Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat - Page 6 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Curly · #76 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Bush Disagrees That Iraq War Raises Threat of Terrorism, New York Times, September 26, 2006:

Quote:

President Bush on Tuesday said it is naive and a mistake to think that the war with Iraq has worsened terrorism, disputing a national intelligence assessment by his own administration. He said he was declassifying part of the report.

Quote:

Bush said he had directed National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to declassify those parts of the report that don't compromise national security.

Sounds good. Blank out any information on sources and methods, but include all other information, especially conclusions.

varrussword · #77 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Rightisright,

I can understand you exasperation in discussing anything with liberal whack jobs. Their arguments are based on propaganda rather than actual facts.

They perpetuate the lie that Iraq has nothing to do with islamic terror in the mid-east. Nevermind the reality that Saddams top lietenants met with leading members of the taliban, as stated in the 911 commission report. Nevermind that Iraq broke our ceasefire agreement. Nevermind that Saddam was in the process of obtaining the required materials to create a nuclear bomb; of which parts of it have been discovered in Iraq. Nevermind that Saddam attempted to have W1 assasinated. Nevermind the reality the Iraq is a huge success and that we've liberated millions of iraqis. To liberals conservative republicans are the enemy.

They choose to focus on soundbytes that portray the war in the worst possible light because that's the kind of people they are. They are so blinded by hatred of the right and specifically Bush that they're willing to risk the lifes of their american bretheren to perpetuate lies that are aimed at them regaining power.

Fortunately they are the uneducated ignorant minority. I have faith that americans know the difference and in fact act on that knowledge. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that they control no branches of the government.

Slon · #78 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curly

Bush Disagrees That Iraq War Raises Threat of Terrorism, New York Times, September 26, 2006:

Sounds good. Blank out any information on sources and methods, but include all other information, especially conclusions.

Of course he disagrees. If he agreed, he would have had to make up another bogus reason to justify Iraq. Like maybe "The War on Dictators" or "The Struggle Against Logic."

MattLarson · #79 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

A couple of posts have been removed. There is no need to call other posters names.

If you don't want to respond to another poster anymore, then don't. Forgo the announcement and carry on.

Matt

Curly · #80 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

OK - here it is - the parts of the NIE that have been declassified.

Declassified Key Judgments of the National Intelligence Estimate “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States” dated April 2006

kengle · #81 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Quote:

I can understand you exasperation in discussing anything with liberal whack jobs. Their arguments are based on propaganda rather than actual facts.

First of all, why does anybody that disagrees with our Iraq policy has to be a liberal whack job?

Quote:

Nevermind the reality that Saddams top lietenants met with leading members of the taliban, as stated in the 911 commission report.

Never mind that you are not quoting the rest of it and taking this out of context.

Quote:

Nevermind that Saddam was in the process of obtaining the required materials to create a nuclear bomb; of which parts of it have been discovered in Iraq.

Wrong! Read the Duelfer report. It has been quoted and linked to many times so it should be easy to find.

Quote:

Nevermind that Saddam attempted to have W1 assasinated.

Actually, that was never substantiated, but I'm willing to believe he would try.

Quote:

Nevermind the reality the Iraq is a huge success and that we've liberated millions of iraqis.

Oh yeah! HUGE success. Please quote anybody in the Bush administration saying that it is a huge success.

Quote:

To liberals conservative republicans are the enemy.

I don't consider myself a liberal, or a conservative. Yet I still think think Iraq is not going well.

Quote:

They choose to focus on soundbytes that portray the war in the worst possible light because that's the kind of people they are.

It's not sound bites, it's most of the news coming out that place.

Quote:

Fortunately they are the uneducated ignorant minority. I have faith that americans know the difference and in fact act on that knowledge. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that they control no branches of the government.

Yep! The majority of people apparently don't agree with you. Pick your poll to find out...

Apparently, only a precious few like you know the truth, that Iraq should be the next touristy destination.

hairballxavier · #82 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by IIIX

From the Church Of Satan, 5th of the 9 satanic statements. You're going even further than the satanists, as you want to take your vengeance before any harm is done to you. In this context, your suggestion to "fry them" is rather ironical.

Just warning you about your inconsistencies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by COS

3. Solipsism—Can be very dangerous for Satanists. Projecting your reactions, responses and sensibilities onto someone who is probably far less attuned than you are. It is the mistake of expecting people to give you the same consideration, courtesy and respect that you naturally give them. They won’t. Instead, Satanists must strive to apply the dictum of “Do unto others as they do unto you.” It’s work for most of us and requires constant vigilance lest you slip into a comfortable illusion of everyone being like you. As has been said, certain utopias would be ideal in a nation of philosophers, but unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, from a Machiavellian standpoint) we are far from that point.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html

Seems to me that according to your link, we should fry them just as they have vowed to do to us.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html

Slon · #83 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by varrussword

Rightisright,

I can understand you exasperation in discussing anything with liberal whack jobs. Their arguments are based on propaganda rather than actual facts.

He suggested nuking innocents and the people who disagree are the whackjobs, huh?

Quote:

They perpetuate the lie that Iraq has nothing to do with islamic terror in the mid-east.

Iraq does have to do with Islamic terror: it is now causing its increase all thanks to Goerge W Bush and his invasion.

Quote:

Nevermind the reality that Saddams top lietenants met with leading members of the taliban, as stated in the 911 commission report.

Even if it were true, I don't see what the big deal is if the US actually FUNDED those kinds of people (I'm being sarcastic it is a big deal, but still hypocritical).

Quote:

Support for anti-communist groups including armed insurgencies against communist governments was referred to by his supporters as the Reagan Doctrine. Following this policy, the U.S. funded groups the administration called "freedom fighters", such as the mujahideen in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, and, with the white supremicist government of South Africa, Jonas Savimbi's rebel forces in Angola —all of which were fighting Soviet or Cuban backed Marxist governments. The U.S. increased military funding for anti-communist action in Central America The U.S. also helped fund central European anti-communist groups such as the Polish Solidarity movement. Reagan took a hard line against the pro-Vietnamese communist regime in Cambodia by paradoxically working with communist-run China which was providing support to Khmer Rouge communist guerillas who were fighting the Vietnamese.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan

Oh and:

Quote:

The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq.

Quote:

In late 2001, Cheney said it was "pretty well confirmed" that Sept. 11 mastermind Mohamed Atta met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official before the attacks, in April 2000 in Prague; Cheney later said the meeting could not be proved or disproved.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Jun16.html

Quote:

Nevermind that Iraq broke our ceasefire agreement.

Quote:

But critics of the no-fly zones point out that the resolution did not say the Security Council was acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which provides for enforcement action.

Nor did it say that all necessary means could be used.

Critics add that whatever was justified in 1991 is not necessarily justified more than 10 years later, when the reasons for continuing the air patrols may have changed.

France no longer takes part in policing the no-fly zones, and the US and the UK are now alone in the Security Council in insisting that their frequent bombing of Iraqi targets is covered by international law.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1175950.stm

If you are talking about the attack on no-fly zones.

Quote:

Nevermind that Saddam was in the process of obtaining the required materials to create a nuclear bomb; of which parts of it have been discovered in Iraq.

Source for this?

Quote:

Nevermind that Saddam attempted to have W1 assasinated.

I don't even think he was president at the time. What is the big deal? As opposed to assassinating a leader who is in power, right?

Quote:

It has been estimated that there have been over 600 attempts on Castro's life committed by the CIA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_C...ation_Attempts

Quote:

Nevermind the reality the Iraq is a huge success and that we've liberated millions of iraqis.

Yeah, they are totally liberated. Now they can suffer a similar amount of deaths, more torture and more terrorism. Hurray!

Quote:

To liberals conservative republicans are the enemy.

They choose to focus on soundbytes that portray the war in the worst possible light because that's the kind of people they are.

There really isn't a way to look at the war in a favorable light unless you are insane, sarcastic or ignorant.

Quote:

They are so blinded by hatred of the right and specifically Bush that they're willing to risk the lifes of their american bretheren to perpetuate lies that are aimed at them regaining power.

You don't need to focus on the WMD lies/dishonesty from Bush. It's pretty clear unless you are totally devoted to the party.

Quote:

Fortunately they are the uneducated ignorant minority.

This coming from someone who believed the WMD bullshit.

Quote:

I have faith that americans know the difference and in fact act on that knowledge. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that they control no branches of the government.

I am hopeful that you will act on the obvious knowledge and stop supporting Bush.

Slon · #84 (**permalink**) 09-26-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html

Seems to me that according to your link, we should fry them just as they have vowed to do to us.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html

It says “Do unto others as they do unto you.”, not “Do unto others as they would do unto you.”

hairballxavier · #85 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slon

It says “Do unto others as they do unto you.”, not “Do unto others as they would do unto you.”

They try to kill us, therefore we should try to kill them.

Pretty simple eh.

They/you are losing.

Thems the breaks kid, you just took the wrong side.

Slon · #86 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by hairballxavier

They try to kill us, therefore we should try to kill them.

Pretty simple eh.

They/you are losing.

Thems the breaks kid, you just took the wrong side.

Why do you assume I am on "their" side?

Also, you said:

"we should fry them just as they have vowed to do to us."

Following the example, we should vow to fry them and that is all.

hairballxavier · #87 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slon

Why do you assume I am on "their" side?

Because you are the enemy.

jotathought · #88 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curly

Bush Disagrees That Iraq War Raises Threat of Terrorism, New York Times, September 26, 2006:

Sounds good. Blank out any information on sources and methods, but include all other information, especially conclusions.

Look what the conclusions list as the main factors that fuel the jihadism:

Quote:

Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq "jihad"; (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims - all of which jihadists exploit.

Guess what? A self-governed Iraq will allow the Iraqis to implement their own foreign policy goals and will provide the necessary means to rid the corruption and injustices that fuel the jihad. A self-governed Iraq will also provide the reforms and/or free market so that Iraqis will have the ability to purchase property, own the property and protect that property --- reducing and relieving the oppressive nature that radicalization thrives on. Engagement of military force in Iraq led to factor #2, but Factor #1 and #3 will be directly impacted by the democratization of Iraq because it will allow Iraqis to defend themselves and rebuild their infrastructure, while the cut-n-run approach won't even address those factors ...

..... and Democrats propose that leaving Iraq will make things better ...

mabus · #89 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jotathought

A self-governed Iraq will [...] provide the necessary means to rid the corruption and injustices that fuel the jihad.

I don't think so. For the jihadists, it will always remain a puppet of the west, for it was installed through a war of aggression by a western aggressor. Both the Iraqi and the Afghanian gouvernment also have absolutely failed to fight corruption and injustice, as well as have failed to improve the situation of the ordinary people. Yet, there is only one word for what the west has archieved in the middle east so far: failure.

Tim · #90 (**permalink**) 09-27-2006

Of course the Iraq war is used as a "recruiting poster" for terrorists by other terrorists - just as every aspect of American foreign policy (and western culture) is used for the same purpose. 9/11 took place BEFORE the invasion of Iraq.

The political tantrums and hysteria around this issue serves one purpose: attracting voters on election day. The smug and pompous posturing is sickening, but not surprising. In this case, it is the Dems - but the GOP is hardly immune.

I will add that I am disgusted by the New York Times' willingness to "leak" classified information to the public. Nothing matters more to the Times than the defeat of Republicans. Nothing.