18-06-2004 22:03									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The US also has plans to attack all different countries in the world. By your logic, the rest of the world should join forces and attack the US pre-emptively.

	18-06-2004 22:05									#32
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Even if the intelligence is true, that Saddam had plans to attack the US. So what?

Al Queda had plans to attack. so what?

	18-06-2004 22:14									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark The efforts to deny the significance of this are quite valiant.

Basically, whether Bush lied or not is a non-issue, that is highly symbolical. The US went to Iraq. The war was a stunning success, but the ocupation goes badly.

Whether the war was justified or not is now something to gloat about, and certainly not something that will change the actual situation.

The main difference it could make, is that the Bush propaganda machine uses it efficiently to help Bush getting reelected. That's about it.

	18-06-2004 22:15									#34
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger The US also has plans to attack all different countries in the world. By your logic, the rest of the world should join forces and attack the US pre-emptively.

And I am sure you would love to lead the charge Anyway, how would you fight terrorism, turn over all Jews to them?

	18-06-2004 22:21									#35
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger The US also has plans to attack all different countries in the world. By your logic, the rest of the world should join forces and attack the US pre-emptively.

Saddam to Iraq Minister of Defense: so are the plans to attack US cities complete?

IMOD: Not yet sir, we're working on them.

S: You are aware, chabibi, that every professional defense ministry maintains on the shelf plans for attacking any country that could be its adversary. We must have similar plans.

IMOD: well, sir of course we do have plans on the shelf for Iran, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - including US forces IN Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

S:No, we must also have plans to attack the US homeland

IMOD:well, no sir, not to challenge your infinite wisdom, but thats a hard nut to crack. After all, we dont have much of a navy, our no intercontinental range bombers or missiles -- I mean no country with our resources, at our distance from North America keeps plans for attacking the continental US.

S: You misunderstand my meaning - our intell services could launch a terrorist attack, either alone or in conjunction with a terrorist group

	18-06-2004 22:27									#36
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor Basically, whether Bush lied or not is a non-issue, that is highly symbolical. The US went to Iraq. The war was a stunning success, but the ocupation goes badly. Whether the war was justified or not is now something to gloat about, and certainly not something that will change the actual situation. The main difference it could make, is that the Bush propaganda machine uses it efficiently to help Bush getting reelected. That's about it.

IF the US public see this a necessary war of self defense, they can maintain "will" through a bad occupation, indefinitely. Which in turn effects the view on the ground, both among our enemies and our friends.

Similarly this may help Tony Blair politically. And even John Howard.

It impacts the view of the US around the world. IF it proves true, that is, which I admit awaits further info. If it proves true, it shows that the US intervention in Iraq is NOT evidence of a US imperial drive for power, for oil, to help Israel, etc. It shows it to be an act of self defense. This impacts the hearts and minds battle around the world.

	18-06-2004 22:28									#37
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln And I am sure you would love to lead the charge Anyway, how would you fight terrorism, turn over all Jews to them?

Dont go there. lets keep this on topic, if possible.

	18-06-2004 22:36									#38
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor The main difference it could make, is that the Bush propaganda machine uses it efficiently to help Bush getting reelected. That's about it.

actually this is GOOD timing for Kerry. Its not to late for him to select an Iraq hawk as VP. Id suggest Ex-senator Bob Kerrey from Nebraska, for a Kerry-Kerrey ticket. Di*k Gephardt is also a possible choice.

	18-06-2004 22:52									#39
	Got spare money?

yes, let's trust mr. putin, former KGB spook... I mean, if you can't trust former KGB agents, who can you trust?

	18-06-2004 22:57									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Look lets assume, for the sake of argument, that Russian intell DID have reports Iraq was planning a terrorist act against the US. Suppose Putin had sat on it. Suppose then that Iraq intell had pulled it off. And then assume that its somehow came out that Russia knew, and didnt tell us. What would THAT do to US-Russian relations????

Maybe Russia had motive to pass bad info. Arguable. But if they had good info, their motive to pass it on is very clear.


Of course if your Bayesian prior is that theres no way Saddam could have had such plans, cause, well, Saddam just didnt do crazy stuff like that, then it makes sense to focus on the Russian motives to pass bad info.

	18-06-2004 23:06									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat As expected, the liberals will ignore this info since it supports Bush's claim that Iraq was a threat.

Talk about expected.

	18-06-2004 23:11									#42
	Remove this text

hat tip to the Corner

"The Left: The war on Iraq is a disaster! The world hates us! You did it unilaterally! You should have gotten Russia on board. You should have gotten Putin to support a U.N. resolution. The support of Russia would show this isn't just America being imperialist, but the whole unified world coming together to face Saddam.

The Right: Well, Putin says Saddam was going to attack us with terrorists.

The Left: Well, who the hell trusts Putin and the Russians? "

	18-06-2004 23:16									#43
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Sava yes, let's trust mr. putin, former KGB spook... I mean, if you can't trust former KGB agents, who can you trust?

Well, you guys don't trust the CIA. Maybe the KGB can do a better job?

	18-06-2004 23:50									#44
	Inflate your Upload Space

You know, its very interesting- I remember Russian intelliegence during the war and what regard it was held in by the pro-war folks. Now, all of a sudden, BAM! Hail the ruskies.

I failt o see how this is more significant that the now dicredited report by the Czechs about Atta that Cheney keeps blathering about but everyone else now ignores.

Now, notice in all the pro-war responses how Putin saying they are still against the war is conviniently ignored. What explains Putin's dichodomy? If they know iraq was planning something, why would they not back the US?


Silly little story.

	19-06-2004 00:08									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by GePap You know, its very interesting- I remember Russian intelliegence during the war and what regard it was held in by the pro-war folks. Now, all of a sudden, BAM! Hail the ruskies. I failt o see how this is more significant that the now dicredited report by the Czechs about Atta that Cheney keeps blathering about but everyone else now ignores. Now, notice in all the pro-war responses how Putin saying they are still against the war is conviniently ignored. What explains Putin's dichodomy? If they know iraq was planning something, why would they not back the US? Silly little story.

1. Russian intell could be wrong, I certainly never said its infallible. But still, that they provided such intell, is no small story.

2. WRT Atta in Prague - so its your position that because that bit of intel was incorrect (which i will accept for the sake of argument) that therefore all intell from another govt is wrong, and a silly story? We know what the limited base for the Atta story was - a siting by a informant for Czech intell. Who COULD have misidentified the person he saw. We dont know yet what intell Russia passed to the US. Untill we do we dont know that this is a silly little story. I presume if its not stronger than the Atta story Putin wouldnt have mentioned it today.

As for why Russia opposed the invasion even if they knew of Iraqi plans to attack, thats easy - they thought (as I presume you would affirm) that any Iraqi terror act on the US would likely be materially insignificant, and not worth the dangers of Iraqi civil war, regional instability etc. Which they would be entitled to say. Theyre NOT our treaty allies. They have NO obligation to join us in a war, even in a war of self-defense.

Did Argentina deny that the US was attacked at Pearl Harbor? No. Did the Argentina declare war on Japan? No. (at least not in '41 or '42) Theres no contradiction here.

	19-06-2004 00:16									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by GePap If they know iraq was planning something, why would they not back the US?

Maybe to maintain good relations. If an Iraqi attack had occured, we would have been very disturbed and probably even angry if they had not warned us.

Besides, just because Russia is a friend does not mean that they have to join us in a war in Iraq. They can be friends and therefore want to warn us of a possible threat and still not be interested in going as far as joining us in a real war.

	19-06-2004 00:17									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Russia warned the United States on several occasions that Iraq's Saddam Hussein planned "terrorist attacks" on its soil, President Vladimir Putin said Friday. "After the events of September 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received such information and passed it on to their American colleagues," he told reporters. The Kremlin leader, who was speaking in the Kazakh capital, said Russian intelligence services had many times received information that Saddam's special forces were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States "and beyond its borders on American military and civilian targets."

dont mean anything. i bet we've got plans of attack against all sorts of countries, including Canada, Russia, and France. does that mean they need to attack us for security reasons?

	19-06-2004 00:24									#48
	Increase the size of your Attachments

'The Kremlin leader, who was speaking in the Kazakh capital, said Russian intelligence services had many times received information that Saddam's special forces were preparing terrorist attacks in the United States "and beyond its borders on American military and civilian targets." '


The attempt to compare this (which MAY have included active preparations, its not clear from the Putin quotes in the media) with Pentagon planning office exercises is really reaching the bottom of the barrel.


I mean the US has just suffered 9/11, and heres a self proclaimed enemey of the US, that the US fought 12 years earlier, and that shoots at US planes in the no fly zones on a regular basis, and russia tells Bush that they know of Iraqi plans to commit TERRORIST acts INSIDE the US - 90% of Americans are gonna consider that as justifying the war. And I bet alot of Europeans, for that matter.

You think Kerry is going to say that plans dont represent a threat? I dont think so.

Chirac, and the Lib Dems in the UK might.


I think GePap is on a warmer track, attack the intell itself.

	19-06-2004 00:33									#49
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat Besides, just because Russia is a friend does not mean that they have to join us in a war in Iraq. They can be friends and therefore want to warn us of a possible threat and still not be interested in going as far as joining us in a real war.

This was not the tune I heard when France "backstabbed" the US by precisely refusing to join its war in Iraq.

	19-06-2004 00:38									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: The attempt to compare this (which MAY have included active preparations, its not clear from the Putin quotes in the media) with Pentagon planning office exercises is really reaching the bottom of the barrel.

why is it different? do terrorist attacks invovle taking the life of people? yes. do military attacks invovle the taking of life of people? yes. so its the same thing.

	19-06-2004 00:39									#51
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor This was not the tune I heard when France "backstabbed" the US by precisely refusing to join its war in Iraq.

1. First France had the sovereign right to backstab us, just as Russia did. Neither Russia failing to support us, nor France failing to support us, are as bad as if Russia had INFORMATION on Iraqi terrorist plans and had not shared them. The point here is not that all is forgiven to Russia, but simply to reconcile the info Russia had with their decision not to support invasion

2. that aside, the anger at France is greater than the anger at Russia for two reasons A. France IS our ally (as those in the US who opposed the war never tire of pointing out) We expect more of you. B. France seems to have played a more active role in organizing the opposition to the US on the UNSC than Russia did.
The combination of A and B is particularly "galling".

	19-06-2004 00:41									#52
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia why is it different? do terrorist attacks invovle taking the life of people? yes. do military attacks invovle the taking of life of people? yes. so its the same thing.

There are instances where military attacks are justified. That is the stated reason for the Dod to make all those plans.

You may well believe that in some instances terrorist acts are justified. I wont argue that here, but I will say that such a position finds few backers in the US, and I suspect few in the UK or Australia.

	19-06-2004 00:45									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: There are instances where military attacks are justified. That is the stated reason for the Dod to make all those plans.

really? is korea a reason? is vietnam a reason? is gulf war I a reason? is gulf war II a reason? is grenada is reason? is afghanistan a reason? is nicaragua a reason? is lebanon a reason?

quote: You may well believe that in some instances terrorist acts are justified. I wont argue that here, but I will say that such a position finds few backers in the US, and I suspect few in the UK or Australia.

and that makes me wrong how?

	19-06-2004 00:48									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: This was not the tune I heard when France "backstabbed" the US by precisely refusing to join its war in Iraq.

I think the people who whine that France "backstabbed" the US don't see lack of willingness of France to join the war as the 'backstab'. After all, Canada, Germany and several other US allies also took no part but have avoided any accusations of betrayal. I think the whiners who accuse France of betraying the US are thinking of Frances efforts in the UN to actively prevent the US from involving the UN in its plans to attack Iraq. They feel that an ally should have at most, only passively opposed the invasion and not attempt to directly derail the US efforts.

For the record I think a true ally might actively oppose the US in an action that they were convinced would be harmful to US interests as well as their own. Friends don't let friends do really stupid self destructive things.

	19-06-2004 00:50									#55
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia really? is korea a reason? is vietnam a reason? is gulf war I a reason? is gulf war II a reason? is grenada is reason? is afghanistan a reason? is nicaragua a reason? is lebanon a reason? LOTM - no, those arent reasons, those are countries (except GW 1 and 2, of course) and that makes me wrong how?

I got you mixed up with one of the folks who thought this was a silly little story. If what you mean to say is that you believe terrorist acts can be justified, or are at least no different from any other military acts, and that therefore the existence of plans for such terrorist acts no more constitutes casus belli for the US than the existence of US war plans constitutes casus belli against the US, in your view, than I must admit that your logic seems to impeccable. I would expect all those who share your premis will share your conclusion.

	19-06-2004 00:52									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor This was not the tune I heard when France "backstabbed" the US by precisely refusing to join its war in Iraq.

Well, I actually don't believe that France backstabbed us. They had their own reasons for not wanting to participate in a war against Iraq. I respect that.

	19-06-2004 00:55									#57
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia do terrorist attacks invovle taking the life of people? yes. do military attacks invovle the taking of life of people? yes. so its the same thing.

Your reasoning is flawed. Two objects can share one characteristic and still be different.

Is my car white? yes.
Is my shirt white? yes. So they are the same thing. Obviously not. They may both be white but they have many differences.

	19-06-2004 00:57									#58
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The Diplomat

	19-06-2004 00:57									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat Well, you guys don't trust the CIA. Maybe the KGB can do a better job?

The CIA are the good guys, Bush is scapegoating them so poeple don't figure out a lot of this stuff was made up by the NSA and Chalabi to legitamate the war. But now the CIA is leaking info to the media, so the truth shall be heard, and Chimpy will be history.

	19-06-2004 01:04									#60
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Odin The CIA are the good guys, Bush is scapegoating them so poeple don't figure out a lot of this stuff was made up by the NSA and Chalabi to legitamate the war. But now the CIA is leaking info to the media, so the truth shall be heard, and Chimpy will be history.

George Tenet "slam dunk case"

BTW, do you mean the NSC? the National Security Advisor (NSA) is Condi Rice. The only agency called the NSA is the National Security Agency = the Puzzle Palace = No Such Agency. You dont mean all those cryptologists made stuff up, do you?