Twenty Years Ago Today--Iraq War Began

[Tiberius]

Shock and awe 

[Tiberius]

 

[Tommy Callahan]

Hmm. More like state sponsored mass murder for TV ratings.

 

Crazy how 99% of the politicians and for profit media sold that crap as kosher. 

 

And 20 years later not one emergency action from post 9/11, has been ended, by either party.

 

But at least back then the lefts base talked about being antiwar, antiestablishment, anti-surveillance state, anti corporations buying politicians, anti PAC.  

 

Like Taibbi and Greenwood.

 

the ones the left now calls turncoats for being the same.

 

 

The new Iraq is, Ukraine.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Chris farley

[Tiberius]

52 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Hmm. More like state sponsored mass murder for TV ratings.

 

Crazy how 99% of the politicians and for profit media sold that crap as kosher. 

 

And 20 years later not one emergency action from post 9/11, has been ended, by either party.

 

But at least back then the lefts base talked about being antiwar, antiestablishment, anti-surveillance state, anti corporations buying politicians, anti PAC.  

 

Like Taibbi and Greenwood.

 

the ones the left now calls turncoats for being the same.

 

 

The new Iraq is, Ukraine.

 

 

 

 

 

99%? No, not even close. Close to 100% Republicans did and about half of Dems did. The Democrats had far more people against the war

 

And those people were clobbered with "Remember 9-11!!!" 

 

And Ukraine is nothing like the failed WMD war 

[Tommy Callahan]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

99%? No, not even close. Close to 100% Republicans did and about half of Dems did. The Democrats had far more people against the war

 

And those people were clobbered with "Remember 9-11!!!" 

 

And Ukraine is nothing like the failed WMD war 

 

 

And would add that was the second time, the gulf war was a decade prior.

 

the rest held hands and sang about America while signing off on everything from DHS, to spying on Americans and giving the white house more authority to WAR.

 

And in full circle, the war mongers back then called any opposing views, Alquada or terrorist sympathizers.

 

Ukraine is to the MIC as Iraq was to the MIC.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Chris farley

[Tiberius]

United States House of Representatives

6 (<2.7%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted against the resolution: Reps. Duncan (R-TN), Hostettler (R-IN), Houghton (R-NY), Leach (R-IA), Morella (R-MD), Paul (R-TX). 126 (~60.3%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.

 

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution ...

And only a clown would compare Ukraine to Iraq, a desperate clown 

[Tenhigh]

Which was the one where the smaller country was invaded by the much more powerful country on false pretenses? Which one did Biden try to keep us out of?

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

Which was the one where the smaller country was invaded by the much more powerful country on false pretenses? Which one did Biden try to keep us out of?

This was Bush's war 

 

"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."

[Tenhigh]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

This was Bush's war 

 

"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."

Bush certainly led it, but he wasn't alone.  Most politicians supported it.

https://youtu.be/7WnTnLgBI_8

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Same crap as Ukraine, except now we just drop money from the sky to fund them slaughtering their own without overtly slaughtering our own kids too. 
 

Democrats are so corrupted by military industrial complex now too. 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Over 29 years of fanhood

[Tommy Callahan]

36 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

Bush certainly led it, but he wasn't alone.  Most politicians supported it.

https://youtu.be/7WnTnLgBI_8

Some Dems voted No to the invasion. but most voted YES.

 

Was even worse with the moronic authorization of force vote

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_of_2001

 

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/107-2002/s237

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Chris farley

[Tiberius]

@Irv I bet you were eating the Freedom Fries, huh? 

51 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Same crap as Ukraine, except now we just drop money from the sky to fund them slaughtering their own without overtly slaughtering our own kids too. 
 

Democrats are so corrupted by military industrial complex now too. 

Bad war/Good war 

 

You can't see the difference, political blinders 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

10 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

@Irv I bet you were eating the Freedom Fries, huh? 

Bad war/Good war 

 

You can't see the difference, political blinders 

Only lunatics and sociopaths think there is such a thing as a good war. 

[Tiberius]

25 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Only lunatics and sociopaths think there is such a thing as a good war. 

Not if you are defending freedom. Only a moral degenerate criticizes helping people fight against tyranny, murder and enslavement 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Just now, Tiberius said:

Not if you are defending freedom. Only a moral degenerate criticizes helping people fight against tyranny, murder and enslavement 

Only an imbecile believes that’s what that war or most wars are about. 

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Only an imbecile believes that’s what that war or most wars are about. 

Idiotic 

[dpberr]

It's hard to name a US war, post WWII that wasn't a failure in policymaking.   In the Iraq War, we seemed to go out of our way to make the worst decisions out of the possible choices.

 

The real reasons for this war always interested me.  It wasn't about freedom or WMDs.  Why would the US invade a reliable pressure door against the Iranians and a dictator who had no use for groups like al-Qaeda?  Did the same thing in Libya.  (Answer:  The Saudis.)

 

[Tommy Callahan]

3 minutes ago, dpberr said:

It's hard to name a US war, post WWII that wasn't a failure in policymaking.   In the Iraq War, we seemed to go out of our way to make the worst decisions out of the possible choices.

 

The real reasons for this war always interested me.  It wasn't about freedom or WMDs.  Why would the US invade a reliable pressure door against the Iranians and a dictator who had no use for groups like al-Qaeda?  Did the same thing in Libya.  (Answer:  The Saudis.)

 

Answer.  

Bretton Woods, the dollar as the reserve currency and profits for the Military industrial complex and the Investors of those companies.  

 

Libya was us and FRANCE. but was supported by IRAN and Russia.  But still wondering where all that physical gold went, as Ghaddafi at the time had one of the largest physical reserves in the world.  Now according to the IMF, they have 0

 

But from WW2, through the moronic wars of the 90's to now. nothing had much to do with The Saudis.  Vietnam?  Korea?  What did Afghanistan have to do with Saudi?

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#20th-century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#21st-century

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

2 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Only an imbecile believes that’s what that war or most wars are about. 

 

8 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Idiotic 

Yes that too 

 

people are less willing to sacrifice their lives or their children’s when politicians are transparent about money and power motivation. 
 

But freedom from tyranny? Good versus evil? Religious righteousness? That sch!t sells to the moronic sheep all day long

[Tiberius]

"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

13 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Answer.  

Bretton Woods, the dollar as the reserve currency and profits for the Military industrial complex and the Investors of those companies.  

 

Libya was us and FRANCE. but was supported by IRAN and Russia.  But still wondering where all that physical gold went, as Ghaddafi at the time had one of the largest physical reserves in the world.  Now according to the IMF, they have 0

 

But from WW2, through the moronic wars of the 90's to now. nothing had much to do with The Saudis.  Vietnam?  Korea?  What did Afghanistan have to do with Saudi?

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#20th-century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#21st-century

Yes the petro dollar. Saddam would still be In power if he hadn’t started trading oil in Euro’s. 
 

That was his cardinal sin against the US. 

[dpberr]

23 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Answer.  

Bretton Woods, the dollar as the reserve currency and profits for the Military industrial complex and the Investors of those companies.  

 

Libya was us and FRANCE. but was supported by IRAN and Russia.  But still wondering where all that physical gold went, as Ghaddafi at the time had one of the largest physical reserves in the world.  Now according to the IMF, they have 0

 

But from WW2, through the moronic wars of the 90's to now. nothing had much to do with The Saudis.  Vietnam?  Korea?  What did Afghanistan have to do with Saudi?

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#20th-century

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_conflicts_involving_the_United_States#21st-century

 

My apologies for not being concise - when I mentioned the Saudis - was talking about the reasons behind the Iraq War only. 

[sherpa]

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

"After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad."

 

I really wish people would stop with obvious red herrings.

 

At the time of this invasion, intel agencies across the globe, including US and British, among others, had concluded that Iraq was running a wmd program.

This info was presented to Congressional Committees in both houses, and the President, who all decided to agree to what the US did.

 

In addition, Iraq was in gross violation of its'  cease fire agreement, numerous UN resolutions, countless warnings, and firing on no fly zone aircraft. 

 

The reality was that the no fly zone could not be maintained indefinitely, and there was no sign that Iraq would ever agree to abide by the ceasefire.

 

Folks on both sides of the isle agreed to that situation, and we got the vote we got to authorize force. 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

6 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

I really wish people would stop with obvious red herrings.

 

At the time of this invasion, intel agencies across the globe, including US and British, among others, had concluded that Iraq was running a wmd program.

This info was presented to Congressional Committees in both houses, and the President, who all decided to agree to what the US did.

 

In addition, Iraq was in gross violation of its'  cease fire agreement, numerous UN resolutions, countless warnings, and firing on no fly zone aircraft. 

 

The reality was that the no fly zone could not be maintained indefinitely, and there was no sign that Iraq would ever agree to abide by the ceasefire.

 

Folks on both sides of the isle agreed to that situation, and we got the vote we got to authorize force. 

 

 

 

Saddam didn't kick the inspectors out, Bush did 

[All_Pro_Bills]

6 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

I really wish people would stop with obvious red herrings.

 

At the time of this invasion, intel agencies across the globe, including US and British, among others, had concluded that Iraq was running a wmd program.

This info was presented to Congressional Committees in both houses, and the President, who all decided to agree to what the US did.

 

In addition, Iraq was in gross violation of its'  cease fire agreement, numerous UN resolutions, countless warnings, and firing on no fly zone aircraft. 

 

The reality was that the no fly zone could not be maintained indefinitely, and there was no sign that Iraq would ever agree to abide by the ceasefire.

 

Folks on both sides of the isle agreed to that situation, and we got the vote we got to authorize force. 

 

 

 

Ironically, from 1980 to 1988, Washington sided with Iraq in their war with Iran.  Then changed their minds to finished off Saddam in the 2nd rendition of the gulf war under Bush 2.  Only to unleash Iran on the rest of the Middle East by removing their natural enemy from the region.  Then turning our attention to contain Iran's regional ambitions and pursuit of nuclear weapons.  All while getting regional "allies" to bulk up on US supplied weapons systems from corporate interests that hire lots of former government and military big-wigs playing some elaborate make-work whack-a-mole project.  This war thing is quite a racket.   

[Tommy Callahan]

13 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

I really wish people would stop with obvious red herrings.

 

At the time of this invasion, intel agencies across the globe, including US and British, among others, had concluded that Iraq was running a wmd program.

This info was presented to Congressional Committees in both houses, and the President, who all decided to agree to what the US did.

 

In addition, Iraq was in gross violation of its'  cease fire agreement, numerous UN resolutions, countless warnings, and firing on no fly zone aircraft. 

 

The reality was that the no fly zone could not be maintained indefinitely, and there was no sign that Iraq would ever agree to abide by the ceasefire.

 

Folks on both sides of the isle agreed to that situation, and we got the vote we got to authorize force. 

 

 

 

similar to now and Ukraine in that regards.

 

the very low estimate has what, 15 K civilians being killed by American/coalition actions in Iraq.

 

 

[sherpa]

16 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

similar to now and Ukraine in that regards.

 

the very low estimate has what, 15 K civilians being killed by American/coalition actions in Iraq.

 

 

 

Probably should do this as a message, but I would be interested in your many times expressed view that the 9-11 commission report is suspect.

You have stuck that view in unrelated threads before, and I am interested in your view, as you seem rational.

Maybe start a thread.

Sorry for being off topic, and certainly not hostile, but its not the worst that happens here. 

[sherpa]

24 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Ironically, from 1980 to 1988, Washington sided with Iraq in their war with Iran.  Then changed their minds to finished off Saddam in the 2nd rendition of the gulf war under Bush 2.  

 

You are omitting the defining event.

Saddam invaded and planned on occupying Kuwait, then grossly violated its' ceasefire agreements.

That was what determined our "change our mind" to use your term.

[SoCal Deek]

36 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Saddam didn't kick the inspectors out, Bush did 

I actually know one of the inspectors, personally. They were packed and ready to go when we attacked. 

[sherpa]

39 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Saddam didn't kick the inspectors out, Bush did 

 

Ya. He simply denied them what he had agreed to.

That's kind of "kicking them out."

 

 

 

[KDIGGZ]

4 hours ago, Tiberius said:

@Irv I bet you were eating the Freedom Fries, huh? 

Bad war/Good war 

 

You can't see the difference, political blinders 

No such thing as a good war. You have the political blinders on to say such a thing. I hate both wars. Keep the same energy with both parties and then maybe we will get somewhere as a country 

Edited March 20, 2023 by KDIGGZ

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, sherpa said:

 

Probably should do this as a message, but I would be interested in your many times expressed view that the 9-11 commission report is suspect.

You have stuck that view in unrelated threads before, and I am interested in your view, as you seem rational.

Maybe start a thread.

Sorry for being off topic, and certainly not hostile, but its not the worst that happens here. 

 

I think the 911 commission report is suspect cuz they didn't even mention the demolition of building 7 at 5:25 pm.

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, sherpa said:

 

Ya. He simply denied them what he had agreed to.

That's kind of "kicking them out."

 

 

 

It's crazy how none of them or that report even mentioned slumberge and a few others doing the first high volume directional drilling that many speculated was going under that border.  But I guess not even mentioning it in the report is just as telling.  

[dpberr]

2 hours ago, sherpa said:

 

Probably should do this as a message, but I would be interested in your many times expressed view that the 9-11 commission report is suspect.

You have stuck that view in unrelated threads before, and I am interested in your view, as you seem rational.

Maybe start a thread.

Sorry for being off topic, and certainly not hostile, but its not the worst that happens here. 

 

The 9-11 Commission report is suspect because to this day ,through several presidential administrations, the US government has fought tooth and nail to keep documents and information pertaining to potential Saudi involvement in 9-11 classified.  Even the great party saviors - Trump and Biden - continued to classify that information.  

[sherpa]

Saudi involvement, including individual Saudi gov  individual  involvement, is not really interesting.

[nedboy7]

The so called bipartisan right wingers on here are completely unable to criticize their own side.  When it's them its oh both parties do that.  When its the other party... "Lock em up".  Pretty predictable.  What is the point of even having a discussion. 

[Tiberius]

18 hours ago, dpberr said:

 

My apologies for not being concise - when I mentioned the Saudis - was talking about the reasons behind the Iraq War only. 

So what are you saying, that Big Oil, Bush and the Saudis all planned this up together? 

17 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:

No such thing as a good war. You have the political blinders on to say such a thing. I hate both wars. Keep the same energy with both parties and then maybe we will get somewhere as a country 

War is bad, but sometimes its good you fight one. You guys are just upset the good guys are winning this one 

[Tommy Callahan]

14 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

The so called bipartisan right wingers on here are completely unable to criticize their own side.  When it's them its oh both parties do that.  When its the other party... "Lock em up".  Pretty predictable.  What is the point of even having a discussion. 

Most of todays Right wingers, as you call them. are anti establishment GOP.

 

 

[aristocrat]

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

On 3/21/2023 at 9:47 AM, Chris farley said:

Most of todays Right wingers, as you call them. are anti establishment GOP.

 

 

or just plain anti establishment.  they don't like the rules cuz they're not very good at playing the game of life and adapting to change.