Forums | MacLife

resedit wrote:

user wrote:

I wonder how many US soldiers in Iraq think that Iraq was responsible for 9/11?

I'm guessing very very few.
Most military people watches fox news, which accurately reported the fact that Al Queda operating from Afghanistan was responsible for 9/11. Given that the military went into Afghanistan first, I think it's pretty damned good chance they know why we went into Afghanistan.

So the same people that watch Fox News and do connect Iraq and 9/11 are somehow dumber than American troops?

It is funny that you constantly parrot the talking point that the government never explicitly connected Iraq and AQ, yet there are a multitude of sound bytes where Saddam is mentioned in the same breath as AQ and 9/11, but Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and anyone in the administration who is quoteworthy.  Are you incapapble of understanding implication and nuance within the Bush Admininistration propoganda?

resedit wrote:

So the same people that watch Fox News and do connect Iraq and 9/11 are somehow dumber than American troops?

Define "connect Iraq and 9/11" please.

No.

Res, in thread after thread about this topic, over the years, you've blatantly claimed that the Bushistas mentioning Saddam and AQ in the same sentence, connecting them with inference and innuendo, is not connecting them at all.  You obtusely claim that unless someting is explicitly stated, it cannot be inferred.  No matter what definition I give, you will quible and claim that it is all in the imagination.

So no. I am not going to pander to your obtuse denial of reality.

resedit wrote:

user wrote:

I wonder how many US soldiers in Iraq think that Iraq was responsible for 9/11?

I'm guessing very very few.
Most military people watches fox news, which accurately reported the fact that Al Queda operating from Afghanistan was responsible for 9/11. Given that the military went into Afghanistan first, I think it's pretty damned good chance they know why we went into Afghanistan.

Not according a survey among 944 military personnels in Iraq a few months ago.

85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

Iran's friendly with Hamas. 

Iraq paid money to the families of suicide bombers, mostly Palestinian.  So did the Saudis. But don't worry, Richard Perle has a plan for the Saudis that war hawks will be able to get behind. 

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

user wrote:

I wonder how many US soldiers in Iraq think that Iraq was responsible for 9/11?

I'm guessing very very few.
Most military people watches fox news, which accurately reported the fact that Al Queda operating from Afghanistan was responsible for 9/11. Given that the military went into Afghanistan first, I think it's pretty damned good chance they know why we went into Afghanistan.

I'm curious about something, Res:

Do you believe that members of this administration desired for the public to be confused on this question, or for them to mistakenly believe (as quite a large number of people did) that Iraq was somehow connected to 9/11?

Is it your feeling that the Administration had absolutely no desire for such a misconception to exist, and that they would have worked harder to dispel such a myth had they been aware of it?

It's certainly not difficult to see where the misconception came from:

One of the greatest dangers we face is that weapons of mass destruction might be passed to terrorists who would not hesitate to use those weapons. Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in acquiring poisons and gases.

We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner. This network runs a poison and explosive training camp in northeast Iraq, and many of its leaders are known to be in Baghdad.

President Bush.

The Administration never, not once, indicated Saddam had anything to do with 9/11.
And no - they did not try to "trick" the american people into thinking so.

What you just quoted is basically what I just said was the connection - we thought Iraq has WoMD and we knew Saddam was trying to contact Al Queda. There is some evidence that Saddam did have a connection with Al Zarqawi.

Since Al Queda had attacked us, we believed Saddam had a WoMD program (I still think he did), and we know Saddam wanted to work with Al Queda - there was serious cause for concern. Keeping WoMD from Al Queda was a very important objective.

Now - some of the intelligence related to the extent of Al Queda and Iraq was clearly flawed, but it was not intentional deception. If the Bush administration wanted to deceive the american people, we would have "found" WoMD in Iraq. We didn't - the administration has been blatently honest about that, even though it reflects badly on the administration.

resedit wrote:

The Administration never, not once, indicated Saddam had anything to do with 9/11.
And no - they did not try to "trick" the american people into thinking so.

What you just quoted is basically what I just said was the connection - we thought Iraq has WoMD and we knew Saddam was trying to contact Al Queda. There is some evidence that Saddam did have a connection with Al Zarqawi.

Since Al Queda had attacked us, we believed Saddam had a WoMD program (I still think he did), and we know Saddam wanted to work with Al Queda - there was serious cause for concern. Keeping WoMD from Al Queda was a very important objective.

Now - some of the intelligence related to the extent of Al Queda and Iraq was clearly flawed, but it was not intentional deception. If the Bush administration wanted to deceive the american people, we would have "found" WoMD in Iraq. We didn't - the administration has been blatently honest about that, even though it reflects badly on the administration.

I take it back.

You arent obtuse.

Merely delusional.

Even the very idea that Bush kept feeding the American people, that he "didn't want" to go to war and that he tried to avoid it, was blatantly untrue.

bratboy wrote:

Even the very idea that Bush kept feeding the American people, that he "didn't want" to go to war and that he tried to avoid it, was blatantly untrue.

He did try - he gave saddam several opportunities, and Saddam was blatantly uncooroperative at every freaking turn.

Finally he let inspectors in, but he didn't let them into some sites. He never gave them access to his scientists. When he finally did let them into those sites, he had them followed - which resulted in the inspectors driving at high speeds trying to shake them, and it never worked.

When they found those burried warheads, Saddam refused to destroy them initially.

Bush gave Saddam every opportunity - Saddam just played games.

Hell, the intelligence agencies thought those statements were false even before Bush used them in the address above!

Some reports indicated that, but not all did.

resedit wrote:

He did try - he gave saddam several opportunities, and Saddam was blatantly uncooroperative at every freaking turn.

Finally he let inspectors in, but he didn't let them into some sites. He never gave them access to his scientists. When he finally did let them into those sites, he had them followed - which resulted in the inspectors driving at high speeds trying to shake them, and it never worked.

When they found those burried warheads, Saddam refused to destroy them initially.

Bush gave Saddam every opportunity - Saddam just played games.

Evidence suggests that Bush had no interests in seeing such efforts succeed.

The page has links to the articles involved:

British Memo — Bush, Blair Agreed to Invade In Late Jan. 2003:

A memo of a two-hour meeting between [Bush and Blair] at the White House on January 31 2003 - nearly two months before the invasion - reveals that Mr Bush made it clear the US intended to invade whether or not there was a second UN resolution and even if UN inspectors found no evidence of a banned Iraqi weapons programme. [Guardian, 2/3/06]

British Memo — Bush Had Made Up His In July 2002:

It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. [Downing Street Minutes, 7/23/02]

Bush Suggested War Against Iraq Nine Days After 9/11:

President George Bush first asked Tony Blair to support the removal of Saddam Hussein from power at a private White House dinner nine days after the terror attacks of 11 September, 2001. [The Observer, 4/4/04]

Richard Clarke Said Bush Pushed Him To Make Case for Iraq War:

Richard Clarke, former White House counterterrorism director: “Rumsfeld was saying that we needed to bomb Iraq. And we all said … no, no. Al-Qaeda is in Afghanistan. … The president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people, shut the door, and said, ‘I want you to find whether Iraq did this.’ Now he never said, ‘Make it up.’ But the entire conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this. [CBS 60 Minutes, 3/21/04]

Rumsfeld Suggested War Against Iraq on 9/11:

Rumsfeld’s instruction to General Myers on 9/11: Find the “best info fast …judge whether good enough [to] hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at same time - not only UBL [Usama Bin Laden]” [Rumsfeld’s notes, 9/11/01]

Former Bush Treasury Secretary Said Bush Wanted To Go To War:

In a CBS “60 Minutes” interview, former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill said, “From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go.” O’Neill says in The Price of Loyalty: “It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying, ‘Go find me a way to do this.’” [CBS, 1/11/04]

Gen. Tommy Franks — Military and Equipment Moved to Iraq In Feb. 2002:

Former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham related a conversation he had with General Tommy Franks in February 2002, 14 months before the initiation of the Iraq war. Franks said, “Senator, we are not engaged in a war in Afghanistan… Military and intelligence personnel are being redeployed to prepare for an action in Iraq… We can finish this job in Afghanistan if we are allowed to do so.” [Bob Graham, Intelligence Matters, p. 125-126]

Link.

*edit*

Warin wrote:

I take it back.

You arent obtuse.

Merely delusional.

And you are merely a smurfing smurf.

My participation in this thread is done.
The split is fine - but the naming of the new thread is clear bias.

And as usual, name calling and insults are spewn because you would rather be an ass than discuss the issue.