The W
Views: 97836694
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
31.7.07 0444
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Powell's Iraq Case
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next(1854 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (46 total)
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 907/1759
EXP: 4883232
For next: 109638

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1231 days
Last activity: 30 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on 6.2.03 1331.03
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1331.54
Transcripts and data if you need to get up to speed

I am just curious what you people thought of this evidence. I know many Deomcratic Congressmen (Fienstein is the most vocal out here) have changed their tune, but I am kind of curious to hear what chaps like OFB thought of the presentation.

I think if one thing was made clear by it, it was the fact that the inspections are pretty much a joke, and that the Iraqis are playing them for saps. My question is, if you are still in favor of staying out of Iraq, what solution do we implement now?
Promote this thread!
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 115

Posts: 994/3938
EXP: 16545343
For next: 266072

Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on 6.2.03 1339.59
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1340.59
Is exile still an option? I don't want to go to WAR with Iraq, per se, but now at least there's proof.
dMr
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 283/2210
EXP: 6803780
For next: 112148

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 4 days
#3 Posted on 6.2.03 1343.46
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1344.44
I get the feeling that most folks would be able to use this evidence to reaffirm their views regardless of what they are.

There isn't exactly 'the smoking gun' that we've heard mentioned on a number of occassions.The legitimacy of the taped recordings will probaly be thrown open to scrutiny, as well as the accuracy of their translation.


The satellite pictures were also potentially open for misinterpretation , regardless of the certainty with which Powell stated the conclusions drawn from them.

I've never been one for mass conspiracy theories so I'd like to believe that all the evidence put forward was legitimate and it certainaly made a good case for war.

But those who think the US and UK are going to go in regardless ain't gonna change their views after hearing that.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 1792/7534
EXP: 43327066
For next: 974696

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 395 days
Last activity: 395 days
#4 Posted on 6.2.03 1353.46
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1355.26







I still say the invasion of France option should not be overlooked. We get a military victory, and with the French philosophy on war casualties will be kept at a minimum. Doing that, you cut off a key economic supporter of Iraq. (This Post was only semi-sarcastic).
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 910/1759
EXP: 4883232
For next: 109638

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1231 days
Last activity: 30 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#5 Posted on 6.2.03 1358.14
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1358.37
Personally, I think the fact that it was Powell making this presentation lends it a lot more credibility.

If there is one thing I like about the man, it is his integrity. He has NEVER had any qualms about not going along with the "party line," or the administration's current agenda if he disagreed with it. Remember how much hell he got from the rest of the cabinet because he was the lone voice ADVOCATING the inspection process, in the fact of tremendous pressure.

Powell has never run for office, so his owes no one. No campaign contributions are hinging on his public stances, no amounts of threats by the GNC to withhold funds will sway him, because he needs none.

Plus, he has a track record of integrity long before he was Secretary of State.

I think if Powell believes this (which it is clear he does), it deserves serious consideration. MUCH moreso than if Bush presented this. If Powell felt it was a sham, I honestly believe he would not participate in it...

Invade France? Not a bad idea, though a totally unrelated issue. I like Brie and Champagne, and they have a good store of national treasures to plunder...
dMr
Andouille
Level: 89

Posts: 284/2210
EXP: 6803780
For next: 112148

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 4 days
#6 Posted on 6.2.03 1408.22
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1413.55

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    Invade France? Not a bad idea, though a totally unrelated issue. I like Brie and Champagne, and they have a good store of national treasures to plunder...


You boys sure better pack a lot of air freshner if you wanna run with this one. It could take years before that place was fit for normal human habitation. :)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 916/4700
EXP: 21380256
For next: 456406

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1185 days
Last activity: 982 days
#7 Posted on 6.2.03 1417.02
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1418.21
People now tend to believe what they believed two days ago. Really not gonna move too many people one way or another. We're going to go in, we're going to win(assuming it does not turn into Mogadishu 2) and then we're stuck trying to win the peace, which is the hard part.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan
Level: 109

Posts: 1440/3426
EXP: 13590047
For next: 369643

Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 hours
#8 Posted on 6.2.03 1449.28
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1453.35
http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20030206/dossier.html

Plagerism!
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 912/1759
EXP: 4883232
For next: 109638

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1231 days
Last activity: 30 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on 6.2.03 1507.35
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1510.27
I don't buy it- really. There are very few actual lines that are even similar, and they are mostly lists of names, activities, and positions. It is too likely that it is a complete coincidence.
And even if it was plagarized in any way- it does not detract from the argument at hand....
Bullitt
Shot in the dark
Level: 85

Posts: 556/1916
EXP: 5678234
For next: 220330

Since: 11.1.02
From: Houston

Since last post: 20 days
Last activity: 20 days
#10 Posted on 6.2.03 1542.33
Reposted on: 6.2.10 1559.01
"Showing, once again, that the US is second-to-none when it comes to Power Point."
spf
Scrapple
Level: 132

Posts: 1528/5402
EXP: 26905932
For next: 226072

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 7.2.03 0107.09
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0108.08
My ability to be swayed by the presentation before the UN was severely hampered by my thoughts that "somewhere someone is making a LOT of money to do that PowerPoint presentation, and I could have done it better." ;)
astrobstrd
Bockwurst
Level: 52

Posts: 354/612
EXP: 1018187
For next: 65661

Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH

Since last post: 2496 days
Last activity: 2463 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on 7.2.03 0112.54
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0113.08

    Originally posted by Grimis
    People now tend to believe what they believed two days ago. Really not gonna move too many people one way or another. We're going to go in, we're going to win(assuming it does not turn into Mogadishu 2) and then we're stuck trying to win the peace, which is the hard part.


I don't know about the quick victory part. Fighting an urban ground war on enemy home turf is much different than kicking them out of a country that they just invaded. Couple this with the fact that Saddam would be very likely to use all of his chemical and biological toys, no matter what the cost to his own people. Even if we do manage to eke out a quick victory, I am sick and fucking tired of seeing panelists on CNN and Fox News talk about this like we have already won.
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 1298/3273
EXP: 12660415
For next: 11569

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 114 days
Last activity: 114 days
#13 Posted on 7.2.03 0210.23
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0214.49
Wheee, I haven't said anything much in the politic forum for a little while. Guess I need to get back to keeping updated on all this.

Anyway, we will win astrobstrd. The only way we lose is if we withdraw, and it will take a lot of casualties before anyone in DC will want to risk backing out. It's political suicide for anyone who has backed the war, and most politicians will act much more quickly to save their career's than to save someone's life.

So the real question, besides how much it's going to cost us to win, is what do we do afterwards? Say hello to Iraq, the newest welfare state!

-Jag

I should probably sleep before posting. Ah well.
astrobstrd
Bockwurst
Level: 52

Posts: 356/612
EXP: 1018187
For next: 65661

Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH

Since last post: 2496 days
Last activity: 2463 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on 7.2.03 0230.24
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0232.04

    Originally posted by Jaguar
    ... and it will take a lot of casualties before anyone in DC will want to risk backing out.


...Like, say the result of a couple thousand gallons of anthrax? Or the other chemical Powell was speaking of which, if memory serves, was touch based and could kill with a drop? I'm not saying something shouldn't be done about Iraq, and after seeing the evidence presented by Powell, I'm starting to lean more and more towards invasion, but, and this is a Rikishi-sized but (gotta love politics folders on a wrestling board ;-P), this will not be the cut-and-dry 1 month campaign that the media would have us believe. This will be hard. There will be a great number of casualties. Victory isn't etched in stone.
dMp
Banger
Level: 98

Posts: 1093/2723
EXP: 9627454
For next: 26933

Since: 4.1.02
From: The Hague, Netherlands (Europe)

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 hours
#15 Posted on 7.2.03 0308.23
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0311.03
What would happen if the US marches in, destroys the Iraqi army and kicks Saddam out and well..NO chemicals/bio weapons are used?

(Not saying that they don't have em. but they must know they fight an uphill battle, and Saddam isn't a fool. By not using those weapons he can make the US look worse than if he did use them, but gets wiped out in a few weeks)


astrobstrd
Bockwurst
Level: 52

Posts: 358/612
EXP: 1018187
For next: 65661

Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH

Since last post: 2496 days
Last activity: 2463 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on 7.2.03 0335.37
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0335.56
    Originally posted by dMp
    What would happen if the US marches in, destroys the Iraqi army and kicks Saddam out and well..NO chemicals/bio weapons are used?

    (Not saying that they don't have em. but they must know they fight an uphill battle, and Saddam isn't a fool. By not using those weapons he can make the US look worse than if he did use them, but gets wiped out in a few weeks)





The options for Saddam here are

a). Not use chemical/biological weapons and hold out with urban warfare and guerilla tactics. This will, in a relatively short time (much longer though than the 1 week it seems the pundits think it would take), allow a victory for the U.S. and its allies. The U.S. will not under any circumstances allow Saddam to stay in power, and he would more than likely be put on trial for war crimes. He loses everything.

or

b). Use his toys. He still loses everything, but goes down kicking and screaming and calling for Jihad (though he is FAR from a devout Muslim, he has no compunctions about this tactic)

He is in a lose-lose situation, but it depends on how he wants to lose. He could win, by simply not letting us win without the blood of tens of thousands on our hands.

(edited by astrobstrd on 7.2.03 0438)
dMp
Banger
Level: 98

Posts: 1095/2723
EXP: 9627454
For next: 26933

Since: 4.1.02
From: The Hague, Netherlands (Europe)

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 hours
#17 Posted on 7.2.03 0624.49
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0625.28
Yeah, but what I meant by not using the shit he has is that he makes the USA looks terrible (especially if they manage to hide it all so that nothing is found) and like all that evidence and whatever wasn't true after all.

I am sure he himself will escape and leaving others to take the fall and be brought to a tribunal. But he can make the US look bad internationally when it is revealed they "falsely" (no reason as they didnt have weapons) destroy another country.

And by doing so he would start a bigger jihad than if he went out and got slain (even if he would become a martyr)
PalpatineW
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 464/1528
EXP: 4047686
For next: 143462

Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2746 days
Last activity: 2588 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on 7.2.03 0720.08
Reposted on: 7.2.10 0721.40
That was quite amusing, Jag. You're very likely correct, and we will be paying welfare out to the entire nation of Iraq. Maybe we can sell Iraqi oil and pay for the rebuilding of the country, though.

As for us getting into urban warfare, I don't see it happening. I pray it doesn't, anyway, because it will go badly for us, even if we win. I've heard reports on the news that the military plans to launch 1.500 air sorties per day in the first week. I imagine we could take him out with air power alone, or at least, primarily. Think of it as a siege. How long is he going to last in there? At the very least, try it for a while and hope some generals stage a coup (and are willing to surrender).

(edited by PalpatineW on 7.2.03 0822)
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 232/518
EXP: 798869
For next: 24679

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 476 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#19 Posted on 7.2.03 1029.37
Reposted on: 7.2.10 1039.38
Iraq need to use its WOMD with 2 or 3 days from the start of the war. After that time they are not going to have the means to deliver them any real distance. Since I believe that there will be no "real" resistance until the US is within sight of Baghdad and then his only recourse then is to poison his own city.

What I am really worried about is with the first couple of days he uses is WOMD on Israel. If he does do that there is no doubt in my mind that Israel is going to nuke Baghdad and most likely 2 or 3 other cities and then Saddam could very well get his Jihad he will be looking for. He would just be dead for it.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 919/4700
EXP: 21380256
For next: 456406

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1185 days
Last activity: 982 days
#20 Posted on 7.2.03 1134.59
Reposted on: 7.2.10 1137.41

    Originally posted by calvinh0560
    Iraq need to use its WOMD with 2 or 3 days from the start of the war. After that time they are not going to have the means to deliver them any real distance. Since I believe that there will be no "real" resistance until the US is within sight of Baghdad and then his only recourse then is to poison his own city.

The only way he can be efective with his WMD's is if he starts the war with them. Guess where a lot of those sorties are going to go? The places we are certain he has is WMD stockpiles in an effort to destroy them before he ever gets them off of the ground. 2 or 3 days in may be too late for them.


    Originally posted by calvinh0560
    What I am really worried about is with the first couple of days he uses is WOMD on Israel. If he does do that there is no doubt in my mind that Israel is going to nuke Baghdad and most likely 2 or 3 other cities and then Saddam could very well get his Jihad he will be looking for. He would just be dead for it.

Israel will launch a lot of what it has. Big chunks of Iraq will be very unhospitable for quite some time...
Pages: 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: State Can Make Inmate Sane Enough to Execute
Next thread: UN is always good for a laugh
Previous thread: What a difference a decade makes
(1854 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Powell's Iraq CaseRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.243 seconds.