Hans Blitz to George Bush: "Told Ya!" *

[itzamirakul]

No WMD...No WMD...No WMD....No WMD....

A total waste of time, lives and money....

Saddam under arrest...for what? For doing what YOU are doing right now?

Torture...Cruelty....Rampant Theft.....Looting.....War Profiteering...

No Oil...No Oil....No Oil....No Oil...because the Iraqis would rather blow up the pipelines than to let you rob them of the oil that is under THEIR sand.

A war for nothing...A war for nothing...A war for nothing...

*Hans Blitz reference from AAR's "Morning Sedition" Program today.

[Stockholm]

1. Kick n/t

[Flying Dream Blues]

7. Well...

I guess the millions that Halliburton and friends are making means it wasn't a TOTAL loss. Barfing smiley here.

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. Yep. Halliburton is profitting out of the chaos that Bush's mess

created.

[liberal N proud]

2. Way to go Hans

[Disturbed]

4. Hans Blix would have proved no WMDs..

but Bush Junta would not allow him to do so.

Would Americans have green lighted the Iraq invasion if Bush Junta
would have told the real reasons for the invasion?

[itzamirakul]

8. Bush, Cheney and Halliburton would have gone to war...

regardless of WHAT the American people thought or wanted. After all, they had mortgages to pay and their children's collge expenses....they NEEDED all that oil...damn the National Treasures that were looted.

How many non-thinking Repubs STILL think that Saddam was in cahoots with Bin Laden re 911? That alone, tells the tale of "the American people."

[itzamirakul]

3. This was not a literal quote from Blitz...

It was a remark made by Mark Moran on AAR's Morning Sedition and the rest of the text is mine.

Just want to be sure that no one thinks this is a literal quote from Hans Blitz. Sorry....Wish it was....

[rodeodance]

5. george will continue to look----prob. under his desk!!

[beam me up scottie]

6. Is that what he's doing under there?

n/t
:eyes:

[Stockholm]

10. Here is one from one of his lectures...

"I was not really startled as I was told my office was bugged, I just wished they would have listened more closely to what I was saying"

He is a great old fart, tons of humor.

[rniel]

12. but it would be cool is people really talked like that

n/m

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bridget Burke]

13. Please, you'll have to do better than that.

Your president lied to get us into a totally illegal war. There's lots of blood on his hands--and on yours.

[southpaw]

14. I don't pretend to understand Saddam's thinking...

But most of his shit makes sense when you consider that he is either posturing as a 'strong leader' to impress his subjects or being defiant to annoy his enemies.

I haven't followed all of the episodes of resistance to UN inspections since Desert Storm, but the cat and mouse stuff that was going on while Blix and co. were in Iraq prior to Operation Iraqi Oil seemed like Saddam complying with the UN, but being deliberately defiant while doing so.

And, did Saddam ever kick the inspectors out? I thought the UN withdrewn them.

[LynnTheDem]

21. No he didn't kick the UN out. They withdrew when Clinton decided to

start up Op Desert Fox ...or "Operation Desert Badger" if you're a fool named G.W. bush...and the UN teams wouldn't be safe with US bombs reigning down.

[quaoar]

15. Who knows?

And what difference does it make what bizarre reasons motivated Saddam? That's like firing an employee because you are sure he is stealing from you, but then you find out he wasn't, but you figure it was OK to fire him anyway because he was acting funny.

[PA Democrat]

16. Oh, did he "fool" all of the rest of the world into invading Iraq?

The rationale that I have heard for Saddam's behavior, is that he would be viewed as weak and vulnerable if he proved he did not have WMD's.

My question is this. If Bush continually claimed he had irrefutable evidence that Saddam still had WMD's, why were the weapons inspectors present in Iraq before we invaded in March, 2003 unable to find anything? In fact, the UN inspectors said that the "intelligence" the US gave them during the inspection was all BAD. Why was this same, obviously bad intelligence then used to justify a war?

THIS is more than "unfortunate". It is a crime.





BTW, check your history. Saddam didn't "throw the inspectors out", Clinton made the decision to withdraw the inspectors.

[neweurope]

17. Has it ever occurred to you that sovereign countries just DON'T LIKE

to be inspected? How would you feel if the UN decided to-morrow to inspect some of YOUR weapons sites? Lord knows YOU have enough WMD to kill the world more than once. - And nobody's saying Saddam was a saint.


---------------------


Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[JoseRizal]

18. People who were and are still supportive of the Presindent's

actions are pretty much are living or I should an idealistic people. The fact of the matter is from the moment the tragedy of Sept.11 happened it would be fair to say that most Americans equated Saddam Hussein with Osama Bin Laden as one or were involved in the planning and co-ordination of it. I think it was kind of second nature guessing by the public at large to put Saddam into our psyche, why you ask well for almost a decade or longer than that Saddam has been villified,reviled like he was Adolf Hitler's twin brother. As a mass murderer,gassing his own people his neighbours, and etc. Now all of these are factually correct and factually verifiable with our intelligence sources or through other intelligence sources thru Russia,Iran,The British,and the Iraqi themselves. Secondly, during the Clinton Administration if I can recall correctly the administration sought to depose Saddam and his regime for good The White HOuse dispatched Sec. of State Albright,The Sec of Defence touring Colleges of some sort. One of that was broadcasted via CNN and the result of it was not pleasant for the administration because largely the support for the kind of action they were seeking were minimal, it have not the will of the general populace. You can correct me on this one if I am mistaken pls. do so. the clinton administration were frustrated by the result largely because they failed to convince the public of the danger of inacting and the blame can also be trace back fairly or unfairly with the President himself due to his lingering affair with a certain person. President Clinton weakened his resolved and stature as a Commander in Chief with The American public thus negating the plans of ousting or doing some severe actions towards the Hussein regime. Although we did still struck Saddam with cruise missiles,and laser guided weapons with the Operation Fox. This was only a fraction I think in my opinion of what the President wanted to hit and destroy. Jumping our date towards Sept.11,2001 N.Y. two towers are in flames and then collapsed into rubbles,Pentagon in flames,purportedly the third plane was supposed to struck the white house or the congress America was hurt,wounded deeply our financial area struck,our defence esttablishment hit and in flames. These are our institutions the very things that symbolizes America and its people. After that well people who have comitted these sick agression were just sorry wether it's Bin laden,Saddam Hussein or The North Koreans themselves.
I think at that time most Americans were calling for blood they wanted action waged against a state they probably could not care less wether the problem is in state or between states. I am not for one were in support and still not in support of the President'a actions against IRAQ as it put our resources from the real source of the problem. What I am trying to write is more of a balanced perspective from both sides of the argument on this case from a perspective of support in IRAQ. People who were in doubt about IRAQ were easily convinced that Saddam have something to do with it, the very public officials they voted for never doubted nor raised enough questions about the impending actions against IRAQ as we all know due to the lack of leadership,courage, and moral convictions. Americans at that time suspended their ability to question the authority with clarity with purpose and wisdom. Americans acted through their frustrations with the Iraqi regime and Saddam himself. With 911 fresh in our mind the current administration never ever hesitated to capitalize on it's citizens vulnerability which was FEAR. Rightly or wrongly were in IRAQ for the long haul but as Americans we ought not fight among ourselves but rather used our anger on something more productive for the republic and that is a civil discussions among our friends and enemies of thought. The point of discussion is that it should not be who is more intellectually superior, or more articulate but rather doing the right things that reflects the very essence of what an American is what it stands for and what our great country always stood for the right of everyone to pursue Life,Liberty,Justice and equality for all. We must find common ground with every individual to strengthen us not weaken us in order to help us guide out of our current predicament.

[jarab]

19. Welcome to the DU !

You appear to be outspoken and open-minded. And, Oh yes, DU rules do permit paragraphing for ease of reading.
Again, "Welcome!"
...O...

[itzamirakul]

20. Oh yes...Welcome...

and please take the advice to break your thoughts up in to more "readable" paragraphs. I need new glasses after reading your post. :)

[LynnTheDem]

22. Actually in polls right after 911, less than 4% Americans said Hussein.

Shortly after September 11, respondents were asked the open-ended question:

<"Who do you think is more responsible [sic> for the recent terrorist attacks on the New York World Trade Center and the Pentagon?"

Only 3% proposed Saddam Hussein or Iraq, while 57% named Osama bin Laden as the most likely suspect.

One year later:

One poll has found a slight majority saying that Iraq was behind the attacks. In August 2002, a Gallup poll found 53% saying they believed "Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the September 11 attacks.

http://www.americans-world.org/digest/regional_issues/Conflict_Iraq/linkstoTerr.cfm

bush & Cheney, their Cartel and the US StenoMedia worked HARD, very HARD, on making Americans believe Iraq did 911. And 60% of bushbots still think Iraq did 911.

Mob Rule by Total Ignorance; it's the New American Way!

And welcome to DU! :hi:

[JoseRizal]

23. Mob Rule by Total Ignorance; it's the New American Way!

I would not label it that way because it put the majority of Americans as not bright people which I thnk is not at all true. Yes, you may able to judge it thru the re-election of President Bush which translates that the majority are in support of the administrations actions plans etc.

I just dont see it that way, I still believe that our current situation was not helped by the very officials we put on office to protect us to inform us to warn us and in some ways to educate and above all to tell us the truth. Neither of these in my opinion happened or they failed to do their collective duty to uphold their roles in the govt. I simply will not blame the people for the perils we face when the opposition party failed to do its duty as a party for the people who thinks like you or me and finally for failing to sway convinced people by facts that it is folly nor prudent to vote for a man who is resolute but wrong, a leader who is not strong nor brave to to do what is right for the nation at large.