Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #7  
Old 02-12-2010, 06:35 AM
Aquila Aquila is offline
Banned


 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 31,124
Re: Nuclear Iran

Quote:
Originally Posted by n david View Post
Let's not forget, it wasn't W or his administration that first talked of war against Iraq, nor was he or his administration the first to talk about WMD's.

Need we revisit the pages of quotes available from the Clinton years and from Democrats who demanded action before the second Iraq War began? I'm sick of hearing this absolute garbage about W's admin "playing so dirty" or lying about WMDs, etc.

The intelligence he - along with Clinton and several Democratic and Republican Congressmen - relied on was terrible.

W's not to blame for the intelligence, nor for the lack of WMDs, nor for playing dirty as you say.

Actually most of this dates back to the first Bush administration when Wolfowitz and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney drafted a paper illustrating the necessity of removing Saddam. A mass media campaign designed to shift public opinion in favor of the war was also discussed. It was then reviewed and opposed by then General Joint Cheif of Staff Colin Powell. Then the document was revised to merely express our position as a denunciation of Saddam's regime. It's actually a very interesting chain of events. The Iraq War was something that was being prepared back under Present Herbert Walker Bush. In fact he wanted to press forward and get the job done then, but backed off for political reasons.

And it is true that the Clinton Administration also supported regime change. However, they took a softer approach to Iraq and so actual regime change was put on the back burner. Interestingly enough, most of the Homeland Security strategies we have come to use were discussed at length under the Clinton Administration after the Oklahoma City bombing. Of course after 911 these strategies were beefed up a bit. For example Clinton favored wire tapping (which he now denies) and a national security agency focused on the homeland. But at the time civil liberties groups cried out against the Clinton Administration's positions and the process was again...back burnered.

It seems they (both Republicans and Democrats) do NOTHING until they absolutely have to.

As far as WMD intel being terrible... I thin the CIA is being a scapegoat on this one. Too many agents decried the information the Bush Administration presented. Some even quietly stepped down because of it. I believe the Bush Administration was engaging in a "Northwoods" type misinformation strategy in the environment that that 9/11 provided.

I understand that sometimes the government needs to lie to us and misinform us to protect us. My question is, was it justified or necessary?

Last edited by Aquila; 02-12-2010 at 06:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
War With Iran-Imminent? And At What Cost? Ron The Newsroom 15 03-04-2026 06:07 PM
Elections in Iran Dedicated Mind Fellowship Hall 6 06-14-2009 09:11 PM
Your thoughts on Iran? ReddMann24 The Newsroom 7 07-13-2008 01:52 AM
Will this be the year of Nuclear Warfare? COOPER Fellowship Hall 13 01-02-2008 03:45 PM
San Juan nuclear submarine in false alarm drama Esther The Newsroom 20 03-15-2007 04:31 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Salome
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.