North Korea Conducts Successful nuclear test

[Keltoi]

Show me where Powell said it was "contained" to not effect his neighbours but is a threat to the USA......a gazillion miles away. Show me where Iraq is linked to Al Qaeda? "World Intelligence" lied and the USA did admit that, and show us proof the world accepted Bush's invasion because of these "newly created threats". Why are you changing it?? You obviously didn't read what I posted. Clearly, when they invaded they were still insisting on WMD being in Iraq. Iraq was not a threat to the USA prior to 9/11 nor after 9/11. YOUR GOVERNMENT LIED MAN!!!!!!!! Go read something that's posted instead of trying to justify an illegal war.

We provide clear proofs and evidences and you blow smoke out your butt with your own opinions trying to justify the slaughter of over 600,000 Iraqi civilians. It's bad enough your government did this, and thankfully the vast majority of Americans know it and admit it, but for you to sit at your pc and try to justify it when the truth is slapping you in the face, is just pathetic.

Why don't you stand in front of all the American soldiers in Iraq and tell them what you have just said here? Trust me, you wouldn't be standing for long....even they know they are being slaughtered because of lies.

Hana

I stand in front of Marines every day and we actually discuss these things. So don't use that tactic. The rest is just emotional, so there is nothing to address there.

 

[*Hana*]

I stand in front of Marines every day and we actually discuss these things. So don't use that tactic. The rest is just emotional, so there is nothing to address there.

Then go tell them they're just being emotional. Tell them they should enjoy giving up their lives because of lies, I'm sure they would appreciate it.

LOL you choose that one sentence of my post to comment on. Provide the proofs I requested in the first half of the post.

 

[akulion]

im back - lemme read ur link ^o)


....much later.....

Very interesting article :uhwhat
it only proves what ive been saying all along...

quotes from your very own article:

If the entire body of official intelligence analysis on Iraq had a policy implication, it was to avoid war -- or, if war was going to be launched, to prepare for a messy aftermath. What is most remarkable about prewar U.S. intelligence on Iraq is not that it got things wrong and thereby misled policymakers; it is that it played so small a role in one of the most important U.S. policy decisions in recent decades.

aha intelligence of agencies VS intelligence of Bush.... :hiding:

The Bush administration's use of intelligence on Iraq did not just blur this distinction; it turned the entire model upside down. The administration used intelligence not to inform decision-making, but to justify a decision already made. It went to war without requesting -- and evidently without being influenced by -- any strategic-level intelligence assessments on any aspect of Iraq.

un huh so like i said bush and his administration were doing everything wrongly cos they had it all planned all along see even ur article points that out!

Official intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs was flawed, but even with its flaws, it was not what led to the war. On the issue that mattered most, the intelligence community judged that Iraq probably was several years away from developing a nuclear weapon. The October 2002 NIE also judged that Saddam was unlikely to use WMD against the United States unless his regime was placed in mortal danger.

so since Bush attacked - according to intelligance reports one could say he was creating a bigger threat to the US than Saddam hussein was :mmokay:

The Bush administration deviated from the professional standard not only in using policy to drive intelligence, but also in aggressively using intelligence to win public support for its decision to go to war. This meant selectively adducing data -- "cherry-picking" -- rather than using the intelligence community's own analytic judgments.

and then the article goes on and on and on to prove my points further :uuh:

so atleast now wake up and admit it man!

im not against YOU - im against what bush and his admin are doing
I dont hate AMERICANS, but i most certainly do hate Bush and his Admin

thats why im saying to u wakeup :uhwhat and open them eyes :uuh:

 

[Keltoi]

I'm not here to defend any decision by George W. Bush, which is why I posted that article in the first place. The point is that intelligence (that we now know is faulty) led to the decision for War in Iraq. The fact that Bush and his administration wanted Saddam Hussein out of the picture as a policy matter is beside the point. In the U.S. it is up to Congress to authorize military action, and by looking at the intelligence available there was enough evidence to point to a "clear and present danger". I do not and did not support the Iraq War in the beginning, but now I'm left with little choice but to support a positive outcome. The article is an opinion by a political scientist, not the gospel. The point of the article was to show the common knowledge on this topic, which was that pre-war intelligence, rightly or wrongly, pointed to a threat inside Iraq.

 

[*Hana*]

Oh, I feel I should make one correction. When we make a mistake we must correct ourselves and you are correct about 600,000 not being accurate.

According to THIS ARTICLE FROM THE BBC , the number is actually, 655,000 since 2003.

An estimated 655,000 Iraqis have died since 2003 who might still be alive but for the US-led invasion, according to a survey by a US university.

Hana

 

[Keltoi]

Oh, I feel I should make one correction. When we make a mistake we must correct ourselves and you are correct about 600,000 not being accurate.

According to THIS ARTICLE FROM THE BBC , the number is actually, 655,000 since 2003.

An estimated 655,000 Iraqis have died since 2003 who might still be alive but for the US-led invasion, according to a survey by a US university.

Hana

Completely misleading in the context you are using. As I've stated many times today, which is obvious if one actually reads this report in its full form, the majority of these deaths are not related to U.S. combat action. They are related to the breakdown of civil order and Iraqis butchering each other, which the U.S. is partly to blame for I agree. However, using this number in the context of U.S. combat action is extremely misleading. From the best estimates, between 30,000 and 60,000 Iraqis have died as a result of U.S. bombing and combat action. Still a huge number, but not nearly the 655,000 you would like to blame the U.S. military for.

 

[akulion]

The intelligence was not faulty - it was the bush administration USING it and portraying what they wanted to show the public which is the real issue:

The Bush administration deviated from the professional standard not only in using policy to drive intelligence, but also in aggressively using intelligence to win public support for its decision to go to war. This meant selectively adducing data -- "cherry-picking" -- rather than using the intelligence community's own analytic judgments.

The intelligence was ALL in favour of NO WAR.
But bush and his admin USED the people..just like it says and now the world knows.

So you see that is why I oppose the decisions of Bush and his administration - and I believe that they are simply war mongers and nothing else. And in my personal opinion are war criminals and murderers.

Because to you the death of 655000 (as hana pointed out) may be a small matter

But to me that is a HUGE MATTER!

 

[akulion]

From the best estimates, between 30,000 and 60,000 Iraqis have died as a result of U.S. bombing and combat action. Still a huge number, but not nearly the 655,000 you would like to blame the U.S. military for.

that is according to FOX news my dear sir

thats according to BUSH

the REAL estimate are now coming forth from the REAL news agencies like BBC and CNN and other sources who are actually doing research like the uni mentioned in the article and amnesty international. Bush and his 'alliances sources are ofcourse insisting 'oh its only 30000 to 40000 nothing more"

Like I said:

:uuh: :uuh: :uuh: Wake up:uuh: :uuh: :uuh:
And open them eyes
open eyesme
(open sesme)

​

 

[Keltoi]

that is according to FOX news my dear sir

thats according to BUSH

the REAL estimate are now coming forth from the REAL news agencies like BBC and CNN and other sources who are actually doing research like the uni mentioned in the article and amnesty international.

Like I said:

:uuh: :uuh: :uuh: Wake up:uuh: :uuh: :uuh:
And open them eyes
open eyesme
(open sesme)
http://www.userbars.net/forum/images/smiles/ashamed.gif
​

Overall, the study found 55% of deaths since March 2003 were due to violence. Of that subset, 56% resulted from gunshots; car bombs and other explosives accounted for 27%, and airstrikes caused 13%. The rest were due to other factors.

I know it is boring and not as dramatic to look at the details, but perhaps you should try.

Here is an article that puts this in context....and it isn't your whipping boy FOX...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15215574/

 

[akulion]

once again - according to the bush admin that figure is true but not according to research.

bush comments on this issue:

"I stand by the figure that a lot of innocent people have lost their life... and that troubles me, and it grieves me," Mr Bush told reporters at the White House.

"Six-hundred thousand or whatever they guessed at is just... it's not credible," Mr Bush said.

coming from a man who didnt even know who the president of Pakistan was Quote "Its that dictator guy" - I wouldnt take his word for anything

im surprised he even knows how many fingers he has

 

[*Hana*]

Completely misleading in the context you are using. As I've stated many times today, which is obvious if one actually reads this report in its full form, the majority of these deaths are not related to U.S. combat action. They are related to the breakdown of civil order and Iraqis butchering each other, which the U.S. is partly to blame for I agree. However, using this number in the context of U.S. combat action is extremely misleading. From the best estimates, between 30,000 and 60,000 Iraqis have died as a result of U.S. bombing and combat action. Still a huge number, but not nearly the 655,000 you would like to blame the U.S. military for.

LOL you really don't like to read articles do you. That article is QUESTIONING the results given by the US Military and the way the numbers were compiled. If you read the article you would see where this USA research group, saw actual death certificates from 80%!!!

The USA illegal invasion is what caused the entire mess in Iraq!!!!!!!!!!!!
You really believe only 60,000 people died in Iraq? lool You're in major denial. I guess you also believe the usa only lost 2500 soldiers too?

We tried to make you see the truth man, you just refuse to see it. Keep your blinders on, that choice is yours, but based on your line of reasoning, don't question the people that were responsible for 9/11. They felt threatened by the USA and must have had their reasons, and who's to say they weren't even more justified with their "intelligence". It doesn't matter if it was twisted, right?? And what the heck, compared to 60,000, 3,000 must seem easy. Not even that many soldiers died in the war according to your gov't. And it doesn't even matter that the Iraqi citizens were completely innocent of any crime....just like those that lost their lives on 9/11. Nope, doesn't matter at all, as long as we can twist and juggle the truth to make it fit the agenda, right?

So, that's it, there are no more words.

Hana

 

[akulion]

The thing is the Bush admin will ALWAYS tell you:

oh we only killed 23 afghanis - the rest of the 300000+ died of influenza

and in iraq we only kiled 40,000 the rest ded of car bombs

they HAVE to because otherwise they KNOW sooner or later they will face war crime charges because this war was totally unjustified!

wether the figure is 10 - 200 - 20000 or 2 billion
Murder is murder!

and unless u can accept that - then there is no hope!

Well now I have to go because I already came back once just cos it was intereesting

but now i really must attent to "customer support" questions down at Tiny Portal - where im a volunteer support guy

 

[*Hana*]

:rollseyes WOW, how far off topic did we go.

We're gonna get a finger slappin' for this one. perhaps, we could move these posts to a new thread? :? And ummm, sorry, for drifting so far off course. :embarrass

Hana

 

[Keltoi]

LOL you really don't like to read articles do you. That article is QUESTIONING the results given by the US Military and the way the numbers were compiled. If you read the article you would see where this USA research group, saw actual death certificates from 80%!!!

The USA illegal invasion is what caused the entire mess in Iraq!!!!!!!!!!!!
You really believe only 60,000 people died in Iraq? lool You're in major denial. I guess you also believe the usa only lost 2500 soldiers too?

We tried to make you see the truth man, you just refuse to see it. Keep your blinders on, that choice is yours, but based on your line of reasoning, don't question the people that were responsible for 9/11. They felt threatened by the USA and must have had their reasons, and who's to say they weren't even more justified with their "intelligence". It doesn't matter if it was twisted, right?? And what the heck, compared to 60,000, 3,000 must seem easy. Not even that many soldiers died in the war according to your gov't. And it doesn't even matter that the Iraqi citizens were completely innocent of any crime....just like those that lost their lives on 9/11. Nope, doesn't matter at all, as long as we can twist and juggle the truth to make it fit the agenda, right?

So, that's it, there are no more words.

Hana

No more words? That is probably for the best since you have fallen back to conspiracy theories. I don't support U.S. involvment in Iraq, but I also don't support misleading statements and emotional conjecture. I'm sorry that I can't agree with you, and I know you honestly believe some of the things you state. No hard feelings I hope.

 

[Keltoi]

The thing is the Bush admin will ALWAYS tell you:

oh we only killed 23 afghanis - the rest of the 300000+ died of influenza

and in iraq we only kiled 40,000 the rest ded of car bombs

they HAVE to because otherwise they KNOW sooner or later they will face war crime charges because this war was totally unjustified!

wether the figure is 10 - 200 - 20000 or 2 billion
Murder is murder!

and unless u can accept that - then there is no hope! http://img52.exs.cx/img52/7849/ambulance6zx.gif

Well now I have to go because I already came back once just cos it was intereesting

but now i really must attent to "customer support" questions down at Tiny Portal - where im a volunteer support guy
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c147/jbrowning/chewy.gif

The Bush administration doesn't have as much control of released information as you seem to believe. It doesn't matter what Bush says when there are a variety of well respected organizations who attempt to estimate the cost of conflict. The majority of these organzations put the number around 30,000 to 60,000 Iraqis killed as a direct result of U.S. military action. This is a high number and is horrible to contemplate, but the recently released study is considered "dramatically too high" by the majority of these well-known organizations.

 

[*Hana*]

No more words? That is probably for the best since you have fallen back to conspiracy theories. I don't support U.S. involvment in Iraq, but I also don't support misleading statements and emotional conjecture. I'm sorry that I can't agree with you, and I know you honestly believe some of the things you state. No hard feelings I hope.

No hard feelings at all, but if you would like to explain the conspiracy theory, I'd listen. LOOOL Listen, we presented FACTS from RELIABLE, KNOWN sources. You speak on your opinion and beliefs and the only "proof" you provided only managed to prove OUR point. We presented facts, if I were giving you my emotional side, my post would run for pages. So, like I said, wear your blinders, join in the celebration of slaughter with your government, it's up to you. No hard feelings.

hana

 

[akulion]

well anyways wether 40000 or 600000 no one TRULY knows

why?

simply because no ones been goin around counting bodies plus who kows how many are dead under rubble and been incenirated by bombs dropped on them (the 20thousand pound bombs dropped on cities)

so in the end

id just like to say - Bush is a murderer and he must hang for it.

Salam Alaikum
bro aku

PS: just to say b4 i leave: ur very unfair in ur debate skills, since u expect everyone else to take ur word but everyone else must provide evidence. And even after evidence is provided to u, u dont give in.

 

[Woodrow]

When a thread has gone this far off topic I can only come to the conclusion that the original topic has been thoroughly discussed and there is no further need for discussion.

fftopic:


:threadclo