Did the president abandon an American soldier?

[Conan71]

SI- Go back to your history books.  The Sunnis and Shi'ites have been battling for centuries.  You also neglect to acknowledge that removing Saddam Hussein from power was as much an objective as finding WMD's.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

SI- Go back to your history books.  The Sunnis and Shi'ites have been battling for centuries.  You also neglect to acknowledge that removing Saddam Hussein from power was as much an objective as finding WMD's.

My history books seem to indicate Iraq was a stable part of the Ottoman empire until it was dismantled post world war 1. Please tell me if I'm reading the wrong kind of history books.

There were weapons inspectors in Iraq, we were told missiles could be launched in 45 minutes. I remember Hans Blix looking very hard for the weapons. If it was an objective of the Iraq war to remove Saddam it was kept hidden from the American people, its allies and the UN until later on. The main reasons for the war were 'Saddam has links to Al Qaeda' and 'He has some WMDs'. Both of these were found to be untrue.

[okiebybirth]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

SI- Go back to your history books.  The Sunnis and Shi'ites have been battling for centuries.  You also neglect to acknowledge that removing Saddam Hussein from power was as much an objective as finding WMD's.

Why didn't Bush Jr. know about the Sunnis and Shi'ites battling for centuries instead of letting Rumsfield convince him it was going to be a cakewalk?  Removing Hussein from power is all well and good, but having a strategy after the war would have been nice.  What happened to the Powell doctrine, why was it thrown out for the half-baked plan by Rumsfield?  We could have quelled a lot of the violence if we had enough troops.  Instead we invaded a country without any plan to occupy, thinking they were going to give us a parade in six short months.

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Iran, the real problem in the Middle East, doubling it's size overnight.

How do you know that? Because the Bush Administration told us? Didn't the Bush Administration also tell us that we had proof that Iraq had WMDs and that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and was a direct threat to the U.S.? How do we know this business about Iran isn't more "faulty intelligence"?

[Double A]

Yep. I would rather have order in Iraq with Saddam Hussein contained and still in power, than have total chaos in Iraq and the U.S. taking orders from Ayatollah Al Satyr. We never should have abandoned the Powell doctrine.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Iran, the real problem in the Middle East, doubling it's size overnight.

How do you know that? Because the Bush Administration told us? Didn't the Bush Administration also tell us that we had proof that Iraq had WMDs and that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and was a direct threat to the U.S.? How do we know this business about Iran isn't more "faulty intelligence"?

You don't have to be a rocket scientist, nor listen to the president to figure out who the new bully is on the block in the Middle East.  Or is that all intelligence clap-trap that Iran is working on nuclear weapons?

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

You don't have to be a rocket scientist, nor listen to the president to figure out who the new bully is on the block in the Middle East.

There's always gonna be a bully in the Middle East. Before we de-stabilized Iraq, it was the other bully in the Middle East. The two bullies were so busy snarling at each other that they were both neutered to some extent.

quote:
Or is that all intelligence clap-trap that Iran is working on nuclear weapons?

I dunno. Neither do you. We know that they're working on things that MIGHT be precursors to nuclear weapons but I haven't seen any evidence (other than speculation) that it's intended for anything other than what they claim it's intended for. Do you have some evidence that it is? If so, please share it with us. We were told at one point (by Bush) that Iraq was six months away from having a nuclear weapon. That turned out to be pure bullcrap. How do we know this is not more bullcrap?

[Conan71]

Well, I'll admit my Arabic sucks, so I can't say for sure that President nut-job in Iran is or isn't saying Israel needs to be wiped off the map or that he's make provocative comments about a "surprise" in relation to their nuclear capabilities.

[rwarn17588]

Of course, if we're worried about Iran having nukes, we shouldn't post documents on the Internet that help them.

[]

[Conan71]

That has GOT to be some sort of subterfuge.  I sh!t down both legs when I heard that on the Today Show.

You guys can have at Bush II for being stupid all you like, but no one could possibly be stupid enough to post instructions on how to build nuclear weapons on the internet or a site that could be accessed via the internet unless it's a subterfuge of some sort.

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Well, I'll admit my Arabic sucks, so I can't say for sure that President nut-job in Iran is or isn't saying Israel needs to be wiped off the map or that he's make provocative comments about a "surprise" in relation to their nuclear capabilities.

Sorry, Conan, I must not have been clear. I was asking whether you have any EVIDENCE, not speculation.

Wait. I DID ask for evidence and not speculation.

Does the fact that you offered nothing but speculation means that you don't have any real evidence either?

As far as Israel is concerned, what does that have to do with this?

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Of course, if we're worried about Iran having nukes, we shouldn't post documents on the Internet that help them.

[]

If you're talking about the plans for building a crude nuclear device, that's been on the Internet for years. I'd find a link for you but, even though I got rid of the plants DECADES ago, I still don't like the thought of the federales snooping around my house. [}:)]

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Well, I'll admit my Arabic sucks, so I can't say for sure that President nut-job in Iran is or isn't saying Israel needs to be wiped off the map or that he's make provocative comments about a "surprise" in relation to their nuclear capabilities.

Sorry, Conan, I must not have been clear. I was asking whether you have any EVIDENCE. Does the fact that you offered nothing but speculation means that you don't have any real evidence either?

As far as Israel is concerned, what does that have to do with this?

Papa, certainly you are pulling my chain, you couldn't possibly be that obtuse.

Sorry I don't have that sort of security clearance, nor does anyone on this forum that I'm aware of.

Connecting the dots of what interpreters have been saying Iran's leader has been saying, he thinks Israel should be wiped off the map, they are working on nuclear research which has not only the U.S. worried, but the EU.  They have been purposefully cagey about what their intentions are with their continuing research on uranium enrichment.  If they are totally clean on their nuclear research, then why are they making bellicose comments like having a "nuclear surprise" and why defy of IAEA edicts and policies?

No one in any article I can find can conclusively state that Iran is enriching uranium soley for peaceful purposes.  If they were enriching it soley for the purpose of energy, then why the veil of secrecy?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525931298&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4378948.stm

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Papa, certainly you are pulling my chain, you couldn't possibly be that obtuse.

I'm not pulling your chain at all...at least not on THIS. [}:)]

Nor am I being obtuse. It's just that I operate on the philosophy of "fool me once..." Bush lied to us about exactly this kind of thing so I don't take him at his word on ANYTHING.

quote:
Sorry I don't have that sort of security clearance, nor does anyone on this forum that I'm aware of.

Connecting the dots of what interpreters have been saying Iran's leader has been saying, he thinks Israel should be wiped off the map, they are working on nuclear research which has not only the U.S. worried, but the EU.  They have been purposefully cagey about what their intentions are with their continuing research on uranium enrichment.  If they are totally clean on their nuclear research, then why are they making bellicose comments like having a "nuclear surprise" and why defy of IAEA edicts and policies?

I don't recall hearing anything about a NUCLEAR surprise. Got a link? As far as the rhetoric of their "leader" I expect that a lot of that is meant for internal consumption. It makes him look good to his "constituency" to talk bold and tough to the U.S.

quote:
No one in any article I can find can conclusively state that Iran is enriching uranium soley for peaceful purposes.  If they were enriching it soley for the purpose of energy, then why the veil of secrecy?

Are you kidding? Try going up to the front gate of any nuclear energy plant in the U.S. and tell 'em you wanna go in and look around.

quote:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525931298&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4378948.stm

I'll take a look at the links this evening.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by papaspot

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Papa, certainly you are pulling my chain, you couldn't possibly be that obtuse.

I'm not pulling your chain at all...at least not on THIS. [}:)]

Nor am I being obtuse. It's just that I operate on the philosophy of "fool me once..." Bush lied to us about exactly this kind of thing so I don't take him at his word on ANYTHING.

quote:
Sorry I don't have that sort of security clearance, nor does anyone on this forum that I'm aware of.

Connecting the dots of what interpreters have been saying Iran's leader has been saying, he thinks Israel should be wiped off the map, they are working on nuclear research which has not only the U.S. worried, but the EU.  They have been purposefully cagey about what their intentions are with their continuing research on uranium enrichment.  If they are totally clean on their nuclear research, then why are they making bellicose comments like having a "nuclear surprise" and why defy of IAEA edicts and policies?

I don't recall hearing anything about a NUCLEAR surprise. Got a link? As far as the rhetoric of their "leader" I expect that a lot of that is meant for internal consumption. It makes him look good to his "constituency" to talk bold and tough to the U.S.

quote:
No one in any article I can find can conclusively state that Iran is enriching uranium soley for peaceful purposes.  If they were enriching it soley for the purpose of energy, then why the veil of secrecy?

Are you kidding? Try going up to the front gate of any nuclear energy plant in the U.S. and tell 'em you wanna go in and look around.

quote:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525931298&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4378948.stm

I'll take a look at the links this evening.

Granted, some of it is trying to look like a hard-donkey, there is a web site maintained primarily by Iranian students that speaks to that effect.  I'm also not discounting that there has been concern in Iran of an Israeli attack using U.S. Nuclear weapons.

It's all in the links I've posted.  However, we aren't talking about individuals randomly driving up to gates of nuclear plants to have a look-see.

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/index.html

It is my understanding that all countries with nuclear capabilities are subject to IAEA regulations and inspections.  Refusing to allow inspections is akin to refusing a cop with a valid search warrant into your house.  If you have nothing to hide, why would you refuse a legal search of your property?  

Continuing to enrich uranium beyond limits necessary for "peaceful" purposes which are set forth (3.5% is considered energy grade, 90% weapons grade.  Iran is now at 5% and planning to add more centrifuges which would give them capability for even higher amounts) is akin to violating a court order- that's oversimplifying, but I don't know another way to put it.

If you are having trouble falling asleep tonight, here's more interesting reading:

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2006/gov2006-53.pdf

The International Atomic Energy Agency is hardly a GWB mouthpiece and not partisan.

I'm just questioning, why, if Iran has totally peaceful intentions with Uranium enrichment, why are they being secretive about it.

We don't need to re-tread on Saddam Hussein's little shell game he had going on in Iraq with the UN for ten years.