Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-01-2008, 05:08 PM   #41
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn View Post
I watched a thing on TV recently that stated that the US only had two atomic bombs. Once the second one was dropped it took months to build another one.
They still had the ability to build it....something the rest of the world couldn't match at the time.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 05:16 PM   #42
Flash Walken
Lifetime Suspension
 
Flash Walken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
Exp:
Default

The 1 million figure IS an invented argument.

edit: also, this thread has gone terribly off track. I blame Troutman.

Last edited by Flash Walken; 02-01-2008 at 05:40 PM.
Flash Walken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 07:09 PM   #43
Vulcan
Franchise Player
 
Vulcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
I thought the FBI agent said that Saddam made up the whole idea of having WMD....and the US fell for it?
Saddam told the FBI agent that he wanted Iran to believe he had WMD for his own protection. I surmised this when we were discussing why Saddam played this game when the USA and the UN knew he didn't have them. The USAs best intelligence about WMD was provided by "Curveball". "But the Germans informed US intelligence that Curveball was a possible alcoholic "out of control" besides being described by his friends as a congenital liar. The guy was motivated to build a story so he could get asylum and I can only conclude that the only people who believed him were Bush and his cronies because they wanted war.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...836_wmd04.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)
Vulcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 07:30 PM   #44
Vulcan
Franchise Player
 
Vulcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
Exp:
Default

Further to my above post, since Iraq was invaded on the basis of a lie, I'd consider it far worse then the perhaps questionable decision to drop the A bomb on Japan.
Vulcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 07:39 PM   #45
CrusaderPi
Redundant Minister of Redundancy
Self-Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5 View Post
considering the majority of the candidates are nowhere as gung-ho about war as the last guy, i think the wise investor would cash in their savings in the near future.
You might want to check where Hillary get her campaign money from. She's more of a tool of the military industrial folks then W is.
CrusaderPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 07:40 PM   #46
CrusaderPi
Redundant Minister of Redundancy
Self-Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerplunk View Post
Was it the US, or Russia? Russia declared war on Japan 2 days after the first bomb was dropped, and it's possible that the thought of the red army sweeping down on them provided that extra little incentive.
Russia had a deal with the rest of the allies to enter the war against Japan 3 months after victory was declared in Europe.
CrusaderPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 07:56 PM   #47
RougeUnderoos
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
Exp:
Default

Comparing the current fiasco to WWII is kind of difficult.

If the Americans had declared war on Germany and raced across the pond only to find that the Nazis hadn't actually invaded Poland or anywhere else, then they would be comparable "mistakes".

There obviously were mistakes in WWII, but at least it was based on something in reality.
__________________

RougeUnderoos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:02 PM   #48
Vulcan
Franchise Player
 
Vulcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrusaderPi View Post
You might want to check where Hillary get her campaign money from. She's more of a tool of the military industrial folks then W is.
I'd like a link just because the thing that bothers me about Hillary is that she voted to give George free rein to invade Iraq when she either knew better or she's pretty uninformed.
Vulcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:09 PM   #49
Blaster86
UnModerator
 
Blaster86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North Vancouver, British Columbia.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
I thought the FBI agent said that Saddam made up the whole idea of having WMD....and the US fell for it?

Yep, to keep the Iranians from invading.
__________________

THANK MR DEMKO
CPHL Ottawa Vancouver
Blaster86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:16 PM   #50
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan View Post
I'd like a link just because the thing that bothers me about Hillary is that she voted to give George free rein to invade Iraq when she either knew better or she's pretty uninformed.
Don't try to paint her as 'uninformed.'

I believe the correct word would be 'stupid.'

Why?

Because she, like the rest of the Democrats, and the rest of Congress didn't even bother to read beyond page 1 of the intelligence report.

Obama may have voted against it...but it wasn't because he followed up on the intelligence and decided it didn't make sense.

Its actually typical of Hillary....the American people supported the war(60% at the time IIRC)...so she supported it. Nevermind with making sure the intelligence was correct.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:21 PM   #51
FlamesAddiction
Franchise Player
 
FlamesAddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

Just before I read this thread, I saw that a suicide bomber in Iraq just killed 72 people...

Iraq is a disaster and a cesspool of terrorism (more so now than before the war). I think that counts as being a mistake.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
FlamesAddiction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:33 PM   #52
RougeUnderoos
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Don't try to paint her as 'uninformed.'

I believe the correct word would be 'stupid.'

Why?

Because she, like the rest of the Democrats, and the rest of Congress didn't even bother to read beyond page 1 of the intelligence report.

Obama may have voted against it...but it wasn't because he followed up on the intelligence and decided it didn't make sense.

Its actually typical of Hillary....the American people supported the war(60% at the time IIRC)...so she supported it. Nevermind with making sure the intelligence was correct.
This is just bizarre. It's pretty clear that you have a decent hate-on for the Clintons but trying to pin this mess on her and the Democrats "not reading the intelligence" is bordering on the pathological.
__________________

RougeUnderoos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:38 PM   #53
FlamingLonghorn
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Austin, Tx
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
Obama may have voted against it...but it wasn't because he followed up on the intelligence and decided it didn't make sense.
Why did he vote against it all knowing master? What says Alex Jones in all of this?
FlamingLonghorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:45 PM   #54
HOZ
Lifetime Suspension
 
HOZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

I would suggest people reread the opinion piece or even better, perhaps read it for the first time.

Talk about way off the mark. Molehilling comes to mind.

Iraq," swears Al Gore, "was the single worst strategic mistake in American history." Senate Majority leader Harry Reid agrees that the war he voted to authorize is "the worst foreign policy mistake in U.S. history," and indeed is already "lost." Many of our historically minded politicians and commanders have weighed in with similar superlatives. Retired General William Odom calls Iraq "the greatest strategic disaster in United States history." Senator Chuck Hagel (who voted for the war) is somewhat more cautious; he terms Iraq "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam." Jimmy Carter takes, as usual, the loftiest view: the Iraq War, and Great Britain's acquiescence in it, constitute "a major tragedy for the world," and prove that the Bush Administration "has been the worst in history."

For those who need to continue the bomb convo I suggest a bit of research of what it was like back in early 1945. If you do not have the time I suggest renting "Flag of Our Fathers". They lay out the reality of the American/ Pacific situation early in the movie. The US was bankrupt and tired of the fight. Britain was spent and Japan was nowhere nearer to surrender than they were in 1942. A president facing the invasion of Okinawa and then the Main Islands (not land!) with a conservative estimate of 1 million casualties.......

And what was Japan like? Well North Korea offers a great comparison.
HOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:50 PM   #55
HOZ
Lifetime Suspension
 
HOZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos View Post
This is just bizarre. It's pretty clear that you have a decent hate-on for the Clintons but trying to pin this mess on her and the Democrats "not reading the intelligence" is bordering on the pathological.
Congress approved the invasion. They had all the information or lack of it to do what they are suppose to do. Check and balance. One candidate, for President, decided that the information or evidence wasn't enough. The other candidate checked the opinion polls and voted. Or did she just agree with Satan and then change her opinion later when the polls went south?
HOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 08:58 PM   #56
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos View Post
This is just bizarre. It's pretty clear that you have a decent hate-on for the Clintons but trying to pin this mess on her and the Democrats "not reading the intelligence" is bordering on the pathological.
Hey, I know Bush and his administration are at fault for starting this 'mess'...but its not like the Democrats, including Hillary aren't guilty as well.

IIRC....there was an article a while back proving that most of Congress didn't bother to properly read the intelligence report. Most of them voted without actually knowing what was at stake....or how the intelligence stacked up.

Hillary was one of them.

At least Obama has stayed his course from the get-go....didn't like it then, doesn't like it now. Hillary goes with the flow. First she supports it...then she supports a bill that tries to force an end to everything.

Like I said before....leaving 2-3 million casualties by pulling out of Vietnam was a 'great' exit strategy. If Iraq is on the brink of civil war now....maybe not as much since the surge, but still, what do you think will happen once the US suddenly pulls out with creating at least some semblance of a government?

Even Obama is off his rocker on this one...and frankly I think he will lose a lot of votes because of his ignorance or just plain 'stupidity' towards Iraq. I admire his willingness to implement change, and think as a person, his morals, his ideals give him the ability to be a great leader. But he is very obviously showing his ignorance on foreign policy issues. Will it be a big deal in the end? Perhaps....but if he surrounds himself with viable, and intelligence people I don't think he'll have a problem.

And yes, I really, really dislike Hillary. I think she is the prime example of everything that is wrong in Washington. Politicians that vote, and act based on how the people throughout America react. If there is 'one' good quality about Bush, its the fact that he has stood by what he has started from the get-go. Perhaps stubbornly too....but its better then the cut and run idea that so many Democrats think will work.

'The surge isn't going to work'....

'Well, maybe it is working now'....

Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 09:04 PM   #57
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sowa View Post
Why did he vote against it all knowing master? What says Alex Jones in all of this?
Read his speech regarding his reasons against the war.

Never mentions anything about poor intelligence. Or even about reading the intelligence reports and concluding that it wasn't good enough.

In fact, he doesn't even mention WMD outside of saying that Saddam tried to acquire nuclear, chemical or biological weapons....or wanted too at one point.

Here, a quote from Obama...

Quote:
"Like most analysts, I assumed that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and coveted nuclear arms."
Yeah, indeed he read the intelligence reports.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 09:10 PM   #58
RougeUnderoos
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HOZ View Post
Congress approved the invasion. They had all the information or lack of it to do what they are suppose to do. Check and balance. One candidate, for President, decided that the information or evidence wasn't enough. The other candidate checked the opinion polls and voted. Or did she just agree with Satan and then change her opinion later when the polls went south?
Hey, I'm not on Hillary's side.
__________________

RougeUnderoos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 09:16 PM   #59
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos View Post
Hey, I'm not on Hillary's side.
His point still stands though.

And it just goes to prove my biggest problem with Hillary.

It must be nice for her....she supported the war when the public supported it...now when the public support for the war has disappeared...so has her support.

Wrong or not, she can afford to do that, obviously in an effort to appease public America.

Bush can't. Which is why his support is at the 'second' lowest that it has ever been for a US President. He has to see it through till the end....wrong or not.

But that still doesn't excuse his mistakes. Or his administration's rush to invade. Even if the intelligence community unilaterally supported all the intelligence that was generated leading up to the war.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2008, 09:18 PM   #60
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Here, I found the article I was talking about earlier.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...007-06-19.html

Quote:
Only a handful of senators outside the Intelligence Committee say they read the full 92-page National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s ability to attack the U.S. before voting to go to war, according to a survey conducted by The Hill.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:31 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy