22-04-2004 19:29									#61
	Suffering from ads?

No, not world conquest.

	22-04-2004 19:31									#62
	Inflate your Upload Space

The fact remains that the Bush Administration obsessed about Iraq and that this was a huge distraction from the war on terror. Going after Saddam Hussein had little or nothing to do with 9/11.

	22-04-2004 19:32									#63
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MrFun No, not world conquest.

Conquest of what then? Saddam's army was too weak to control of all of Iraq after Persian Gulf I, let alone go attack anyone else.

	22-04-2004 19:44									#64
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

The question rah is whether the amdinistration misled the public about its preparations for warmaybe there are people like you who think this was just "finishing the job", but unless you can show that group made up the mayority of war supporters, he charge that Bush gave misleading reasons for the war stands as valid.

	22-04-2004 19:50									#65
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by GePap The question rah is whether the amdinistration misled the public about its preparations for warmaybe there are people like you who think this was just "finishing the job", but unless you can show that group made up the mayority of war supporters, he charge that Bush gave misleading reasons for the war stands as valid.

The lack of across the board uproar, (despite the continued fanning of the flames by the anti-bushies) leads me to believe that there a heck of alot more people that feel that way they you're willing to admit to. And yes, there is no way to prove that, but it fits the my model so I'm comfortable with it.

	22-04-2004 19:52									#66
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I would posit a mayority of Americans, for reaosn beyond me, want to give the amdin. a pass cause they do not like the other possibility-0that they were dupped. Also, they buy the whole "Iraq as part of the war on terror" bit-possibly becuase Iraq is full of Arabs and Muslims, so it must be part of the war on Terror.

	22-04-2004 20:20									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Too often people assume that a brutal dictator is incapable of rational action or thought, despite decades of evidence to the contrary. Hussein may have been murderous. He may have been brutal. He was not, however, so out of touch with reality that he thought he could win a war with the United States.

He sure did the first time around.

quote: The difference is, we don't have to.

Sucks to be him.

	22-04-2004 20:23									#68
	Increase the size of your Attachments

WRT being duped why then would the admin authorize and encourage transparency by allowing, no supporting, Woodwards efforts to uncover the story.

I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

	22-04-2004 20:25									#69
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

Ooooh! Don't remind the liberals of that! It destroys way to much of their argument to make this fun!

	22-04-2004 20:28									#70
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

RIGHHHHT Cause most American knew that-OOPS, NO.

The President barely ever mentioned Hamas or Palestinian sucide bombers-it was all about Saddam giving WMD's to AQ.

The record of speeches by the admin. has far far more referenmces to Ansar Al-Islam than Hamas, cause that angle did not pan out. The depressingly high numbers of people polled who think Iraq was involved in 9/11, (probably the same folks who think WMD's were found) do not support this claim.

	22-04-2004 20:37									#71
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Boshko Conquest of what then? Saddam's army was too weak to control of all of Iraq after Persian Gulf I, let alone go attack anyone else.

Given the mood among many members of the UNSC to lift sanctions, it's fairly likely that Saddam was hoping for the opportunity to do a little shopping and restocking. He'd never be much of a threat, but simply being an ongoing pain in the ass while sitting on top of half the world's oil is good enough for me.

	22-04-2004 20:39									#72
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe WRT being duped why then would the admin authorize and encourage transparency by allowing, no supporting, Woodwards efforts to uncover the story. I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

Consider what happened the last time an administration didn't cooperate with Woodward.

	22-04-2004 20:39									#73
	Inflate your Upload Space

Hey you lib guys are the ones that say he had no terrorist ties.

Powell could not use that piece to support his case in the UN precisely because of the anti-Israel slant the UN is notorious for.

As for Joe Q. Public not knowing this little tidbit, I think you far underestimate.

As for speaches made, 'member these were speaches not only to American public but as a forum to entice world support. No world support could ever be expected were Hamas to be invoked.

	22-04-2004 20:40									#74
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Consider what happened the last time an administration didn't cooperate with Woodward.

Agreed which is why they decided to be transparent.

	22-04-2004 20:50									#75
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe As for Joe Q. Public not knowing this little tidbit, I think you far underestimate.

I have to agree. I've even seen the drunks in the bars toss this tidbit out during arguements.

	22-04-2004 21:04									#76
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Much like you guys, people toss that out to give veneer to the claim of terrorist links.

At most, you can claim Saddam's actions made it economically appealing for people to chose to blow themselves up. Sicne you can not show any Iraqi money going towards planning, perations, buying materials, so forth, this is sort of a very tepid link not worth an invasion period.

Agasin, why the admin. kept talking about Ansar and AQ most of the time.

As for the claim the US would not mention hamas cause of an anti-Israel bent in the UN or the world-BULL. Everyone knows what the US position towards Israel, so failing to mention Hamas would not fool one person.

	22-04-2004 21:07									#77
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by GePap As for the claim the US would not mention hamas cause of an anti-Israel bent in the UN or the world-BULL. Everyone knows what the US position towards Israel, so failing to mention Hamas would not fool one person.

Yes and apparently that is one of the reasons why unilaterilism did not form. To blatantly throw it out there was courting failure. While attempting to choose other means of substantiating the case was a hope at success that ultimately ended in failure.

	22-04-2004 21:09									#78
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap At most, you can claim Saddam's actions made it economically appealing for people to chose to blow themselves up. Sicne you can not show any Iraqi money going towards planning, perations, buying materials, so forth, this is sort of a very tepid link not worth an invasion period.

Perhaps not, but it is yet another material breach in teh UN resolution. And IIRC the stated reason was failure to abide by UN resolutions and constant material breach thereof.

	22-04-2004 21:11									#79
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by GePap At most, you can claim Saddam's actions made it economically appealing for people to chose to blow themselves up. Sicne you can not show any Iraqi money going towards planning, perations, buying materials, so forth, this is sort of a very tepid link not worth an invasion period.

I agree that this alone does not justify an invasion, but it is quite good enough to say that he has supported terrorism. It's just not veneer. If he did this in public view, what might he have been doing out of the public view? As proven many times, our intel has been spotty at best.

	22-04-2004 21:11									#80
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Saddam probably procured boys for Michael Jackson, too.

Joe Public as a rule doesn't like "ragheads" since the oil thing in '73. Joe Public particularly doesn't care much for uppity ragheads like Saddam, and Joe Public could be sold easily on any accusation against Saddam, whether he happens to be guilty of it or not. The simple fact is that our alliance with Israel and being on the opposite side of the oil barrel has generally had the US in a rather less than lovey dovey relationship with the arab world. Throw in a little cold war fun, issues with Iran (and again, Joe Public doesn't really care that they're not arabs, they're bearded guys with turbans who don't like us and talk funny.), and you have an American public who doesn't like the mideast and much of anyone in it.

The whole Hamas and money for the families thing is a hell of a lot less support than members of the Saudi royal family have given directly to Al Qaeda, but we look the other way, whistle dixie, and our politicians suck a little Saudi dick rather than rock that boat.

Joe Public was perfectly happy to be sold any line about Saddam and why we ought to get rid of him.

	22-04-2004 21:16									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Remember the mistake that happened when Chamberlain thought Hitler would comply with world peace??

So you think the comparison of a embargoed, Third World, non-industrialized, 4th rate military dicatorship to the most modern industrial, economic, and military power of its day is valid? The difference you so conveniently ignore is that the world was doing something to stop Hussein, or was it merely my imagination that Hussein had been driven back from Kuwait, had his military crushed, had his major weapons systems disarmed, and didn't even have sovreign control over his whole territory?

	22-04-2004 21:17									#82
	Tired of ads?

MTG agreed. Any statement to the detriment of Saddam no doubt resonated well with Joe Public. Hence my claim that Joe Public remembered this tidbit quite well.

As for the issues you raise regarding the Saud family, et. al. your synopsis is fairly accurate.

	22-04-2004 21:19									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat He sure did the first time around.

I don't think he thought he could win. I think he thought maybe he could stave off defeat until we got tired of fighting. These days, that's all anyone can really hope for, isn't it.

	22-04-2004 21:24									#84
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara So you think the comparison of a embargoed, Third World, non-industrialized, 4th rate military dicatorship to the most modern industrial, economic, and military power of its day is valid?

Hitler's Germany ca 1938 was an economic bubble and far from the "most modern" industrial or military power of it's day. From the repudiation of the treaty of Versailles in 1934 to "Peace in our time" in 1938, Hitler could have been squashed like a bug, but with a lot of resulting instability. Stalin had his own agenda, and the west wanted the whole thing to go away.

Saddam may have been a dumbass with relatively palrty amount of power, but he was a dumbass with a relatively paltry amount of power on top of half the world's oil supply, so his potential to panic yuppie oil futures traders on the Merc was pretty strong. If Saddam was being Saddam in Burkina Faso, who would honestly give a ****? But he was being Saddam right on top of the biggest oil producing region in the world.

	22-04-2004 21:28									#85
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara I don't think he thought he could win. I think he thought maybe he could stave off defeat until we got tired of fighting. These days, that's all anyone can really hope for, isn't it.

Saddam and his senior military staff held us and our forces in a lot of contempt. He had a very poor appreciation of modern doctrine, the capabilities of our equipment vis-a-vis his Soviet export ****, and he expected us to fight like the Iranians with similar effect - except that we were gutless to take those kinds of casualties.

They were completely stunned and shocked at how much damage we did and how fast we could deal it, and at the complete ineffectiveness of their static barrier defenses.

	22-04-2004 21:28									#86
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Oil the world has more or less managed to do without for the last decade plus. He wasn't that important or dangerous. He was a convenient excuse to display our military might.

	22-04-2004 21:32									#87
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

You sound like the people that take the Turner Diaries as gospel che with these paranoid fantasies of yours.

	22-04-2004 21:34									#88
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Oil the world has more or less managed to do without for the last decade plus. He wasn't that important or dangerous. He was a convenient excuse to display our military might.

It's not just the oil he sits on. The Kuwaitis and Saudis were able to pick up that slack in terms of daily production. The point is that as long as Saddam remained in power, and especially if he was allowed to rebuild his military with sanctions lifted, he had a potential destabilizing influence that couldn't be discounted, because the potential was there (with the past history) for him to **** things up.

Besides, if we had to thump someone, don't you agree that all things considered, he was a fairly good target?

	22-04-2004 21:36									#89
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by rah I agree that this alone does not justify an invasion, but it is quite good enough to say that he has supported terrorism. It's just not veneer. If he did this in public view, what might he have been doing out of the public view? As proven many times, our intel has been spotty at best.

At this level, throughout the 1980's the US was a supporter of terrorism, and a lot of people in this admin. were participants (like Negroponte).

	22-04-2004 22:31									#90
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

And there are a lot of people that have accused the US of supporting terrorism because of that past. That doesn't change anything in terms of Saddam.