Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Oct 24, 2004.
are we feeling safer yet?
How many American soldiers have already died from explosives "liberated" from this site?
How many will die in the months to come?
What are the chances that Sunnis who hate America now hate it enough to take some potent plastic explosives they've gotten hold of and deliver them to agents who will exact terror on our planes or cities?
Good thing the oil fields are secure, though. Phew!
Yeah, I'm glad Kerry brought this up. I just wished he pressed it more. We hear so much about how he mentioned Cheney's gay daughter (not like Keyes called her an abomination or anything), but no one mentions we went into Iraq under false presumptions and immediately guarded the oil, leaving the dangerous stuff to disappear and kill our troops. Yet Bush is pro-troops, and those who oppose him are against!?! We hear this stuff in passing and it's back to what the candidates did in the 70's.
I saw a report earlier on the news where this woman kept saying how she didn't understand why people hated Bush when he saved us from all of Saddams WMDs after he attacked us on 9/11. Someone tried correcting her, but she wasn't hearing it. Sad.
It's a shame nobody gets fired for incompetence any more. I mean, it must have been SOMEBODY's responsibility to secure this stuff. Either the troops on the ground, or the man at the top. Cover up and carry on!
Well, we shall see in a little over a week...
neat thing is, if the top man goes, all the support staff get the axe too...<crosses fingers>
This would seem to indicate that the insurgence isn't being led by a few Saddam extremists backed by Al Qaida imports. Together with the "precision" execution of 50 Iraqi army recruits yesterday, it would seem that there are, at the very least, active sympathisers within the Iraqi security forces. If that is indeed the case, be prepared for things to get much worse.
Bush's judgment over this whole thing is incompetent to the point willful neglect. It is now clear that the US and the rest of the world would be safer had he not invaded Iraq.
If you read the Fallouja article I posted recently your worst fears will be confirmed. The leader of the Iraqi security force which was hastily improvised during the early days of that crisis was an ex-Saddam guy who turned out to be an insurgency leader, so in all probability the weapons and supplies he was given were, in short order, directed right back at US troops. I think it might be time to stop calling this an insurgency and to start referring to it by its real name, a civil war. The US has little to no ability to discern who is on what side.
It doesn't matter. I've lost faith in the American public to put 2 and 2 together and realize that maybe. Just maybe Kerry is dead on, on a majority of his attacks. It isn't mud slinging when you are telling the truth damn it!
True, I hope that all of these boondoggles will wake up the Republican Zealots who think Bush is their savior. How many screw ups can we tolerate from one administration? It makes you wonder if these clowns have any idea what to do about anything? Heck these clowns cant even manage the Flu vaccine let alone their war. How many Tons of weapons were just ignored by this administration??? Lets just face the fact that this is the most incompetant,inept administration since Carter. We can do better. Ill vote for Kerry. Enough of the constant Boondogles from Cheney, i mean Bush. I feel like America is being ran by a 3rd grader.
They don't even bother to cover up anymore.
You're mistaking this administration (and perhaps its constituency) for one that gives a ****.
Its one thing if they can't find the WMDs, but its a whole 'nother thing if they can't keep what they have found secure!
My god, the incompetence is outrageous, 1 pound of this stuff brought down an air plane, imagine 314 tons of this stuff lost in Iraq, there is enough to make bombs galore.
Now the Pentagon says this is no problem, there are already a lot of weapons lying around in Iraq. Well if they can't secure a known weapons site in Iraq that they had under their control during the war, then how are they going to keep us safe at home.
The Bush campaign's response to this story is that it's just "headlines."
Mr Orwell, Mr Serling.
Mr Serling, Mr Orwell.
Unbelieveable response (thanks IJ)...
You know, if the "headlines" read "1,000,000 new jobs created" or some such hypothetical instead, would they merely be "headlines" then?
Reality: "you are doing a piss-poor job Mr Bush."
Mr Bush: " how would you know sir, we have never met before this moment"
the following day, of course, we'd see footage of mr bush introducing mr reality at a senate prayer breakfast.
That's always assuming that Mr Reality is not a Muslim...
So, are we feeling safter yet?
from the article:
oh, that's reassuring. why not just say that 9/11 was no big deal, since nukes weren't involved?
and then there's this:
bloody incompetent planning
1. get saddam
2. collect flowers
3. enjoy re-election
goal 1: get saddam
goal 2: see goal 1
or Plan 3: Own goal.
You forgot guard oil fields. Just because the reason we said we were going was for WMDs, doesn't mean we have to guard them when we get there. Just like we get attacked by one guy, and go after another. Step 1... misdirected vengeance. Step 2... ? Step 3... profit. Makes perfect sense to anyone angry enough to be blind to the truth.
Why is most of the press reporting that the WH claims 243,000 tons of munitions have been made secure, thereby implying that the 350 tons is a drop in the ocean? It is 243,000 "pieces of ordnance", not 243,000 tons. Makes quite a difference to how it reads. 243,000 TONS is a hell of a lot of gear. I thought it looked sus, so I checked, and, Hey Presto:
as opposed to:
It gets better...
Is this intentional?
and a couple of paragraphs later:
Why does the press continue to confuse weight with number? 406,000 munitions is a very different thing from "more than 400,000 tons". Probably no more than 10-20,000 tons, which puts the "missing" 400 tons into a much clearer perspective. It's quite a significant percentage.
You'd have thought that if it was the sealed stuff they removed, they would have a record of it.
I also still question the quantities being thrown around here: they are AGAIN claiming that it's over 400,000 tons of munitions, when it has been clearly stated by the Pentagon (see posts above) that the quantity seized was 400,000 munitions. There is potentially a HUGE difference here. 400,000 tons seems a ridiculously large amount, even for a regime like Saddam's. The Pentagon's accounting is as bad for munitions as it is for civilian deaths. The sad fact is that nobody in authority seems to have any regard for the truth or honesty of what they say.