Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[Chandernagore]

Lest we forget, here are some of Bush statements regarding WMD. Witness the hard plain truth and be elevated by it. Amen.

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

-- United Nations Address September 12, 2002

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."

-- Radio Address October 5, 2002

"The Iraqi regime ... possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."

"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."

"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" -- his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high--strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."

-- Cincinnati, Ohio Speech October 7, 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

-- State of the Union Address January 28, 2003

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

-- Address to the Nation March 17, 2003

[mabadesc]

Wow, Chandernagore, I or someone else must have struck a nerve with you somewhere. You're starting to steam....

Getting back to the issue, though, you keep answering my points with other points, my questions with other questions. So you're not making our conversation very interesting.


I suggest you take a step back and take a deep breath, clear your mind, forget all the pro-Bush AND anti-Bush rhethoric, and look at the bigger picture.

Then really ask yourself why the US went to war in Irak. Forget your hatred of Bush for a few seconds, and don't come up with the oil excuse. As far as I know, there are no oil pipes going from Irak straight to the US. On the contrary, oil prices here are the highest they've been in a long, long while.

Come on, you can do it. Try to come up with other reasons. Just think of it as an exercise in logic.

Cheers :cheers:

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

Wow, Chandernagore, I or someone else must have struck a nerve with you somewhere.  You're starting to steam.... Getting back to the issue, though, you keep answering my points with other points, my questions with other questions.  So you're not making our conversation very interesting.

I have my own agenda Hey the elections are getting close now, hurry :!:

QUOTE

I suggest you take a step back and take a deep breath, clear your mind, forget all the pro-Bush AND anti-Bush rhethoric, and look at the bigger picture. Then really ask yourself why the US went to war in Irak.  Forget your hatred of Bush for a few seconds, and don't come up with the oil excuse.  As far as I know, there are no oil pipes going from Irak straight to the US.  On the contrary, oil prices here are the highest they've been in a long, long while. Come on, you can do it.  Try to come up with other reasons.  Just think of it as an exercise in logic.

Oh how frustrating this is, Mabadesc ! :mrgreen: I can't come up with a logical or sensible answer. Perhaps it's because I'm looking only at good reasons to invade Irak. Because there are plenty of bad ones. But I tell myself that if me, Chandernagore, an average Western European democrat, cannot see a good reason for it, then I wonder how the less fortunate, less educated people forming the majority of middel east Muslim population are supposed to get it right.

But, ok, I will play the game honestly. Let me push forward 3 proposals

1. "Daddy started it and I must stay the course"
2. "Those who are not with us are against us"
3. "Bring them on !"

:keep:

[Chandernagore]

India - Pakistan : rush to total war !

India should rightfully invade Pakistan as soon as possible, unilaterally and without recourse to further diplomacy.
Terrorists aided by Pakistan have killed several thousands of Indians. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. India is a democracy.

Looks pretty clear-cut to me and not subject to further discussion. The situation has to be dealt with quickly. WMD can fall on Karachi and New Delhi within a few minutes. To war, dear friends ! Cry havoc !

Dear readers, our following week article : why Russia should unilaterally invade Greenland. And remove it's leader before a kamikaze Inuit blows up his fish laden kayak in the port of Murmansk. Stay tuned.

[dragos]

The answer of the director of "Fahrenheit 9/11", asked if Bush should see the movie: it is in color, it is in English, and it lasts less than two hours :loool:

[Florin]

QUOTE

[b][size=18]Fahrenheit 9/11 The new movie that the Republican administration struggles to censor. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/f...ilm/3722769.stm .......

Thank you for the good news.
But unfortunately, as it is censored in the most democratic country of the planet, people of that country will continue to happily enjoy their sweet brainwashing.

[Chandernagore]

In an effort to understand the global vision of the Great Leader I compiled a serie of teachings from differents sources. I changed and/or added a few of my own to get what I believe to be the most accurate rendering of current admin. foreign policy available. I hope this will help us understand Irak. So here we go :

Strategic guide for Unilateral Empire : 10 holy rules (+W. Bush+)

1. Any diplomatic activity should be based exclusively on the law of the jungle.
2. Piss off your traditional allies until they all leave. You want to rule unilaterally.
3. If you have a bad plan , do not hurry or worry. Sleep on it. Maybe next morning you will wake up with an even worst plan.
4. Pray God you do not f..k up and crash that jet on the carrier
5. You're either against us or you are really badly against us.
6. If you ever find yourself in deep shit, stay the course.
7. The abuses of a small isolated group of people is not the America that I know, even if that group is in the Whitehouse
8. Support Fox News. Nobody will notice you're loosing.
9. The best place to store your guns is on someone else’s holy land, next to an oil ressource.
10. Those ultimately responsible for your failure are those that warned against it

[Chandernagore]

The true faith... or ....why we should believe too.

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

But unfortunately, as it is censored in the most democratic country of the planet

Florin, you know very well the documentary is not censored. Disney, the parent company of the producing company, decided not to make it available for publishing. Their fear was that the documentary would piss off a lot of people and therefore Disney stock would go down in value.

Censorship means that it would be illegal to view it, and that the government would order the ban on publishing. This is certainly not the case...

This was a corporate decision made by the company who owns the rights to publication. It wasn't a governmental decision...

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

This was a corporate decision made by the company who owns the rights to publication.  It wasn't a governmental decision...

Mmm. Like the latter could not, say, "influence" the former...

I'm in doubt when I recall that during the main operations the American media behaved more like a pack of young exited cheerleaders than information professionals. Of course you can say that blind patriotism sold well. Or you could say that the government exerted sufficient indirect pressure. Hard to tell :roll:

Numerous are the ways to censorship, brother Mabadesc o:)

[Florin]

QUOTE

............. Florin, you know very well the documentary is not censored.  Disney, the parent company of the producing company, decided not to make it available for publishing.  Their fear was that the documentary would piss off a lot of people and therefore Disney stock would go down in value. ...................

About "piss off a lot of people"...
One of the main fears was that the brother of Mr. President Bush, the one who is governor of Florida, will put an end to the taxation benefits which Walt Disney enjoy in Florida.
How can you predict who will be piss off of before showing it to the public?
I can accept you remark only if by "a lot of people" we would consider just the few hundreds from the inner circles of the present White House administration.

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

One of the main fears was that the brother of Mr. President Bush, the one who is governor of Florida...[...]

Yes, true. Thanks for reminding me about this. Sorry for ommitting this factor, I wasn't trying to ignore it or hide it, I had just forgotten about it.

QUOTE

How can you predict who will be piss off of before showing it to the public?

Most companies, especially large ones, have a Risk Management department which do exactly this sort of thing, based on analyzing polls, stock price trends as related to current events, etc...

QUOTE

I can accept you remark only if by \"a lot of people\" we would consider just the few hundreds from the inner circles of the present White House administration.

Well, these few hundred people are definitely included and play a major role, but when I said "a lot of people" I meant the entire audience, which is made up of millions of Americans. Since the subject of the documentary is quite controversial, and since Disney is already viewed as a very liberal corporations (one of the first companies to offer joint employee benefits - medical, pension, life insurance - to gay employees and their "spouses"), I guess they were anticipating an adverse reaction from the public, and hence their stock may have lost value due to this documentary.

Your argument is valid, though...

[Chandernagore]

Meanwhile I'm still awaiting Mabadesc's definitive explanation as to why Bush had to invade Irak at all price and why it has become impossible to withdraw.

Something tells me however that I won't get the answer any soon !

[mabadesc]

Chandernagore wrote:

QUOTE

Meanwhile I'm still awaiting Mabadesc's definitive explanation as to why Bush had to invade Irak at all price and why it has become impossible to withdraw

I'm not aware that you asked me for an explanation on the invasion to Irak. And I've certainly never spoken about the withdrawing of the troops or the impossibility of this.

In summary: What the heck are you talking about? :roll:

QUOTE

Something tells me however that I won't get the answer any soon !

Something tells you right....

Why no answer? Because:
1. I don't think you ever asked me.
2. You haven't answered my questions, you just bypassed them (convienently for you). So why should I bother answering yours if you haven't answered mine in a serious manner?
3. All your recent comments were weak attempts at mockery. No signs of wanting to have an open, serious debate.
4. Regardless of how valid people's arguments are, they've never been able to convince you of anything. You just keep chugging along with your horse-blinders on. Kind of typical for radical liberals - they think they're always right and they try to ram their point of view down your throat, even though they're the ones playing the victims and accusing others of doing this (hypocrisy at its best).

Makes sense to you? Oh well, I didn't think it would, "Mr. Sensitive Anti-Nazi regalia". :wink:

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

I'm not aware that you asked me for an explanation on the invasion to Irak.  And I've certainly never spoken about the withdrawing of the troops or the impossibility of this. In summary:  What the heck are you talking about?   :roll: !

You have such a selective memory Mabadesc, I never know when you forget or when you conveniently forget. You asked me for the reasons of invasion and you told me that, with some effort, I could find out. I answered that I could not come up with a good reason. So I made 3 proposals in a light tone (to take out some of the drama, you know)
It amounted to this :
1. Bush wanted to finish his father job (because he's angry at the assasination attempt, because it suited his business men nature, whatever...)
2. Irak, not being with the US, was against the US (a clear conclusion from Bush own words)
3. An excess of testosterone making him want to appear to do something (anything) to avoid being compared to Clinton.

QUOTE

I don't think you ever asked me.

Well, that was a sort of relaxed chat. We don't need to start each sentence with "question !" or "answer !".

QUOTE

2.  You haven't answered my questions, you just bypassed them (convienently for you).  So why should I bother answering yours if you   haven't answered mine in a serious manner?

Well, Mabadesc you can always dismiss any statement by arguing that they are not serious enough for you and escape the embarassment
If you could reformulate one or two questions I would gladly do my best to be more clear and incisive that I have been.

QUOTE

3.  All your recent comments were weak attempts at mockery.  No signs of wanting to have an open, serious debate.

Well I admit that it's really hard to comment on that president and avoid any sense of mockery. Mea culpa.

QUOTE

4.  Regardless of how valid people's arguments are, they've never been able to convince you of anything. You just keep chugging along with your horse-blinders on.  Kind of typical for radical liberals - they think they're always right and they try to ram their point of view down your throat, even though they're the ones playing the victims and accusing others of doing this (hypocrisy at its best).

Kind of thing you hear on every forum everyday. That was pretty lame.

QUOTE

Makes sense to you?  Oh well, I didn't think it would, \"Mr. Sensitive Anti-Nazi regalia\".   :wink:

Oh Mabadesc I see that, while rejecting any sense of mockery as unworthy, you're not beyond serving it to others :laugh: Or maybe I didn't understood what Nazi has to make with Irak invasion. Perhaps you see a link that I missed ?