

    “We had MORE reason to invade Iraq than Afghanistan? because we OWNED it? As I recall the organization responsible for the attacks on the US was in Afghanistan. Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with any attack on the US and was totally incapable of attacking ANYONE.”

    You recall wrongly. And once again you are freely mixing Afghanistan, a rural lawless province with Taliban supported Islamic Arab terrorists. Afghanistan (the country) did not attack us on 9/11. There were no Afghan hijackers on those planes. OBL, Zawahiri, KSM (etc) are not Afghans. How do you get such a fundamental fact incorrect, about something so momentous and barely a decade old? And you screwed up: (“because we OWNED it?”) when what I actually said was: “We had more reason to invade Iraq than Afghanistan. Iraq was virtually a protectorate after the Gulf War, we owned the situation. Hussein was left in power (thanks to bedwetters like you), he massacred the opposition, (…all the other things I listed). The Gulf war needed a conclusion, a conclusion without Saddam Hussein left in power. In this context Afghanistan (the country) RELATIVE to Iraq was LESS justifiable. Iraq was our situation, we were there. Get back to me when you support invasions in Iran, Syria and Lebanon because of the Bekaa Valley, for decades a similar terrorist training ground. That is a perfect comparison to Afghanistan, Lebanon the host, Syria the facilitator, Iran the sponsor. Truth is, people like you argue any reason convenient at a given moment to stop the USA from doing the right thing. You are a charter member of a suicide cult, good for you. What is *not* good for you is that people are finally waking up, all over the world, the era of leftist socialist progressive neo-communism will hopefully soon come to an end. This is in part due to your over-reach with AGW, as people know a scam when they see it.

    You are the first I have heard think someone could link it to global warming. Now that would be a fanciful conspiracy theory. I am guessing time machines would be involved.

    Your ability to read and understand is severely compromised by your idealogical zeal (or perhaps drinking). What I said was extremely simple, and somewhat facetious although in your case that is questionable, meaning it looks less facetious and more likely than not: “You blame us for dead babies, not Hussein? The next thing your going to tell me is that Global Warming killed millions of Ukrainians, not Stalin.” This simple point references your inversion of reality from your incredibly nasty insinuation that *we* were responsible for dead babies, which makes it likely that you will do the same with regards to Stalin famines, blaming something unrelated (Global Warming). In case you cannot understand me, I am the last person on planet Earth that would let Stalin or Lenin off the hook and use a scapegoat (like you did). My last paragraph in context was:

    “Has it even crossed your mind that the starvation should have been completely impossible with Iraq releasing oil under UN guidance for cash and food? Did you even consider the question: how can it happen? You blame us for dead babies, not Hussein? The next thing your going to tell me is that Global Warming killed millions of Ukrainians, not Stalin.“.

    You have readily proved to me that it could not be more accurate.

  9. Tony Duncan says:

    Blade,

    Well this IS as fun as I thought. I have to go to sleep now, but as I suspected you just ignored what I actually wrote, invented meaning to fit your twisted view of my position and then just wrote other meaningless stuff that in no way contained any factual contradiction to what I wrote. Goodnight.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s