Investigation into Iraq War | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 191 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614155
Today 0
Topics 127544
  
 
Messageboard index
Investigation into Iraq War
 

offline BlatantEcho from All over (United States) on 2004-01-28 00:16 [#01051646]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker



People are starting to call for an investigation into the
invasion of Iraq under false pretense.

NY times article found here: NYTIMES

Basically, Dr. Kay, in charge of the investigation for WMDs,
found nothing of the sort, and said it was obvious there
weren't any such weapons for years.

Intelligence breakdown or politics as usual?

I'm all for an inquiring, not just because I don't like
bush, but because I do love my country. Being the butt of
the world view is awful, and we should be spreading human
rights and dignity, not imperialism and suffering.

Politics aside, I think an investigation is a good idea.
You?


 

offline REFLEX from Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) on 2004-01-28 00:18 [#01051647]
Points: 8864 Status: Regular



There was a thing in the newspaper saying that there are
people in the white house who are saying that the evidence
and reasons to go into Iraq in the first place were pretty
much false.


 

offline DeadEight from vancouver (Canada) on 2004-01-28 00:26 [#01051649]
Points: 5437 Status: Regular



i'm glad that people in the states don't like the fact that
the world hates them...


 

offline REFLEX from Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) on 2004-01-28 00:35 [#01051651]
Points: 8864 Status: Regular



no shit.


 

offline REFLEX from Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) on 2004-01-28 00:36 [#01051652]
Points: 8864 Status: Regular



no shit.


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2004-01-28 00:54 [#01051659]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker



Any investigation will be a whitewash. The American people
need to overthrow the state and be done with their elite's
imperial adventures. Only then will they stop another 9/11.


 

offline -crazone from smashing acid over and over on 2004-01-28 01:07 [#01051664]
Points: 11234 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



why investigate something they allready know; again a waste
of a lot of money wich they could better spend on saving the
world...and I don't think saving the world is going to be
done by using artillerie


 

offline Jedi Chris on 2004-01-28 01:29 [#01051678]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker | Followup to jonesy: #01051659



Not going to happen is it?


 

offline blowfield on 2004-01-28 02:01 [#01051691]
Points: 572 Status: Regular | Followup to -crazone: #01051664



the last time bush had the idea he is responsible to "save
the world" he started the iraq war...


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2004-01-28 02:31 [#01051715]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to Jedi Chris: #01051678



No one can say.


 

offline BlatantEcho from All over (United States) on 2004-01-28 09:21 [#01052077]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to jonesy: #01051659



see, that is the thing.

Is this call for an investigation all political?

If it is, then it doesn't matter, we are fucked from the
start.

If it isn't, and people really want to find out who fucked
up so bad, then lets do it!.

Gawd, the 2004 elections can't come soon enough.......


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2004-01-28 09:23 [#01052079]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #01052077



You need to take up arms against your government mate. Get
organazized!


 

offline BlatantEcho from All over (United States) on 2004-01-28 09:28 [#01052096]
Points: 7210 Status: Lurker | Followup to jonesy: #01052079



Fuck government yes, but I still love my country, it is full
of many good people.

I'm going to do everything I can to make sure everyone who
is outraged, fucking VOTES.

Yes, this time I will march, this time I will protest,
because if we fuck up again this time, oh lord....... :(

---------
but yeah, I really think an independent investigation might
make everyone realize the false pretenses that got 500+ of
our boys killed, mud on our face, and another country
invaded and occupied.

double :(


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 09:30 [#01052098]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #01052096 | Show recordbag



how do people in the US generally feel about the election
coming up? Are they looking foward to getting rid of Bush or
do they actually think he's doing a good job?


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2004-01-28 09:31 [#01052100]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to BlatantEcho: #01052096



Fuck voting! As RATM had it: the structure is set you never
change it with a ballot poll.

You've got to get it together mairn, like the muthfuckin
Weathermen.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 09:48 [#01052119]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052098



i think bush is doing ok. a number of his policies scare
me, and the whole "either you're with me, or you're against
me" mentality leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. i
don't think it's healthy to discourage dissent like that.
and his aggressive foriegn policy is creating a lot of
resentment towards america. but, overall i think he's done
a pretty decent job.

there'll always be hatred for america, as long as we're on
top. when we crumble, there'll be hatred for whoever takes
our place.

i thought it was dumb to put so much emphasis on wmd as a
justification for war. just because i was afraid this would
happen. we don't find them and the shit hits the fan. i
don't doubt that dubya thought there was a really good
chance saddam had them. i sure as hell think he wanted
them. but, i'd say it's a fair bet that the administration
stretched the truth a good bit.

- saddam's a bad guy.
- iraq sits on prime real estate.
- it's in the middle of an area that is very hostile to
america.
- they have oil.
- saddam probably provides help to people that hate
america.
- saddam tried to kill dubya's daddy.
- there's a good chance he has, or is trying to get wmd's.
- he's repeatedly ignored specific UN mandates.
- the UN sanctions are killing the most innocent iraqis
every day.
- the bulk of our army is already there.

all of these (and more i'm sure) are reasons for the war.

was i "for" the war? absolutely not. war is horrible.
but, i do think it was the best option out of a pool of all
bad options.

if you're going to dispute my standpoint, please, state what
you think should've been done instead. not just how much
you hate america.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 09:55 [#01052122]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



oh, and i have no idea who i'm going to vote for.

i'd really like to get someone with a little bit less of a
unilateral mindset in office. but, absolutely none of the
democratic contenders seem very appealing to me.

there doesn't seem to be any real mission from any of them.
dean's whole campaign seems to be that he's anti-bush...
which is nice when you want to get people riled up, but,
exactly what does he stand for?

tear down everything bush has done. ok, fine. but, now
what are you going to rebuild?


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 09:55 [#01052123]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



"if you're going to dispute my standpoint, please, state
what
you think should've been done instead. not just how much
you hate america."

America "had to act"?? Don't make me laugh.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 09:58 [#01052127]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052123



nah, we didn't have to act.

i never said that at all.

i just said that i thought removing saddam by force was a
more acceptable option than doing nothing. which is what
you seem to be emplying should've been done.


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 09:59 [#01052130]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



there is nothing they should have done instead, the US does
NOT rule the world. Thats why there is the United Nations,
and we know what the US thinks about that organisation.


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 10:02 [#01052134]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Followup to epohs: #01052127 | Show recordbag



but why all of a sudden did something need to be done? The
US supported Iraq for years, knowing what the regime was
like.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 10:05 [#01052140]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052130



the UN had tried to impose their will on iraq time
and time again. multiple resolutions trying to force saddam
to comply with open inspections, and disclosure of
information about his various illegal (on an international
scale) programs.

and time and time again he blatantly disregarded those
resolutions.

so, the UN imposed sanctions. those sactions were
critically flawed. they were killing thousands of truly
innocent iraqis every month. i don't see how doing nothing
and letting those people starve can be so easilly ignored by
the world.

saddam was very vocal about his dislike for america. should
we've removed those sanctions and let him do what he wanted?
honestly, is that a better option?

i do think bush went about it too unilaterally. i said that
above. but, i don't think we did the complete wrong thing.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 10:07 [#01052143]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052134



i listed a number of reasons in my long post above.

we provided some support for iraq because we disliked iran
more. politics is a shitty shitty business that breeds
coruption.

i'm not serving up blanket support for our gov't. they do
plenty of things that i can't stand.


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 10:17 [#01052145]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



"should
we've removed those sanctions and let him do what he wanted?

honestly, is that a better option?"

i don't honesly know what would have been the best option. I
just think diplomacy, a changing of the sanctions so the
people did not suffer would have been better than all the
civilian deaths caused by "Shock and Awe" (what were they
thinking??)

As for WMD, UN weapon inspectors said they were making
progress, however the US insisted they had to act quick!
They couldn't wait months because of these invisible WMD
they were developing.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 10:32 [#01052162]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052145



"however the US insisted they had to act quick!"

yeah, i think that was probably bullshit. i think we
already had our carriers, battleships, tanks and men in the
area... plus, dubya wanted to make the move before his term
was up. that was probably the hurry.

but, the inspectors had been saying they were making
progress for 12 years. i really don't think the diplomacy
between the world and saddam would've ever worked, because
he didn't want it to.

however, i do think dubya should've worked harder on the
diplomacy between the US and the rest of the world.


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 10:37 [#01052164]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



"however, i do think dubya should've worked harder on the
diplomacy between the US and the rest of the world."

I think so too, and the UN should have had the last say on
Iraq.

Aside from that, the current goverment is TERRIBLE when it
comes to Environmental issues. I heard he even lifted limits
to the amount of pollution factories could produce?

Anyway i'm more concerned about the future and the
possibility of a US Government without Bush. I've been
looking at some of the democrats and i'd pick any of the
main 3 to replace Bush.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 10:41 [#01052166]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



i h8 the vast majority of the republican stance on the
environment. they're very pro business. and environmental
reform costs businesses money. but, i think in the long run
there's schloads of money to be saved/made from going
green.

<-- very pro environment.


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2004-01-28 10:59 [#01052188]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag



The Hutton enquiry has ruled that Blair did believe
there were WMDs...

I normally have faith in the law lords so this has shaken my
belief that Blair did know there was no threat a bit.


 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2004-01-28 11:08 [#01052202]
Points: 24590 Status: Lurker



anyone who loves a country needs their head examined


 

offline nlogax from oh, you must be the brains (Norway) on 2004-01-28 11:27 [#01052226]
Points: 4653 Status: Regular | Followup to marlowe: #01052202



affirmative.


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 11:30 [#01052232]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #01052188 | Show recordbag



I find it strange he's so convinced they had WMD.

Even Colin Powell admitted the other day he didn't know
wether they had WMD or not. Why is Tony Blair so convinced?


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 11:31 [#01052235]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



i love my car.

i love my chain.

i'm i'm just in love with that girl over there.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2004-01-28 11:34 [#01052236]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



bush may well be voted in for another term


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2004-01-28 11:37 [#01052239]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to pantalaimon: #01052232 | Show recordbag



I know, it would of been more diplomatic for him to of said
he believed there was a fair chance they did, enough to
warrant going to war. His dogged insistance that they
did falls down when he is unable to produce any evidence.


 

offline Anus_Presley on 2004-01-28 11:38 [#01052241]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker



i don't carre about nothing no morre. therre's little point
it seems.


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2004-01-28 11:39 [#01052242]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to Anus_Presley: #01052241



yes theres that


 

offline rockenjohnny from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2004-01-28 11:41 [#01052243]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker



i wonder where the rollover is


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 11:59 [#01052267]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Followup to rockenjohnny: #01052236 | Show recordbag



"bush may well be voted in for another term"

don't say thinks like that, i'm trying to be hopeful here!


 

offline mc_303_beatz from Glasgow, Scotland on 2004-01-28 12:05 [#01052275]
Points: 3386 Status: Regular | Followup to epohs: #01052143



I think you are blind to the fact that the USA not only
supported Iraq, but supplied them with weapons to not only
kill enemies with, but kill Iraq`s own people. And I also
think you are blind to the fact that the USA`s main purpose
for this war was to take over Iraq`s vast oil fields, thus
gifting US companies with Multi-milliondollar contracts in
the name of corporate gain. And another reason or this war
was for the US to extend it`s mission to become a
Undemocratic Global Police State.

bye


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:30 [#01052322]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to mc_303_beatz: #01052275



and, i think you are quick to tell me that i'm blind because
you disagree with my point of view.

i also think you are quick to assume that you're point of
view is undoubtedly correct.

i clearly stated in one of my posts above that i believe the
fact that iraq has oil was a factor in the eagerness for us
to go to war. do i think it was the major cause? i'm
unsure. but, i doubt it was as simple as our oil lust.

i also acknowledged that we supported the unsavory saddam
regime. i gave, what i believe to be the reasons for this.
and stated that gov't was a breeding ground for corruption,
and implied that i did not like that.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:37 [#01052323]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to mc_303_beatz: #01052275



and, i think you are quick to tell me that i'm blind because
you disagree with my point of view.

i also think you are quick to assume that you're point of
view is undoubtedly correct.

i clearly stated in one of my posts above that i believe the
fact that iraq has oil was a factor in the eagerness for us
to go to war. do i think it was the major cause? i'm
unsure.

i also acknowledged that we supported the unsavory saddam
regime. i gave, what i believe to be the reason for this.
and stated that gov't was a breeding ground for corruption,
and implied that i did not like that.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:37 [#01052324]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to mc_303_beatz: #01052275



and, i think you are quick to tell me that i'm blind because
you disagree with my point of view.

i also think you are quick to assume that you're point of
view is undoubtedly correct.

i clearly stated in one of my posts above that i believe the
fact that iraq has oil was a factor in the eagerness for us
to go to war. do i think it was the major cause? i'm
unsure.

i also acknowledged that we supported the unsavory saddam
regime. i gave, what i believe to be the reason for this.
and stated that gov't was a breeding ground for corruption,
and implied that i did not like that.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:37 [#01052325]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to mc_303_beatz: #01052275



and, i think you are quick to tell me that i'm blind because
you disagree with my point of view.

i also think you are quick to assume that you're point of
view is undoubtedly correct.

i clearly stated in one of my posts above that i believe the
fact that iraq has oil was a factor in the eagerness for us
to go to war. do i think it was the major cause? i'm
unsure.

i also acknowledged that we supported the unsavory saddam
regime. i gave, what i believe to be the reason for this.
and stated that gov't was a breeding ground for corruption,
and implied that i did not like that.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:38 [#01052327]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



wtf?


 

offline pantalaimon from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2004-01-28 12:41 [#01052331]
Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



ok we get it already! :)


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2004-01-28 12:42 [#01052333]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



haha!

well, i'm a trigger happy american, what can i say?

:)


 

offline mc_303_beatz from Glasgow, Scotland on 2004-01-28 12:42 [#01052334]
Points: 3386 Status: Regular | Followup to epohs: #01052322



I am always correct. :)


 

offline jonesy from Lisboa (Portugal) on 2004-01-29 00:29 [#01052962]
Points: 6650 Status: Lurker | Followup to epohs: #01052140



There have been more resolutions passed against Israel and
yet we do nothing. Why?


 

offline stefano_azevedo from Pindorama (Brazil) on 2005-03-06 18:08 [#01523816]
Points: 4396 Status: Regular



why not bump?


 


Messageboard index