Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Rice in Iraq: "This war came to us"

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Rice in Iraq: "This war came to us"
Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Apple Scruff

Joined: 29 Oct 2003

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 1:04 pm Post subject: Rice in Iraq: "This war came to us"

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/15/iraq.main/index.html

Quote:

"I want you to keep focused on what you are doing here," Rice told the diplomats and troops who gathered in one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces. "This war came to us, not the other way around."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!! Oh man, that was good. I wonder who writes her material.

Quote:

"The United States, along with the rest of the free world, believed somehow for a number of years that people in this region didn't care about freedom," she said. "We cared about stability. And what we got was neither. We got a malignancy that was growing that came to haunt us on the fine September day" in 2001.

I'd be obliged to agree with her if the U.S. had finished its business in Afghanistan, or maybe brought the hammer down on Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Sure, there's plenty of terrorists in Iraq now, but only after the U.S. opened up an all-you-can-Jihad buffet in March of 2003.

The American gov't takes its military and the public at large for fools, and so far it seems they've been correct in doing so.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject:

She is right.

Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 3:49 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

She is right.

Nope, she is not right and for an intelligent woman to say such a thing is monstrous.

The invasion of Iraq was justified not by WMD (the stated reason) nor to "free Iraqis" (the current rationale).

R. S. Refugee

Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 4:23 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

She is right.

As Shakespeare said, "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

Or as Dubya might say, "Once ya start tellin' these dang lies, it's hard to quit."

FUBAR

Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: The Y.C.

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 5:12 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

She is right.

You must mean because of all those WMDs that Sadam was producing? Or because of all the assassination attempts placed on GW's by Sadam. or it b/c of all the terrorist camps that Iraq was running.

We all know that the US manipulated the media, government and people into thinking it was a war the US needed to enter. Now that we have alot more information, no reasonably educated person can argue that the Iraq invasion was started for no other reason than GW's dislike of their leader.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 5:41 pm Post subject:

Quote:

You must mean because of all those WMDs that Sadam was producing? Or because of all the assassination attempts placed on GW's by Sadam. or it b/c of all the terrorist camps that Iraq was running.

Saddam was not in compliance was he?

Saddam did have terrorists in Iraq.

Quote:

We all know that the US manipulated the media, government and people into thinking it was a war the US needed to enter. Now that we have alot more information, no reasonably educated person can argue that the Iraq invasion was started for no other reason than GW's dislike of their leader.[

No Saddam was contained but sanctions killed the US like a war and made the US hated they also required the US to maintain no fly zones and keep US forces in Saudi Arabia - forever.

What was the event that caused Bin Laden to start up his war against the US in the first place? US forces in Saudi Arabia.

Only US forces in Saddam face kept the sanctiions because no other nation in the world was williing to keep them.

Do you think mid east regimes were going to allow the US to keep US forces in their nations - forever?

Besides Saddam could yo- yo the US forever.

He threatens Kuwait the US sends soldiers - Saddam backs down the US withdraws forces.

six months later

Saddam threatens Kuwait or kicks out inspectors- the US sends tens of thousands of soldiers - Saddam backs down the US withdraws forces.

Until the next time

Until the next time
Ditto

Ditto

Futhermore the survival of Saddams' regime sent a message to the entire middle east. YOU CAN FIGHT THE US AND SURIVIVE to FIGHT ANOTHER DAY - AND EVEN WIN.

After 9-11 the US had to change that perception.

Saddam Hussein had tried to get nuclear weapons and threaten Kuwait more than once and there is no reason in the world to think he would not do so again.

Saddam had tried to get WMDs and invade Kuwait in the past more than once and there is no reason to believe that he would not do so again in the future. More than that they way the mid east is a threat to the US . The hate and incitment and the planning of terror that mid east regimes and the elites engage in will not be tolerated anymore.

Saddam never gave up his war or his revolutionary agenda, if he didn't want war then he should have given it up.

Wangja

Joined: 17 May 2004
Location: Seoul, Yongsan

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 8:14 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

Quote:

You must mean because of all those WMDs that Sadam was producing? Or because of all the assassination attempts placed on GW's by Sadam. or it b/c of all the terrorist camps that Iraq was running.

Saddam was not in compliance was he? Blix believed he was and that there were no WMD.
Saddam did have terrorists in Iraq. The is no link between Hussein and WTC. There may have been a few terrorists before the invasion, as there are in most countries, but the war made it a honey pot.

Quote:

No Saddam was contained but sanctions killed the US like a war and made the US hated they also required the US to maintain no fly zones and keep US forces in Saudi Arabia - forever. Maybe,
but until such time as he crossed a border, what concern was it of anyone?

What was the event that caused Bin Laden to start up his war against the US in the first place? US forces in Saudi Arabia. Yes, that was his stated reason. But, with that aim objective achieved, what is his current rationale?

Only US forces in Saddam face kept the sanctiions because no other nation in the world was williing to keep them. Bollox.

Do you think mid east regimes were going to allow the US to keep US forces in their nations - forever? Probably not, but Qatar is doing an OK job for now.
Besides Saddam could yo- yo the US forever. That's what you oay your diplomats for.
He threatens Kuwait the US sends soldiers - Saddam backs down the US withdraws forces.

six months later

Saddam threatens Kuwait or kicks out inspectors- the US sends tens of thousands of soldiers - Saddam backs down the US withdraws forces.

Until the next time

Until the next time
Ditto

Ditto

Futhermore the survival of Saddams' regime sent a message to the entire middle east. YOU CAN FIGHT THE US AND SURIVIVE to FIGHT ANOTHER DAY - AND EVEN WIN. If there had been no invasion, there would have been nothing to win - or lose. Now there is.

After 9-11 the US had to change that perception.

Saddam Hussein had tried to get nuclear weapons and threaten Kuwait more than once and there is no reason in the world to think he would not do so again. Then the world would have acted, like they did before.

Saddam had tried to get WMDs and invade Kuwait in the past more than once and there is no reason to believe that he would not do so again in the future. More than that they way the mid east is a threat to the US . He was no threat to the US. That is baloney. The hate and incitment and the planning of terror that mid east regimes and the elites engage in will not be tolerated anymore. BTW, there is a case to be made that the territory of Kuwait he invaded was in earlier times Iraq's, just as the southern part was part of what is now saudi Arabia. THat's for anotehr day.

Saddam never gave up his war or his revolutionary agenda, if he didn't want war then he should have given it up.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 10:42 pm Post subject:

WANG

Quote:

Blix believed he was and that there were no WMD.

I thought he said that he was not sure. Besides Blix was the head of IAEC in the late 80s when Saddam was trying to get nuclear weapons

Saddam kept the capability, Saddam had stuff that he was not supposed to have , he also tried to get NKoreas newest missile.

Quote:

What have we found and what have we not found in the first 3 months of our work?

We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN. Let me just give you a few examples of these concealment efforts, some of which I will elaborate on later:

A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.

Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.

Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment. In addition to the discovery of extensive concealment efforts, we have been faced with a systematic sanitization of documentary and computer evidence in a wide range of offices, laboratories, and companies suspected of WMD work. The pattern of these efforts to erase evidence - hard drives destroyed, specific files burned, equipment cleaned of all traces of use - are ones of deliberate, rather than random, acts. For example,

On 10 July 2003 an ISG team exploited the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) Headquarters in Baghdad. The basement of the main building contained an archive of documents situated on well-organized rows of metal shelving. The basement suffered no fire damage despite the total destruction of the upper floors from coalition air strikes. Upon arrival the exploitation team encountered small piles of ash where individual documents or binders of documents were intentionally destroyed. Computer hard drives had been deliberately destroyed. Computers would have had financial value to a random looter; their destruction, rather than removal for resale or reuse, indicates a targeted effort to prevent Coalition forces from gaining access to their contents.

All IIS laboratories visited by IIS exploitation teams have been clearly sanitized, including removal of much equipment, shredding and burning of documents, and even the removal of nameplates from office doors.

Although much of the deliberate destruction and sanitization of documents and records probably occurred during the height of OIF combat operations, indications of significant continuing destruction efforts have been found after the end of major combat operations, including entry in May 2003 of the locked gated vaults of the Ba'ath party intelligence building in Baghdad and highly selective destruction of computer hard drives and data storage equipment along with the burning of a small number of specific binders that appear to have contained financial and intelligence records, and in July 2003 a site exploitation team at the Abu Ghurayb Prison found one pile of the smoldering ashes from documents that was still warm to the touch. I would now like to review our efforts in each of the major lines of enquiry that ISG has pursued during this initial phase of its work.

With regard to biological warfare activities, which has been one of our two initial areas of focus, ISG teams are uncovering significant information - including research and development of BW-applicable organisms, the involvement of Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) in possible BW activities, and deliberate concealment activities. All of this suggests Iraq after 1996 further compartmentalized its program and focused on maintaining smaller, covert capabilities that could be activated quickly to surge the production of BW agents.

Debriefings of IIS officials and site visits have begun to unravel a clandestine network of laboratories and facilities within the security service apparatus. This network was never declared to the UN and was previously unknown. We are still working on determining the extent to which this network was tied to large-scale military efforts or BW terror weapons, but this clandestine capability was suitable for preserving BW expertise, BW capable facilities and continuing R&D - all key elements for maintaining a capability for resuming BW production. The IIS also played a prominent role in sponsoring students for overseas graduate studies in the biological sciences, according to Iraqi scientists and IIS sources, providing an important avenue for furthering BW-applicable research. This was the only area of graduate work that the IIS appeared to sponsor.

Discussions with Iraqi scientists uncovered agent R&D work that paired overt work with nonpathogenic organisms serving as surrogates for prohibited investigation with pathogenic agents. Examples include: B. Thurengiensis (Bt) with B. anthracis (anthrax), and medicinal plants with ricin. In a similar vein, two key former BW scientists, confirmed that Iraq under the guise of legitimate activity developed refinements of processes and products relevant to BW agents. The scientists discussed the development of improved, simplified fermentation and spray drying capabilities for the simulant Bt that would have been directly applicable to anthrax, and one scientist confirmed that the production line for Bt could be switched to produce anthrax in one week if the seed stock were available.

A very large body of information has been developed through debriefings, site visits, and exploitation of captured Iraqi documents that confirms that Iraq concealed equipment and materials from UN inspectors when they returned in 2002. One noteworthy example is a collection of reference strains that ought to have been declared to the UN. Among them was a vial of live C. botulinum Okra B. from which a biological agent can be produced. This discovery - hidden in the home of a BW scientist - illustrates the point I made earlier about the difficulty of locating small stocks of material that can be used to covertly surge production of deadly weapons. The scientist who concealed the vials containing this agent has identified a large cache of agents that he was asked, but refused, to conceal. ISG is actively searching for this second cache.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/994223/posts

http://www.insightmag.com/media/paper441/news/2004/05/11/World/Investigative.Reportsaddams.Wmd.Have.Been.Found-670120.shtml

WANG

Quote:

The is no link between Hussein and WTC. There may have been a few terrorists before the invasion, as there are in most countries, but the war made it a honey pot.

Quote:

Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna* and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer. Saddam boasted publicly of his financial sponsorship of suicide bombers in Israel. (Quite a few Americans of all denominations walk the streets of Jerusalem.) In 1991, a large number of Western hostages were taken by the hideous Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and held in terrible conditions for a long time. After that same invasion was repelled—Saddam having killed quite a few Americans and Egyptians and Syrians and Brits in the meantime and having threatened to kill many more—the Iraqi secret police were caught trying to murder former President Bush during his visit to Kuwait. Never mind whether his son should take that personally. (Though why should he not?) Should you and I not resent any foreign dictatorship that attempts to kill one of our retired chief executives? (President Clinton certainly took it that way: He ordered the destruction by cruise missiles of the Baathist "security" headquarters.) Iraqi forces fired, every day, for 10 years, on the aircraft that patrolled the no-fly zones and staved off further genocide in the north and south of the country. In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam. In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge. Its official media regularly spewed out a stream of anti-Semitic incitement. I think one might describe that as "threatening," even if one was narrow enough to think that anti-Semitism only menaces Jews. And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war. On Dec. 1, 2003, the New York Times reported—and the David Kay report had established—that Saddam had been secretly negotiating with the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il in a series of secret meetings in Syria, as late as the spring of 2003, to buy a North Korean missile system, and missile-production system, right off the shelf. (This attempt was not uncovered until after the fall of Baghdad, the coalition's presence having meanwhile put an end to the negotiations.)

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

Saddam wasn't allowed to have any of them.

Quote:

Maybe,
but until such time as he crossed a border, what concern was it of anyone?

Because the US had to keep forces there to prevent him from doing so.

And the US had to maintain no fly zones to prevent Saddam from slaughtering the Kurds again.

Quote:

Yes, that was his stated reason. But, with that aim objective achieved, what is his current rationale?

To get back the Caliphate. But more than that the US could not threaten Saudi Arabia and contain Saddam at the same time.

Quote:

Bollox.

Quote:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
September 22, 2000
STATEMENT BY RICHARD BOUCHER, SPOKESMAN
FRENCH AIRFLIGHT INTO BAGHDAD
At a time when Iraq continues to defy the UN sanctions regime -- and
will not even allow a UN team to inspect the humanitarian conditions
in Iraq -- France, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, has
allowed a flight to Iraq in blatant violation of UN sanctions
resolutions.
The flight was done in clear defiance of the UN and its established
procedures. We fail to understand why the French government, which has
discussed this at the United Nations for some time, could not wait 12
hours to gain sanctions committee approval of the flight. We are
raising this matter at the UN Security Council today.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Quote:

. SMART SANCTIONS ARE AN EFFORT TO RESCUE THE SANCTIONS, WHICH HAVE LOST NEARLY ALL SUPPORT

Most of the world is no longer ready to tolerate the sanctions. The resumption of plane flights into Iraq and the signing of trade agreements between Iraq and its traditional trading partners are signals that if the policy continues countries will start to openly violate it. Furthermore, thanks largely to the efforts of anti-sanctions activists, the world has realized that the sanctions regime and specifically the United States are to blame for most if not all of the suffering in Iraq. In a press briefing on March 8, Colin Powell put it this way – ��Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime had successfully put the burden on us as denying the wherewithal for civilians and children in Iraq to live and to get the nutrition and the health care they needed.��

Smart sanctions are an attempt by the U.S. and U.K. governments to spin things so that they are no longer blamed for the suffering that will certainly continue in Iraq under their plan – as a British diplomat recently told reporters, ��If our proposals are adopted by the Security Council, Iraq will have no excuse for the suffering of the Iraqi people��

http://www.endthewar.org/frontps/smartsanctions.htm

Really who kept the sancitons? other than the US. Most of the other nations in the world weren't keeping the sancitons. , indeed the sancitons were failing.

Quote:

Probably not, but Qatar is doing an OK job for now

For now.

Quote:

That's what you oay your diplomats for.

No more Yo Yoing the US.

Quote:

If there had been no invasion, there would have been nothing to win - or lose. Now there is

yes there was. Mid east regimes thought they could teach hate, plan terror and incite violence and that they could get away with it.

Quote:

Then the world would have acted, like they did before

.

No the US acted and the US paid a big price for containing Saddam Hussein 9-11.

Quote:

He was no threat to the US. That is baloney

The way the mid east is a threat to the US. That is the truth.

Quote:

BTW, there is a case to be made that the territory of Kuwait he invaded was in earlier times Iraq's, just as the southern part was part of what is now saudi Arabia. THat's for anotehr day

They were both part of the Ottoman Empire. The case is very very weak.

Quote:

Kuwait's northern border with Iraq dates from an agreement made with Turkey in 1913. Iraq accepted this claim in 1932 upon its independence from Turkey. However, following Kuwait's independence in 1961, Iraq claimed Kuwait, under the pretense that Kuwait had been part of the Ottoman Empire subject to Iraqi suzerainty. In 1963, Iraq reaffirmed its acceptance of Kuwaiti sovereignty and the boundary it agreed to in 1913 and 1932, in the "Agreed Minutes between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition, and Related Matters."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kuwait

Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sun May 15, 2005 11:12 pm; edited 2 times in total

FUBAR

Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: The Y.C.

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 11:00 pm Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

Quote:

You must mean because of all those WMDs that Sadam was producing? Or because of all the assassination attempts placed on GW's by Sadam. or it b/c of all the terrorist camps that Iraq was running.

Saddam was not in compliance was he?

Saddam did have terrorists in Iraq.

Compliance with what? The Proliferation of Nucler Weapons? How many treaties does the US comply; let's try The Geneva Convention for starters.

So, why did Iraq deserve to be attacked? I remember Pakistan conducting Nuclear Tests several years back, but never being attacked? For what reason were they not attacked?

Terrorists in Iraq? Before or after the US started is illegal war on Iraq. You guys try keep trying to put a spin on things, but anybody who is educated can see right through it. As I stated before; The US attacked Iraq because GW hates Sadam. The sooner he is out of power the better.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 11:17 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Compliance with what? The Proliferation of Nucler Weapons? How many treaties does the US comply; let's try The Geneva Convention for starters.

What Saddam was supposed to do at the end of the gulf war I.

the US usually is in complience w/ the Geneva convention

Quote:

So, why did Iraq deserve to be attacked?

cause Saddam didn't give up his war. He was shooting at US planes and he tried to kill a US president.

Saddam was expansion and Saddam was a bigger killer than Idi Amin.

He wouldn't give up his war.

Quote:

I remember Pakistan conducting Nuclear Tests several years back, but never being attacked? For what reason were they not attacked?

Cause Saddam was at war w the US

Quote:

Terrorists in Iraq? Before or after the US started is illegal war on Iraq. You guys try keep trying to put a spin on things, but anybody who is educated can see right through it. As I stated before; The US attacked Iraq because GW hates Sadam. The sooner he is out of power the better

.[

there were terrorsits in Iraq before. Yes or No?

Quote:

That this—his pro-American moment—was the worst Moore could possibly say of Saddam's depravity is further suggested by some astonishing falsifications. Moore asserts that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even threatened (his words) any American. I never quite know whether Moore is as ignorant as he looks, or even if that would be humanly possible. Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna* and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer. Saddam boasted publicly of his financial sponsorship of suicide bombers in Israel. (Quite a few Americans of all denominations walk the streets of Jerusalem.) In 1991, a large number of Western hostages were taken by the hideous Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and held in terrible conditions for a long time. After that same invasion was repelled—Saddam having killed quite a few Americans and Egyptians and Syrians and Brits in the meantime and having threatened to kill many more—the Iraqi secret police were caught trying to murder former President Bush during his visit to Kuwait. Never mind whether his son should take that personally. (Though why should he not?) Should you and I not resent any foreign dictatorship that attempts to kill one of our retired chief executives? (President Clinton certainly took it that way: He ordered the destruction by cruise missiles of the Baathist "security" headquarters.) Iraqi forces fired, every day, for 10 years, on the aircraft that patrolled the no-fly zones and staved off further genocide in the north and south of the country. In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam. In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge. Its official media regularly spewed out a stream of anti-Semitic incitement. I think one might describe that as "threatening," even if one was narrow enough to think that anti-Semitism only menaces Jews. And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war. On Dec. 1, 2003, the New York Times reported—and the David Kay report had established—that Saddam had been secretly negotiating with the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il in a series of secret meetings in Syria, as late as the spring of 2003, to buy a North Korean missile system, and missile-production system, right off the shelf. (This attempt was not uncovered until after the fall of Baghdad, the coalition's presence having meanwhile put an end to the negotiations.)

IF the Iraq war was illegal then the UN must reverse it.

The international system failed and the US war was moral.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 4:44 am Post subject:

Quote:

Nope, she is not right and for an intelligent woman to say such a thing is monstrous.

The invasion of Iraq was justified not by WMD (the stated reason) nor to "free Iraqis" (the current rationale).

I think too little attention is being paid to the paranoid world view the Bushies have. Paranoia has a long and 'respected' place in American political thinking...the Know-Nothings, the Anti-Masonic Party, the Wobblies, the Red Scare of the '20's and 50's not to mention the Cold War. Condi's area of expertise was the Soviet Union. She is steeped in that kind of thinking. The Right in general is pretty paranoid. Just think about the Culture War. Their whole way of discourse is extremely emotional.

Apple Scruff

Joined: 29 Oct 2003

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 8:26 am Post subject:

No matter what your ass-backwards logic for invading Iraq is, there is no denying that there are a number of other countries in the world that present a much greater threat to the U.S. than Iraq. This whole war, and the fact that there are still people who think they can justify it, is a farce.

mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 4:40 pm Post subject:

Quote from Rumsfeld today:

Quote:

"People lost their lives. People are dead," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said. "People need to be very careful about what they say, just as they need to be careful about what they do."

Now, what could he be talking about here?

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 5:06 pm Post subject: Re: Rice in Iraq: "This war came to us"

Quote:

"I want you to keep focused on what you are doing here," Rice told the diplomats and troops who gathered in one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces. "This war came to us, not the other way around."

Apple Scruff wrote:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!! Oh man, that was good. I wonder who writes her material.

Likely the same gaggle of cunning reptiles who don't want THIS kind of thing discussed in the major media.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/911.html

Quote:

Now what was it Hitler said about repeatedly telling the same BIG lie over & over again ??? Confused

Repetition = TRUTH
( Orwell )

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 8:47 pm Post subject:

Hitler would like the American Free Press

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 1 of 3

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe