BUSH WINS AGAIN



 Politics > Politics-USA > BUSH WINS AGAIN

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Politics > Politics-USA
User: "Ken [NY"
Date: 29 Sep 2003 07:39:12 AM
Object: BUSH WINS AGAIN
BUSH WINS AGAIN
By DEBORAH ORIN
NY Post

September 29, 2003 -- When a beloved cleric was murdered at a holy
shrine in the Iraqi town of Najaf and suspects got caught boasting
about it at an Internet café, the outraged townspeople didn't lynch
them - instead, they got marched off to the police.
It's a small but telling hint that despite decades of Saddam Hussein's
brutality, the Iraqi people have the potential be a bulwark of Mideast
democracy - and also a clue to the logic behind President Bush's
policy.
The cover of this week's Time magazine blares: "Mission Not
Accomplished" - as if the Iraq war has suddenly morphed into a total
failure. But is that true?
The mission was to get rid of Saddam. He's gone from power. It's an
ongoing frustration that he hasn't been caught, but his removal has
already brought a major shift in the Middle East, the center of
terrorist threats.
Oddly enough, Saddam's exit has been most quickly accepted in the Arab
world. The famous "Arab street" didn't erupt. Al-Jazeera TV lost some
credibility. And post-Saddam Iraqi leaders were welcomed into OPEC and
the Arab League.
It hasn't led to instant Arab-Israeli peace, but it has enormously
reduced the potential support for Mideast terror. Saddam is no longer
there to bribe the families of homicide bombers. No one but terrorists
regrets his fall.
And others, notably Russian President Vladimir Putin this weekend,
have joined Bush in warning the other two nations with Iraq in his
"Axis of Evil" - North Korea and Iran - against any nuclear-weapons
ambitions.
All of which suggests that Bush's action against Iraq strengthened
America's credibility around the world, rather than weakening it as
critics claim.
After Bush spoke to the United Nations last week, the loudest foes of
the Iraq war - France and Germany - rushed to snuggle up to the
president and say they'd like a role in postwar Iraq.
And contrary to a lot of press reports, the Iraqi people aren't
ungrateful - even in unsettled Baghdad, a remarkable 67 percent of
Iraqis are optimistic and expect to be better off in five years. In
most of the country, the number is surely higher.
Yes, there were plenty of blunders in planning for the postwar, many
perhaps because the State Department and CIA were too suspicious of
Iraqi exiles. In hindsight, it would have been smarter to trust the
exiles more - and train more of them as Iraqi soldiers and police.
It's also true that the Bush administration has been remarkably inept
at communicating the success stories out of Iraq.
One result is the surging growth of an Internet universe - a lot of it
linked via Instapundit.com - focused on spreading good news from Iraq
and lambasting "Big Media," especially the anti-American BBC, for
ignoring it.
But this week's Time magazine is typical of a press corps that has -
mostly - raced to highlight every bit of bad news from Iraq, and
virtually none of the good news.
When NBC anchor Tom Brokaw went to Iraq, it was as if he was visiting
a different country than that any other TV journalist had reported
from, because he left Baghdad and many of his reports actually had an
optimistic tone.
Why? Perhaps because Brokaw has chronicled the Greatest Generation and
World War II, a time of patience instead of attention deficit disorder
and a demand for overnight success. Nowadays, one can imagine critics
instantly howling for Dwight D. Eisenhower's head over the deaths on
D-Day.
It's worth remembering, as critics revive their Vietnam quagmire
comparisons, that over 57,000 U.S. troops died in Vietnam and so far
the U.S. death toll in Iraq is 308, fewer than the 343 firemen who
were killed on 9/11.
Every death is a tragedy. But that doesn't make the war a failure. In
fact, it is a success.
Deborah Orin is The Post's Washington Bureau Chief.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm
"I would have been a Republican if
Karl Rove had returned my phone calls."
-Wesley Clark (D)
"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
.

User: "Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñoßí®"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN says the Republicrat 29 Sep 2003 09:08:51 PM
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, "Ken [NY)" <email@Below.Text>
wrote:

BUSH WINS AGAIN
By DEBORAH ORIN
NY Post

Here are more examples from today's news of Bu$h "winning":
"One U.S. Soldier Killed in Iraq Fighting
Iraqi Insurgents Ambush U.S Convoys Triggering Eight-Hour Battle; One
U.S. Soldier Killed"
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030929_1458.html
"I would sacrifice my own life, but I would never turn bin Laden over,"
said the 20-year-old Khan, flower tucked behind his ear as is local
custom.
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030929_1363.html
"The Justice Department has opened a preliminary inquiry into allegations
that White House officials violated federal law by revealing the identity
of an undercover CIA agent, senior U.S. officials said Monday."
http://www.msnbc.com/news/973047.asp?0si=-
If you're not into reading, here's an animated gif that explains all
this:
http://snurl.com/2ier
--
-------------------------------------------
Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
-------------------------------------------
http://snurl.com/27tb | http://snurl.com/25dx
http://www.irregulartimes.com/darthbush.html
.
User: "Ken [NY"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN says the Republicrat 30 Sep 2003 07:31:08 AM
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 02:08:51 GMT, "Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñoßí®"
<abuse@anarchy.gov> wrote:

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, "Ken [NY)" <email@Below.Text>
wrote:

BUSH WINS AGAIN
By DEBORAH ORIN
NY Post



Here are more examples from today's news of Bu$h "winning":


"One U.S. Soldier Killed in Iraq Fighting

55,000 more such deaths and you have the Viet Nam war.
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm
"I would have been a Republican if
Karl Rove had returned my phone calls."
-Wesley Clark (D)
"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
.
User: "Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñoßí®"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN says the Republicrat 30 Sep 2003 10:51:19 PM
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, "Ken [NY)" <email@Below.Text>
wrote:

Here are more examples from today's news of Bu$h "winning":


"One U.S. Soldier Killed in Iraq Fighting


55,000 more such deaths and you have the Viet Nam war.

Have you read what doctors have said about the low fatalities? Seems that
the bombs and RPG attacks Iraqis typically employ usually do not kill
because of the flak vests U$ troops now wear. Instead, they cripple for
life. Severed limbs, deafness, blindness, paralysis, soldiers BBQ'd alive
while trapped in their overturned Hummers. Enough to get you out of the war
and on welfare. There have now been over 6,000 wounded troops requiring
hospitalization reported by the DoD, unofficial counts suggest the number
to be as high as 10,000.
If it's going to take Vietnam-level casualties to get you idiots to finally
admit your mistakes, then that is what you shall have. 6,000 out of action
and/or crippled in 4.5 months, not much more to go 'til 55,000.
You can tell the families of all those soldiers that their wounds don't
count as "real" casualties.
--
-------------------------------------------
Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
-------------------------------------------
http://snurl.com/27tb | http://snurl.com/25dx
http://www.irregulartimes.com/darthbush.html
.



User: "scroff"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 01 Oct 2003 10:04:58 PM
Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
<email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:

The mission was to get rid of Saddam. He's gone from power. It's an
ongoing frustration that he hasn't been caught, but his removal has
already brought a major shift in the Middle East, the center of
terrorist threats

The mission was NOT to get rid of Saddam. That would have been a nice
perk. The mission, as stated, was to rid Iraq of WMD's and to
annihilate an imminent threat to the US, neither of which has panned
out.
.
User: "E.E.Bud Keith"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 01 Oct 2003 11:57:19 PM
"scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...

Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
<email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:

The mission was to get rid of Saddam. He's gone from power. It's an
ongoing frustration that he hasn't been caught, but his removal has
already brought a major shift in the Middle East, the center of
terrorist threats


The mission was NOT to get rid of Saddam. That would have been a nice
perk. The mission, as stated, was to rid Iraq of WMD's and to
annihilate an imminent threat to the US, neither of which has panned
out.
WRONG, the mission was multi purposed of which one portion was to get rid

of WMD.
Which of course does not mean they do not exist. mearly that they have not
been found to date. But liberals expect that everyone but them is able to
perform miracles.
.
User: "Shakeel Virk"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 03 Oct 2003 08:22:53 AM
In soc.culture.usa E.E.Bud Keith <budk101@comcast.net> wrote:
: "scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
: news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...
:> Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
:> <email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:
: Which of course does not mean they do not exist. mearly that they have not
: been found to date. But liberals expect that everyone but them is able to
: perform miracles.
Exactly! So why attack when you have no proof!!!!!!!!
I mean if you can't even get a hint of proof after sending
200,000 troops for 6 months in Iraq how in the hell did they
get 'proof' sitting in the US ?!!!!!
George Bush repeatedly said Iraq has WMD - an outright lie!
If he said we have no proof but suspect Iraq has WMD that would
have been different. He stood their straight faced stared straight
into the camera and told every American that Iraq has WMD and is
an imminent threat to the US. - A bold faced lie.
Even after 6 months and billions of dollars later no proof has been
found. What does that tell you ?
It tells you that Bush lied to you. He had no proof when he said Iraq
has WMD.
Let's review:
There was no major conflict in Iraq the focus was on Afghanistan.
Then Bush and US turned their attention to Iraq and demanded weapons
inspectors be allowed back in Iraq at the same time they started sending
troops to the region.
They made every demand on Iraq - from giving Inspectors more power,
interviewing scientists, taking scientists outside the country, allowing
Spy planes to fly over Iraq, destroying missiles, etc.. etc..
Iraq complied to all of these demands during which time the US continued
to build up troops.
The reports from weapons inspectors all went in Iraqs favour and Bush was
about to be exposed as a liar. Iraq was about to be proven honest when it
came to WMD.
The US administration went on and on about how 'decepitive' Iraq is, and
how they cannot be 'trusted', and how Iraqs word does not mean anything,
etc.. etc.. all of the time they were the ones telling the lies, making
false accusations... What happened to the 'bomb factories' they said
Saddam had in his palaces ? - All bold face lies.
As the inspectors were proving Iraq truthful, Bush was feeling the heat
and building up troops around Iraq.
Then for no valid reason Iraq became an "imminent threat". How ?
Iraq had weapons inspectors in their country. They couldn't so much as
sneeze in the direction of the US or any other country because the eyes
of the world were on them and they knew it.
Liars! Dishonest murderers!
.
User: "Ken [NY"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 03 Oct 2003 09:54:36 AM
On 3 Oct 2003 13:22:53 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3sv12@qlink.queensu.ca>
wrote:

In soc.culture.usa E.E.Bud Keith <budk101@comcast.net> wrote:

: "scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
: news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...
:> Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
:> <email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:

: Which of course does not mean they do not exist. mearly that they have not
: been found to date. But liberals expect that everyone but them is able to
: perform miracles.

Exactly! So why attack when you have no proof!!!!!!!!

Because the Iraqi government did not produce the proof
required by the UN via numerous SC resolutions including 1441. The UN
inspectors were bumbling around entering buildings through the fron
doors while stuff was being spirited out the back doors. Therefore,
the only way to get the proof was to see for ourselves. Tsk tsk tsk.
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm
"I would have been a Republican if
Karl Rove had returned my phone calls."
-Wesley Clark (D)
"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
.
User: "Shakeel Virk"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 03 Oct 2003 06:34:17 PM
In soc.culture.usa "Ken [NY)" <email@below.text> wrote:
: On 3 Oct 2003 13:22:53 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3sv12@qlink.queensu.ca>
: wrote:
:>In soc.culture.usa E.E.Bud Keith <budk101@comcast.net> wrote:
:>
:>: "scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
:>: news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...
:>:> Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
:>:> <email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:
:>
:>: Which of course does not mean they do not exist. mearly that they have not
:>: been found to date. But liberals expect that everyone but them is able to
:>: perform miracles.
:>
:>Exactly! So why attack when you have no proof!!!!!!!!
: Because the Iraqi government did not produce the proof
: required by the UN via numerous SC resolutions including 1441. The UN
: inspectors were bumbling around entering buildings through the fron
: doors while stuff was being spirited out the back doors. Therefore,
: the only way to get the proof was to see for ourselves. Tsk tsk tsk.
And you know inspectors were 'incapable' because you watched Iraqis hide
the weapons as inspectors appeared ????!!!!
You don't know what your talking about. Your making up stuff to avoid
having to condemn Bush. Your making wild claims so you can continue to
defend Bush.
What about the American inspectors led by David Kay who also has not found
any weapons of mass destruction or 'smoking gun' ? He's had 6 months.
Bush lied. Where is his proof of Iraqs weapons ? He said he had proof
and would provide it at the right time. He didn't want to jeopordize the
'intelligence'. Well Saddam is finished it's high time he bring forward
this 'intelligence', wouldn't you agree ?
Your unconditional support of Bush is blinding you.
.
User: "Ken [NY"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 04 Oct 2003 05:45:35 AM
On 3 Oct 2003 23:34:17 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3sv12@qlink.queensu.ca>
wrote:

: Because the Iraqi government did not produce the proof
: required by the UN via numerous SC resolutions including 1441. The UN
: inspectors were bumbling around entering buildings through the fron
: doors while stuff was being spirited out the back doors. Therefore,
: the only way to get the proof was to see for ourselves. Tsk tsk tsk.

And you know inspectors were 'incapable' because you watched Iraqis hide
the weapons as inspectors appeared ????!!!!

You don't know what your talking about. Your making up stuff to avoid
having to condemn Bush. Your making wild claims so you can continue to
defend Bush.

By now, you ought to be aware that I make NOTHING up, but I do
produce information which greatly upsets those who defend stalinists
such as Saddam Hussein.
Like you, for instance.
Here you go:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Remarks to the United Nations Security Council
Secretary Colin L. Powell
New York City
February 5, 2003
Here you see 15 munitions bunkers in yellow and red outlines. The four
that are in red squares represent active chemical munitions bunkers.
How do I know that? How can I say that? Let me give you a closer look.
Look at the image on the left. On the left is a close-up of one of the
four chemical bunkers. The two arrows indicate the presence of sure
signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions. The arrow at
the top that says "security" points to a facility that is a signature
item for this kind of bunker. Inside that facility are special guards
and special equipment to monitor any leakage that might come out of
the bunker. The truck you also see is a signature item. It's a
decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong. This is
characteristic of those four bunkers. The special security facility
and the decontamination vehicle will be in the area, if not at any one
of them or one of the other, it is moving around those four and it
moves as needed to move as people are working in the different
bunkers.
Now look at the picture on the right. You are now looking at two of
those sanitized bunkers. The signature vehicles are gone, the tents
are gone. It's been cleaned up. And it was done on the 22nd of
December as the UN inspection team is arriving, and you can see the
inspection vehicles arriving in the lower portion of the picture on
the right.
The bunkers are clean when the inspectors get there. They found
nothing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Regards,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm
"I would have been a Republican if
Karl Rove had returned my phone calls."
-Wesley Clark (D)
"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke
Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.
.
User: "Shakeel Virk"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 06 Oct 2003 12:56:35 PM
In soc.culture.usa "Ken [NY)" <email@below.text> wrote:
: On 3 Oct 2003 23:34:17 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3sv12@qlink.queensu.ca>
: wrote:
: By now, you ought to be aware that I make NOTHING up, but I do
: produce information which greatly upsets those who defend stalinists
: such as Saddam Hussein.
Whose defending Saddam ? Not me.
Bush is an evil murderer and so is Saddam. I condemn them both.
The fact is Iraqis are suffering because of the illegal invasion of Iraq.
The fact is Bush said Iraq was in imminent threat to the US which is a
blantant lie.
The fact is Bush murdered innocent people because of this lie.
: Like you, for instance.
I don't like Saddam. I never have and never will. Compared to Bush he is a
petty criminal who was used and abused by the US government. He remained
in power because of the US government and would have been removed during
the Iran-Iraq war had it not been for the support of
Saddams ally - the US.
: Remarks to the United Nations Security Council
Hans Blix and the rest of the world community were not impressed in
the slightest by Powells 'proof' or more correctly stated 'lack of proof'.
Read it carefully - it is all based on conjecture. "Chemical munitions
bunker" and his proof is a picture of a building ???!!
If you have 'proof' with pictures is it sooo hard to tell the UN weapons
inspectors to make a surprise visit ? Or even fly in yourself out of the
blue and secure the area proving once and for all you are honest ?
The fact is the US didn't do this. They sat back and took pictures ???!!!
Why ? Why not surprise the Iraqis and prove they are hiding
illegal chemical weapons ? Makes no sense to tell everybody in the open.
You tell only the important UN inspectors and you devise a plan to secure
the area without notifying Iraqis. It's that simple.
Heck you could spend 87 billion dollars on the plan to make sure it
excutes successfully and still save money and lives.
It makes no sense to any honest person.
Powell speech failed to convince anybody about Iraqs WMD because it was
based on lies and false information. That's the honest truth you are
refusing to accept.
What happened to the "bomb factories" we heard about in Saddams Palaces ?
We don't hear any more talk about that lie either.
.

User: "scroff"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 04 Oct 2003 10:14:21 AM
On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 10:45:35 GMT, "Ken [NY)" <email@Below.Text> wrote:

On 3 Oct 2003 23:34:17 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3sv12@qlink.queensu.ca>
wrote:

: Because the Iraqi government did not produce the proof
: required by the UN via numerous SC resolutions including 1441. The UN
: inspectors were bumbling around entering buildings through the fron
: doors while stuff was being spirited out the back doors. Therefore,
: the only way to get the proof was to see for ourselves. Tsk tsk tsk.

And you know inspectors were 'incapable' because you watched Iraqis hide
the weapons as inspectors appeared ????!!!!

You don't know what your talking about. Your making up stuff to avoid
having to condemn Bush. Your making wild claims so you can continue to
defend Bush.


By now, you ought to be aware that I make NOTHING up, but I do
produce information which greatly upsets those who defend stalinists
such as Saddam Hussein.
Like you, for instance.
Here you go:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remarks to the United Nations Security Council

Secretary Colin L. Powell
New York City
February 5, 2003

Here you see 15 munitions bunkers in yellow and red outlines. The four
that are in red squares represent active chemical munitions bunkers.

How do I know that? How can I say that? Let me give you a closer look.
Look at the image on the left. On the left is a close-up of one of the
four chemical bunkers. The two arrows indicate the presence of sure
signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions. The arrow at
the top that says "security" points to a facility that is a signature
item for this kind of bunker. Inside that facility are special guards
and special equipment to monitor any leakage that might come out of
the bunker. The truck you also see is a signature item. It's a
decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong. This is
characteristic of those four bunkers. The special security facility
and the decontamination vehicle will be in the area, if not at any one
of them or one of the other, it is moving around those four and it
moves as needed to move as people are working in the different
bunkers.

Now look at the picture on the right. You are now looking at two of
those sanitized bunkers. The signature vehicles are gone, the tents
are gone. It's been cleaned up. And it was done on the 22nd of
December as the UN inspection team is arriving, and you can see the
inspection vehicles arriving in the lower portion of the picture on
the right.

The bunkers are clean when the inspectors get there. They found
nothing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Regards,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
____________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"I would have been a Republican if
Karl Rove had returned my phone calls."
-Wesley Clark (D)

"Evil triumphs when good men do nothing."
-- Edmund Burke

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

ROFL!
That was good. Y'know, in 1890 something the NY Sun posted and
editorial entitled "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus". It about
proved the existence of and actual Santa Claus as Powell's
presentation before the UN proves there are actual wmd.
I know, I know, why would he lie?
Here's another quote from Powells fantasy:
"Let me say a word about satellite images before I show a couple. The
photos that I am about to show you are sometimes hard for the average
person to interpret, hard for me. The painstaking work of photo
analysis takes experts with years and years of experience, pouring for
hours and hours over light tables. But as I show you these images, I
will try to capture and explain what they mean, what they indicate to
our imagery specialists."
They are interpretations, educated guesses. Why is it so hard to cop
to the fact that these educated guesses were wrong? Had we not invaded
so quickly we would have found hat out by now.
Send the bush twins to Iraq, watch how fast our troops come back.
----------------------------------------------
Any Which Way
-because there's more to it than Fox tells you-
http://www.anywhichway.net
----------------------------------------------
.





User: "scroff"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 02 Oct 2003 11:32:46 AM
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:57:19 -0500, "E.E.Bud Keith"
<budk101@comcast.net> wrote:


"scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...

Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
<email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:

The mission was to get rid of Saddam. He's gone from power. It's an
ongoing frustration that he hasn't been caught, but his removal has
already brought a major shift in the Middle East, the center of
terrorist threats


The mission was NOT to get rid of Saddam. That would have been a nice
perk. The mission, as stated, was to rid Iraq of WMD's and to
annihilate an imminent threat to the US, neither of which has panned
out.
WRONG, the mission was multi purposed of which one portion was to get rid

of WMD.

The true mission, which was never stated explicitly, was to rid Iraq
of Saddam in order to ope Iraq to US capitalist interests, acording to
Wolfowitz. The mission, as stated by king george to congress in order
to get the power to wage this war, was to do away with the imminenet
threat that Iraq posed. Go back and read the idiots speeches.
----------------------------------------------
Any Which Way
-because there's more to it than Fox tells you-
http://www.anywhichway.net
----------------------------------------------
.

User: "scroff"

Title: Re: BUSH WINS AGAIN 02 Oct 2003 11:20:18 AM
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 23:57:19 -0500, "E.E.Bud Keith"
<budk101@comcast.net> wrote:


"scroff" <.@..> wrote in message
news:7c5nnvsvck2n25lqv4l5vh8dmvghuf7pk3@4ax.com...

Sometime around Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:39:12 GMT, "Ken [NY)"
<email@Below.Text> scribbled on a rock and threw this into cyberspace:

The mission was to get rid of Saddam. He's gone from power. It's an
ongoing frustration that he hasn't been caught, but his removal has
already brought a major shift in the Middle East, the center of
terrorist threats


The mission was NOT to get rid of Saddam. That would have been a nice
perk. The mission, as stated, was to rid Iraq of WMD's and to
annihilate an imminent threat to the US, neither of which has panned
out.
WRONG, the mission was multi purposed of which one portion was to get rid

of WMD.
Which of course does not mean they do not exist. mearly that they have not
been found to date. But liberals expect that everyone but them is able to
perform miracles.

It would indeed be a miracle, a very questionable miracle, if they
were found. Especially in light of the inspectors' 1998 reports. Even
the Blight House is beginning to "suspect" that Saddam himself was
issuing false statements overstating his stockpile. It would be hard
to hide the amount of weapons that Powell said were posing such an
imminent threat prior to the battle of Iraq.
----------------------------------------------
Any Which Way
-because there's more to it than Fox tells you-
http://www.anywhichway.net
----------------------------------------------
.




  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
Re: Demmierat Ba Ba Boxer Cries as Bush Wins Again
Re: Demmierat Ba Ba Boxer reduced to tears as Bush wins again
Kerry wins again; Bubble Boy Bush totally out of touch
Re: Demmierat Ba Ba Boxer Cries as Bush Wins Again
Kerry wins again! Bush bombs it--what a loser
Bush wins again :( = episode V: Empire Strikes Back
Re: Demmierat Ba Ba Boxer Cries as Bush Wins Again
Franken wins! Fascist Faux News LOSES again!
Boeing Eating Airbus' Lunch--U.S. Free Enterprise Wins Again
Ray Nagin Wins N.O. Mayoral Again
WEAK LAME DUCK PRESIDENT WINS AGAIN. (Democ)RATS LOSE AGAIN. "WASHINGTON -- Michael B. Mukasey appeared on Friday to be all but assured of becoming the nation's 81st attorney general when two Senate Democrats broke ranks and said they would support
Re: US wins again.
kerry wins big again, in new hampshire....
Re: CNN: BUSH Still Wins Over retard Gore
Re: CNN: BUSH Still Wins Over retard Gore
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER