Politics: Onward from New Hampshire

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski While we were trying to get the UN to give us permission, you think it made sense to go into Iraq and blow stuff up?

I bet you would have opposed an air strike to take out Osama for fear of pissing off the French. Pansy.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
And this guy is "one of the world's most brutal mass murderers."
Can you think of one other Ty?

Now we're really screwed. This wasn't supposed to get out. Luckily, they've missed that the real reason for not getting this guy was that everybody had their eye on Haiti at the time, planning for the deposing of Aristide.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
NBC News is reporting that the military had plans to take out one of the leading terrorist threats, Abu Musab Zarqawi, whom David Brooks described as "one of the world's most brutal mass murderers," but that the political leadership at the White House stopped the operation because they worried that it would undercut the case for invading Iraq:

In addition to his prior resume, the military is fingering Zarqawi as the prime suspect in the bombings over the weekend that killed 200+ Shiites in Iraq.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
In addition to his prior resume, the military is fingering Zarqawi as the prime suspect in the bombings over the weekend that killed 200+ Shiites in Iraq.

Interestingly enough, there were mass demonstrations this morning in Iran - moderates who were protesting their own government's suspected leading role in planning and carrying out those attacks.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I bet you would have opposed an air strike to take out Osama for fear of pissing off the French. Pansy.

Goofy Hank Response:
Can't answer until you complete the hypo- is this during Ramadan or not?

Mean Hank Response:
And you know what else, before when Club said this guys justified the invasion, you said they weren't that important and mainly just screwed with Iraq, and were no threat at all to us.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Interestingly enough, there were mass demonstrations this morning in Iran - moderates who were protesting their own government's suspected leading role in planning and carrying out those attacks.

I have seen suggestions -- and will post them if I can figure out where this was -- that the attacks are the work of a few extremists designed to inflame tensions between Shi'ites and Sunnis, so as to cause a civil war. Not that there's any reason to admire the government of Iran.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Mean Hank Response:
And you know what else, before when Club said this guys justified the invasion, you said they weren't that important and mainly just screwed with Iraq, and were no threat at all to us.

Cite, please. I think I said that they had nothing to do with Hussein, since they were in a part of the country outside of his control, and that we could take them out without a full-on invasion. Which this story confirms.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Maybe so, but Suskind's book demonstrates that Cheney is one of very few people with good access to the President (Andy Card and Condi Rice are two others), that Cheney has a very significant role in deciding who gets to say what to W., and that he uses this role to press his own views. Of course, the source for this account was the Treasury Secretary. Suskind has been posting documents that reflect this sort of thing on his website.

Again, so what? That doesn't mean that Cheney set this particular policy. I don't know if you have listened to what Laura Bush has to say on this topic, but she seems to be vehemently opposed to gay marriage. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that she has some influence on the President in regards to his admin's policy on marriage. He is, afterall, married to her.

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
That was my point,

Again, so what? What is the big deal if GWB has advisors who he listens to on various policy matters?

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
although it's unclear why you think I love Clinton.

It is because of all the posts of yours I have read in the last few years.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Numbskull. In June 2002 we were still listening to you guys and trying to get UN approval to make Iraq fix things the UN insisted it fix 10 years earlier. While we were trying to get the UN to give us permission, you think it made sense to go into Iraq and blow stuff up? I know these guys were seperate from Saddam, but still the unauthorized attack.
What the source for the "why," couldn't the "why" have been we aren't going to turn cowboy if we don't have to. And this guy is "one of the world's most brutal mass murderers."
Can you think of one other Ty?
I bet you are a fucking a pain in litigation. "Hank, I noticed pps 12,356-59 have some marks. I'm concerned you masked information and I'm filing a motion tomorrow to have you BLAH BLAH>"

We were bombing the crap out of things in the no-fly zones during the UN talks. That's not turning cowboy.

I have no comment on Ty's litigation practices.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I have seen suggestions -- and will post them if I can figure out where this was -- that the attacks are the work of a few extremists designed to inflame tensions between Shi'ites and Sunnis, so as to cause a civil war. Not that there's any reason to admire the government of Iran.

Of course it is, that and to make everyone hate us. They all were able to beat themselves and their kids for the first time in memory, and rather than letting them be thankful to us, some Sunnis blew them up.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Mean Hank Response:
And you know what else, before when Club said this guys justified the invasion, you said they weren't that important and mainly just screwed with Iraq, and were no threat at all to us.

That's it Hank, give in to the dark side.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
We were bombing the crap out of things in the no-fly zones during the UN talks. That's not turning cowboy.

We were bombing aa batteries that targeted our jets. This would have been blowing up stuff in the no-fly zones, that were created to keep Saddam from blowing up stuff there. See?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I have seen suggestions -- and will post them if I can figure out where this was -- that the attacks are the work of a few extremists designed to inflame tensions between Shi'ites and Sunnis, so as to cause a civil war. Not that there's any reason to admire the government of Iran.

It wasn't suggestions, it was the letter written from an Al Qaeda operative to the mothership, which I posted weeks ago.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I have seen suggestions -- and will post them if I can figure out where this was -- that the attacks are the work of a few extremists designed to inflame tensions between Shi'ites and Sunnis, so as to cause a civil war.

Seems plausible to me. My question is who is backing the extremists?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

You're having a particularly bad day for reading comprehension.

Originally posted by Not Me
Again, so what? That doesn't mean that Cheney set this particular policy.

Exactly. I thought it was interesting that Cheney was distancing himself from the policy, if subtly.

I don't know if you have listened to what Laura Bush has to say on this topic, but she seems to be vehemently opposed to gay marriage. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that she has some influence on the President in regards to his admin's policy on marriage. He is, afterall, married to her.

I have listened to what Laura Bush said, and what I heard led me to conclude quite the opposite -- that she personally has less of a problem with it, but was expressing sympathy for the people who do:

• Laura Bush says gay marriages are "a very, very shocking issue" for some people, a subject that should be debated by Americans rather than settled by a Massachusetts court or the mayor of San Francisco.
  
  Asked how she feels about the issue personally, Mrs. Bush replies: "Let's just leave it at that."

USA Today

Again, so what? What is the big deal if GWB has advisors who he listens to on various policy matters?

You said that Cheney is just another advisor, and I was telling you that you were wrong. This by itself doesn't make anyone a better or worse person, except insofar as you are uninformed, but it is the sort of thing that is of interest to people who are interested in how the country works. YMMV.

It is because of all the posts of yours I have read in the last few years.

Maybe it's been a bad few years of reading comprehension for you.