An Airline Passenger’s Story

marktheshark wrote: horza wrote: The British and American public were lied to - once the troops were in and Sadam removed from power the WOMD couldnt be found - a tyrant was removed - it doesnt change the fact that government lied - however,this is a prog site - music is my reason for being here How were they lied to? The powers that be all had the same intell. You think Bush woke up one night and nudged Laura saying "Honey, we need to go into Iraq. So I'm going to make up a story about WMDs to justify it." And her response would probably have been "That's nice dear. But since you're up, you think you can function now?" Come on, you're grabbing at straws.

This is a prime example of reductio ad absurdum. Yet within your attempt
at satire, lies more than a grain of truth.

Reports from the intelligence services were considered very selectively by
both the US and UK governments in taking the decision to go to war. In
other words, the intelligence was not approached with an open mind and
used as a decision-making tool. Rather, a decision was taken that the war
should begin and the intelligence used to justify that decision.

In the case of the US, that decision was based partly on the desire to
secure Iraq's oil reserves, and partly on the States' self-perception that is
a global policeman (global bully would be nearer the mark).

In the case of the UK, the Government was performing badly on home
affairs, and believed a "quick win" in an international war would shore up
its ailing position. The problem for Tony Blair has been that the public
has not reacted in the same way as they did to the Falklands War - mainly
because that war was in reaction to an illegal invasion of a British
overseas territory by a foreign power, whereas in Iraq the US and the UK
actively started the war.

To their eternal discredit, many of my colleagues here in the Conservative
opposition voted in favour of the war, since they believed the intelligence
presented by Blair. Frankly, they should have known better, and hopefully
do now.

As for the US, my view is that Iraq will become a second Vietnam, and
history will not look favourably upon those who instigated, participated in
and supported this military action.

It does annoy me that people still look at war from such a romantic point of view. You don't invade a country whether it's for oil or building democracy. You just don't,as it doesn't benefit anyone (apart from the aggressor) and so far it hasn't brought any benefit to Iraq and isn't at all likely to ever do so  (unless you think decorative stuff like their new constitution makes up for the damage done to the country).The army itself  tends to breed assholes rather good people, though I dont mean that as an insult to anybody. Credit should be given to the soldiers, but for taking on a tougher job than others rather than fighting for a futile idea.

"keeps the oppressors and terrorists in power"
You're the oppressor and terrorists.
Bush family was (and maybe still is?)in business with the BenLaden team.
Ben Laden is your creation. That's YOUR FAULT now if there has been terroriist attacks and many death in Spain and England.
We now live in the fear because of you and your monkee president!
That's not a computer game or one of your stupid TV soaps!!!


Edited by oliverstoned

Yes, but he don't mind! for him it's just a computer game, or a TV show that he watches while eating his Hamberger, his Coke and his 2 liters of Ice cream.

...Go hell you, your degenerate president and his friend /ennemy ben Laden!!

To imply that opposition to the illegal war in Iraq constitutes approval of
Saddam Hussein's dreadful regime is simplistic in the extreme. I have
never met Saddam, but a friend and political colleague of mine (an MP
under John Major in the nineties) did. His meeting commenced with
Saddam showing him a video of him (Saddam) murdering people, much in
the way that a normal person would display holiday snaps, and convinced
my friend that Saddam was a deranged lunatic. In my view, he should
have been taken out in the 1991 Gulf War, when the Allies had a clear
mandate to do so (since Iraq had committed an act of war by invading
Kuwait). This war, however, has been deceitful and based on false
intelligence, and has replaced Saddam's malign rule with a huge power
vacuum - which may ultimately be far more dangerous for the people of
Iraq, let alone the peoples of the West.

stonebeard wrote: Wow, I never thought you could actually write something so stupid, ignorant, and completely biased, but here I am reading it.

Wow, I never thought you could actually write something so stupid, ignorant, and completely biased, but here I am reading it.......Stonebeard!!!

Tony R wrote: stonebeard wrote: Wow, I never thought you could actually write something so stupid, ignorant, and completely biased, but here I am reading it. Wow, I never thought you could actually write something so stupid, ignorant, and completely biased, but here I am reading it.......Stonebeard!!!

Yes, what was I thinking!!!! Americans did indeed cause all those terrorist bombings in England and Spain!!! The American people brought 9/11 upon themselves.

stonebeard wrote: Yes, what was I thinking!!!! Americans did indeed cause all those terrorist bombings in England and Spain!!! The American people brought 9/11 upon themselves.

Now you are using your brains......see the truth in those statements.......

 

 

 

OTR BY TR

BTW: I wouldn't take offense to Oliverstoned's post if he mentioned only Bush as the fault with Bin Laden, but since he accused the whole of America for terrorist attacks commited by fanatics, I can do nothing but take offense.