|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:30 pm Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
 |
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Buckley is doing nothing of the kind. He writes that the objective has failed, but that does not necessarily mean that U.S forces should cut and run. It could just as well mean establishing a new objective. Their original plans didn't work, time to admit defeat for those, and formulate new plans. If anybody, much less Buckley believes that the U.S. is going to leave Iraq anytime soon, I have a bridge to sell you. |
Always an excuse, never an answer. Yo, lump-o-led-for-brains: Before Bush *won* his FIRST election, I knew there would be war in Iraq if he DID win.
After his election, I knew there was nothing to be found in Iraq, but that EVEN IF THERE WERE, an invastion was a mistake.
Tell me, oh lump-o-lead, if *I* knew, why the HELL didn't he???? And why are YOU making excuse for him?
YOU are exactly why the world is going to hell in a handbasket. |
that is just false.
the US policy before 9-11 was smart sanctions.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1207742.stm
The Bush adminstration's policy was regime change in Iraq but that policy was no different than that of the Clinton adminstration.
O'Neill: 'Frenzy' distorted war plans account
Rumsfeld: Idea of a bias toward war 'a total misunderstanding'
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said Tuesday his account of the Bush administration's early discussions about a possible invasion of Iraq has been distorted by a "red meat frenzy."
The controversy began last week when excerpts were released from a book on the administration published Tuesday in which O'Neill suggests Iraq was the focus of President Bush's first National Security Council meeting.
That started what O'Neill described to NBC's "Today" show as a "red meat frenzy that's occurred when people didn't have anything except snippets."
"People are trying to make a case that I said the president was planning war in Iraq early in the administration," O'Neill said.
"Actually, there was a continuation of work that had been going on in the Clinton administration with the notion that there needed to be regime change in Iraq."
The idea that Bush "came into office with a predisposition to invade Iraq, I think, is a total misunderstanding of the situation," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters at the Pentagon.
Bush administration officials have noted that U.S. policy dating from the Clinton administration was to seek "regime change" in Iraq, although it focused on funding and training Iraqi opposition groups rather than using military force. (Full story)
Retired Army Gen. Hugh Shelton, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he saw nothing to indicate the United States was close to attacking Iraq early in Bush's term.
Shelton, who retired shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, said the brass reviewed "on the shelf" plans to respond to crises with the incoming Bush administration.
But in the administration's first six months, "I saw nothing that would lead me to believe that we were any closer to attacking Iraq than we had been during the previous administration," Shelton told CNN.
O'Neill, former CEO of aluminum producer Alcoa, sat on the National Security Council during his 23 months as treasury secretary.
He was pushed out of the administration in December 2002 during a dispute over tax cuts and growing budget deficits, and was the primary source for author Ron Suskind's book, "The Price of Loyalty: George Bush, the White House and the Education of Paul O'Neill."
"From the start, we were building the case against Hussein and looking at how we could take him out and change Iraq into a new country," O'Neill is quoted as saying in the book.
"And, if we did that, it would solve everything. It was about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it -- the president saying, 'Fine. Go find me a way to do this.'"
But Tuesday O'Neill said, "I'm amazed that anyone would think that our government, on a continuing basis across political administrations, doesn't do contingency planning and look at circumstances."
Several Democratic presidential candidates seized on O'Neill's comments to argue that the Bush administration misled Americans about the drive to war with Iraq, where nearly 500 American troops have been killed since March.
Democratic front-runner Howard Dean used them as a jumping-off point to attack three rivals -- Rep. *beep* Gephardt and Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards -- who supported a congressional resolution authorizing Bush to act against Iraq.
"I would remind Iowans and others that a year ago, I stood up against this war and was the only one to do so of the individuals I have mentioned," said Dean, whose opposition to the war helped propel him to the top of the pack.
Bush repeated his position Monday that his administration turned to war with Iraq only after the September 11 attacks changed the way U.S. officials viewed Baghdad's suspected weapons programs.
That Iraq was a concern before that time was evident in July 2001, when national security adviser Condoleezza Rice told CNN that Saddam "is on the radar screen for the administration," and senior officials met at the White House two days later to discuss Iraq.
During the same time, Iraq began dispersing aircraft and air defense capabilities in preparation for more aggressive U.S. airstrikes to enforce the "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.
A senior administration official told CNN that early Bush administration discussions regarding Iraq reviewed existing policies and plans.
Officials were particularly concerned with enforcement of the "no-fly" zones, where Iraqi air defense forces had been taking potshots at U.S. and British warplanes since late 1998.
Rumsfeld said Tuesday that Iraq was the only place in the world where U.S. forces were being fired upon "with impunity," and "clearing it was something that needed to be addressed."
Richard Perle, a leading advocate of war with Iraq and a member of the independent Defense Advisory Board that advises Rumsfeld, told CNN the review was still under way when the September 11 attacks occurred.
|
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/13/oneill.bush
EFL trainer say it is not so. |
Back to ignoring your silliness after this Joo:
Your own link/cut-and-paste contradicts the point you are trying to create out of thin air and desperation:
| Quote: |
| Bush administration officials have noted that U.S. policy dating from the Clinton administration was to seek "regime change" in Iraq, although it focused on funding and training Iraqi opposition groups rather than using military force. |
Clinton was not planning a war. And if he was, it was certainly contingency planning, which I have no problem with. Every administration has people tucked away somewhere dreaming up what if's. Not an issue. What is an issue is skewing the data to justify a war you are going to start regardless of the truth.
And how can you, rather insanely, tell me that what *I* knew to be true, and subsequently happened, is false? How can it possibly be false that I knew with absolute certainty that a Bush win meant war in Iraq EVEN BEFORE 9/11?? Simple analysis made it obvious. And when he went ahead with this criminal activity, I also knew, before the war was launched, that it was doomed to failure. BOTH analyses have proven correct, so how do you call them false?
You make some bizarre statements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:17 pm Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Back to ignoring your silliness after this Joo: |
you don't like getting your head handed to you.
| Quote: |
| Your own link/cut-and-paste contradicts the point you are trying to create out of thin air and desperation: |
Nope
[quote]
| Quote: |
| Bush administration officials have noted that U.S. policy dating from the Clinton administration was to seek "regime change" in Iraq, although it focused on funding and training Iraqi opposition groups rather than using military force. |
this was the policy of the Bush administration before 9-11 as well.
| Quote: |
| Clinton was not planning a war. And if he was, it was certainly contingency planning, which I have no problem with. Every administration has people tucked away somewhere dreaming up what if's. Not an issue. What is an issue is skewing the data to justify a war you are going to start regardless of the truth. |
Bush had the same contingency planning.
| Quote: |
Shelton, who retired shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, said the brass reviewed "on the shelf" plans to respond to crises with the incoming Bush administration.
But in the administration's first six months, "I saw nothing that would lead me to believe that we were any closer to attacking Iraq than we had been during the previous administration," Shelton told CNN |
why did you leave this out?
| Quote: |
| And how can you, rather insanely, tell me that what *I* knew to be true, and subsequently happened, is false? How can it possibly be false that I knew with absolute certainty that a Bush win meant war in Iraq EVEN BEFORE 9/11?? Simple analysis made it obvious. And when he went ahead with this criminal activity, I also knew, before the war was launched, that it was doomed to failure. BOTH analyses have proven correct, so how do you call them false? |
IF that was the case then why was the policy before 9-11 smart sanctions?
Not criminal activity cause
1) the US was already at war with Saddam before 9-11.
2) Saddam was a serial aggressor and one of the great killers of all time.
| Quote: |
| You make some bizarre statements. |
You are out of it.
anyway the US ought to move its forces to Kurdistan. It wlll eventually do that anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:51 pm Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Back to ignoring your silliness after this Joo: |
you don't like getting your head handed to you. |
The typical response of someone who's just had his argument demolished, lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Yu_Bum_suk wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Back to ignoring your silliness after this Joo: |
you don't like getting your head handed to you. |
The typical response of someone who's just had his argument demolished, lol. |
Your arguments have been demolished time and time again. It wasn't even difficult in the least. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:41 am Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Yu_Bum_suk wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Back to ignoring your silliness after this Joo: |
you don't like getting your head handed to you. |
The typical response of someone who's just had his argument demolished, lol. |
Your arguments have been demolished time and time again. It wasn't even difficult in the least. |
What time was that? I hardly even disagree with you anymore. I'm a bit worried about the long-term international effects of America's deficit financing, but re: Iraq I've come to think that what America is doing is great. Iraq will be a mess regardless so why not tie down most available uints there and prevent or at least severely delay future regime changes.
But even though I'm not hugely concerned about America saddling its children with debt I have to say that EFLtrainer handed your ass to you on a platter, buddy - and he's not even someone I find particularly endearing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:52 am Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Quote: |
What time was that? |
about every time I argued w/ you.
| Quote: |
| I hardly even disagree with you anymore. I'm a bit worried about the long-term international effects of America's deficit financing, but re: Iraq I've come to think that what America is doing is great. Iraq will be a mess regardless so why not tie down most available uints there and prevent or at least severely delay future regime changes. |
Well you are an apologist for the Bathists , Khomeni lovers and Bin Laden followers. So of course you would like the US to suffer trouble. Cause you are one of the international group of US haters who trades hateful stories about the US like baseball cards -cause it gives you a feeling of membership in a group.
Look at this Yu Bum Suk is siding with Khomeni , the Bathists and Al Qaida against the US - Oh what a surprise
Anyway you probably will be saddened to know the US airforce and Navy are in good shape. They can do what they need to do- should it come to that.
| Quote: |
| But even though I'm not hugely concerned about America saddling its children with debt I have to say that EFLtrainer handed your ass to you on a platter, buddy - and he's not even someone I find particularly endearing |
.
EFL trainer win? Like when ? Like when he was wrong about the US not spending money on R&D.
Are you delusional?
Actually you are just an angry radical and everything you ever say is cause of that.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:30 am Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
[
YOU are exactly why the world is going to hell in a handbasket. |
Even by your standards this is particularly moronic. I am responsible for all the world's ills? Really such overblown rhetoric does not strengthen your case, it just makes you look rather silly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:33 am Post subject: Re: Buckley "the American objective in Iraq has failed& |
|
|
| Yu_Bum_suk wrote: |
| [I have to say that EFLtrainer handed your ass to you on a platter, buddy - and he's not even someone I find particularly endearing. |
Actually Mr Joo is destroying EFL trainer, the guy isn't even making any sense any more, or for that matter an argument. All he did was toss out a few pathetic personal flames and run away. Joo's way ahead. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
