Dani a écrit:

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 00:20:39 GMT, Jean Guernon
<jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote:

Dani a écrit:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:19:11 GMT, Jean Guernon
<jguernon@globetrotter.net> wrote:

Except it was neither illegal nor unjustified.

Jean, we've been over this enough times that we've reached the point
of agreeing to disagree because neither of us will change our minds.
I know you have children and grandchildren that live here (what are
their views on Bush and the war speaking of which?) But I live here
while you're in Canada so it's a reality for me.

There were no weapons of mass destruction. Saddam, yes, an evil
man - but *not* an imminent threat

with the capability to deploy WMD

within 45 minutes as we were told. And there was also no connection
between Saddam and Al-Queda as we were told. Young men and women
(no just Americans Barbarossa!) were sent off to be killed and some
maimed/disabled for life.

And for what? To ***** off a lot more

terrorists who are already pissed to begin with - and create much more
chaos in Iraq now than *before* the invasion?

They were sent to reinforce a LEGAL UN resolution.

The UN was not in full compliance with us. We did not have all of our
allies by our side. But Bush didn't care; he wanted to invade Iraq
and capture Saddam *no matter what* - he even said it himself that he
was going to do it whether or not our allies were with us. The man
had a personal vendetta.

It doesn't matter. The UN resolution was breached with a last chance
resolution to comply, which they were in compliance with. The reason
they weaseled out is because they had deals with the culprit to steal
money from the people. And it doesn't matter the rest. It had to be
applied. The US did the right thing. The weasels are those who betrayed
their own signature. And made, and still make, this operation difficult,
much harder since Kofi Annan has officially joined the weasels of the
world when all he has is the resolution unanimously signed about this
intervention. It is a shame.

How quick after 9/11 did he decide it was time to invade Iraq? Too
quick. Bin Laden was the Mastermind and the most wanted man in the
world one day and (admittedly by Bush) not even a *priority* the next.

It doesn't matter either, they could do both as Powell confirmed, along
with all the Pentagon officials, the UN resolution was a priority for
the world as well as for the US.

It had been breached in so many ways, after the last chance one had been
unanimously determined, it had to be applied. Even 6 more months
wouldn't have changed anything about finding out about WMD according to
David Kay. But he had breached it in half a dozen other ways than WMDs.

You can't let the only resolution authorizing force in case of breach go
un-implemented when it's been 12 years, and there is a last chance one
unanimously approved. Lest the UN means nothing. Little did we know that
Kofi would single-handedly make that "nothing" official even after
saving the credibility of the organism. There is no word for the
indignation but you probably wouldn't understand since you believe the
weasels.

The only one
guaranteeing force for non compliance for 12 years, and that is what
everyone in the SC and in the American house and Congress signed for.

Face it. There was not any WMD (which we were told existed) .. Saddam
was not an imminent threat (which we were told he was) .. Saddam did
not have WMD that could be deployed within 45 minutes (which we were
told he had) .. Saddam and Al-Queda did not have a link (which we were
told they did)

No, face it yourself. Saddam was deemed an imminent threat and was
thought to have WMDs by all experts and even by your idol Kerry. And yes
there were very strong ties with AlQaeda as the 9-11 report showed. They
just didn't plan the 9-11 operation together.

They were butt buddies, Saddam offered safe haven to Binny for instance,
Al Zarkawi was training in Iraq before the invasion. Camps were used for
training AlQaeda in Iraq. I don't know where you get your info, but it
is not where it can be found. They all had this intelligence.

And apparently, Bin wasn't the most wanted man in the world (which we
were told he was) - if Bush himself later admitted that he wasn't even
a priority.

Nah, this is disinformation by the dems. Bush merely ONCE said he was
not too concerned about him since they were chasing AlQaeda, you have to
read what he really said then and right before as he refers to it, it
was a follow up question:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Q Mr. President, in your speeches now you rarely talk or mention
Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you tell the American people
if you have any more information, if you know if he is dead or alive?
Final part -- deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until
you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really eliminate the
threat of --

THE PRESIDENT: Deep in my heart I know the man is on the run, if he's
alive at all. Who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not; we haven't
heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person
is -- really indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the
mission.

Terror is bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person
who's now been marginalized. His network, his host government has been
destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it,
and met his match. He is -- as I mentioned in my speech, I do mention
the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to
their death and he, himself, tries to hide -- if, in fact, he's hiding
at all.

So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much
time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about
making sure that our soldiers are well supplied; that the strategy is
clear; that the coalition is strong; that when we find enemy bunched up
like we did in Shahikot Mountains, that the military has all the support
it needs to go in and do the job, which they did.
(...)
Q But don't you believe that the threat that bin Laden posed won't
truly be eliminated until he is found either dead or alive?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I
wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure.
And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said.
I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I
was concerned about him, when he had taken over a country. I was
concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and
calling the shots for the Taliban.

But once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became
-- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place
to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we -- excuse me for a
minute -- and if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it.
Either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things -- part
of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that
we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary, or
training, or a place to hide, or a place to raise money.

And we've got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American
people have got to understand, that we've only been at this six months.
This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that; I don't know
whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's
going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure
you, I am not going to blink. And I'm not going to get tired. Because
I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action, and I am
going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the
world and for freedom.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, to take one little part of this out of the context when he said he
was not "THAT" concerned about one single individual, as much as he was
about all of them, and pretend that he said he wasn't at all concerned,
is Dems' (AND weasels' AND media's) TYPICAL disinformation.

It is in fact gross exaggeration, if not a blatant lie.

There rest is absolutely irrelevant.

YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?????

Ahhh.. now you're yelling at me. Who'da thunk it.

Nah, I underline what I put emphasis on with capitals.

It's time for you to start understaning this for what it is; not for
what you WANT it to be.

Nothing was accomplished except for a divided Unites States (half
Kerry/half Bush) - a world that can't stand us.. and families torn
apart and lives wasted. And no sense of security or safety within
our borders or American interests of our allies around the world.

ALL this is because of WEASELS who undermine America.

I agree. It *is* because of Bush and the administration.

Nah, the weasels are those who criticize the leadership of America,
ALWAYS with PURE lies, weasels are NOT the leadership itself. You don't
agree. But should. You are bamboozled by all the weasels who have no
clue about the topic of the NG here but come from everywhere around the
world, many are Canadians, many are from Europe, and why? Just to bash
over the leadership of the US of A. They all have one voice, like crows.
I'm afraid a blue bird like you might turn like them, not outwardly of
course, but yet you hear something else in the cacophony they make and
you question the legitimacy, not of these weasels, but of someone who
has a much bigger stake in your country and simply defends its
legitimate rulers.

We should have been chasing the *real* threat - Bin Laden. But we
were wasting time and *especially* lives in Iraq. More and more
of us are seeing this now...including a vast majority of Americans.

Bah, every single US official including Powell say that America can do
both, that this is not a concern. (Only weasels speak of that...)

Half of Americans, Jean (and since the debates, even more Americans
are seeing this) - are we all weasels?

Weasels have taken over the dems. Doesn't mean that those who follow
them are aware that all they do is lie. You are not for instance. At
least I doubt it. I don't think you would play the same game they play
on purpose knowing it is all lies.

And no, obviously they can't
do both seeing that the big bad "Mastermind" is free while Saddam is
in custody.

He is not free to do as he please, is he? He is squirming in a cave like
a worm, letting out messages that takes months to be aired. He is still
on the run. Hopefully not for long. Never has the chase been slowed down
for him.

And blame weasels (Including annan the *****) if it goes bad. They are
the ones who undermine what they all signed unanimously, abroad, or who
undermine what their representatives signed, domestically. They are the
ones encouraging Muslims to justify not helping the coalition help the
Iraqis rule their country. They are responsible for the increase in lost
of lives over there compared to what it would be if they were honest.

There's no use going on in circles, Jean - we aren't going to agree.
Let's just avoid eachother when it comes to controversial threads.
Because I know I'm right.. and you think you're right.

Dani

Whatever. But listen carefully, and VERIFY with the sources, maybe you
won't be so sure. All the hoopla are always pure lies and always to
undermine the pride and prestige of America. I can't imagine this
country's leadership being disputed on such a basis.

J.

[snip]