Whatever You Say, Mr. President !
To all who say, "They're there, we just can't find them." Or, "We found them, but it's being kept a secret." Or, "He smuggled them out, he was just too clever for us to detect it." Or, "The media covered it up, we found WMDs and they didn't report it." And so on....
You either believe that:
A. The US Intelligence agencies are truly inept, or
B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
Somehow, the much simpler explanation that WMDs never existed at all and that Saddam Hussein made a great miscalculation when he thought he could simply deny their existence without allowing inspectors in, makes much more sense. B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
Again, I come back to history. Wars were won or lost due to mistakes and miscalculations. It is obvious to anyone who has studied warfare that this is a fundamental truth.
- Jack
Don't think so Moose - the mere act of acquiring them is going to paint a big red arrow, right to your home.
To all who say, "They're there, we just can't find them." Or, "We found them, but it's being kept a secret." Or, "He smuggled them out, he was just too clever for us to detect it." Or, "The media covered it up, we found WMDs and they didn't report it." And so on....
You either believe that:
Again, I come back to history. Wars were won or lost due to mistakes and miscalculations. It is obvious to anyone who has studied warfare that this is a fundamental truth.
- Jack
To all who say, "They're there, we just can't find them." Or, "We found them, but it's being kept a secret." Or, "He smuggled them out, he was just too clever for us to detect it." Or, "The media covered it up, we found WMDs and they didn't report it." And so on....
You either believe that:
A. The US Intelligence agencies are truly inept, or
B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
Somehow, the much simpler explanation that WMDs never existed at all and that Saddam Hussein made a great miscalculation when he thought he could simply deny their existence without allowing inspectors in, makes much more sense. B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
Again, I come back to history. Wars were won or lost due to mistakes and miscalculations. It is obvious to anyone who has studied warfare that this is a fundamental truth.
- Jack
We know they were there, that is a fact. The only people that said no WMD's was the liberal media and Bush. Bush said no to keep the troops safe from anyone finding out that they did find the WMD's so they would not be attacked for them. The books I suggested in my first post here explain all of this in a non biased way from 2 guys that had to work for Saddam or they would be killed trying to leave the country.
You can't honestly believe what you just said here.
- Jack
You either believe that:
A. The US Intelligence agencies are truly inept, or
B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
- Jack[/QUOTE]
Or all the above.
A. The US Intelligence agencies are truly inept, or
B. Bush didn't try very hard to find the justification for his war that would have made him the greatest President ever, or
C. A bunch of third-world terrorists are BETTER than the combined efforts of Western World allies, or
D. The Liberal Media controls the World and would like to see it destroyed.
- Jack[/QUOTE]
Or all the above.
__________________
Jim
Jim
Your assessment is that impeachment was the RIGHT thing to do. Does that make you a republican?
Back to the OP's topic: so do you think that the economy has bottomed out and that we are now in a recovery? Could it be more platitudes and propaganda form an administration that has used such tactics to it's fullest advantage? Are the American people gullible, or should we believe what our president and his administration are telling us?
Last edited by Frank S; Sep 21, 2009 at 11:48 PM.
Your assessment is that impeachment was the RIGHT thing to do. Does that make you a republican?
Back to the OP's topic: so do you think that the economy has bottomed out and that we are now in a recovery? Could it be more platitudes and propaganda form an administration that has used such tactics to it's fullest advantage? Are the American people gullible, or should we believe what our president and his administration are telling us?
Back to the OP's topic: so do you think that the economy has bottomed out and that we are now in a recovery? Could it be more platitudes and propaganda form an administration that has used such tactics to it's fullest advantage? Are the American people gullible, or should we believe what our president and his administration are telling us?
I DO think the economy has bottomed out. It may well drop again a bit though in the "W" pattern before it really recovers. I have no doubt that it WILL recover - the question is simply "when"?
- Jack
Aren't there currently congressional investigations into one of our top intelligence agencies to prove that they are in fact inept?
Wasn't the US intelligence used by several congresses, by more than one president, and by one president as a pretense to go to war gathered by the same agencies that Pelosi and congress are investigating to prove that they are inept?
So if there are in fact NO WMD, the US intelligence agencies must be inept.
Then, should we believe that the current administrations economic advisors, Sec. of the Treasury and Fed Reserve chair competent enough to properly evaluate our economy? Based on their calculations in thier nine months in office, they might be more inept than our intelligence agencies.
Wasn't the US intelligence used by several congresses, by more than one president, and by one president as a pretense to go to war gathered by the same agencies that Pelosi and congress are investigating to prove that they are inept?
So if there are in fact NO WMD, the US intelligence agencies must be inept.
Then, should we believe that the current administrations economic advisors, Sec. of the Treasury and Fed Reserve chair competent enough to properly evaluate our economy? Based on their calculations in thier nine months in office, they might be more inept than our intelligence agencies.
Still no WMDs....
- Jack
Directly from the article:
"While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called "dirty bomb" — a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material — it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment."
Also remember, Bushie was going to Iraq based on the information from George Tenet and his "slam-dunk" on Iraq. George Tenet was a clinton appointee.
Game, set, match.
"While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called "dirty bomb" — a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material — it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment."
Also remember, Bushie was going to Iraq based on the information from George Tenet and his "slam-dunk" on Iraq. George Tenet was a clinton appointee.
Game, set, match.
Last edited by Frank S; Sep 22, 2009 at 12:12 AM.
Aren't there currently congressional investigations into one of our top intelligence agencies to prove that they are in fact inept?
Wasn't the US intelligence used by several congresses, by more than one president, and by one president as a pretense to go to war gathered by the same agencies that Pelosi and congress are investigating to prove that they are inept?
So if there are in fact NO WMD, the US intelligence agencies must be inept.
Then, should we believe that the current administrations economic advisors, Sec. of the Treasury and Fed Reserve chair competent enough to properly evaluate our economy? Based on their calculations in thier nine months in office, they might be more inept than our intelligence agencies.
Wasn't the US intelligence used by several congresses, by more than one president, and by one president as a pretense to go to war gathered by the same agencies that Pelosi and congress are investigating to prove that they are inept?
So if there are in fact NO WMD, the US intelligence agencies must be inept.
Then, should we believe that the current administrations economic advisors, Sec. of the Treasury and Fed Reserve chair competent enough to properly evaluate our economy? Based on their calculations in thier nine months in office, they might be more inept than our intelligence agencies.
Now, the ultimate political bosses are in the Administration. They tell the intelligence agencies what they want to hear. Not surprisingly, they get exactly what they want to hear.
IF you have an Administration with an open mind, then the intelligence agencies and other advisory boards can do their jobs and they will do it well.
President Dwight Eisenhower was a master at listening to his advisers. He knew he didn't have all the answers, so he got good advice. Abe Lincoln, from all accounts, was of similar stature, but that's too far back, isn't it?
- Jack
Not really. Having been in the "intelligence reporting business" for a bit, I have some idea how it works. The people you report to have jobs to protect. They have to satisfy the needs of their bosses, which are built upon political goals. You are told to report things that support those goals, and to suppress anything that is contrary to those goals.
Now, the ultimate political bosses are in the Administration. They tell the intelligence agencies what they want to hear. Not surprisingly, they get exactly what they want to hear.
IF you have an Administration with an open mind, then the intelligence agencies and other advisory boards can do their jobs and they will do it well.
President Dwight Eisenhower was a master at listening to his advisers. He knew he didn't have all the answers, so he got good advice. Abe Lincoln, from all accounts, was of similar stature, but that's too far back, isn't it?
- Jack
Now, the ultimate political bosses are in the Administration. They tell the intelligence agencies what they want to hear. Not surprisingly, they get exactly what they want to hear.
IF you have an Administration with an open mind, then the intelligence agencies and other advisory boards can do their jobs and they will do it well.
President Dwight Eisenhower was a master at listening to his advisers. He knew he didn't have all the answers, so he got good advice. Abe Lincoln, from all accounts, was of similar stature, but that's too far back, isn't it?
- Jack
This is covered in-depth in, "Sabotage: Americas' Enemies Within The CIA", "Surrender Is Not An Option", "At The Center Of The Storm", and also, "The Politics of Diplomacy."
Remember, an administrations' policy is colored by his advisors AND the reports they get from the CIA and State.
Directly from the article:
"While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called "dirty bomb" — a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material — it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment."
Also remember, Bushie was going to Iraq based on the information from George Tenet and his "slam-dunk" on Iraq. George Tenet was a clinton appointee.
Game, set, match.
"While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called "dirty bomb" — a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material — it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment."
Also remember, Bushie was going to Iraq based on the information from George Tenet and his "slam-dunk" on Iraq. George Tenet was a clinton appointee.
Game, set, match.
I can see people diving under tables right now! Yellowcake cannot be made into a "dirty bomb" - read the quote! And, Frank, I acknowledged that it COULD be refined into usable uranium, didn't I? Did we find any capability in Iraq to perform this task?
Tenet told Bush what Bush wanted to hear. Bush needed an excuse. Rational minds, like Colin Powell, were telling him to proceed carefully, but he didn't listen and managed to get the CIA to construct a pretense that justified an invasion.
You're not even in the game.
- Jack





