Saddam caught on tape talking of WMD's

Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. Board Supporter
    snakebyte05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,538
    Rep Power
    900
    Level
    30
    Lv. Percent
    84.67%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Saddam caught on tape talking of WMD's


    This article is not saying he had them, but he definatly wanted them and was trying to decieve the U.N. that he had them. Also makes references to him having the supplies to make them.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11373537/

    MSNBC.com
    Saddam talked of WMD attack in U.S.
    Tapes show him ‘almost obsessed’ with weapons, don’t prove he had them
    By Lisa Myers & the NBC Investigative Unit
    NBC News
    Updated: 6:29 p.m. ET Feb. 15, 2006
    WASHINGTON - Among the treasure trove of information captured after Saddam Hussein's fall were tape
    recordings of the Iraqi leader discussing weapons of mass destruction with top aides.
    Transcripts of Saddam's tapes reviewed by NBC News show him ruminating about future terror attacks
    in the United States using weapons of mass destruction.
    "We shouldn’t be surprised to see a car bomb with nuclear [material] explode [in] Washington, either
    germ or chemical," Saddam tells aides. "So this is coming,” Saddam says on the tapes, “but not from
    Iraq," he adds, seeming to indicate that Iraq would not be the source of any such attack.
    An unidentified Saddam aide replies that biological weapons are easy to construct: “… any biologist can
    make it in water tank and kill 100,000 person … so you can’t accuse a country, one person can do it.
    One American person can do it in a house, next to the White House.”
    On another tape, Saddam says future terrorism will be with WMD. "It is possible in the future to see a
    booby trap and the explosion turns out to be nuclear, germ or chemical."
    U.S. intelligence analysts have confirmed to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that
    Saddam’s voice on the audiotapes is authentic. The analysts believe most of the tapes were recorded in
    the ’90s, after the first Gulf War.
    “What the tapes show is that between the first gulf war and the second gulf war, Saddam Hussein had
    not lost his appetite for, or interest in, weapons of mass destruction,” says Gary Milhollin of the
    Wisconsin Project, an advocacy group working to slow the spread of weapons of mass destruction. “To
    the contrary, he was almost obsessed by them.’’
    Importantly, though, many U.S. intelligence experts say the 12 hours of tape does not solve the riddle
    of whether Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 U.S. invasion.
    “It certainly shows that he was trying to deceive the U.N., but it doesn't show that he actually had
    weapons in his possession at the time of the invasion,” says Bill Harlow, a former CIA spokesman and
    an NBC News analyst.
    In the transcripts, one of Saddam’s aides discusses filling missiles with germs. “Yes, the intention is that
    the missile will be filled with chemical or germ, and when it comes down it will cover a wider circle than
    the traditional missile,” the aide tells Saddam. Saddam replies: “That’s good, they are teaching us
    things that will be useful in the future.”
    Other aides seem to discuss hiding weapons from U.N. inspectors. “We have not told them the truth
    about the imported material,” one says. He adds, “Where was the nuclear material transported to? A
    number of them were transported out of Iraq.” He also says: “We will confess, but not to the biological
    program.”
    The debates over Iraq’s WMD will likely continue. The House Intelligence Committee is pressing U.S.
    intelligence officials to publicly release more than 35,000 boxes of documents recovered in Iraq after the
    U.S. invasion. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., does not believe the
    documents have been fully translated and analyzed.
    John Loftus, an author and former federal prosecutor, obtained the Saddam audiotapes through a
    former U.S. military intelligence analyst, he says. Loftus tells NBC News he will play the tapes this
    weekend at an intelligence summit he is hosting in the Washington area.
    NBC News has not listened to the tapes and has not been able to independently confirm the accuracy of
    the translations.
    Lisa Myers is NBC's senior investigative correspondent.
    © 2006 MSNBC Interactive
    © 2006 MSNBC.com
    URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11373537/

  2. Board Supporter
    RipdnTxs2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    48
    Posts
    577
    Rep Power
    404
    Level
    19
    Lv. Percent
    50.93%

    Iwonder why the media did not jump all over this, hmmmmm....
  3. Board Supporter
    diminuendo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Age
    36
    Posts
    332
    Rep Power
    290
    Level
    15
    Lv. Percent
    62.53%

    Seems casual to blow it off as "well, just because he was hoping to have a chance to use WMDs in Washington doesn't mean he was gonna do it...like for certain."

    **** the media machine...too busy covering a hunting accident.
    •   
       

  4. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27397
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.31%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Media are a bunch of Brokeback Mountain lovin queers. All they know is sensationalism and the forward march of their idealist, Socialist, Politically correct, make me want to string someone up by the nutsack agenda.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  5. Doctor Science
    LakeMountD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    4,251
    Rep Power
    2555
    Level
    46
    Lv. Percent
    92.67%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by diminuendo
    Seems casual to blow it off as "well, just because he was hoping to have a chance to use WMDs in Washington doesn't mean he was gonna do it...like for certain."

    **** the media machine...too busy covering a hunting accident.
    ****ing seriously man. I mean I am not going to sit here and take political sides but I did take Bush's side on the whole WMD thing because whether they had them right this second or not, everyone should have known he was trying his ass off to get them.
  6. Senior Member
    MaynardMeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,108
    Rep Power
    677
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    63.26%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    actually more of that story does say that saddam had them... one of his old generals is talking now and is going public with the whole plan they had and did to load these weapons both chem. and bio on two or 3 large cargo planes and get them out of the country while the US came in...
  7. Board Supporter
    snakebyte05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,538
    Rep Power
    900
    Level
    30
    Lv. Percent
    84.67%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by MaynardMeek
    actually more of that story does say that saddam had them... one of his old generals is talking now and is going public with the whole plan they had and did to load these weapons both chem. and bio on two or 3 large cargo planes and get them out of the country while the US came in...
    any articles on this? Id be very interested to read them, also to have some documented sources to show others (then they cant say I am full of ****, ill have some thing to back it up)
  8. Registered User
    milwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Age
    48
    Posts
    2,460
    Rep Power
    1405
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    44.91%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by LakeMountD
    ****ing seriously man. I mean I am not going to sit here and take political sides but I did take Bush's side on the whole WMD thing because whether they had them right this second or not, everyone should have known he was trying his ass off to get them.
    werd that!!!
  9. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr
    Media are a bunch of Brokeback Mountain lovin queers. All they know is sensationalism and the forward march of their idealist, Socialist, Politically correct, make me want to string someone up by the nutsack agenda.
    It's definitely and interesting development. However as far as the media goes, I haven't seen this on Fox News either so there may be more to the lack of coverage than liberal bias and agendas. It may in fact be lack of credibility or confirmation across sources. In others words not a good, or more to the point factually solid story yet. Last article I read on this was posted here and according to that one the translation of the tapes had not been independently confirmed yet.
  10. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27397
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.31%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    It's definitely and interesting development. However as far as the media goes, I haven't seen this on Fox News either so there may be more to the lack of coverage than liberal bias and agendas. It may in fact be lack of credibility or confirmation across sources. In others words not a good, or more to the point factually solid story yet. Last article I read on this was posted here and according to that one the translation of the tapes had not been independently confirmed yet.
    I'm not a fan of Fox news either. They may have a slightly diff agenda than other networks but an agenda it is. My rantings were more toward the media in general and not relating praticularly to this story. I was just being a bitter old man.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  11. Registered User
    milwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Age
    48
    Posts
    2,460
    Rep Power
    1405
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    44.91%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I generally prefer FOX news to the other bilge out there, but that's not to say they don't have their particular opinion/slant/adgenda.
  12. New Member
    chauncy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    124
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    15.74%

    Even if we establish that he had intent to create WMDs. I still disagree that he was a greater threat then those countries who right this moment are starting their nuclear weapons programs. Yeah we got rid of Saddam, but in his wake the rise of Iran, Hamas and islamofacism has taken hold.
  13. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27397
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.31%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    And we are now logistically in prime real estate to launch an assault into Iran.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  14. Senior Member
    MaynardMeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,108
    Rep Power
    677
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    63.26%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    we will have a much better ability to go into iran after the port deal goes thru. and also protect the only water way to the ocean from iran sinking old cargo ships blocking the way...
  15. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by MaynardMeek
    we will have a much better ability to go into iran after the port deal goes thru. and also protect the only water way to the ocean from iran sinking old cargo ships blocking the way...
    And the president, should these tapes prove out, would not be vulnerable to the He Lied Us Into War attacks except to the most aerdent democrats who wouldn't vote for the next Republican anyway. Basically if it turns out true Saddam either had WMDs or was vigorously trying to aquire them, and that gets broad exposure, Bush could probably get away with leveling France and not have to deal with much backlash from anyone. Also as has been pointed out the strategic position we're in now with regrds to Iran, oil and the ability to protect its shipment, ain't all that bad. Which makes me wonder just how dumb this president actually isn't, or at least his staff. I've heavily doubted the intelligence of this administration a lot of times, but I got to admit every now and then something like this pops up and makes me wonder.
  16. New Member
    chauncy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    124
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    15.74%

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    And the president, should these tapes prove out, would not be vulnerable to the He Lied Us Into War attacks except to the most aerdent democrats who wouldn't vote for the next Republican anyway. Basically if it turns out true Saddam either had WMDs or was vigorously trying to aquire them, and that gets broad exposure, Bush could probably get away with leveling France and not have to deal with much backlash from anyone. Also as has been pointed out the strategic position we're in now with regrds to Iran, oil and the ability to protect its shipment, ain't all that bad. Which makes me wonder just how dumb this president actually isn't, or at least his staff. I've heavily doubted the intelligence of this administration a lot of times, but I got to admit every now and then something like this pops up and makes me wonder.
    Even if strategicly we are in a good spot to launch an attack against iran. It does not take into account the fact that our military is highly over extended right now and thats according to research conducted by the federal government. This is the first time I've heard about the ports deal offering us some sort of strategic position. I thought it was primarily an economic decision. What troubles me about the deal is that dubai still has a huge amount of disdain towards israel which could lead to a conflict of interest in the future.
  17. Advanced Member
    Squeaks4ver's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  114 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    30
    Posts
    630
    Rep Power
    1605
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    54.64%

    it still is a great econmic thing in my opinion. gas prices should go down but like, how can pres bush go around and talk about that. everyone will be like "you are selling the country out for oil!"

    everyone they interview on these docks doesn't care, i think their opinon counts here
  18. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by chauncy
    Even if strategicly we are in a good spot to launch an attack against iran. It does not take into account the fact that our military is highly over extended right now and thats according to research conducted by the federal government. This is the first time I've heard about the ports deal offering us some sort of strategic position. I thought it was primarily an economic decision. What troubles me about the deal is that dubai still has a huge amount of disdain towards israel which could lead to a conflict of interest in the future.
    True. The most recent issue and the one just past of Foreign Affairs has some great articles on Iraq. Get yourself a copy if you haven't already, it's reall good reading. In the current issue the first article was on the Iraqization strategy and the author, Biddle, makes some pretty interesting points regarding that strategy and why it could be likely to be a loser in the end.
  19. Elite Member
    bioman's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    513136
    Level
    59
    Lv. Percent
    86.76%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    We cannot even hope to attack Iran and remove it's leadership until Iraq is fully stabilized. Iran knows this, thus the saber rattling and tough sounding rhetoric. I seriously doubt any military action will come out of Iran. If they so much as look at Israel they will be sorry and they know it.

    Leaders of these Arab nations that pledge the destruction of Israel are just blowing smoke up their populaces' asses. They couldn't hope to win against Israel, they know it, but they have to sound tough against the Jews or they'll be taken out by zealots.

    So if we march on Iran, we have to occupy if there is going to be any hopes of having it stabilize and keep the oil flowing. I'd be for surgical strikes to take out nuclear capacity but even that is reported to not be easy as Iran has placed these targets in hardened bunkers and the like.



    IF Saddam really had WMD it would be the sensational story of the year and no media outlet is going to sit on it while the others run with it. There is not a worldwide liberal media conspiracy no matter how much some of you wish there was. It's an absurd premise to justify the actions of an absurd administration.
  20. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bioman
    Leaders of these Arab nations that pledge the destruction of Israel are just blowing smoke up their populaces' asses. They couldn't hope to win against Israel, they know it, but they have to sound tough against the Jews or they'll be taken out by zealots.
    The Israeli army is fairly impressive. But then again "winning" no longer means what it traditionally meant. Israel can very well win a war against Iran, but one well placed nuke from a suicide bomber or a missle and Israel would be crippled. It's possible to win while still sufferring losses in the hundreds of thousands in other words. I'm fairly sure the zealots know that too.

    IF Saddam really had WMD it would be the sensational story of the year and no media outlet is going to sit on it while the others run with it. There is not a worldwide liberal media conspiracy no matter how much some of you wish there was. It's an absurd premise to justify the actions of an absurd administration.
    I don't think there's a world wide media conspiracy, I just think the majority of media is liberal. I have no problem with that, all media are biassed. The likely reason this hasn't been reported anywhere is lack of confirmation, etc.
  21. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    I haven't seen this on Fox News either so there may be more to the lack of coverage than liberal bias and agendas. .
    I saw it on Fox when it first hit. I did not see it on CNN and MSNBC has buried under the port deal.

    It was on FOX the same night they ran the Cuban immigrant story (the bridge that isn't a bridge)
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  22. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    I saw it on Fox when it first hit. I did not see it on CNN and MSNBC has buried under the port deal.

    It was on FOX the same night they ran the Cuban immigrant story (the bridge that isn't a bridge)
    Interesting. I never caught it and that's the news channel I generally watch.
  23. New Member
    mindgames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    189
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    12.55%

    May I just say,
    "What if Saddam was trying to get WMD's.....what right does that give the country that has more of them than any nation on earth to invade a sovereign nation illegally and in the process murder over 30,000 innocent women and children and destabilise the Middle East???"
  24. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27397
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.31%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by mindgames
    May I just say,
    "What if Saddam was trying to get WMD's.....what right does that give the country that has more of them than any nation on earth to invade a sovereign nation illegally and in the process murder over 30,000 innocent women and children and destabilise the Middle East???"
    That statement is so rampant with error that I don't know whether or not it justifies a response. Are you that far out of the mainstream or have you just totally ignored the history of that region. I suppose Hitler should have been left alone as well huh? At least let him massacre Jews within the confines of his own sovereign borders. Destabalize the Middle East? Are you joking? How dare us take a peacefull tourist and resort area and turn it into a bloodbath. If you have a problem with the most benevolent nation in recorded history wielding the biggest hammer so be it. But if we were so bad your little island continent would be a US state by now.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  25. Registered User
    milwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Age
    48
    Posts
    2,460
    Rep Power
    1405
    Level
    37
    Lv. Percent
    44.91%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by mindgames
    May I just say,
    "What if Saddam was trying to get WMD's.....what right does that give the country that has more of them than any nation on earth to invade a sovereign nation illegally and in the process murder over 30,000 innocent women and children and destabilise the Middle East???"
    Interesting wording. Assisting a country's removal of a barbaric, murderous tyrant (on trial now for crimes against humanity in his own country) is hardly an invasion (my opinion). And as far as the murdering, well, that was Saddam's specialty! Lastly, the idea that the US (or anyone, for that matter) will "destabilize" the middle east is pretty unlikely; place has been unstable for 1000+ years.
  26. New Member
    SirThor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    11
    Rep Power
    111
    Level
    2
    Lv. Percent
    79.33%

    We should've took Sadam out when we had the chance! Now we got to worry about sadam, osama, iran, north korea....and list keeps going on and on. I spent four months over there when i was a medic in the army. It was not fun at all.
  27. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Interesting. I never caught it and that's the news channel I generally watch.
    Hannity covered it then saw it again briefly with Brit Hume. I was rather surprised that they didn't go into more detail though.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  28. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by mindgames
    May I just say,
    "What if Saddam was trying to get WMD's.....what right does that give the country that has more of them than any nation on earth to invade a sovereign nation illegally and in the process murder over 30,000 innocent women and children and destabilise the Middle East???"
    In a way I agree, but in a way I also have to disagree. It's kind of like my opinion on gun control. There's no reason to stop law abiding citizens from owning them, but criminals definitely. Any methods that don't impinge on the rights of the former but do stop the latter from aquiring firearms would be acceptable to me. Which is also why I have no problem with France having WMDs, because even though they seem kind of pathetic to me, I doubt they're going to nuke us. Saddam on the other hand, while he might not directly attack us, I would not put an attempt at an attack directly or indirectly outside the realm of possibility, which justifies some action.

    Now what action, how and when are of course arguable. But there is a distinct difference between Canada having nukes and Iraq and/or Iran having them which does justify different treatment of those situations. There are madmen in the world. They occasionally get a hold of knives, guns, and sometimes nations and armies.
  29. New Member
    chauncy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    124
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    15.74%

    Quote Originally Posted by bioman
    We cannot even hope to attack Iran and remove it's leadership until Iraq is fully stabilized. Iran knows this, thus the saber rattling and tough sounding rhetoric. I seriously doubt any military action will come out of Iran. If they so much as look at Israel they will be sorry and they know it.

    Leaders of these Arab nations that pledge the destruction of Israel are just blowing smoke up their populaces' asses. They couldn't hope to win against Israel, they know it, but they have to sound tough against the Jews or they'll be taken out by zealots.
    Great point.
  30. New Member
    chauncy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Age
    43
    Posts
    17
    Rep Power
    124
    Level
    4
    Lv. Percent
    15.74%

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr
    That statement is so rampant with error that I don't know whether or not it justifies a response. Are you that far out of the mainstream or have you just totally ignored the history of that region. I suppose Hitler should have been left alone as well huh? At least let him massacre Jews within the confines of his own sovereign borders. Destabalize the Middle East? Are you joking? How dare us take a peacefull tourist and resort area and turn it into a bloodbath. If you have a problem with the most benevolent nation in recorded history wielding the biggest hammer so be it. But if we were so bad your little island continent would be a US state by now.
    If we are going to go along that line of reasoning than why not involve ourselves in darfur? How about North Korea ? This whole hitler reference I think is not totally applicable. Hitler was an active threat to all of the world. The power he had amassed and the power Saddam yield are not even close. Saddam was a threat , yes, but definitely not more than say Kim Jong-il. I certainly don't think that the threat posed by iraq was sufficient enough to warrant war. Also I think this idea of us as liberators is one that really was more of a side note during the initial build up to the war. My recollections are that our main goal was not to liberate a nation but to defeat a growing threat upon our nation. Maybe I'm simply not giving enough credit to Saddam.
  31. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by chauncy
    This whole hitler reference I think is not totally applicable. Hitler was an active threat to all of the world. The power he had amassed and the power Saddam yield are not even close. Saddam was a threat , yes, but definitely not more than say Kim Jong-il.
    Kim's got better hair.
  32. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27397
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.31%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    If we would have intervened sooner Hitler would not have amassed so much power.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  33. New Member
    mindgames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    189
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    12.55%

    Quote Originally Posted by milwood
    Interesting wording. Assisting a country's removal of a barbaric, murderous tyrant (on trial now for crimes against humanity in his own country) is hardly an invasion (my opinion). And as far as the murdering, well, that was Saddam's specialty! Lastly, the idea that the US (or anyone, for that matter) will "destabilize" the middle east is pretty unlikely; place has been unstable for 1000+ years.

    I'd say from the reaction of the Iraqi people, and 2300+ dead US soldiers later, that they may disagree by their actions with your idea that you are "assisting."

    Regardless of Saddam's record -which was obviously bad - what gave the US the right to go stomping on in there and like a mindless imbecile on speed in a crystal shop and trash infrastructure and innocents all over the show?

    "Murderous tyrant", ..............hmmmmmmmm 30,000 plus innocents killed by US soldiers really weakens your point - what does that make Bush?

    Look at Bush's latest approval rating - 34% - it is now lower than Nixon's before he resigned.......symptomatic I'd say.

    BTW there are much more murderous - but obviously not as politically expedient - targets the US could have chosen.

    Hardly an invasion...OMG you are really pushing it there - ask the 72% of US soldiers who want to go home by Christmas and the families of the dead soldiers on both sides if invasion is a too strong term.
  34. New Member
    mindgames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    189
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    12.55%

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr
    That statement is so rampant with error that I don't know whether or not it justifies a response. Are you that far out of the mainstream or have you just totally ignored the history of that region. I suppose Hitler should have been left alone as well huh? At least let him massacre Jews within the confines of his own sovereign borders. Destabalize the Middle East? Are you joking? How dare us take a peacefull tourist and resort area and turn it into a bloodbath. If you have a problem with the most benevolent nation in recorded history wielding the biggest hammer so be it. But if we were so bad your little island continent would be a US state by now.
    Your response in no place shows where I have made "errors."

    Most benevolent nation - are you totally out of your mind!! Where do I start.....Vietnam, Contras/ Nicaragua /Central America.(where you armed cocaine dealers), Cuba, Middle East, Afghanistan ( Where you ousted a government armed the insurgents and are now fighting them!!)South America...the world is TOTALLY over your unwanted self righteous Christian fundamentalist inteference. Thats why all over the world, citizens are electing nightmare governments for the USA - look at elections in Central and south America and Palestine for example over the past year.....

    We may as well be your Island state as unfortunately our idiotic PM kowtows to your vastly unpopular President.
  35. New Member
    mindgames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    189
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    12.55%

    Sorry to be a thread hog, but look at this link to see just how "benevolent" the US is perceived.

    An excerpt......

    For 1999's session of the United Nations Commission for Human Rights, Amnesty International put the United States on a list of persistent violators of human rights, higher than China and excluding Cuba. (Here is the full document.)




    http://www.globalissues.org/HumanRig...nalHumanRights
  36. Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2675
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    20.19%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr
    That statement is so rampant with error that I don't know whether or not it justifies a response. Are you that far out of the mainstream or have you just totally ignored the history of that region. I suppose Hitler should have been left alone as well huh?
    I don't quite agree with you here. Hitler had an obvious desire for territorial expansion coupled with the ability to act on it, which I don't think Saddam ever did have or would have had. This was brought to fruition because of the punitive nature of the Versailles Treaty, which helped to get a mass movement in German nationalism going. The situation in the Middle East is not similar in one crucial way: there is no nationalist movement. Nor is there really a strong Muslimist movement because of all the various sectarian and ethnic differences among them in the area. It would really be hard if not impossible to get something like WWII Germany going there. Many of their problems stem from post WWI divisions and interventions and they've yet to get a mass movement together and likely never will.

    There is one crucial similar point between the Middle East and Saddam and his ilk and Hitler and WWII, and that is unless you blatantly ignore it the current situation was created/made worse by previous interventions by others, the USA, the British, etc. One could, and many have argued, that without Versailles and WWI, WWII never would have happened. The current situation in the Middle East goes back to WWI and interventions in the region since then. While you could say we're obligated to clean up our own mess, unless we learn to stop making messes we'll never see the end of it.

    Point being, just like preWWII Germany these countries in the Middle East did not get the way they are currently without a lot of "help" on the part of the USA and others. However, unlike preWWII German there is and likely never was a world threat of the type Hitler represented. And even in that example, look at the results. The classic example would Czecs and Poles. Britain looked the other way when Germany invaded Czecoslovakia, but declared war after he invaded Poland. The relative death counts in those countries during WWII make it a legitimate question as to whether or not Poland was actually helped by anyone else's intervention on their behalf. And what happened after we "saved" so many of those countries in WWII? They were delivered into the hands of another set of brutal butchers in the USSR.

    The war started because of treaty violations. The wholesale mass murder of the Jews only started after the war started. Is it possible that more Jews could have been saved by avoiding war? Would the Wannsee meeting and Final Solution have been pursued if German thought they could languidly go about expunging Jews through legal actions as they generally had until then, until war pressures gave a justification and a cover to do the unthinkable? I know a lot of people think of WWII as this sacred struggle against tyranny, but the tyranny that came afterward in the form of the USSR was worse in terms of deaths and the time it was in power than Hitler's regime. WWII is not an unquestionably wonderful war despite the Greatest Generation propoganda. It is a valid point to make that interventions by the west, the USA and Britain in particular, may have done more to escalate existing wars, WWII included, and caused more death in the past than our noninvolvment would have caused or allowed to happen. And one could argue that perhaps the people who got killed who otherwise would have lived would have preferred to live under tyranny than die in the name of a western defined version of freedom.

    To put it shortly Hitler isn't a trump card. Bring him up and you have to acknowledge we had a hand in making him and escalating his power to the hyper levels they went to. You also have to deal with the aftermath of WWII, which wasn't exactly ideal for a lot of people for the following few decades. Few good things happen leading up to, during and in the aftermath of wars. Distance from WWII in time gives a lot of people the idea that it was unquestionably a good idea. Maybe in the end it was. But you can't deal with WWII and Hitler in a vacuum and ignore our and others' hand in bringing it about, and how we completely fell asleep at the wheel while worse tyrants than Hitler happily murdered away.
  37. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Hitler had an obvious desire for territorial expansion coupled with the ability to act on it, which I don't think Saddam ever did have or would have had.
    Iraq? Kuwait?
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  38. Registered User
    Iron Warrior's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  265 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,328
    Rep Power
    13069
    Level
    51
    Lv. Percent
    28.59%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobo
    Iraq? Kuwait?
    He was on the verge of invading Saudi Arabia too wasn't he ? No way we'd let him control all that oil
  39. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7017

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    I don't quite agree with you here. Hitler had an obvious desire for territorial expansion coupled with the ability to act on it, which I don't think Saddam ever did have or would have had. This was brought to fruition because of the punitive nature of the Versailles Treaty, which helped to get a mass movement in German nationalism going. The situation in the Middle East is not similar in one crucial way: there is no nationalist movement. Nor is there really a strong Muslimist movement because of all the various sectarian and ethnic differences among them in the area. It would really be hard if not impossible to get something like WWII Germany going there. Many of their problems stem from post WWI divisions and interventions and they've yet to get a mass movement together and likely never will.

    There is one crucial similar point between the Middle East and Saddam and his ilk and Hitler and WWII, and that is unless you blatantly ignore it the current situation was created/made worse by previous interventions by others, the USA, the British, etc. One could, and many have argued, that without Versailles and WWI, WWII never would have happened. The current situation in the Middle East goes back to WWI and interventions in the region since then. While you could say we're obligated to clean up our own mess, unless we learn to stop making messes we'll never see the end of it.

    Point being, just like preWWII Germany these countries in the Middle East did not get the way they are currently without a lot of "help" on the part of the USA and others. However, unlike preWWII German there is and likely never was a world threat of the type Hitler represented. And even in that example, look at the results. The classic example would Czecs and Poles. Britain looked the other way when Germany invaded Czecoslovakia, but declared war after he invaded Poland. The relative death counts in those countries during WWII make it a legitimate question as to whether or not Poland was actually helped by anyone else's intervention on their behalf. And what happened after we "saved" so many of those countries in WWII? They were delivered into the hands of another set of brutal butchers in the USSR.

    The war started because of treaty violations. The wholesale mass murder of the Jews only started after the war started. Is it possible that more Jews could have been saved by avoiding war? Would the Wannsee meeting and Final Solution have been pursued if German thought they could languidly go about expunging Jews through legal actions as they generally had until then, until war pressures gave a justification and a cover to do the unthinkable? I know a lot of people think of WWII as this sacred struggle against tyranny, but the tyranny that came afterward in the form of the USSR was worse in terms of deaths and the time it was in power than Hitler's regime. WWII is not an unquestionably wonderful war despite the Greatest Generation propoganda. It is a valid point to make that interventions by the west, the USA and Britain in particular, may have done more to escalate existing wars, WWII included, and caused more death in the past than our noninvolvment would have caused or allowed to happen. And one could argue that perhaps the people who got killed who otherwise would have lived would have preferred to live under tyranny than die in the name of a western defined version of freedom.

    To put it shortly Hitler isn't a trump card. Bring him up and you have to acknowledge we had a hand in making him and escalating his power to the hyper levels they went to. You also have to deal with the aftermath of WWII, which wasn't exactly ideal for a lot of people for the following few decades. Few good things happen leading up to, during and in the aftermath of wars. Distance from WWII in time gives a lot of people the idea that it was unquestionably a good idea. Maybe in the end it was. But you can't deal with WWII and Hitler in a vacuum and ignore our and others' hand in bringing it about, and how we completely fell asleep at the wheel while worse tyrants than Hitler happily murdered away.
    No offense CDB, but this sounds more like a politicans spin on history to me. By adapting this viewpoint I could tie in causes for todays events all the way back to the middle ages.

    Nationalistic frenzy and the subsequent wars they have caused were around before US was ever a significant figure in European affairs. Germany's declaration of war on Russia in 1914 had little to do with the US (since the people favored isolation at that point in time) and the majority of the war was fought without US intervention (other than trade). US intervention escalated the war but also helped end it sooner. By using your criteria I could say the Black Hand had more influence in "making" Hitler than anytihng the US did.


    I don't tihnk anyone here is stating the US is 100% innocent. Far from it, but I tend to see those with very passionate ideological point of views lose a very large grip on reality. (not you CDB, I think you are pretty level headed)


    "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
    Edmund Burke
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  40. Senior Member
    MaynardMeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,108
    Rep Power
    677
    Level
    26
    Lv. Percent
    63.26%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    all i know is.. he is looking good! Bobo what exactly have you been doing with him?
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Girl caught on video making fun of her boss
    By The Doberman in forum General Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-06-2005, 09:53 AM
  2. Some insight on what kind of Protein Blend PW
    By Damien in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-29-2003, 11:54 AM
  3. Short cycling and 19Nor 2Weeks On/4 Weeks of
    By neurotic in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-10-2003, 09:31 PM
  4. Awesome training posts on teen section of bb.com
    By ex_banana-eater in forum Exercise Science
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-28-2003, 08:50 PM
  5. heres on older pic of me..kinda dark
    By hamper19 in forum Pics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-15-2002, 09:25 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in