ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > General Forums > Political Discussions
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-02-2004, 16:06 PM   #46 (permalink)
Trooth
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 11-23-03
Posts: 2,110
Country:
The nuclear threat was the most absurd of the claims made by the allies. It basically said that if you gave Iraq the right amount of time, money, resources and expertise they could produce a nuclear weapon.

So could anyone on this board.

Also, Bush might not have said a threat to continental US. But Colin Powell did. And he didn't do that without the say so of his boss.

Also, Saddam and AQ link's are about the same as US AQ links. AQ had tried to kill Saddam on a few occaisions after all.
Trooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 17:34 PM   #47 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
Also, Saddam and AQ link's are about the same as US AQ links. AQ had tried to kill Saddam on a few occaisions after all.
You are wrong. Read the article.
__________________
"Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today's world do not have."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"

NEVER FORGET
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:15 PM   #48 (permalink)
Trooth
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 11-23-03
Posts: 2,110
Country:
I have.

AQ offered to place its mujhadeen into Saudi Arabia to defend SA and perhaps launch an attack against Iraq. It was the rejection of this offer and the turning to the US that, apparently, convinced Bin Laden of his cause.
Trooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:19 PM   #49 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
I have.

AQ offered to place its mujhadeen into Saudi Arabia to defend SA and perhaps launch an attack against Iraq. It was the rejection of this offer and the turning to the US that, apparently, convinced Bin Laden of his cause.
Quote:
Saddam and AQ link's are about the same as US AQ links.
If this is true then you must know the name of the AQ agent that is being protected in the US.
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:20 PM   #50 (permalink)
maersk
New Member
 
maersk's Avatar
 
Join Date: 05-27-04
Posts: 24
and

we like to critisicse france for their business dealings with saddam, when in the 80's the reagan administration was involved neck deep in business / military deals with saddam, so the kurds get gassed at halabja in '88, why no military intervention then??? shiites revolt in 91, just after the gulf war, yet we leave em high & dry. why all of a sudden when dubya gets elected is there this full scale move twards war??? bush used 9/11 as a convinient excuse to get back at the guy who tried to kill his daddy.





for all his ineptness, clinton would have known better



yea, call me a pinko, whatever.
maersk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:23 PM   #51 (permalink)
Trooth
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 11-23-03
Posts: 2,110
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leader
If this is true then you must know the name of the AQ agent that is being protected in the US.
Well, there is in all likelyhood secret service people in the US tha thave had direct links with AQ (when AQ/Taliban were fighting the Ruskies). It wasn't that long ago after all. Would it be unreasonable to assume that some of the CIA's contacts of the time might have visited the US in the height of the cold war? If so, might some of them still be there?
Trooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:29 PM   #52 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
we like to critisicse france for their business dealings with saddam, when in the 80's the reagan administration was involved neck deep in business / military deals with saddam, so the kurds get gassed at halabja in '88, why no military intervention then???
No political will.

Quote:
shiites revolt in 91, just after the gulf war, yet we leave em high & dry.
Which was wrong.

Quote:
why all of a sudden when dubya gets elected is there this full scale move twards war???
September 11th changed things. You do not understand, obviously.

Quote:
bush used 9/11 as a convinient excuse to get back at the guy who tried to kill his daddy.
Stop this bs. I support the war in Iraq, and Saddam did not try to kill anyone in my family.

Quote:
for all his ineptness, clinton would have known better
Clinton should have taken out Saddam in 98'.

Quote:
yea, call me a pinko, whatever.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you imaged that I said that.
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:30 PM   #53 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
Well, there is in all likelyhood secret service people in the US tha thave had direct links with AQ (when AQ/Taliban were fighting the Ruskies). It wasn't that long ago after all. Would it be unreasonable to assume that some of the CIA's contacts of the time might have visited the US in the height of the cold war? If so, might some of them still be there?
proof?
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:36 PM   #54 (permalink)
Trooth
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 11-23-03
Posts: 2,110
Country:
I will only be able to put the same proof together as the article you posted. Drawing together quotes and instances that cannot be directly tied together.

I accept an AQ member might never have visited the US. But we know they did meet CIA types. Or at least their bank accounts met.
Trooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 18:37 PM   #55 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
I accept an AQ member might never have visited the US. But we know they did meet CIA types. Or at least their bank accounts met.
So the US is funding AQ? Ok were is the proof?
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 19:36 PM   #56 (permalink)
Trooth
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 11-23-03
Posts: 2,110
Country:
I didn't say is, i said was. I would be extremely surprised if they had any links now, they probably ended when AQ first turned on the US.

In terms of proof, all i could possibly do i post articles from the web, such as :-
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2001/465/465p15.htm
Trooth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 21:40 PM   #57 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally Posted by jth298
So you are saying that Bush was of the opinion that Iraq's military constituted no threat to North America. Of course, this view was not shared by Donald Rumsfeld as this CBS video shows.

Tony Blair sold the war to the UK people as a matter of national security - referencing frequently the claim that Iraq could strike at us using weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes. Only after the war, his defence minister Geoff Hoon, sheepishly stated that this claim only related to 'battlefield weapons' and that he'd forgotten to let everyone know that...

Of course none of this had anything to do with the threat from terrorist attack. This was something entirely seperate to Iraq. However, a threat remains from Al Queida as the madrid bombings showed. The threat of planes being flown into buildings and trains being blown up is one to address seriously - because it is real.
So then you're agreeing with me... good. BTW, the video doesn't work here and anything that comes from "moveon.org" is garbage. If you are not in agreement then find something substantial and text that supports your statement about Bush.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jth298
Believe it or not I firmly believe that since the UK chose to go in with the Americans that we should stick it out with them till the end. The UK and US are allies and its right that we honor that as the US has honoured th UK in past conflict.
I never said different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
it wasent iraqis who flew the planes into the WTC, in fact i dont think a single one of the terrorists where iraqi.
How many were there because the US and UK were in Saudi maintaining UN sanctions, as Osama cited?
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
what nuclear material there might have been in iraq (and its highly doubtful that they even had any such material since the isrealies destroyed their reactor in '84) was almost certainly destroyed immidiately after the first gulf war, and if any remained, i doubt it would have been enough to construct any kind of viable weapon.


same goes for the chemical / bioweapons saddam supposedly still had at the time of the us invasion. sure, the troops might find a few shells with traces of degraded anthrax in them, but i doubt that any huge stockpile (like the bush administration was so loudly touting) will be found.
Even France and Russia thought they had huge stockpiles of the stuff, and they were in bed with Saddam. Either that, or they set us up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
Also, Bush might not have said a threat to continental US. But Colin Powell did. And he didn't do that without the say so of his boss.
Transcript showing Colin Powell saying the Iraqi military was a threat to the continental United States?
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
we like to critisicse france for their business dealings with saddam, when in the 80's the reagan administration was involved neck deep in business / military deals with saddam, so the kurds get gassed at halabja in '88, why no military intervention then??? shiites revolt in 91, just after the gulf war, yet we leave em high & dry.
Was Saddam under UN sanction when the US had dealings with them? As to all of this, I consider it all bad. Never ever make deals with bad guys. I would have supported removal of any/all of these nasty freaks at any point, you wouldn't have, you don't now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
why all of a sudden when dubya gets elected is there this full scale move twards war??? bush used 9/11 as a convinient excuse to get back at the guy who tried to kill his daddy.
Wow, that is a stupid statement. I can allmost hear you stamping your lil' feet as you type it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maersk
yea, call me a pinko, whatever.
I don't think you're a pinko, I just think you are more about conspiracy than real life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
greenleft.org
I don't believe a word of it and I haven't even read it yet. Hope it's not confirming anything I believe, or I'll be forced to rethink.

Oh, that was decades ago. I'm sure we can find every NATO countries fingerprints on nearly everything that happened durring the cold war, that screwed the USSR. That "enemy of my enemy is my friend" stuff is bunk.
__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

Last edited by Confed999 : 06-02-2004 at 21:42 PM.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 21:52 PM   #58 (permalink)
Anon
New Member
 
Join Date: 08-03-03
Posts: 0
Trooth, Al Q was formed after US assistance to the Afghans ended. The US never in any way, shape or form supported Al Q financially or otherwise.

Your insinuating otherwise is an affront of the worst kind to America, and all Americans in general.

If you spout poisonous lies of this magnitude again i will ban you personally, or resign my post as moderator and desist in posting here if i'm prevented from doing so.

I WILL NOT TOLERATE ABSOLUTELY UNSUBSTANTIATED LIES ALLEGING US GOV'T TREASON AGAINST HER PEOPLE TO BE PROPOGATED AT ANY SITE I AM A PARTY TO, PERIOD.

If you plan to make claims of that magnitude you better be prepared to back them up with at least a half dozen reports from numerous well acknowledged sources when you do so.

Last edited by Anon : 06-02-2004 at 21:54 PM.
Anon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 22:46 PM   #59 (permalink)
Leader
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 09-04-03
Location: Boston, MA, USPRA
Posts: 5,124
Send a message via AIM to Leader Send a message via MSN to Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trooth
I didn't say is, i said was. I would be extremely surprised if they had any links now, they probably ended when AQ first turned on the US.

In terms of proof, all i could possibly do i post articles from the web, such as :-
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2001/465/465p15.htm
From my understanding of the Afghan conflict the US never funded OLB. There were two groups fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. Local Afghans, which were supported by the US and the foreign fighters supported by the Saudis. OBL is obviously one of the latter.
Leader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 22:51 PM   #60 (permalink)
themuffinman
Regular
 
themuffinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-30-04
Location: california
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by M21Sniper
Trooth, Al Q was formed after US assistance to the Afghans ended. The US never in any way, shape or form supported Al Q financially or otherwise.

Your insinuating otherwise is an affront of the worst kind to America, and all Americans in general.

If you spout poisonous lies of this magnitude again i will ban you personally, or resign my post as moderator and desist in posting here if i'm prevented from doing so.

I WILL NOT TOLERATE ABSOLUTELY UNSUBSTANTIATED LIES ALLEGING US GOV'T TREASON AGAINST HER PEOPLE TO BE PROPOGATED AT ANY SITE I AM A PARTY TO, PERIOD.

If you plan to make claims of that magnitude you better be prepared to back them up with at least a half dozen reports from numerous well acknowledged sources when you do so.
thank you
__________________
Pain is just weakness leaving the body. USMC
Semper Fi
themuffinman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Analysis: Chechnya Ironduke The Western Alliance 4 07-28-2008 19:30 PM
Interview with PLAAF LGen Liu Yazhou Officer of Engineers The Field Mess 34 05-10-2007 15:44 PM
Invasion of East Timor (1975) troung Warfare in the Modern Age 3 06-03-2005 15:43 PM
UN coverup of Oil for Food scandal Anon Political Discussions 0 06-01-2004 10:34 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:05 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8