Kay: "Iraq had no WMD"

[Shannow]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbc350gearhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shannow:
sbc350gearhead,
I think that this concept of pre-emptive strikes, that is retaliating before the first blow occurs leaves the way open for this kind of error.

Then you are relying solely on intelligence that someone is planning to do something....gets messy, and mistakes will be made.

---

No offense shannow, but a couple of years ago, we found out what doing nothing gets us. The powers that be, knew that osama was a serious threat, but waited for the trigger to be pulled. Now, the majority of americans fully support chopping off the arm of anyone drawing a gun.

---

No offence taken.

However, when it's found that the arm wasn't even holding a gun, support starts to wane.

 

[XS650]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shannow:



However, when it's found that the arm wasn't even holding a gun, support starts to wane.

---

But, he had plans to get a gun. Isn't that justification to chop somones arm off?

****

 

[Drew99GT]

Why is it that anti-war people, and most notably, the Democratic candidates, are anti-US? And that the anti-war view aides and gives comfort to the "enemy"? I think we, the US, aided and gave comfort to the real US enemy, Al-Queda by unilaterally invading Iraq!!!! Instead of attacking the argument, anti-war people get labelled anti-US. That's just a propogandast statment of no-merrit what-so-ever.

 

[MarkC]

quote:

---

Originally posted by XS650:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shannow:



However, when it's found that the arm wasn't even holding a gun, support starts to wane.

---

But, he had plans to get a gun. Isn't that justification to chop somones arm off?

****

---

Oh wait, I get it. Anybody who thinks about doing something bad must be offed?
That would revolutionize our criminal justice system, wouldn't it?

 

[sbc350gearhead]

Well, with our liberal justice system.........those who actually do something wrong are labeled as "victims" and actually get away with it. Perhaps the justice system could use a revolution.........but we digress.

 

[bootlegger_1]

Bush used the same intelligence agency that Clinton did. Remember Clinton launched a massive cruise missle attack against what, a murderous dictator named Saddam that he believed possesed WMD. Strange how that gets lost in the discussion. But if you really want a culprit that led to this faulty conclusion look no further than the former Senator Robert Toricelli, aka the torch who gutted the CIA's ability to do their job with what later became known as the Toricelli amendment. Both parties are less than honest with the people they represent. Neither has a lock on honesty or dishonesty.

**********************************
"Torch" Has Some 'Splainin' to Do

"Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., led congressional efforts in the mid-1990s
that handcuffed the CIA's abilities to recruit spies - a key policy that
helped allow the attacks of Sept. 11 to take place with no intelligence
warnings. Current and former CIA operatives say that Clinton administration
policies, which forbade the CIA from recruiting known terrorists and other
criminals, left the U.S. government bereft of all intelligence about such
terrorist groups.

"In 1995, then-Rep. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., made secrets public at the
behest of left-wing activist Bianca Jagger, his girlfriend at the time,
according to Newark Star-Ledger columnist Paul Mulshine in the
January/February issue of Heterodoxy. The secrets suggested that the CIA
had on its payroll one or more unsavory characters who had been involved in
murder. Torricelli gave away secrets he obtained through his membership on
the House Intelligence Committee. This so outraged then-Speaker Newt
Gingrich that he tried to have the New Jersey Democrat kicked off the
panel."