Terrorist Caliphate Established

Werbung:
A nuclear explosion, while not out of the question, is obviously the most extreme example of terrorism. But, it is extremely possible that we will be attacked again, and that attack will be a direct result of the failure of our foreign policy under the current administration. It is the failure to execute the war to its definitive conclusion.

As for the new caliphate, it is a fact - I do not believe you will see it go away. It has structure, it has weapons, it has land, and it has oil ... everything you need to start your own country. More importantly, it doesn't have organized resistance. They're not nutters ... they are committed religious zealots. The only thing worse than that is committed liberal zealots in the White House.
Again, partly correct. Another attempt at a terrorist attack is quite likely. A nuclear bomb is the worst and most extreme sort of scenario. Such an attack is a direct result of our foreign policy, going back to deposing the government of Iraq and establishing the Shaw, our invasion of Iraq, our cozy relationship with Saudi Arabia, a whole lot of things.

But, luckily for us, the Caliphate is not a fact, at least not yet, and we still do have allies in the ME that could prevent it.

If, that is, we play our cards right.
 
Yes Japan has moved rom a self defence force to a military force that will help its friends. It took a long time but it eventually tore up the constitution dictated by he allies.
I am not saying WW2 was wrong. It did save many countries including mine from being occupied. However Japan was on our side in World war 1, agains us in World war 2. I am no willing to say what side it will be on in world War 3.
 
Yes Japan has moved rom a self defence force to a military force that will help its friends. It took a long time but it eventually tore up the constitution dictated by he allies.
I am not saying WW2 was wrong. It did save many countries including mine from being occupied. However Japan was on our side in World war 1, agains us in World war 2. I am no willing to say what side it will be on in world War 3.

This is not a discussion about Japan, so I will refrain from commenting.

But, I presume you do not question your complicity in the mess in the ME today ...
 
I oppose my Country involvement in Iraq. I did support the war with Japan because they bomb us and started the war.
 
I oppose my Country involvement in Iraq. I did support the war with Japan because they bomb us and started the war.
No offense Aus ....

But how is it a man (or woman to be pc) with "4 degrees" cannot figure out in history what passivism got us all in the past?

Indoctrination?
 
Degrees have nothing to do with this. Are you asking me why I can justify not supporting the Western invasion of Iraq or supporting the withdrawal of western forces.
I did not support the invasion because there was no invasion or attack on any western country and there were no weapons of massed destructions.The terrorist at September 11 were not from Iraq it was just more convenient to attack them then Sadur Arabia where most of them come from,

I support the withdrawal because the Western forces were not gaining any more, They were just making the West unpopular in the Middle East.
 
Degrees have nothing to do with this. Are you asking me why I can justify not supporting the Western invasion of Iraq or supporting the withdrawal of western forces.
I did not support the invasion because there was no invasion or attack on any western country and there were no weapons of massed destructions.The terrorist at September 11 were not from Iraq it was just more convenient to attack them then Sadur Arabia where most of them come from,

I support the withdrawal because the Western forces were not gaining any more, They were just making the West unpopular in the Middle East.

Hmmm ... no attacks on any western country?

Just let them brown sand beetles in Kuwait die, huh?
Screw the Kurds ... they ain't part of the West.
To hell with the Jews ---- they shoulda put Jerusalem in Pennsylvania, right?
Terrorist training facilities? Let them operate ... after all, they haven't attacked Sydney yet ... of course, they have killed thousands of innocents and thousands of our allies, but f*ck 'em, right?
Financing the suicide bomber programs? Aww, who cares? They just blow up other ragheads in the local market, right?

Wow, man ... you need to think that thru.

No weapons of mass destruction? And, you knew this ??? (Why the hell didn't you tell us????)
Despite the fact that WMDs had been deployed during the war on the Kurds and the Iran-Iraq War? These were just a figment of the CIA's imagination?
The yellowcake? Just made up?
The 200 Bio-missile casings? A false finding?
A little 20-20 hindsight, perhaps?
Or, are you just conveniently ignoring history in order to make it fit the currently popular political diatribe?

On withdrawal, you're right ... if we're not going to do it right (and we weren't - under Obama), then get the hell out. But ... the question is whether Obama's strategy was the right one ... the proof is on the table today ... it wasn't.
 
Hmmm ... no attacks on any western country?

Just let them brown sand beetles in Kuwait die, huh?
Screw the Kurds ... they ain't part of the West.
To hell with the Jews ---- they shoulda put Jerusalem in Pennsylvania, right?
Terrorist training facilities? Let them operate ... after all, they haven't attacked Sydney yet ... of course, they have killed thousands of innocents and thousands of our allies, but f*ck 'em, right?
Financing the suicide bomber programs? Aww, who cares? They just blow up other ragheads in the local market, right?

Wow, man ... you need to think that thru.

No weapons of mass destruction? And, you knew this ??? (Why the hell didn't you tell us????)
Despite the fact that WMDs had been deployed during the war on the Kurds and the Iran-Iraq War? These were just a figment of the CIA's imagination?
The yellowcake? Just made up?
The 200 Bio-missile casings? A false finding?
A little 20-20 hindsight, perhaps?
Or, are you just conveniently ignoring history in order to make it fit the currently popular political diatribe?

On withdrawal, you're right ... if we're not going to do it right (and we weren't - under Obama), then get the hell out. But ... the question is whether Obama's strategy was the right one ... the proof is on the table today ... it wasn't.
There are decades of data that reflect that passivism is a fail .....

Aus's "4 degrees" has every thing to do with it. Is it eduction or indoctrination?

Those who deny or do not understand history are doomed to repeat it!

Aus could not be a more shining example of this truth!

There is a reason why America was founded by white Europeans that understood that exceptionalism comes from the people and not some government.

A fact that our sheeple indoctrinated (4 degrees) friend like Aus will never understand!

Freedom and Liberties come to those who are evolved enough to understand it ....

Not all Europeans understood this .... as our friend represents ....

There is a reason why we rebelled against King George and "passivist" disagreed!
 
BFan and Texas, The facts that there were no weapons of massed destruction found when the West invaded Iraq arewell known and testify by many inquires. Even the British Government admitted it was wrong and this was the reason given for Britain and Australia to send troops to Iraq.
What happen in Iraq is irrelevant as that war was over.
Bush order the withdrawal from Iraq.
I understand America was first settle by what you call Indians not whites
These are facts you ignore.
 
BFan and Texas, The facts that there were no weapons of massed destruction found when the West invaded Iraq arewell known and testify by many inquires. Even the British Government admitted it was wrong and this was the reason given for Britain and Australia to send troops to Iraq.
What happen in Iraq is irrelevant as that war was over.
Bush order the withdrawal from Iraq.
I understand America was first settle by what you call Indians not whites
These are facts you ignore.
These are facts that you cannot ignore ....

Your four degrees of indoctrination doesn't mean shit ....

All normal thinking Americans are well aware of our history... and your dumbass indoctrination understanding doesn't mean shit ....

The WMD's were in Iraq and it was not just the US intelligence saying so it was international intelligence as well .... and those weapons are now showing up abroad aren't they Aus ....

But, you don't get this being an indoctrinated LEFTIST and all ...

Forgive me my friend but you are a more than classic example of what Vladimir Lenin referred to as a useful idiot!!!
 
BFan and Texas, The facts that there were no weapons of massed destruction found when the West invaded Iraq arewell known and testify by many inquires. Even the British Government admitted it was wrong and this was the reason given for Britain and Australia to send troops to Iraq.
What happen in Iraq is irrelevant as that war was over.
Bush order the withdrawal from Iraq.
I understand America was first settle by what you call Indians not whites
These are facts you ignore.

There WERE WMDs in Iraq, but you didn't hear about them, did you?
You didn't hear about the biological weapons factories we destroyed, did you?
You didn't hear about the bio delivery systems we uncovered, did you?
You probably also didn't hear about the observed movement of vehicles and materials into Syria and Iran before our attack, did you? What do you suppose were in those trucks? Lunch?
Is it a coincidence that the gas being used against the Syrian people today is the same type as those used by Saddam against the Kurds?

What happened in Iraq is NOT irrelevant .. read the damn paper. It was our failure to execute the war to its proper conclusion that has allowed the turmoil we have today.

What the hell does Indians vs. Native Americans have to do with the item under discussion?
 
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"No, no!! It's not true - none of it is true! I read it in my alphabet soup! It's not true."
-- Aus22
 
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"No, no!! It's not true - none of it is true! I read it in my alphabet soup! It's not true."
-- Aus22

If all those Democrats thought that Saddam Hussain had WMD, then he must have had them, right? Good thing we invaded and took them away from him.
 
Werbung:
If all those Democrats thought that Saddam Hussain had WMD, then he must have had them, right? Good thing we invaded and took them away from him.


And, if he had them, and we did nothing?

But, you and I both know that WMDs was a false flag exploited by Democrats to try to cover up their duplicity ... it doesn't change the fact that we needed to go in, that we should have gone in ... the only problem is that we didn't finish the job.
 
Back
Top