Skip to main content

View Diary: What you did NOT see on thursday's ABC Nightline!!! (267 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Thank everyone for the comments.... (none)
    For those that looked at my previous posts, I am a conservative (and proud of it).  I also enjoy spirited political debate.  But that debate has to be intelligent, which is why I am trying to help you.  

    My point in my earlier post remains: intelligence agencies around the world believed that Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs.  The UK has completed an investigation into whether PM Blair had coerced his intelligence agency into overstating the case against Iraq, and they found that he didn't.  Our own Senate Committee on Intelligence issued a report last year on the same thing.  They went into great detail about how screwed up our intel was, but also found that the Bush Administration had not coerced the CIA into overstating their assessment, either.  

    So here we have it, a conservative American president and a liberal British Prime Minister both looking at similar intelligence and reaching the same conclusion.  Does that mean Blair is an imperialistic facist idiot as well? You seem to reserve your hatred only for Bush, so I'm not sure.

    Was our intelligence flawed? Obviously it was.  But instead of going straight for the "Bush is an idiot facist" defense (to be used in conjuction with "liar, liar, pants on fire") at least attempt to figure out what he (and a majority of the Senate, to include John Kerry) were thinking and why.  

    You are not going to win an argument by dismissing the other side as ignorant or stupid.  And if you truly think 59 million Americans are nutjobs, then you have more problems than I am qualified to help you with.  

    •  What Bush and Blair were thinking was... (none)
      We need to get the oil.

      The reason the U.S. and U.K. went to Iraq together is because of the fact that Saddam had decided to trade in Euros rather than Dollars... both governments were feeling threatned by the European Union.

      It's as simple as that.

      And of curse, it was good business for the military industrial complex and Halliburton.

      Oh wait... there I go being ignorant and uniformed again, because any intelligent individual knows that the Bush Administration has no connection whatsoever to Halliburton, petroleum interests, or the military industrial complex.

      My own dedication to Bush/Cheney Inc. Listen to WMD: Words of Mis-Direction

      by NewWay4NewDay on Sat Jan 29, 2005 at 08:40:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Now take that logic one step further (none)
        Saddam had indeed decided to trade in Euros.  He was paying for French, German, and Russian assurances that the UN would not sanction further military action against him, and would eventually end economic sanctions.  He was paying them in Oil-for-Food kickbacks, in the billions of dollars, and oil drilling contracts inside Iraq.

        We were never going to win a vote in the security council for military action, because Saddam had already rigged the vote.  

        You're starting to add to the reasons to go to war now, not detract from them.  

        France and Germany are the ones who wanted the oil, and were willing to sell their souls to get it.    

        And I want to scream "conspiracy theorist" everytime I hear the words military-industrial-complex.  This isn't a movie or a Dan Brown novel, this is real life.  Military contractors make less money in profit than you probably think, and have no influence on the conduct of foreign policy.  

        Any other "words of mis-direction" you want me to tackle? Is that the sum of your argument? We went for oil?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site