Powell: No connection between Iraq and 9/11

[nakedemperor]

Let it go! you don't seem to grasp the concept of terrorism at all. Regardless of what has or has not been said the world is a better place with Saddam out of power!

Wow. WOW. Let's sample some of my posts in this thread to see how I might respond to Sir Evil's latest...

"Because I'm obviously a liberal you all take liberties with what you think I do and do not believe. Never, never, never have I said that Saddam didn't deserve to be removed from power. Never, never, never have I said that leaving Saddam in power was the better course of action."

"There, that's it. That being said, I think having Saddam removed was a good thing. I don't believe my initial point is incompatible with this statement: I do not believe that I can in good conscience overlook being thusly misled even though when the wool was pulled from over my eyes some good was visible."

Thanks Sir Evil, you've been a wonderful waste of time.

 

[insein]

Wow. WOW. Let's sample some of my posts in this thread to see how I might respond to Sir Evil's latest...

"Because I'm obviously a liberal you all take liberties with what you think I do and do not believe. Never, never, never have I said that Saddam didn't deserve to be removed from power. Never, never, never have I said that leaving Saddam in power was the better course of action."

"There, that's it. That being said, I think having Saddam removed was a good thing. I don't believe my initial point is incompatible with this statement: I do not believe that I can in good conscience overlook being thusly misled even though when the wool was pulled from over my eyes some good was visible."

Thanks Sir Evil, you've been a wonderful waste of time.

Saddam being removed from power is a good thing yet your worried about how we went to war. Despite the obvious fact that the reasons for war were laid out before you and have all been achieved in some way shape or form, you insist on proving that we were wrong in going to war to remove a man who you say should have been removed. Yea thats about right.

 

[NightTrain]

Saddam being removed from power is a good thing yet your worried about how we went to war. Despite the obvious fact that the reasons for war were laid out before you and have all been achieved in some way shape or form, you insist on proving that we were wrong in going to war to remove a man who you say should have been removed. Yea thats about right.

Yep.

Insein, what you have here is a liberal that hates Bush because he's a liberal and that's what liberals do. Hate Bush.

Doesn't matter if he liberated 2 countries and liberated millions of people, ANYONE BUT BUSH. That's the bottom line. Al Gore got ROBBED! That's all you need to know and you'll get laid on campus.

 

[Annie]

If you would like I can waste a whole lot more of your time!

With all your whining leading to the same thing in vertually everything you post, I would say that you have wasted the time of more people than not!

I would NEVER cross you like that!

Naked, take a look at liberal4now to get an idea that it isn't healthy to cross SE! Or jimnyc for that matter!

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[nakedemperor]

Yep.

Insein, what you have here is a liberal that hates Bush because he's a liberal and that's what liberals do. Hate Bush.

Doesn't matter if he liberated 2 countries and liberated millions of people, ANYONE BUT BUSH. That's the bottom line. Al Gore got ROBBED! That's all you need to know and you'll get laid on campus.

I don't have Bush. And the reason I have to keep saying the same thing is because not one of you is actually listening. How many times has this happened on this one thread:

"I don't believe that the end (Saddam out of power) justifies the means (misleading 270 million people to get behind it). However, I think the end (Saddam out of power) under straightforward means (as easy as 'we need to remove a ruthless dictator') would have been perfectly legitimate."

You can argue with me that we were misled, but someone, anyone, please actually see my argument for what it is. Please stop reducing my arguments to "he OBVIOUSLY hates Bush" and "whining". I disagree with many of yours (arguments) but it seems arrogant and shortsighted to consistantly poo-poo someone's posts in this manner.

 

[UsaPride]

Well, when I see polls from 2002 continuing through the present that report that people (the majority, back in '02) think that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, I can't blame it on the liberal media, can I? I feel that this widespread misconception was a direct result of the White House's daily-expressed rhetoric on the subject.

Because of my husband being in Gulf War 1 and what we know from that, we DID think 9/11 happened because of Saddam and that was right after seeing the 2nd plane hit. Other soldiers that I know, some that served during the first Gulf war, and some that are serving now ALL believed the same thing. So, President Bush and no one in the White House had to convince us. I've told numerous people, George W. Bush can come tell me that Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11, help in anyway, and I wouldn't believe him!!
Not all of us just believe what we're told because it's popular in our clique.

 

[CSM]

What's sad is that people will allow themselves to be mislead as long as the end justifies the means. By the logic we were given, any number of other dictators would have been equally as worthy of invasion.

And I'm going to have to disagree with your simplistic argument of "the friend of my enemy is my friend". Its an overgeneralization that does not take into account the nuances of the situation. Saddam was a secular dictator, a power-hungry control freak. Giving WMDs to rogue terrorists would have been a significant loss of control-- once you give WMD to terrorists you lose the ability to tell them where and when to use them. Moreover, bin Laden was a sworn enemy of Saddam. He called him the "socialist infidel". A top lieutenant of Ansar al Islam, bin Laden's group in the North of Iraq (which people on this board think was in league with Saddam because they were also anti-Kurd) said in an interview on Iraq: Uncovered: "Truly Saddam is also the enemy".

I just don't buy that Saddam would have given WMD (that he didn't have, apparently) to al Qaeda. There is no evidence to suggest he did, logic to suggest he wouldn't have. Thus, I believe the justification for the war as sold to the American people dissipates.

Most interesting in this article is the description of Zarqawi. Also note that the big Z went to IRAQ when the Afghanistan operations started, got medical treatment there, etc.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/12/14/jordan.arrest/

Also, please note the date of the article. There are many more articles about captured terrorists (particularly in the UK and Jordan) trying to use chemical weapons in their attacks.

I also seem to remember reading somewhere about a video tape of Al-Quaeda experimenting on a dog in a gas chamber; that chamber later found in Afghanistan.

The point is, Al Quaeda was (and probably still is) looking for chemical weapons. Zarqawi played a prime role in that effort. Saddam may or may not have provided the chemicals.

 

[nakedemperor]

I've told numerous people, George W. Bush can come tell me that Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11, help in anyway, and I wouldn't believe him!!

That's using your head. Atta girl.

 

[UsaPride]

That's using your head. Atta girl.

????? Why? You'd believe Bush if he told you Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11? Please!! If Bush came on TV and said, "Saddam did not help in anyway with 9/11" there'd be streets lined up with liberal protestors saying Bush was a liar and Saddam DID have something to do with it!!!
I'd be stupid for thinking Bush lied, but you and others call him a liar on a daily, hourly basis? There's your "what the f**k" right there buddy!!! :spank3:

 

[wade]

????? Why? You'd believe Bush if he told you Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11? Please!! If Bush came on TV and said, "Saddam did not help in anyway with 9/11" there'd be streets lined up with liberal protestors saying Bush was a liar and Saddam DID have something to do with it!!!
I'd be stupid for thinking Bush lied, but you and others call him a liar on a daily, hourly basis? There's your "what the f**k" right there buddy!!! :spank3:

Some people are just foaming at the mouth and want to kill someone. Pride is one.

Wade.

 

[UsaPride]

Some people are just foaming at the mouth and want to kill someone. Pride is one.

Wade.

Excuse me?

 

[Annie]

Excuse me?

LOL Consider the source!

 

[lilcountriegal]

Excuse me?

Just ignore him Tammie... the ex-lax hasnt kicked in yet. :nine:

 

[UsaPride]

LOL Consider the source!

So he was talking about me. Who the hell do I want to kill? I've never wanted to kill anyone or anything in my life. I've never wished death or harm to anyone, wait, okay, never death! Where the hell did I say I wanted anyone killed?

 

[CSM]

Pride is now officially a member of the War-Mongering Baby Killers Club. Welcome. I have been a member for over 35 years.

 

[UsaPride]

Pride is now officially a member of the War-Mongering Baby Killers Club. Welcome. I have been a member for over 35 years.

Damn, I've been labeled, LOL! It was bound to happen sometime, LOL!
Okay, "War-Mongering" I got, but "Baby killers", wouldn't that be the pro-abortion liberal groups? :dev1:

 

[CSM]

Damn, I've been labeled, LOL! It was bound to happen sometime, LOL!
Okay, "War-Mongering" I got, but "Baby killers", wouldn't that be the pro-abortion liberal groups? :dev1:

Nope, us Baby Killers in this Club deliberately target children while engaging in immoral and illegal wars. Women and old men are actually just collateral dammage.

 

[UsaPride]

Nope, us Baby Killers in this Club deliberately target children while engaging in immoral and illegal wars. Women and old men are actually just collateral dammage.

Oh, okay, it belongs with the "war-mongering" then. Damn, I am learning so much, thanks CSM, LOL!!

 

[CSM]

Oh, okay, it belongs with the "war-mongering" then. Damn, I am learning so much, thanks CSM, LOL!!

No problem. If you need a list of the rules you'll have to wait because they change depending what war we are in at the moment.

 

[nakedemperor]

????? Why? You'd believe Bush if he told you Saddam didn't have anything to do with 9/11? Please!! If Bush came on TV and said, "Saddam did not help in anyway with 9/11" there'd be streets lined up with liberal protestors saying Bush was a liar and Saddam DID have something to do with it!!!
I'd be stupid for thinking Bush lied, but you and others call him a liar on a daily, hourly basis? There's your "what the f**k" right there buddy!!! :spank3:

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the 11 September attacks," Mr Bush told reporters as he met members of Congress on energy legislation.

Now, you could respond, "There's no EVIDENCE, but he definitely did!!"

Where are your liberal protestors? Your logic is extraordinarily convoluted, but none of your fellow conservatives will dare touch you because you are one of them. I, on the other hand, am daily subjected to misinterpretations and words being put into my mouth.

Ok, so the people who have the absolute, positive MOST to gain from a connection between Iraq and 9/11 say there's no evidence to support Baghdad's involvement in the attacks. I believe the president's assertion, and as much as he (and you) would like/benefit from a connection, THERE JUST ISN'T ONE.