Documentary Examines Iraq War 'Hoax'

Sunday, February 17, 2013

A new MSNBC documentary that airs Monday night, Hubris, presents new evidence that President George W. Bush launched the Iraq War on false pretenses in 2003. David Corn, who coauthored the book that the documentary is based on, writes, "The film highlights a Pentagon document declassified two years ago. This memo notes that in November 2001 -- shortly after the 9/11 attacks -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met with General Tommy Franks to review plans for the 'decapitation' of the Iraqi government. The two men reviewed how a war against Saddam could be triggered; that list included a 'dispute over WMD inspections.' It's evidence that the administration was seeking a pretense for war."

Posted by Corky at 10:19 AM | 137 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Front Page
Breaking News
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Create a Poll
Edit Account
Weekly Digest
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

Read the Retort using RSS.

RSS Feed

Author Info

Corky

Joined 2005/05/24
Visited 2013/05/18

Status: user

MORE STORIES

The Atlantic: The Real Benghazi Scandal (5 comments) ...

CBO Cuts Deficit Estimate by 24% (47 comments) ...

Time: This Housing Upturn Looks Like the Real Thing (8 comments) ...

Holder Blasts Issa, Calls Him 'Shameful' (61 comments) ...

IRS Also Investigated 3 Dem Groups (48 comments) ...

In the film, Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff at the time, recalls the day Congress passed a resolution authorizing Bush to attack Iraq: "Powell walked into my office and without so much as a fare-thee-well, he walked over to the window and he said, 'I wonder what'll happen when we put 500,000 troops into Iraq and comb the country from one end to the other and find nothing?'"

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

"Lyin' the whole gol'dern country into war was hard werk!"

- GW "Got War?" Bush

(we know, we know, the 43rd Pres never existed)

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-16 11:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Is there a statute of limitations? I'd like to see everybody involved in this scam do some serious time ~ especially George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condi Rice.

#3 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 12:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

#2 why was it necessary to destroy the Iraqi government?
Couldn't we just destroy Saddam Hussein and/or the WMD?

#4 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 02:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

Study: Bushies Lied 935 Times to Sell Iraq Invasion

Typical dishonesty from the murderous cancervatives.

#5 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-17 02:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Powell walked into my office and without so much as a fare-thee-well, he walked over to the window and he said, "I wonder what'll happen when we put 500,000 troops into Iraq and comb the country from one end to the other and find nothing?"

I'll tell you what happened, Dumya put on his flight suit and sashayed to and fro underneath the 'Mission Accomplished' banner.

#6 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-17 02:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

I scanned the link looking for who did this study, but saw no citation.
But finding a few tons of yellowcake, a couple of buried centrifuges and the undeniable truth that Hussein used a WMD (nerve gas) on his own citizens makes me yawn at this oft repeated lie by the left that there were no WMDs.

#7 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 03:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

"why was it necessary to destroy the Iraqi government."

The Bush administration had to get their own Iraqi Parliament in office so they could get a constitutional amendment that Iraq would not nationalize the U.S. and British oil companies after they moved in ~ plus the Chinese were also coveting the Iraqi oil fields and lucrative contracts and leases for R & D were at stake.

Bush expended 2 trillion dollars (on the cuff) and the lives of nearly 5000 U.S. servicemen for that little folly ~ and the Chinese ended up with the bulk of the contracts anyway.

The U.S Got NADA!

#8 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 04:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Diablo you are a liar.

No WMDs in Iraq

Q: Were there really weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when the U.S. invaded in 2003?

A: No. The Iraq Survey Group determined that Iraq had abandoned its quest to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and that it had already destroyed all of its existing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.

#9 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 04:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Tell that to the Kurds, Snoof.
BTW, after they caught Hussein they asked him specifically why he was making such noise about Iraq and WMDs. He said he was creating that impression to scare Iran, not us.
So if the government took him at his word (as we do for North Korea these days with their nuke program) who is to blame?
Oh, I am a 'liar' for saying truthfully they found tons of yellowcake and a couple of buried centrifuges, or that Hussein gassed the Kurds, Snoof?
Which of those statement is untrue? You are the liar.

#10 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

Gee, Snoof! Look at which administration is perpetuating the yellowcake "lie":

www.cbsnews.com

"The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program - a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

"The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" - the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment - was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions."

#11 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's a 2009 story, Snoof, the Obama era. Should we prosecute him along with Bush?

#12 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

The bush apologist is still pushing the yellowcake lie. What a surprise.

www.snopes.com

#13 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-17 04:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Rein, do you have any memory? I have posted since I came here years ago I voted twice against Bush. Who is the liar?
And the Snopes link I checked when doing the Google search to enlighten Snoof. Even IT says there were tons of yellowcake removed from Iraq. It only tries to soft-pedal what its purpose was and ignores the fact Hussein himself was trying to give the appearance of being on the brink of a bomb.
So should we prosecute Obama administration members for the "lie" or will you finally see this left wing shibboleth of "no WMDs" is the actual lie?
And what about those dead Kurds....killed by a WMD?

#14 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'll take Hans Blix's word over that of a bush apologist's when it comes to the question of whether or not Iraq had WMD's in 2003.

#15 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-17 04:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yellowcake is not a WMD. But Diablo is still a liar.

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 04:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's a 2009 story, Snoof, the Obama era. Should we prosecute him along with Bush?

I think we should focus on you being a liar before we fry the bigger fish.

Nowhere in the 2009 story do you see the Obama administration claiming Iraq had WMD.

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 04:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

And what about those dead Kurds....killed by a WMD?

Yes, they were killed by a WMD. Long before we invaded.
None of your lies change the simple truth that we did not find any WMD in Iraq.
I am beginning to think you don't even realize you're lying.
Your rationalization is so comprehensive that you're subconsciously lying to yourself, and your conscious mind believes it.

It's actually a pretty common thing to do, for example top athletes all think they're the best. (This was on radiolab on NPR just recently.) It's part of the psychological profile of success. What's not clear is why you need to shill for the Iraq war. Lose somebody close to you and can't stand the thought of them dying for lies? Infatuated with the idea of America swinging its big stick around?

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 04:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

Even my Iraqi barber who was wholly for the war can admit he is for the war not because it's in America's interest but because Saddam killed his whole family and he hates Saddam.

What's your reason, Diablo?

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 04:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

SNOOFY

Liar is such a harsh word. Perhaps Diablo did not read the entire article which, incidentally, disproves just about everything he/she says. Conveniently or otherwise, some important information was left out of his/her argument.

Excerpt:

The yellowcake removed from Iraq in 2008 was material that had long since been identified, documented, and stored in sealed containers under the supervision of U.N. inspectors. It was not a "secret" cache that was recently "discovered" by the U.S. and the yellowcake had not been purchased by Iraq in the years immediately preceding the 2003 invasion. The uranium was the remnants of decades-old nuclear reactor projects that had been put out of commission many years earlier: One reactor at Al Tuwaitha was bombed by Israel in 1981, and another was bombed and disabled during Operation Desert Storm in 1991.

cont . . .

The yellowcake removed from Iraq was not the same yellowcake that President Bush claimed (lied about) in a now discredited section of his 2003 State of the Union address, that Mr. Hussein was trying to purchase in Niger.

The evidence of a falsehood continues . . .

The items cited that the July 2008 removal of yellowcake from Iraq as proof that Iraq had in fact buying yellowcake in an attempt to restart its nuclear program before the U.S. invasion of March 2003, and therefore the Bush administration was right and Joseph Wilson was wrong, is factually erroneous.

#20 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 05:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

As for gassing the Kurds, I believe that Donald Rumsfeld still has the receipt in his wallet for the gas.

www.google.com DONALD RUMSFELD

#21 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 05:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Poor Manuesstonedar and Diablo don't seem to have heard of the findings of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG aka the Duelfer Report) (2004), which took the legs out from under the Bush administration's stated rationale for its war of choice in Iraq. Here it is, Manuesstonedar and Diablo, some light bedtime reading: www.cia.gov

What's truly amazing is Duelfer's report was released seven months after Bush started the war - over eight years ago - and these guys don't know anything about it.

#22 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-17 06:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

DOC

People know only what they want to know and apparently that is the case here.

We could drive a semi through the holes in DIABLO's version, for example.

History won't be kind to Mr. Bush because of this colossal blunder.

#23 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 06:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

TWINPAC -

Interesting piece - www.guardian.co.uk

Over 100,000 Iraqi dead, more than 4400 US military killed in Bush's war of choice in Iraq, 32,000+ wounded US, moneywise over $800 billion.

And these morons are still beyond recognizing it was all based on lies.

Makes me shudder.

#24 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-17 07:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

#24---
economy bottom-feeding w no relief in sight,
neighbors out of work,
dollar declining,
Russia Bombers buzzing US territory...

yet leftist dupes are diddling themselves with yester-year's headlines

actually, entirely predictable via recorded history

#25 | Posted by roadrunner22 at 2013-02-17 08:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

#25 | POSTED BY ROADRUNNER22

If you were presiding over this crap hole of an economy with a foreign policy that has left the middle east in flames you'd be digging up history to deflect too.

#26 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-17 08:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

more than 4400 US military killed in Bush's war of choice in Iraq, 32,000+ wounded US

The right wingers literally do not care about the human cost of war.
They don't even seem to care about the economic cost of war.
But it was a good war, of that much they're certain.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 09:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

". . . . . .you'd be digging up history to deflect too."

#26 | POSTED BY PANEOCON

You are an expert is this area! And you are the copy and paste "queen" of the retort. Happy Valley and your neighbors must be real proud of your accomplishments.

#28 | Posted by UGM27Polaris at 2013-02-17 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

DOC

The worst of it is ~ they can hardly wait to put another one of their glory hounds in the Oval Office so they can pick up where they left off. That will be a dark day for America if we ever allow it to happen.

#30 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 09:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

TWINPAC -

Seriously, though, you're absolutely on target with that observation. They just don't seem to be able to get enough of the dirty, nasty, cowardly business of sending others and others' children off to fight their big-balls wars.

(They'll yammer about Obama, but from what I've seen he's cut the number of troops exposed to danger. Something the chickenhawks are always loath to do.)

Often, of course, it's those who've experienced war - Colin Powell springs to mind - who know the dangers inherent in these adventures.

But the chickenhawks? Never.

"I had other priorities."
Dick Cheney

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam."
Mitt Romney

#32 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-17 09:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

#28 | POSTED BY UGM27POLARIS

Any time you think you can find a issue with the article I post fee free to dispute it. Or just do you typical drive by insult.

#35 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-17 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

"If you were presiding over this crap hole of an economy with a foreign policy that has left the middle east in flames you'd be digging up history to deflect too."

Weak, very, very weak.

#36 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-17 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam

Mitt Romney

#32 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013

And, if it weren't for the discipline, the bad food, and the risk of physical and psychological ruin, I would have gone.

#37 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-17 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

If you were presiding over this crap hole of an economy with a foreign policy that has left the middle east in flames

#26 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-17

This was precisely how Bush left the country in 2008. Now we have fewer flames and less crap. I wonder if that had ANYTHING to do with Bush leaving?

#38 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-17 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam

Mitt Romney

#32 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013

"But, most especially, it was impossible for anyone in uniform to make any real money while in Vietnam back then. Anyone who really loves money understands".

Mitt Romney

#39 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-17 11:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

God, what a prissy hypocrite of a president Mitt would have been. Thank God for President Obama.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-17 11:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

ZED

A big A-A-A-MEN to that o' wise one.

#41 | Posted by Twinpac at 2013-02-17 11:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam

Mitt Romney

That's why this country is doomed. An intelligent population would have pummeled that weasel with rotten tomatoes for such willful dishonesty and cynicism.

#42 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-17 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

" Thank God for President Obama."

Willard sucks, but if "God" sent us Obama, we want a refund.

#43 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-17 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Every war ever fought was a hoax.

The masters send their slaves to kill off a bunch.
I read estimate they are trying to cut population by 2/3.

There is no doubt they will start a global nuclear war.

#44 | Posted by Ranchy at 2013-02-17 11:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

Coincidentally, I was just reviewing an album with a song specifically about this foreign policy debacle. Perhaps this should have been the soundtrack to Hubris. Consider this lyric:

Should have thought it through
Before they left it up to you
Last best hope
retrograde reality

Shanghai commandeer
Exploit anger and our fear
Pretext of convenience
Self-ordained divinity

EXTEND THE LONG ARM
OF THE LAW
CAN'T REACH AS FAR AS WE WOULD FALL
WRITING'S ON THE WALL

Rile up the rabble with more
patriotic prattle
Platform any indecency
Vilify objection for the
sake of our protection
Shout down dissension to
ensure democracy

EXTEND THE LONG ARM OF THE LAW
CAN'T REACH AS FAR AS WE WOULD FALL
GUNBOAT CONVERSE DIPLOMACY
AND IT ALL SEEMED LIKE A BAD DREAM

Should have thought it through
Before they left it up to you
Last gasp for morality

(evidently I cannot post the song link here, but the band is called The Ready Stance and has a website at readystance dot com. Another song, Real America speaks to similar far-right shenanigans)

#45 | Posted by Policy_Crux at 2013-02-17 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

"If you are not with me you are agin me."

#46 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-02-17 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

The winners write history, no matter how hard McCain and other losers try to keep the lies going. ((I used to think McCain was one of the few good senators, what happened?))

#47 | Posted by THomewood at 2013-02-17 01:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Lyin' the whole gol'dern country into war was hard werk!"
- GW "Got War?" Bush
(we know, we know, the 43rd Pres never existed)
#1 | POSTED BY CORKY

So, Corky. Why did GW do this then?

(Please tell me it was to make his friends rich)

#48 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yellowcake is not a WMD. But Diablo is still a liar.
#16 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Ok, Snoofy. What is this material used for.

Answer or you're a liar.

#49 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 01:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If you are not with me you are agin me."
#46 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

The part I really don't get is if Bush is a criminal and everyone around him is a criminal, then why aren't they in jail? Was anyone prosecuted?

The evidence is right there!

#50 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 01:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

But finding a few tons of yellowcake, a couple of buried centrifuges and the undeniable truth that Hussein used a WMD (nerve gas) on his own citizens makes me yawn at this oft repeated lie by the left that there were no WMDs.

Good God you're delusional.

Even worse is after the absolute thumping Diablo has taken you have eddie chiming in with the same ridiculous claims, just in a new wrapping paper.

Do any of you actually remember the UN speech by Powell and what he claimed Iraq had? I do. And it was no where close to reality.

I also remember the laundry list of rationals we went through as the time passed and nothing resembling what they supposedly had was found.

#51 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-17 02:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

The part I really don't get is if Bush is a criminal and everyone around him is a criminal, then why aren't they in jail? Was anyone prosecuted?

The evidence is right there!

What's even worse is they can state the problem explicitly and not get it.

#52 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-17 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Yes, they were killed by a WMD. Long before we invaded.
None of your lies change the simple truth that we did not find any WMD in Iraq."

Yes they were killed by WMD and I am liar for saying it was a WMD???
This is what passes for 'discussion' to a leftist.
I did not say they were manufacturing WMDs either. If someone says he is going to develop WMDs, as Hussein was doing, and has hundreds of tons of yellowcake, as even you admit, and had a reactor already that was bombed because it could yield weapons grade uranium....Hey, if it walks like a duck.
Just because a gun is not loaded does not mean it is not a potentially lethal weapon.

#53 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 03:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#53 | Posted by Diablo

Give it up, 'blo. Your boy Bush and the rest of his corrupt, criminal crew were and are world-class frauds and charlatans. They should be on trial somewhere.

#54 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-17 03:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes they were killed by WMD and I am liar for saying it was a WMD???
This is what passes for 'discussion' to a leftist.

I'm sorry, but the rest of your selective acknowledgement and convenient turning off of logical thought passes for 'discussion'?

I did not say they were manufacturing WMDs either. If someone says he is going to develop WMDs, as Hussein was doing, and has hundreds of tons of yellowcake, as even you admit, and had a reactor already that was bombed because it could yield weapons grade uranium....Hey, if it walks like a duck.

Hundreds of tons under the control of the UN in sealed containers and a reactor destroyed by bombing.

Boy, sure sounds like a done deal to me.

and the undeniable truth that Hussein used a WMD (nerve gas) on his own citizens makes me yawn at this oft repeated lie by the left that there were no WMDs.

So you wouldn't argue if another country preemptively struck the US because of the undeniable truth that we nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

#55 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-17 03:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What's your reason, Diablo?"

When did I ever write I was for the war, Snoof. I was against it. And I also voted against Bush.

But the lefties will keep calling me a Bush apologist who was for the invasion. Lies are the currency of radicals.

Any other diversions to offer?

#56 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 03:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Hundreds of tons under the control of the UN in sealed containers and a reactor destroyed by bombing."

And a dictator doing his best to convince the world he was developing such weapons? You ignore that. Hussein did more than the CIA or Bush to put forth the image.
Don't you think Japan would have wanted a preemptive strike on White Sands had they known we were developing a workable A-Bomb, JPW?

#57 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 03:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Give it up, 'blo. Your boy Bush and the rest of his corrupt, criminal crew were and are world-class frauds and charlatans. They should be on trial somewhere."

The lie again??? My boy Bush?
Obviously has not read some of my notes about this president against whom I voted.
Don't forget it was Pope John Paul II who early and clearly started criticizing this invasion. My man John Paul!
(Your boy Obama, removing yellowcake that really isn't yellowcake I guess))

#58 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 03:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

You ignore that. Hussein did more than the CIA or Bush to put forth the image.

No I don't. I realize he was a blustering old fool farting in the wind of UN inspections and other sources of information.

It was no secret at the time that he was full of it.

You ignore THAT.

Don't you think Japan would have wanted a preemptive strike on White Sands had they known we were developing a workable A-Bomb, JPW?

Sure.

But as usual your logic conveniently fails you in that there's one obvious difference-we were actually making one.

Also, it's bad form to answer a question with a question. Do you support the use of historical rationals when it comes to deciding military strikes? Should our use of nukes in the 40's be high on China's list of reasons to strike the US?

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-17 03:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Your boy Obama"

He's not my boy, Blo. He and Bush should/should have been impeached for violations of the Constitution.

#60 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-17 03:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yellowcake is not a WMD. But Diablo is still a liar.
#16 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Ok, Snoofy. What is this material used for.

Answer or you're a liar.

On the off chance you're not incapable of learning, I reference you to this paragraph from the CBS story Diablo posted:

While yellowcake alone is not considered potent enough for a so-called "dirty bomb" - a conventional explosive that disperses radioactive material - it could stir widespread panic if incorporated in a blast. Yellowcake also can be enriched for use in reactors and, at higher levels, nuclear weapons using sophisticated equipment.

Or this sentence from the relevant wikipedia article:

Yellowcake is used in the preparation of uranium fuel for nuclear reactors, for which it is smelted into purified UO2 for use in fuel rods for pressurized heavy-water reactors and other systems that use natural unenriched uranium.

Hey, come to think of it, didn't Iraq supposedly try to get yellowcake from Nigeria? (That was proven to be false, but you right-wingers still believe it.) So why not invade Nigeria then? They're the source of global terrorism! Also we should invade ourselves since we used WMD in Japan and have a centuries-long history of using WMD on our own people by giving smallpox blankets to the natives. What's that you say, the Indians aren't Americans? That's funny, the Kurds would tell you they aren't Iraqis.

#61 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

"He and Bush should/should have been impeached for violations of the Constitution."

Finally we agree on something, Null, although I wish even more we had enough congressional members who obeyed the Constitution to have put both in check.

#62 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Also, it's bad form to answer a question with a question. Do you support the use of historical rationals when it comes to deciding military strikes? Should our use of nukes in the 40's be high on China's list of reasons to strike the US?"

Answering a question with a question is bad form!
I don't know what you mean by historical rationals, but your second question is interesting, considering how long these weapons have been around we remain the only country actually to have used them, and I bet that is a concern to China and others. Also, we have never agreed to renounce a first strike.

However Snoof's logic is, for a change, good in post #61. That's why I was not fully in favor of the Iraq invasion or a present strike on Iran (by us at least). When does the preemptive logic end? It simple is not enough reason for an all-out war, maybe for a single strike and such but not full scale operations.

#63 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

P.S. I tolerated, not truly supported, the Iraq invasion up to the point we captured Hussein. After that we should have flipped the bird and left, letting them sink into a much deserved anarchy.

#64 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 04:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

#61 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Ok. Your proof has proven that Diablo is not a liar.

#65 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 05:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why did Bush start the war if he knew there were no WMDs

(please tell me it was to make his friends rich)

#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 05:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why did Bush start the war if he knew there were no WMDs

(please tell me it was to make his friends rich)

#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 05

Let's start with the theory he might be mentally ill.

#67 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-17 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why did Bush start the war if he knew there were no WMDs
(please tell me it was to make his friends rich)
#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 05

Let's start with the theory he might be mentally ill.
#67 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2013-02-17 05:14 PM | FLAG:

Eddie is definitely mentally ill.

#68 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-02-17 05:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

News Flash. No WMDs were discovered in Iraq. No mobile bases, as presented by Colin Powell, were discovered in Iraq. Iraq was not at war with Iran and was spreading false rumors in order to intimidate Iran.

The BushJr administration lied us into a war with false claims about WMDs and connections between Saddam and al Qaeda. Neither of which could be discovered.

It's pathetic to hear anyone defend the action of the BushJr administration. You are obviously suffering from Alzheimer's.

#69 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-02-17 05:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think the better part of it was post 9/11 momentum, that and I suspect (but can not prove) Bush has some sympathy for the evangelical misreading of the Book of Revelations as a cipher for the end times and was behaving accordingly.

#70 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 05:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why did Bush start the war if he knew there were no WMDs
(please tell me it was to make his friends rich)

#66 | POSTED BY RONPAUL

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov

#71 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-17 05:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

#61 | POSTED BY SNOOFY
Ok. Your proof has proven that Diablo is not a liar.

Are you really that jealous that somebody other than yourself was called a liar?

#72 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 05:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

#70 | POSTED BY DIABLO

I honestly believe his self-identified sense of fatalism definitely played a part in his decision making. This is a man who let it publicly known that he speaks directly with Gawd, to the point of invoking Gawd's name as part of his persuasion to invade Iraq.

Bush wanted the War Time President label for history's sake. He wanted to be remembered. He wanted his place in history. He wasn't going down as the President of 9/11. He wanted history to remember him for something more, something he could be comfortable with, something he could then be able to relate to his father as - a War Time President. And his religion gave him the perfect philosophical rationalization and justification to proceed at any cost - even if that meant framing the pretenses for war inappropriately...

....ahem....IMO.

#73 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-17 05:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think the better part of it was post 9/11 momentum

i.e. the "Pearl Harbor level event" used to rally public for the invasion, exactly as set forth in the PNAC document, signed by top level Bush administration players.

All Bush had to do to get his casus belli was... wait for the inevitable attack and not accidentally stop it.

#74 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 05:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

I more think he succumbed to the same mentality, Snoof. Presidents are humans, too.
In any case, he was a boob but Gore would have been worse in retrospect. What ghastly choices we get for president.

#75 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 06:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Answering a question with a question is bad form!

Not when I'm restating it to try a second time for an answer lol

I don't know what you mean by historical rationals, but your second question is interesting, considering how long these weapons have been around we remain the only country actually to have used them, and I bet that is a concern to China and others. Also, we have never agreed to renounce a first strike.

By historical rationals I mean using an example of past behavior (ie Saddam's gassing of the Kurds) as a reason for action years or decades after the fact despite newer information suggesting the situation has changed.

The fact Saddam gassed the Kurds was irrelevant considering there were many arguing he didn't have the weapons to do that again anyway.

My point considering our use of nukes in 1945 is just to illustrate that I would hope that wouldn't weigh heavily in a consideration to go to war with the US. Different times, different people and different political considerations. That Truman bombed Hiroshima/Nagasaki would be a poor rationale for our likelihood to use nukes today.

P.S. I tolerated, not truly supported, the Iraq invasion up to the point we captured Hussein.

Which is irresponsible and wrong IMO. Bomb the hell out of a country over questionable assertions then simply leave the smouldering rubble to its fate? Would you genuinely be surprised when we (the US) were called tyrants and a dangerous people? Would you be genuinely surprised when we had another one, two or ten 9/11s?

#76 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-17 06:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

"In any case, he was a boob but Gore would have been worse in retrospect."

Thousands of people would still be alive if Gore had been awarded the office to which he was elected.

#77 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-17 06:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Now if only some producer in Hollywood would put together a very believable and realistic story about 9-11, why it occurred, and who was behind it, and the beneficiaries, instead of the false fantasy promoted by the 9-11 Commission. It would get Americans thinking.

#78 | Posted by Robson at 2013-02-17 08:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

.... The American Public Richly Deserved the Screwing It Got... & Gets!

**** The Iraq War "Hoax" COST how many LIVES and how much MONEY...and all these Bush Govt CRIMINALS are still walking around FREE???

#79 | Posted by AntiCadillac at 2013-02-17 08:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

**** The Iraq War "Hoax" COST how many LIVES and how much MONEY...and all these Bush Govt CRIMINALS are still walking around FREE???

All thanks to B. Hussein Obama.

#80 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-17 08:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Anyone interested should see what the leading Democrats said about Saddam Hussein and Iraq prior to the war. By hindsight, it was a mistake as was the Afghanistan War. But public anger over September 11 suggested that something should be done.
The U.S. has not won a war since WWII.

#81 | Posted by Donald at 2013-02-17 08:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Anyone interested should see what the leading Democrats said about Saddam Hussein and Iraq prior to the war.

You mean saying those things was a mistake, or invading Iraq was a mistake?

Actions speak louder than words. Look at Reagan's words during the Cold War. They were quite hostile. Meanwhile, his actions mostly consisted of he and Nancy meeting Mr. and Mrs. Gorbachev for tea and cookies.

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-17 10:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

What a waste of money two war,for what? Even China won the oil right for Iraq,we didn't even get that. Way to go you dumb politicians!

#83 | Posted by truthteller101 at 2013-02-17 11:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

The misinformation and ignorance displayed here AGAIN by the rightie tighties is nothing short of astonishing. Saddam Hussein, like Osama bin Laden, was at one point on the CIA payroll and used by the CIA to control Iraq's oil flow. More importantly he was a US pawn in our perpetual war on their neighbor Iran. To this end we supplied the raw materials and technology for Hussein to gas Iranians. Germany supplied the equipment. This arrangement provided the vital official US position of plausible deniability. As long as they were gasing Iranians we didn't just not care, we made it happen.

But as Hussein's hold on power consolidated, he began to ignore his former US patron and nationalized oil, attempted to reestablish traditional borders when Chevron began drilling horizontally into Iraq from Kuwait, leading to the desert Storm, and worst of all decided to trade oil for Euros. Our alleged outrage over weapons of mass destruction story is just more BS to feed to our domestic population. The Bush/Cheney claim that he was a threat to our national security or linked to al Queda are just more lies in an endless sea of lies.

The moral outrage exhibited by the right over Hussein's behavior is typical US hyprocrisy. If he cooperated with our economic policies we wouldn't care who he murdered, gased or tortured. In fact we facilitated it, as long as he continued to do our bidding.

#84 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-17 11:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

#82 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I'd ask for a refund on your history class. Mikhail Gorbachev was the General Secretary of the Communist Party and was not president of Russia until 1988 and Reagan left office in 1989. They first met face to face at the Reykjavík Summit in Oct 1986.

#85 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-17 11:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Corky, I asked long ago about who did this alleged study. Got any info?

#86 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-17 11:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The misinformation and ignorance displayed here AGAIN by the rightie tighties is nothing short of astonishing. Saddam Hussein, like Osama bin Laden, was at one point on the CIA payroll and used by the CIA to control Iraq's oil flow."

Yeah...like..right on..I guess. Light up another bowl.

"More importantly he was a US pawn in our perpetual war on their neighbor Iran."

Oh.. yeah. So we killed him, right? He was on our payroll and we killed him.
No wonder you chose that handle.

#87 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-18 12:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

There was little the Agency could do directly against Khomeini. But indirectly it was doing tremendous damage by providing covert assistance to Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis for their bloody war with Iran.

George Crile, "Charlie Wilson's War", 2003, Grove Press, p. 275

US Support for Iraq during the Iran/Iraq War
en.wikipedia.org

#88 | Posted by madscientist at 2013-02-18 12:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

apparently diablo does not understand what "at one point" means, nor is he able to recognize that we were his biggest supporter as long as he was willing to go to war with Iran for us.

#89 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 12:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

Diablo's more interested in calling people potheads, drunks and making fun of peoples' handles. Par for the course, Nutcase.

#90 | Posted by madscientist at 2013-02-18 12:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

Oh.. yeah. So we killed him, right? He was on our payroll and we killed him.

Sigh.
The Iraqis killed him, Diablo.
And he had long outlived his usefulness to us by then.
Or rather, it had become more useful to paint him as an enemy than an ally.

But seriously, Diablo, do you really think we wouldn't burn somebody who used to be our guy?
Maybe you should ask Manuel Noriega about that.

#91 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 12:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

I have posted since I came here years ago I voted twice against Bush. Who is the liar?
DIABLO

You came here 2009. It is easy to claim what you claimed. Most of your old postings made that claim very questionable (laughable).

#92 | Posted by fribo at 2013-02-18 06:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why did Bush start the war if he knew there were no WMDs
(please tell me it was to make his friends rich)
#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-17 05

Let's start with the theory he might be mentally ill.

#67 | POSTED BY ZED

Zed,

LOL!!!

So, you say that Bush invaded Iraq to make his friends rich?

#93 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 08:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

So, you say that Bush invaded Iraq to make his friends rich?

#93 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013

Where do I say that?

What I do say is that the idea W. was missing a few bottles out of a six-pack should be examined more.

This is, in my opinion, one reason Mitt lost, by the way. People are counting bottles better than formerly.

#94 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-18 08:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

This is, in my opinion, one reason Mitt lost, by the way. People are counting bottles better than formerly.
#94 | POSTED BY ZED

Ok guy. You said it above with the ridicules answer you gave.

You either don't have the capacity for rational thought or you are just too partisan to consider that Bush had a reason that you wouldn't be able to comprehend even if you tried.

My point is that you won't admit it because you would have to admit some things about our country that you don't want to admit.

#95 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 08:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

My point is that you won't admit it because you would have to admit some things about our country that you don't want to admit.

#95 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18

My point is that you won't admit things about people.

#96 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-18 09:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

My point is that you won't admit things about people.
#96 | POSTED BY ZED

You said it in post #94. You don't have the capacity because the result you desire is that your man is in the White House.

So, you are satisfied that a group of rich people got away with a crime worse than murder?

Obama is just as guilty for what Bush did because he did nothing about it.

#97 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 09:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

But seriously, Diablo, do you really think we wouldn't burn somebody who used to be our guy?
Maybe you should ask Manuel Noriega about that.

#91 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Bin Laden wasn't. LOL!!!!

LOL!!!!!

#98 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 09:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

You're spread too much over the landscape, EDWARD. Its not fun.

#99 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-18 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I think that future generations will have a hard time understanding why there was a Gulf War II, much like we today have difficulty with WWI.

I lived through it and I don't understand it.

#100 | Posted by Zed at 2013-02-18 09:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

I lived through it and I don't understand it.
#100 | POSTED BY ZED

No, you won't understand it.

You take simple explanations that don't make sense, but you don't care because the Democrats are in power because of it.

We traded a POTUS who was a tyrant external to the nation for one who is a tyrant domestically.

#101 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 10:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

'Hoax' insinuates a harmless quality to the deception. 'Treason' is a better word to describe that happened....

#102 | Posted by Sully at 2013-02-18 10:24 AM | Reply | Flag:

'Hoax' insinuates a harmless quality to the deception. 'Treason' is a better word to describe that happened....
#102 | POSTED BY SULLY

I agree.

But why did no one go to jail or even prosecuted?

#103 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

"But why did no one go to jail or even prosecuted?"

Good question. Willard should have asked Obama why Obama didn't prosecute Willard's cronies in the GOP during the debates. Wonder why he didn't.

#104 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-18 10:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

Good question. Willard should have asked Obama why Obama didn't prosecute Willard's cronies in the GOP during the debates. Wonder why he didn't.

#104 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Ooooooooo. No goal post moving. Remember?

Romney is not the POTUS. Obama is.

Again:
"But why did no one go to jail or even prosecuted?"

#105 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 10:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hoax' insinuates a harmless quality to the deception. 'Treason' is a better word to describe that happened....
#102 | POSTED BY SULLY

I agree.
But why did no one go to jail or even prosecuted?

#103 | POSTED BY RONPAUL

How come all of the Bush haters can't answer this?

#106 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 10:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ron,

Because we do not live in a Democracy, because we created the Geneva Conventions and refuse to hold ourselves to the same standard to which we held the Japanese and Germans retroactively.

One can ask the same question regarding fraud and gambling on Wall Street which collapsed the economy worldwide and whose losses were promptly transferred not to the perpetrators, but the innocent middle class that had nothing to do with the crisis.

Our Democracy is an illusion, perpetrated by a Joseph Goebel's mass media for the benefit of the 1%. All the while pretending that free markets work. Our President is protected from prosecution in order to avoid immense international embarrassment. You might recall that there was an effort to arrest Rumsfeld when he visited France, but secret higher powers prevented it. Similarly, Italy and Malaysia have conducted trials in absentia of Bush and 13 CIA agents. Both have resulted in convictions yet, unlike Julian Assange, there will be no extradiction. Same with Luis Posada Carilles and Jose Padilla. Carilles is known to have blown up a commercial flight from Cuba to Venezuella. The US has protected Carilles and refused extradiction to Venezuella. Padilla , on the other hand, was convicted of an imaginary crime which never occurred. Different political standards in grotesque political trials. 90% of those incarcerated in Guantanamo were released without charges because they were falsely accused and arrested in order to collect millions in bounties. The kind of stuff you expect from China or Russia.

THe pattern is clear. Heavy handed prosecution of poor and powerless people and immunity for the rich and powerful.

en.wikipedia.org

www.amazon.com

#107 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 11:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Carilles is known to have blown up a commercial flight from Cuba to Venezuella. The US has protected Carilles and refused extradiction to Venezuella."

Why is Obama harboring terrorists? I thought he was against terrorism.

#108 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-18 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

W said he was worried about Gog and Magog.
www.motherjones.com

#109 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-02-18 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

You might recall that there was an effort to arrest Rumsfeld when he visited France, but secret higher powers prevented it.

Amazing stuff, isn't it?

Truth is stranger than fiction.

#110 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 12:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

W said he was worried about Gog and Magog.
www.motherjones.com
#109 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

Another Lib in denial...

#111 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 12:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Denial? Here is a larger truth which explains Shrub and bin Laden perfectly.

www.amazon.com

#112 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Denial? Here is a larger truth which explains Shrub and bin Laden perfectly.
#112 | POSTED BY NUTCASE

Nut, I wasn't addressing you. I was referring to OldWhiskey.

Your Amazon link goes to a list of different books.

#113 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

A migrant worker, by the name of Eric Hoffer, wrote the "True Believer", providing brilliant insights into the minds and behavior of fanatics of all sorts. They are very dangerous, regardless their political persuasion..

#114 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're on the right track, nutcase.

Check out this article:
www.caseyresearch.com

It's amazing how many Americans have never heard of this.

#115 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 01:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But why did no one go to jail or even prosecuted?"

Those at the top are seldom held accountable. Remember when Ford pardoned Nixon?

Prosecution might even turn public tide against Obama enough that he loses re-election and the incoming GOP President pardons the Bush crowd.

South Africa at least had a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We don't even get that.

It's just too unpatriotic to question America, especially when it comes to foreign policy. You might as well go spit on some soldiers coming home from [INSERT FOREIGN WAR HERE]. A young John Kerry questioned American foreign policy in Vietnam, it became an albatross around his neck when he ran for President.

#116 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 02:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Even now, all these long years later, I still am boggled at how the nation actually psyched itself up to go to war with Iraq. I remember my confusion and disbelief as it all played out. I kept telling myself that there was no way that Bush/Cheney were actually going to initiate that war. The amount ignorance displayed by most Americans, and the overall complicity of the media and Congress and big business throughout process forever changed how I viewed America as an 'organism' (for lack of a better word). It was like watching a tragedy in slow motion and looking to the 'responsible' elements of society to put an end to it, but instead watching them do the opposite.
Even today, when I hear talk that people believed Saddam had WMDS and that justified the war, I shake my head in sadness. First of all, he didn't have WMDs. And even if he did, that was no cause to initiate an all out invasion of Iraq. Nations throughout the world, even nations we do not like, have WMDs. That has never been the threshold for mounting an invasion. Neither before Iraq, nor since. It was all [...] to promote a political agenda. And it ended up costing hundreds of thousand of lives and trillions of dollars. The Horror!

#117 | Posted by moder8 at 2013-02-18 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

In a way, I imagine average ordinary Germans in the 1930s watched the rise of Hitler and Naziism with the same disbelief that I viewed GWB and this nations march to war based on lies, hatred and fear. Nobody could believe that it was actually happening, and most people wanted to believe it was the right thing to do.

#118 | Posted by moder8 at 2013-02-18 04:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

I viewed GWB and this nations march to war based on lies, hatred and fear.

So, why did Bush do it?

#119 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 04:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

None of this is relevant, Bush isn't POTUS any more. Lets talk about the next few crappy years of Obama's administration.

#120 | Posted by danv at 2013-02-18 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

To promote a neocon, quasi-Reaganesque fantasy which they convinced themselves would lead to the spread of democracy in the Middle East, the advent of a New American Century, massive profits for their corporate partners in the oil and weapons industries, and the clueless hope that we actually would be welcomed as "liberators". It was all lies and [...], with a heavy dose of ignorant wishful thinking thrown in.

#121 | Posted by moder8 at 2013-02-18 04:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

What's past is prologue.
--Wm. Shakespeare

#122 | Posted by madscientist at 2013-02-18 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

"None of this is relevant, Bush isn't POTUS any more."

Yeah, I supposed the 4,000 people whose livs he threw away just rose from the dead when his term was up. So let's just forget it because no harm, no foul, right? Nothing lost so why call these people out for that they are even though they to this date haven't been held the least bit accountable?

Great point. Really, you're very sharp. And a true patriot as well. Deflecting for this lowlives doesn't make you a horrible American at all.....

#123 | Posted by Sully at 2013-02-18 04:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Great point. Really, you're very sharp.
#123 | POSTED BY SULLY

Well, it seems that he's just agreeing with Obama. Bush is not the POTUS anymore and should not be subjected to any kind of punishment. In fact, no one in the Administration should be prosecuted.

Is that right?

#124 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 05:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, why did Bush do it?
#119 | POSTED BY RONPAUL

Operation
Iraqi
Liberation

georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov

#125 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2013-02-18 05:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Funny to see those who want to "move on" and call the "Benghazi cover up" old stuff still focused on George Bush.

#126 | Posted by sames1 at 2013-02-18 05:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Is that right?

#124 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-02-18 05:17 PM | Reply | Flag:"

Given I've alredy directly contradicted your statment, why bother asking?

You seem to be operating under the delusion that I don't criticize Obama. Or that I've ever voted for him for that matter.

I know our government is never going to prosecute the traitors because A) it would open up the Dems to criticism for not oppposing them B) about 45% of the country still supports the traitors out of party loyalty and as a result any proscution of the traitors would widely be labelled a partisan stunt rather than "justice" and C) The Democrats don't want to face potential prosecution for their crimes either.

That doesn't mean that decent Americans shouldn't call the scumbag traitors out for what they are at every opportunity. These people should be treated like the lowlives they are. If the only consequence of their sleazy betrayal is that once in a while they are made to feel uncomfortable because they are treated like the scum they are by a real American, at least that is something.

#127 | Posted by Sully at 2013-02-18 05:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

...
... so let's say even if Iraq had WMD's, what was the urgency in attacking them ? ....
...
.... North Korea has nukes, the government there has starved millions of their own people to death, but nobody makes a noise about invading them and 'bringing democracy' ....
...
... Pakistan has nukes, Israel has nukes ... nobody talks about invading them .....
...
.... there was no U.S. invasion when the Rwandans murdered a million of their own, when Cambodians murdered 3 million of their own ....
...
.... our conscience seems to be very selective ..........

#128 | Posted by skizziks at 2013-02-18 07:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Our government has been conning the American people for years. The marketing of the Iraq war always stuck in my craw. It brought back memories of the same BS with the Vietnam war. Then the Libyan BS. It doesn't matter who is in the WH. They're puppets of the banks, bureaucrats, the monied and the powerful. Obungler is no different. He's just better at the con especially when the MSM is in bed with him. Politics is like a football game; you have the partisans of both parties on the sidelines cheering their teams on and when the victor is in the WH, the partisans allow their guy to carry on the same BS that they accused the other team's guy of.

#129 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-18 07:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

The "petrodollar" system was a brilliant political and economic move. It forced the world's oil money to flow through the US Federal Reserve, creating ever-growing international demand for both US dollars and US debt, while essentially letting the US pretty much own the world's oil for free, since oil's value is denominated in a currency that America controls and prints. The petrodollar system spread beyond oil: the majority of international trade is done in US dollars. That means that from Russia to China, Brazil to South Korea, every country aims to maximize the US-dollar surplus garnered from its export trade to buy oil.

The US has reaped many rewards. As oil usage increased in the 1980s, demand for the US dollar rose with it, lifting the US economy to new heights. But even without economic success at home the US dollar would have soared, because the petrodollar system created consistent international demand for US dollars, which in turn gained in value. A strong US dollar allowed Americans to buy imported goods at a massive discount. The availability of cheap imports hit the US manufacturing industry hard, and the disappearance of manufacturing jobs remains one of the biggest challenges in resurrecting the US economy today.

The value of the US dollar is determined in large part by the fact that oil is sold in US dollars. If that trade shifts to a different currency, countries around the world won't need all their US money. The resulting sell-off of US dollars would weaken the currency dramatically.

Everybody says the US goes to war to protect its oil supplies, but doesn't it really go to war to ensure the continuation of the petrodollar system?

#130 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 08:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Everybody says the US goes to war to protect its oil supplies, but doesn't it really go to war to ensure the continuation of the petrodollar system?

Distinction without a difference, for exactly the reasons you stated.

The politicians get everybody on board with language like "our interests" and "our way of life."

#131 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 08:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

.... Public's "Cognitive Dissonance" is Good News for the War Mongers!

**** The (surprisingly) low response to this damning article effectively demonstrates that the Majority of the American Public still blindly refuses to believe their Govt & Country is being run by a bunch of Vile,Greedy CROOKS & THUGS!

#132 | Posted by AntiCadillac at 2013-02-18 08:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

War Is A Racket

#133 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2013-02-18 09:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's rare to find people who both know how the system works and are openly unapologetic about it.
Most right-wingers fall back on moral arguments in defense of the status quo.
Few will say "9/11 was a small price to pay for the American hegemony."
In fact I've yet to meet one, at least in America.

#134 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 09:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Funny to see those who want to "move on" and call the "Benghazi cover up" old stuff still focused on George Bush.

Those two events aren't even apples and oranges.

They're apples and Chevys.

#135 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-18 09:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

They're apples and Chevys.

#135 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-18 09:04 PM | Reply

JPW obviously isn't versed in the difference between fruit and metal.

#136 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-18 09:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Everybody says the US goes to war to protect its oil supplies, but doesn't it really go to war to ensure the continuation of the petrodollar system?

#130 | Posted by nutcase at 2013-02-18 08:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Countries are slowly breaking the stranglehold of the American dollar as reserve currency. They're starting to cut out the dollar in direct trade and this "aberration" will become more of a reality with time. With time the petrodollar will also be slowly compromised. Ultimately, a new form of "reserve currency" will be ushered in based on a basket of currencies and backed to a degree by hard assets. Instead of a "bretton-woods" agreement we'll have a "singapore-beijing" agreement.

#137 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-18 09:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

I haven't heard "Bretton-Woods" since the last time I picked up a copy of AdBusters. Or was it Lyndon LaRouche's Executive Intelligence News?

The media does an excellent job of not mentioning the structural foundations of the status quo.

#138 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 09:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

JPW obviously isn't versed in the difference between fruit and metal.

You think suffering from pica is a joke?

#139 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-18 10:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Countries are slowly breaking the stranglehold of the American dollar as reserve currency.

It would be to our advantage to (gradually) let them if we still had manufacturing to export.

Unfortunately the "job creators" don't care about America or the middle class, only the bottom line, and moved their manufacturing capacity overseas.

#140 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 10:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

The media does an excellent job of not mentioning the structural foundations of the status quo.

#138 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-18 09:51 PM | Reply |

The MSM doesn't have a clue of the quiet currency revolution taking place throughout the world. There are multiple events giving clues to the future massive changes: Germany repatriating their gold, China/Japan and China/Russia making international trade agreements cutting out the dollar as an intermediary, countries purchasing oil without dollars and some with gold, the BRICs planning to use their own currency in trading with each other, the growing use of Chinese currency in Africa, China/UAE agreement for the purchase of oil/trade in their own currencies, and the UN and IMF have now been discussing the possibility of a new world order reserve currency. It doesn't help that the world will cry no tears for the US if these changes occur.

#141 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-18 10:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

You think suffering from pica is a joke?

#139 | Posted by jpw at 2013-02-18 10:02 PM | Reply |

Lead paint is a biatch.

#142 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-18 10:24 PM | Reply | Flag: