Is Iraq going to fall?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Detbuch - if he said that then he was wrong. I'm not here to defend him.

Jim - I watched on tv the same things you did and thought there were WMDs. I also thought Blitz (??) should have been given the more time he wanted to continue looking. The point it that the adm. seemed to have ignored or down played every bit of evidence that was contrary to their view that they had WMDs. Look what they did with the tubes, Libby planted the story then they used that story to justify the invasion. Seems like there are more hearings on what happened the first few days in Bengazi than what happened then.

Of course, you have a point.

But I keep coming back to this...Bush gave Saddam plenty of chances to avoid war by letting the inspectors do their job (which he was obligated to do). If Bush was hell-bent on war, he wouldn't have gived Saddam a dozen chances to avoid war by simply complying with international law. To say that Bush had made up his mind to invade and wasn't going to be dissuaded, is refuted by that simple fact.

Lots of people were wrong. If you want to call that a sign of some degree of incompetence on the part of everyone who was wrong, that's got some validity to it I guess. I'd call it an honest mistake, not something that was a calculated deception.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But I keep coming back to this...Bush gave Saddam plenty of chances to avoid war by letting the inspectors do their job (which he was obligated to do). If Bush was hell-bent on war, he wouldn't have gived Saddam a dozen chances to avoid war by simply complying with international law. To say that Bush had made up his mind to invade and wasn't going to be dissuaded, is refuted by that simple fact.

Much of Bush's inner circle didn't want him to even go to the UN because they feared it would stop the process. They did it only for legitimacy, and abandoned it when it became clear that Hans Blix was heading towards a call of no WMD.

There certainly is debate if the US complied with international law by moving forward with the invasion.

-spence

[buckman]

[QUOTE=spence;

There certainly is debate if the US complied with international law by moving forward with the invasion.

-spence[/QUOTE]

???? Did this just happen???
I bet even your blinders have Obama stickers on them
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Much of Bush's inner circle didn't want him to even go to the UN because they feared it would stop the process. They did it only for legitimacy, and abandoned it when it became clear that Hans Blix was heading towards a call of no WMD.

There certainly is debate if the US complied with international law by moving forward with the invasion.

-spence

(1) then a lot of other countries violated international law with us, because we were not the only ones there.

(2) if you are a stickler for sticking to international law, why do you suppose your hero rolled over like a dog when Putin seized Crimea?

Have fun with that.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

(1) then a lot of other countries violated international law with us, because we were not the only ones there.

(2) if you are a stickler for sticking to international law, why do you suppose your hero rolled over like a dog when Putin seized Crimea?

Have fun with that.

Why do you say "have fun with that" like you've made some brilliant point?

We weren't alone in 2003 but the list is pretty short.

As for Crimea, yes Russia likely broke international law. With everything, there's only so much you can do. Was Obama supposed to bomb the covert Russian troops?

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Why do you say "have fun with that" like you've made some brilliant point?

We weren't alone in 2003 but the list is pretty short.

As for Crimea, yes Russia likely broke international law. With everything, there's only so much you can do. Was Obama supposed to bomb the covert Russian troops?

-spence

"We weren't alone in 2003 but the list is pretty short."

Before you blindly and thoughtlessly defend your side every time, try getting some facts first. From one site, a list of 21 countries that had troops in Iraq with us. I knew of 14 off the top of my head...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita..._coalition.htm

"Was Obama supposed to bomb the covert Russian troops? "

I didn't hear many people at all support that. But it projects weakness when he stands there like a eunuch.

Here is what he was "supposed to do". When he campaigned, I kept hearing that because Obama (unlike Bush) was an intellectual instead of a cowboy, and because he was such a cosmopolitan and enlightened Nobel laureate, because he was pot-partisan and even post-racial (he's above such mundane things, you see) he was going to repair all the damage done by Bush and bring everyone in the world together in a collective hug. He would solve problems by making everyone love us...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"We weren't alone in 2003 but the list is pretty short."

Before you blindly and thoughtlessly defend your side every time, try getting some facts first. From one site, a list of 21 countries that had troops in Iraq with us. I knew of 14 off the top of my head...

httqp://www.globalsecurity.org/milit..._coalition.htm

I said in 2003 not 2006. I believe the invading coalition was only 5 countries not including the Kurds...

You jumpeth too fast.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device