downing street memo[POLITICS]

Discussion in 'Green Room' started by Perris Calderon, Jun 5, 2005.

  1. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    the downing street memo

    revelations from page 2 and on

    I have no idea if this is true...the revelations have been around for about 25 days, and I've been waiting to see it discredited...so far I can't find anthing that discredits the memo...

    I've also been waiting to see it somewhere in in mainstream media...it hasn't shown up

    so, what do you think, rubbish?

    I have no idea yet

    it's hard to believe the "liberal media" hasn't jumped on this isn't it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
    Sazar likes this.
  2. tdinc

    tdinc █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User

    Messages:
    3,507
    Location:
    Sterling Heights, MICHIGAN
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    link requires login..... :)
     
  3. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    ah, wrong link anyway..I'm on slow, can't get if now...try a google search till I get back
     
  4. tdinc

    tdinc █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User

    Messages:
    3,507
    Location:
    Sterling Heights, MICHIGAN
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    Again.....to add my 2cents ....."Governments" from any country have many things going on years before they happen. this document real or not, has no meaning what so ever. everyone in their right mind knew that saddam "the freak" was a murderer and villian. so what ever needed to happen did. i could really care less about politics. crooked or not. the job was done and thats all. Liberal rubbish....trying to cause a stir.........bleh
     
  5. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    link fixed

    pre emptive response to the story?

    what we did to saddam did not need to be done...MUCH more important things needed to be done long before the saddam issue should have been addressed

    because of "the saddam issue" our military resources are so close to bankruptcy due to Iraq, we are forced to actually close military installations (no argument either, according to rumsfeld himself, we are closing militrary installations becuase of the war in Iraq)

    and our national defense is stretched thinner then our own generals believe is prudent

    in addition, even if the saddam issue should have been addressed, it should NOT have been addressed while we were defending against an attack on our soil and we were engaged in afghanistan
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  6. tdinc

    tdinc █▄█ ▀█▄ █ Political User

    Messages:
    3,507
    Location:
    Sterling Heights, MICHIGAN
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    not to start a fight here. but did'nt saddam murder thousands upon thousands of innocent people and children? and continued to display hate towards the united states?....this debate about iraq has now become a circus around the world...not to go off topic but if the united states did not go in and take down hitler in WWII we would all be speaking German right now.
     
  7. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    excuse me tdinc, but in our unprovoked invasion, we have murdered thousands of innocent people our selfs

    now, Saddam was not a threat to the world like Hitler, was he...the analogy does not hold

    plus, there were far more important threats then Saddam in the world, and the analogy doesn't hold for that reason either

    plus, we were already engaged defending against an actual and successful attack on our own soil, and the analogy won't hold for that

    the Iraq conflict is a circus in the eyes of the world, and on that point we are in agreement

    because of the attack in America on September eleventh, the entire world became a community of Americans...it was heart warming in our time of anguish...everyone was an American in their disgust for what happened to us and the people that did it

    Now, our unprovoked action in Iraq turned that high regard and unheard of sentiment into the most vile hatred we have ever known...a turn around in sentiment that sounds as it couldn't evolve if told before hand

    Saddam was a smaller threat, not a larger threat then in the past, and you don't create this kind of conflict when the threat grows smaller, you face the conflict if the threat grows larger

    there is no analogy that would stand when comparing our unprovoked invasion of Iraq as compared with the u.s. defending other countries against unprovoked attacks

    for instance the first conflict with Saddam and Bush senior was something that needed to be resolved...I supported that conflict
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  8. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    Not many people will talk about it because that would require acknowledgement and then the onus would be on them to discredit it.

    Best to wait till the story fades from peoples minds.

    It's disappointing but true, the current administration is the least accountable that I know of in recent american history and has taken far too many liberties with the power vested in it, I would go so far as calling it abuses.

    Calling the media "liberal" is an easy ploy of the right-wing evangelical conservative masses and the masterminds @ the top. Just brand them "liberal" whenever something damning comes out and BAM, the masses say, oh it must be so.

    The primary reason the media has not said anything about it is because the bush white house has been very good at discrediting even valid stories.

    For example the newsweek story. Concentrating on a small part of it, the magazine itself was discredited even as a trickle of information lends more and more credence to the majority of the story. By sticking to only the flushnig down the toilet part it allows for less room to freelance. See how it works?
     
  9. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    Does anyone believe this?
     
  10. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    I believe it

    UNITED NATIONS - U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors said in a report "obtained Thursday.

    "believe that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons"

    this means alcohol, dirt, stuff like this would be included in that discription...no doubt, anywhere on the planet you can find material that "could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles"

    the items are specifically mentioned in that article to have legitimate purpose domestically...from the article;

    He said the missing material can be used for legitimate purposes.

    did you miss that?

    in addition, these are reports of sites that we are supposed to be safeguarding...it seems we are not doing a good job of that
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  11. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    If they were used for legitimate purposes, why would they move them from 109 sites?
     
  12. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    re read the article you provided, you are misinterpreting the purpose of it

    it's to demonstrate that we are not safeguarding items that could be used to manufacture terrorist weapons...terrorists now have this material, thanx to our unprovoked invasion of this country

    the inspectors are raising an alam, claiming what was there during their inspection vs. what's not there now and since we have occupied the country

    thanx for making my point

    now let's get back on topic of "the downing street memo", you haven't had a comment
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  13. Sazar

    Sazar F@H - Is it in you? Staff Member Political User Folding Team

    Messages:
    14,905
    Location:
    Between Austin and Tampa
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    It's been moved since the invasion, Bush and the iraqi government peeps should be the ones you should be asking that to.
     
  14. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    There's nothing substantial to the memo yet. I can't make a judgement. It could be one of those fringe theories that turns out to be earth-shattering-news true, or it may always remain a fringe theory. Either way, it's still at the early stages.
     
  15. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    very fair unwonted...I applaud the statement..most supporters of the administration that I have spoken to are making excuses for the meetings

    I'll tell you what, I think we are in a battered wife syndrome, and even if the memo is true, I don't think Americans will do much about it
     
  16. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    I'm not able to see the link, at least in Mozilla (and I tried turning off Proxomitron and the like for advert blocking, no go). Perhaps IE will have more success with that link...

    But I have seen this demonstrated again and again in the past. Material was secured before the weapons inspectors were thrown out following the invasion. It was after the invasion that we failed to protect it from looting by terrorists and the like that could turn around and make dirty bombs and the like...

    As to Iraq and Saddam, I would have to say that if there was a right time to remove him from power, it was in 1991 at the conclusion of the first Gult War, not in 2003... The country was already weakened from 12 years of economic sanctions, military inspections and dismantling of it's weapons capability... The real reason we had a quick victory in the beginning war (but not the insurgency that followed) was that Iraq didn't have a substantial military capability and could not have put up the fight they did in 1991...

    What we have done however wrt Iraq is dangerious for our country. Reports have come out (and some of them right during the Terry Shiavo media coverage, which took much of the media's attention then) which basically stated:

    - The readiness level of our troops is at a real low (lower then it has been in decades)...

    - Out of the hodge podge of remaining service men and reserves (who aren't committed to battle now), it would be difficult to build an effective fighting force.

    - The troops already in battle (not to mention those who could be, if we had a war on another front) already have their equipment stretched rather thin, having to share equipment between units, to continue doing their job...

    - Under such extreme use, the equipment is degrading rather fast, and it's unlikely we could rebuild our reserves for equipment until we withdrawl some of the commitment we now have in place.

    - One thing not mentioned in the article, but worth mentioning. Even if they acquired more recruits, or re-instituted the draft, without equipment we'd be sending more of our men and women into the slaughter. One can't expect people to do the best job their capable of, without both the training and the equipment to complete their task.

    But given the situation with the national debt (and our current policy of tax cut and deficit spend), this adds another element to building/rebuilding all the equipment they'd need, to be adequately supplied (let along for another battle front, should we next launch a war with Iran, North Korea, or the like, while keeping the current troops/equipment in place...)

    Another more recent article was a bit more optomistic and said we could take one more battle, but beyond that... Even that more optomistic assesement didn't say we weren't stretching things mighty thin.

    Sadam wasn't a viable threat. He had bad intention, yes. He was a horrible dictator responsible for some quite attroscious acts, yes (even when we were supporting him during the Iran/Iraq war). But in the aftermath of Gulf War 1, 12 years of ecconomic sanctions, dismantling of his military capability, and weapons inspections during that period, he didn't have the capability to act upon them...

    What our policy of pre-emptive warfare and the like has done, is take one of the most powerful militaries in the world, and render it to a condition (based upon multiple assesements), where we are vulnerable. And given the national debt, re-supplying all this equipment that is degrading rapidly won't necessarily be an easy task... I think many can see where this is going. In combat, one of the goals is to cut off the enemies supplies/their ability to supply their own troops; but when one does it to themself, it's akin to as my martial arts teacher would put it "giving the opponent an unfair advantage"...

    Now if I were one of these enemies, sitting in Iran or North Korea for instance, I would sit back, and wait for this super power of ours to continue to tax it's own military capability, see just how far they would allow this situation (wrt our military preparedness) to decline, just how far things would be allowed to continue wrt a worsening public image around the world; and when it hit a sorta rock bottom, then launch a surprise attack with a whole host of other stated enemies in one allied assault. Essentially create a "united Earth" against whomever, apply my own "shock and awe" technique if you will, after having allowed them to weaken themselves as they wished... But as long as an opposing enemy is weakening themself, I would let them... All I can say to this, is be alert, and don't bite so much off that one is left vulnerable themself...
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  17. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    son goku, that's another great post

    the most frightening thing about all of this is that it looks like it's intentional and deliberate..everybody knew we'd be depleting our defense resources when we went to Iraq, and everyone knew we would be turning the world against us.

    what have we done to ourselfs?

    we live in troublesome times
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2005
  18. Son Goku

    Son Goku No lover of dogma

    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    Hey perris,

    You might want to take a look at Richard Clarke's book on the matter. I never read it all, just about the first chapter or 2. Some (aka the right wing media) wasn't all too happy about the book's publication) and it wasn't beyond controversy, but it does seem to add a bit to this...

    From what Clarke was saying, Bush was intent on invading Iraq from day 1 (right after 9/11) and Clarke was arguing "but they aren't the one's who attacked us...the war is with Afghanastan..." Bush seemed determined that he wanted Iraq...

    I've only heard this next bit one time, and I don't know if it's true or not... But someone told me that George W's fixation with Iraq has something to do with threats (or was it that he tried to go after him) Sadam made wrt his father... I haven't seen a sorce on that part, so can't comment...

    The person who was telling me this was in the hospital at the time due to cancer around where the tonsil would be (though his tonsils had been removed). He wasn't able to speak due to the trake (sp?) hanging out his throat, so it was what I was able to glimpse as he was trying to write his responces down for people...
     
  19. Perris Calderon

    Perris Calderon Moderator Staff Member Political User

    Messages:
    12,333
    Location:
    new york
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    yes, both Bush and rumsfeld admitted that they wanted to attack Iraq for what afghanistan did to us when pressured under oath

    amazing

    rumsfelds excuse, (under oath he says that he knows afghanistan attacked us, but;) "there were no good targets in afghanistan, there were good targets in Iraq"

    not only an obsurd statement even as it stands if true, but it wasn't true, there were EXCELLANT targets in afghanistan...that is untill we deliberately waited too long for those targets to be effective

    this entire situation seems deliberate
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2005
  20. Johnny

    Johnny .. Commodore .. Political User

    Messages:
    5,015
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    Re: anyone believe this? [POLITICS]

    You can go and defend him during his trial Perris. I am sure they would love to have you as a material witness, seeing that you were there during his time in office. I imagine you can probably give him a great aliby :rolleyes: Time for you to drop this, it so old that it is getting rediculous. What was done was done, it needed done. Whether you agree or not. Time for a man who was on his way to being more of burden than hitler to go. end of story.

    What is going on is really nothing we have no control over, you may think something completely diff. But the facts are we have no way of knowing what is really going on. We don't know 99.9% of what is going on behind the scenes. We only know what the media is telling us, then you know how they are. They only broadcast the bad. I have yet to see any good things come from the media on this whole issue. Actually, I am wrong, Fox news showed some footage of how hundreds of people over there were praising us for what we did.

    Then people like you do not do anything

    Oh, and if you are going to start your facts garbage. I want links to all you say showing me the "Facts" ..
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 6, 2005