View Single Post
      01-18-2008, 05:27 PM   #92
Zoom Zoom

Drives: 2010 VW GTI
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona

iTrader: (0)

Originally Posted by Khobin~ View Post
my 2 cents:

1. "weapons of mass destruction" found = 0, The "intellegence" he had obviously wasn't that credible, or they would have found something...unlike the intelliegence they had warning them that 9/11 was going to happen.:wink:
So the intelligence was credible, then it wasn't? Ehh... you will have to explain that to me. And, again, there were more agencies than just the CIA that were advising the US. There were at least 5 credible reports which the US acted on, IIRC.

BTW, the US did find weapons of mass destruction in the form of thousands of pounds of sarin and mustard gas. But that little factoid seems to be ignored by the press.

Originally Posted by Khobin
2. How are you less safe? Well rights of many Americans were seemingly suspensed, and can be pretty much done at any point, due to suspicision of being a terrorist, or involved in terroist activies...not to mention that bombing the shit out of 2 countries is going to leave a lot of pissed off people, they might smile at gun holding soldiers as they walk by, but at home they will probably be telling their children how their family was killed...:iono:
How is this being less safe? We can debate the privacy issue all we want, but we still aren't less safe.

Originally Posted by Khobin
Perhaps Afghanistan was somewhat "justified", but Iraq was something else, it wasn't about getting Saddam out of power, it wasn't about "weapons of mass destruction"...And in the end, the cycle continues.
...I smell the oil argument coming...

I guess my question to those that were (are) against the war is: Is doing nothing a legitimate alternative? Remember, 9/11 happened before we invaded Iraq. So the "hornet's nest" argument isn't ringing true with me. Anyway, good question for discussion as I would be very curious to see what many of you would have done (or will do) given the same intelligence at the same time (as in, not knowing what we know now).

Originally Posted by E82TT6
It's simply indisputable that Al Quaeda is stronger now. Every credible intelligence source states as much.
Post one. I would like to see a credible intelligence source that states that we US citizens are less safe now than in back in 2003. Perhaps I have missed these reports (a pretty good probability of that, actually)...

Originally Posted by E82TT6
0 connection between Iraq and Islamic Terrorism.
That is profoundly inaccurate. Even the United Nations recognized that Iraq was a state-sponsor of terrorism. Heck, many would argue that the way he treated many of his citizens was terrorism itself.

BTW, seeing as we have a fair amount of Barack supporters here, I thought I would share this image I got in an email the other day:


In the garage: 2007 MINI Cooper S

WARNING: What you have read is an opinion. Yours will differ.