Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Saddam Wanted Out
gnomexxx
Member Posts: 2,920
How much money does Bush think a US soldier’s life is worth? How much money does Bush think the lives of our allies’ soldiers or innocent Iraqis are worth?
As we’re finding out, not very much. On March 17, 2003 President Bush issued the warning: “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing ,” yet now thanks to a transcript leaked to the Spanish newspaper El Pais, we learn that more than three weeks prior to that Bush had told former Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar that “The Egyptians are speaking to Saddam Hussein. It seems he’s indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he’s allowed to take $1 billion …” When confronted about the leaked transcript yesterday, Whitehouse spokeswoman Dana Perino did not dispute its accuracy.
Just last week we learned from former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan that the real reason behind the war in Iraq was oil , and now we are finding out that the entire war could have been averted for letting him get away with $1 billion. That’s just than one tenth of 1% of what this insane invasion and occupation of Iraq, that continues claim the lives of our country’s bravest men and women, has now been forcast to cost. Think about that just for a second. Every single death, Iraqi and American coalition alike, could have been saved and Bush could have had Saddam’s oil, but apparently he didn’t even seriously consider it. Topping that, he then lied in public to the entire world about it just so he could have his war regardless. How’s that for compassionate conservatism?
===============================
Comments
Almost every word out of Saddam's mouth has been a lie. Oh but I guess we should believe him now because of some supposed conversation. Please, if this was something that would make Bush look good it would automatically be shot down as a lie, made up, or simply false. Amazing how some people just believe anything. Now I'm not disputing the story is true, just that people would believe Saddam would just step and down. Nazi's were put to death at Nuremburg for less then Saddam did. Wake up people.
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
Well this must be considered treason on Bush's part...anyone dispute that?
I would gamble one billion and see if Saddam would leave. It would be worth it.
I mean no offense and I'm not saying that I'm for or against the Iraq war but.....
Bush thought Saddam was prepared to flee: report
"A spokesman for Aznar's private foundation had no comment on the transcript or its authenticity. El Pais, which was critical of the Iraq war and of Aznar's government, did not say how it obtained the transcript which it said (El Pais said) was made by a Spanish diplomat who attended the meeting."
This is all based on an unsubstantiated transcript that somehow just appeared out of mid air in the hands of a very vocal anti-war and anti-Aznar group. I would look at this with a grain of salt. I'm not saying it isn't true but it just seems really coincidental that this very important document would end up in these peoples hands without any proof of it's authenticity. Just my 2 cents for what it's worth.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
I will go into exile if anyone cares to offer up 1 billion dollars.
But yeah, even if Saddam had just went into exile it wouldn't have worked out in favour of the US, not from a government standpoint.
See the government needs to police Iraq so that they have a US friendly oil bearing country to trade with, to ensure cheaper and more accessable oil. They are just failing as usual.
The US doesn't try to hard to avoid fights, from the Mexican American War till now, they tend to jump into fights quickly, often making up reasons to go.
War profiteers have tight connections in the government.
If you think of all the times we could have avoided a war, the past century would have been one of peace in America, except maybe WWII.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
worth a billion huh? let him live the life of luxury in peace and not pay for anything.
not if it was your family he had killed ....
or your people he had killed off just because hey i need to test this new gas to see f it works...
so (god forbid) someone commits some kinda of violent crime against your family just once .. once please go argue for the defence saying he needs some money and to be free.
Americans today are pathetic. Cant even support your own people I dont see why anyone on the world would think we are capable of doing anything for them when we cant even get behind our own cause and do anything for ourselves.
maybe we should stop the wars everywhere else and move the front lines to our own homes again.
personally as someone who has fought in 2 wars for the US i am glad we only had to fight anywhere but here. I would gladly serve my time ANYWHERE as long as it meant my family at home was safe.
Not many buildings have been knocked over by bombs or planes in my state since we invaded ( I remember that being one of the goals of it all).That suits me fine.
i fully beleive that if WWII had happened after 1971 all of europe and about half of the US would speak only german.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
"We do not have weapons of mass destruction...."
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
But the White House confirmed it's accuracy. So that's a moot point.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
"We do not have weapons of mass destruction...."
The UN even says he did now, seems they had records of his weapon production this whole time ( check out what CNN found boy that story got shut up quick was only a week ago someone found boxes of records)...
Feel free to ask the kurds what wiped out the entire village of their people, im sure it wasnt sarin (WMD by the way) and he used every last ounce he had didnt he cause i mean lets use it all now and forget even saddam is on TV saying he needed to test his new weapon.
(damn enter key closed my post too soon)
I really get worked up on this whole issue as America is a country where most people need to be told they cant use a hairdryer in the shower or that they cant put toothpaste in their eyes but these same people know how to deal with other countires who past existance was a direct threat to them being able to use said dryer and toothpaste.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Found this somewhere else but was funny and slightly on topic ...
" Liberal "Rules" for Arguing
During the past year, I have spent countless hours trying to have rational debates about the various issues surrounding Iraq with Liberals on various message boards all over the Web. I've wondered over and over why they all seem to follow certain patterns. I've been trying to codify the rules that they seem to use, to increase my ability to identify the tactics they're using. When I identify which rule they're following, they invariably reply with strings of invective, proving that they know exactly what they're doing. Following are the top five Liberal "Rules" for Arguing that I've so far identified, having been repeatedly subjected to all these and more.
#1: Attack Your Opponent
If you feel that your opponent is trying to use facts to your disadvantage, attack him or her personally. Call your opponent names, insult his ancestry, imply that he performs improbable sex acts with animals or his own mother -- or both. If you can arouse his anger, you will have him on familiar ground where he can be beat. Your aim is to make your opponent stop using those pesky facts and figures to win the argument -- everyone knows arguments are supposed to be emotional, not cold and rational, so he's doing it wrong to start with. Names guaranteed to upset an opponent with a conservative bent are Nazi, Dittohead (meaning he's a fan of Rush Limbaugh), and Sheep. Spell "Republican" and "America" with a K in them, to suggest that your opponent is a member of the KKK -- but if they mention that Democratic Senator Robert Byrd was a Klansman, accuse your opponent of making an ad hominem attack! Make sure to claim that your opponent is either a dupe, is brainwashed, or is perhaps working for the government. If at all possible, make personal attacks on President Bush at the same time; that usually forces people to try and defend him.
#2: Switch Your Arguments
If you feel that your are beginning to lose an argument, change it. Switch sides altogether if you have to. For instance, if you are arguing that there are no biological or chemical weapons in Iraq, and your opponent quotes one of the many UN reports that state there definitely were banned weapons there, suddenly change your argument to "of course, there were, the US gave them to Saddam". Never mind the fact that you were just saying they didn't exist -- the purpose is to confuse your opponent and keep him from winning the argument. And in the above instance, if your opponent shows records from the CDC proving that Iraq requested medical samples through the World Health Organisation to combat anthrax and botulism, switch your argument BACK AGAIN and claim that Saddam destroyed the WMD he made form the samples after kicking out the inspectors in 1998, ignoring your earlier arguments that there never was any, and then that the US provided it. Logic is for losers! Consistency is for conservatives! If your opponent gives up the argument, loudly proclaim a victory!
#3: Raise The Bar
When your opponent presents you with proof of anything -- UN records of WMD stockpiles, Amnesty International records of humanitarian crimes, eyewitness accounts of rape, torture, murder, etc -- state that it's not enough to convince you. Tell your opponent that his so- called "proof" doesn't mean anything at all. Insist that anything from only one source doesn't count. Force him or her to go back and search for more proof... and more, and still more. Eventually, your opponent will grow tired of trying to convince you with mere facts and figures, and either give up or get angry -- and then you know you've got him! You can tell everyone that your opponent lost because his or her proof was "laughable".
#4: Attack The Source
When your opponent presents you with those pesky facts, there's only one way to beat him -- attack the source. Refuse to give credence to anything reported by the Weekly Standard, or NewsMax, even if your opponent's facts come from another source as well. Any news outlet even slightly to the right of the New York Times, the LA Times, CBS, ABC, NPR and Time is immediately suspect. Put down FOX news channel and anyone that refers to it -- ignore the fact that they have reported the same stories as every other network. The fact that your opponent uses any of those obviously biased sources automatically proves him wrong, a brainwashed tool, a sheep, etc (see rule #1). If he gives you information from a web site, attack that site as being biased, or right-wing. If he attacks your sources as being left-wing, scoff at that argument -- you know that "left wing" and "correct" are the same thing. Quotes from any liberal source (even a non-journalist's web page or blog) are automatically correct, while any conservative source is OBVIOUSLY distorting the facts to make an ideological point.
#5: Blame America First/Moral Equivalency
It's very important, at all times, to remember that America is the REAL bad guy here, everywhere, and for all time. If your opponent shows facts about Saddam's humanitarian offenses, match them with claims of America's own "atrocities". Although your opponent will claim there is no comparison between the two, continue to claim, for instance, that Saddam's 30- year record of using rape, murder, torture and mutilation on prisoners merely accused of crimes is the EXACT SAME THING as Texas administering the death penalty after due process of law. Argue that because America has not always been absolutely perfect, Americans have no right to judge any other country, no matter what it does, even though the Geneva Convention did not exist until after WWII. Stay focussed on your vision of an evil America ruled by corporate greed, evil America slobbering to kill the innocents in other countries, evil America ruthlessly building an empire, and evil America only pretending to be benevolent and generous to other countries. Never give credence to your opponent's arguments that America rebuilt countries like France, Germany, Japan, Nicaragua, Grenada, etc... it was obviously a ruse of some kind! Always seek to put the worst possible interpretation on everything America does or ever has done, or any statement by any member of the Administration. Remember that America exists only to dominate the entire world, like a James Bond supervillain. For reference, watch as many Oliver Stone movies as possible. Remember that American soldiers always act exactly like the soldiers in Platoon.
This is how I've watched Liberals argue every day for the last year. The only thing that matters to them is winning, by any means or tactics necessary. Finding out the truth of the matter doesn't seem to matter at all, does it? "
as for the colors i am bored lol and needed something else to do as i sit here listening to others play singstar waiting for my turn...
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Bush was bound and determined to invade Iraq. There was nothing Hussain could do to avoid it. Everything before (and since) is just posturing. Bush got what he wanted, which is a permanent US presence in Iraq. What's a few thousand US lives, give or take? Not much.
That story really has been shut up...because I can't find it anywhere. Link please?
QFT.
Yeah, it is worth a billion for him to get out of there. $1 billion < U.S Soldier's life.
By the way 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. Please don't make this mistake again. I'll let Bush debunk your WMD and 9/11 = Iraq arguments himself www.youtube.com/watch
There is no evidence that pulling our troops home would put any war on our soil. The middle eastern countries that you warmongers claim as threats are third world. Israel could flatten all of them tomorrow if they wanted. Don't even think about using the 9/11 argument, it is not relevant.
How many of you have been there and handed out humanitarian rations, flew the poor bastards that happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time to field hospitals so we could care for them. How many of you whiners have served your country in any way? If you think that we are not fighting terrorists in Iraq you have your head in your B-side. By doing everything that you can to undermine the unity of this nation all you do is strengthen the resolve of the enemy because they know that the louder you people while the shorter time they have to wait for us to pull out of there completely and leave the innocents to be slaughtered once again.
sincerely
CPL Gerard USMC
just last week?
hopefully the bush smash and grab era is almost over.if they don't start ww3 before they can be kicked out of govt maybe some justice will be served on them in the next decade.
Just to make it clear.
The 1 Billion Dollars would be out of his own money.
Saddam personal fortune was much bigger than 1 Billion Dollar, he was just asking to keep at least part of it.
So the issue is not about the money, but if it was right to let him go in exile or not.
How many of you have been there and handed out humanitarian rations, flew the poor bastards that happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time to field hospitals so we could care for them. How many of you whiners have served your country in any way? If you think that we are not fighting terrorists in Iraq you have your head in your B-side. By doing everything that you can to undermine the unity of this nation all you do is strengthen the resolve of the enemy because they know that the louder you people while the shorter time they have to wait for us to pull out of there completely and leave the innocents to be slaughtered once again.
sincerely
CPL Gerard USMC
1. Where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government's job is to free oppressed people in other countries? Hmm? As a Marine aren't you supposed to defend the Constitution first? We can't free everyone, we can't protect everyone. You're supposed to protect my rights, not theirs. Yeah it sounds harsh, but that's life.
2. This war and our foreign policy in general is driving us into debt. We are 8.9 trillion dollars in debt. This war is being waged thanks to the oppressed China. The Chinese live under a very oppressive regime....no freedom there my friend. So we are going into enormous debt to China. This means we are giving one oppressive regime huge economical power in our country and using the money to take out another oppressive regime...and now merely occupying while waiting for the Iraqi government to do something....anything. How are we to defend ourselves when we are in severe debt, and our dollar is losing value...it's now lower than the Canadian dollar? HOW? We are going to CRASH!! Now we're about to go into Iran...Good lord.
3. This was NEVER about freeing people from oppressive regimes. We heavily support Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabi is controlled the by Saudi MONARCHY. They brutally kill and torture homosexuals, nobody has privacy, heavy censorship everywhere, you can discriminate and blackmail homosexuals if you so please, no cross-dressing, no women can vote, no drunkeness. Individuals accused of crimes are not provided with representation, and according to Amnesty International, some defendants are convicted based on confessions obtained under duress, torture or deception. Need I say more?
KING Abdullah of good ol pro-western civilization Saudi Arabia and his best friend Bush. It's amazing what oil can do for a relationship.
I haven't even gotten into our allies Pakistan, yet.
4. I believe you're fighting terrorists, but the conflict is also creating more. You're a great propaganda tool for the terrorist's recruiting goals.
5. So just get out. Save yourself. Save the country's economy. Maybe close and man that gaping hole we call our "Borders"...a little birdy told me terrorists can easily get in if pregnant Mexicans can.
Saddam is DEAD period,the world is like your local hwy,your car is on it along with other cars and those cars are like countrys ! their all going the same direction some are passing you and some are behind you ! But their all racing to natural resources.But the US car is pulling its home behind it .
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
I dont know what the last part of your post implies. But prove that Saddam had WMD at the time of the "ultimatum" and invasion.
Oh, by the way, nobody called you out yet on your post about "how liberals argue", mainly because this board consists overwhelmingly of conservatives and falsely described libertarians. If your goal was to get a few cheap laughs, then good job - but, if you want to actually debate, then do so.
With that said, debate is an interesting thing. It's very rare that people change their minds during a debate, mostly because we always try to defend ourselves during its course. The reason why so many people have changed their minds about the war since its inception is because there is always new evidence [reports, transcripts of meetings] coming about how the President was adamant about getting into the war. It's a gradual process because as things become declassified, we become more aware about how the President waged his public relations campaign to persuade the citizenry into supporting the war at the beginning.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
It's true - there will still be terrorists in Iraq if we stay there. We could still win in Iraq. I think it would take a national draft, two million soldiers and 4 trillion dollars to do it.
I agree with your point about a checks and balances system. Congress has failed us by not having the balls to think independently at the time of the invasion and subsequently for funding bills. But: the Constitution also states that war funding is to be reappropriated every 2 years, and now, I hope Congress defunds this war and pulls the troops out.
Your argument that our "national resolve" has anything to do with the terrorists is not true. It might apply in a formal war against another nation. But terrorists are kidding themselves if they think people who oppose the war give a crap about how they feel about it. We don't. If Osama bin Laden told us that all Americans should go to college, is my duty to drop out? I don't think so. I don't give a crap about how terrorists feel about my national policy.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
But the White House confirmed it's accuracy. So that's a moot point.
"In Washington, White House National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe declined to comment on the report."No the White House refused to comment, just like they refuse to comment on UFO's and Ghosts. That doesn't prove anything except that they don't want to get involved.
Bren
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
I saw Dana Perino's response to it, and she basically said that:
1. She could not confirm or deny the meeting's existence.
2. She didn't want to comment on the conversation which took place between the world leaders.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08
Yeah? So this Authenticates it? Like I said a refusal to comment is not an admission of guilt it just proves they don't want to get involved in it.
Bren
Edit: Like I said in my original post.....I'm not saying it is or isn't true just that a building on a shaky foundation will fall eventually.
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
Yeah, all it proves so far is that they're afraid of it, I think.
www.draftgore.com
Gore '08