Are we facing a new Cold War?

Isolation is what helped Germany to grow such hatred towards the rest of the world and thus....WWII
 
I disagree. The Russia-Georgia conflict doesn't concern us, or at least it shouldn't. These two countries have a long, contorted history with one another and they were almost destined to fight each other in battle. What we should be doing, instead of trying to build a missile shield in Poland and self-righteously declaring our support for Georgia, is keeping our noses out of their business.

That's the same thing we should be doing with Iran, to tell you the truth, until there is evidence that they have nuclear weapons and it is clear that they want to attack Israel or its allies. We need to get out heads out of our asses and realize that these other countries are sovereign and they are capable of making their own decisions without our intervention. Moreover, we need to realize that our intervention only infuriates some of these nations more, and that if we don't stop acting like the world's police, we're going to end up severing our most important alliances and find ourselves all alone in the world one way or another.

Instead of lobbying for sanctions or taking provocative military measures, we should be sending diplomats to these countries and opening up talks on every single issue which faces the international community. From Iran's nuclear program to Russia's hostility, we shouldn't be making threats, we should sit down and talk things out like adults. Or, we should keep our nose out of their business and let these countries work out their problems by themselves.

I'm tired of our military being stretched to the limits in Iraq, I certainly don't want to see an entire generation drafted because we feel this need to have the bigger penis in the room by exercising our military might and diplomatic aggressiveness.
While I agree with you to an extent the devil's advocate in me says that when we have proof of Iran's nuclear arsenal and their intentions to destroy Isreal/whoever, it'll be too late. Our definitave proof is the actual attack.

And as for our threats against Russia, I feel we are actually taking a step back from the smack talk. sure we have said how terrible it is, but the US seems content in letting NATO be the ones to officially declare anything, which is how it should be.
 
Cold War my ass, now we know how the world felt when we invaded Iraq

That wasn't fear,it was the US scrambling to show that it was still "the only superpower in the world". We all know how that was botched.

Bush ruined America's reputation,now George "dumba$$" Bush seeks to screw up the America-Russia relationship..something he should not even go near.
 
That was fear, the rest of the world was fearing what America would do next
 
I cannot believe that some of you argue that the Georgia (Democratic country) and the Russian conflict is similar to Iraq and US.

Sure in layman's eyes they might... I mean they both had one country enter another and people died... but that is it.
 
That was fear, the rest of the world was fearing what America would do next

The rest of the world knew what America was going to do...
We asked the world, got their support and went into battle with the rest of the world against Iraq.
 
The rest of the world knew what America was going to do...
We asked the world, got their support and went into battle with the rest of the world against Iraq.



Wrong, and what we did tell them was not the truth.....
 
Wrong, and what we did tell them was not the truth.....

What that Iraq violated many UN resoluations?
What that Iraq did have Yellow Cake?
http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/07/about_that_500_tons_of_yellow.html
What that we did not ask the United Nations for their support?
Here is the support that the US had...
In 2003 Countries that favored the war:

Western Europe:
United Kingdom
Spain
Portugal
Denmark
Netherlands
Iceland
Italy

Baltic States:
Estonia #
Latvia #
Lithuania #
Central Europe:
Poland
Czech Republic
Slovakia #
Hungary
Balkans:
Albania #
Macedonia #
Romania #
Bulgaria #
Turkey
Croatia #
Slovenia #

Eastern Europe
Ukraine

Japan
South Korea
Singapore
Philippines
Afghanistan
Azerbaijan
Uzbekistan
Georgia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Solomon Islands
Mongolia
Palau
Tonga

North America:
United States of America

South and Central America:
El Salvador
Colombia
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Honduras

2004 - Countries that provided troops:
Western Europe:
United Kingdom
Spain
Portugal
Denmark
Norway
Netherlands
Iceland
Italy

Baltic States:
Estonia #
Latvia #
Lithuania #
Central Europe:
Poland
Czech Republic
Slovakia #
Hungary
Balkans:
Albania #
Macedonia #
Romania #
Bulgaria #
Turkey
Croatia #
Slovenia #

Eastern Europe
Ukraine
Moldova

Japan
South Korea
Singapore
Philippines
Afghanistan
Kazakhstan
Uzbekistan
Azerbaijan
Georgia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Solomon Islands
Mongolia
Palau
Tonga
Thailand

North America:
United States of America

South and Central America:
El Salvador
Colombia
Nicaragua
Costa Rica
Dominican Republic
Honduras ANZ:
Australia
New Zealand

Middle East:
Kuwait

Africa:
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Uganda
Rwanda
Angola

Iraq Troop numbers March 2004
Country Troops Per 100000
population Per 1000
military
1 USA 130,000 47.7 94.8
2 United Kingdom 9,000 15.2 42.4
3 Italy 3,000 5.3 11.3
4 Poland 2,460 6.7 10.2
5 Ukraine 1,600 3.2 5.1
6 Spain * 1,300 3.3 7.0
7 Netherlands 1,100 7.0 19.5
8 Australia 800 4.3 14.5
9 Romania 700 3.1 3.4
10 Bulgaria 480 5.9 5.9
11 Thailand 440 0.7 1.4
12 Denmark 420 7.8 17.3
13 Honduras * 368 6.1 5.4
14 El Salvador 361 6.2 14.7
15 Dominican Republic 302 3.7 12.3
16 Hungary 300 2.9 6.9
17 Japan 240 0.2 1.0
18 Norway 179 4.0 5.8
19 Mongolia 160 6.1 17.6
20 Azerbaijan 150 1.9 2.1
21 Portugal 128 1.3 2.6
22 Latvia 120 5.1 20.9
23 Lithuania 118 3.3 9.7
24 Slovakia 102 1.9 2.3
25 Czech Republic 80 0.8 1.4
26 Philippines 80 0.1 0.7
27 Albania 70 2.1 7.0 **
28 Georgia 70 1.4 2.7
29 New Zealand 61 1.7 6.4
30 Moldova 50 1.1 4.7
31 Macedonia 37 1.8 2.3
32 Estonia 31 2.2 6.5
33 Canada ^ 31^
34 Kazakhstan 25 0.1 0.4
Sources: The Australian, 17th March 2004.
 
Wrong, and what we did tell them was not the truth.....

Who lied? Here are a list of quotes if you need help (do note Seven of these quotes were said before Bush took office).

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
 
Who lied? Here are a list of quotes if you need help (do note Seven of these quotes were said before Bush took office).

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

epicfailqi1ig2.gif


There were no WMDs, we destroyed their ability to make them in the Golf war and the bombing in the late 90's, so save your breath.
 
Posted the link where Yellow Cake was found, and the US gave them a year to get rid of them before the US went it...

Love the seal... he did fail.

He failed with handling the war after the initial attack.
He failed even more without limiting his parties spending in Washington. This was a huge chance for Republicans to stand behind their core values... but that was lost many moons ago.
 
Doug, what you don't seem to understand is that before the Iraq war, there were many people from all positions, presenting facts that were saying Iraq did not have WMD, and probably didn't even have the capability to produce WMD.

The weapons inspectors that were actually over there, were just one group insistent upon the fact that there were no WMD.

The problem is, is that Bush and co were so set on getting into Iraq, that they only listened to people that presented "evidence" that agreed with their assessment that there were WMD.
 
Doug, what you don't seem to understand is that before the Iraq war, there were many people from all positions, presenting facts that were saying Iraq did not have WMD, and probably didn't even have the capability to produce WMD.

The weapons inspectors that were actually over there, were just one group insistent upon the fact that there were no WMD.

The problem is, is that Bush and co were so set on getting into Iraq, that they only listened to people that presented "evidence" that agreed with their assessment that there were WMD.

Not many positions... just a few, and they were getting cut backs from Iraq with money. Look at the oil for food scandal: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-09-07-un-oilforfood_x.htm?csp=34

Here is one quote from the article the barely touches the surface:
"Lax oversight allowed Saddam's regime to pocket $1.8 billion in kickbacks in the awarding of contracts during the program's operation from 1997-2003, the committee said." - and this was the same organization that went looking for WMD in his country. Little conspiracy no?

There was evidence from all Gov. intel from many countries that Saddam and Compamy were bad guys.

Again Bush failed with many things but taking out Saddam is not one of them. The argument could and should have been presented better. They should not have held so much weight on WMD, but there was a valid threat he did have them.
 
Doug, what you don't seem to understand is that before the Iraq war, there were many people from all positions, presenting facts that were saying Iraq did not have WMD, and probably didn't even have the capability to produce WMD.

The weapons inspectors that were actually over there, were just one group insistent upon the fact that there were no WMD.

The problem is, is that Bush and co were so set on getting into Iraq, that they only listened to people that presented "evidence" that agreed with their assessment that there were WMD.

Yes - George Bush and Co.

The Co. being Joe Biden, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, etc. etc. etc.
 
Yes - George Bush and Co.

The Co. being Joe Biden, John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, etc. etc. etc.

These Congressmen and Senators went with the information that was given to them at the time. And the information given to them by the Bush administration said that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. They acted accordingly, based on the information they had. It wasn't their fault that it was manipulated by the Bush administration, and that the justification for war was a colorful fairy tale.
 
I am sorry, but I am losing my patience.

First, Russia didn't attack Georgia. There is enough evidence that Saakashvili's army (I am saying Saakashvili's, because Georgians hate him and tried to rise against him several times this year) invaded South Ossetia and started mass killing of Russian citizenships during the Olympic games, when both Putin and Medvedev took a rest. Then, he called Western journalists to show how "Russia invades Georgia and kills people", what that was BS. Russia wanted to save its people and send its army against Georgians, who were killing not only men, but also women and children. Saakashvili again used it as a "proof" of "Russian invasion". The number of killings of South Ossetians reached 2,000. Considering the fact that there are only 700,000 Ossetians in the world (including those of North Ossetia), that's crazy.

What about the case with Poland, I think the fact that it puts Russia under the threat is enough to explain why Medvedev acts so.
 
I am sorry, but I am losing my patience.

First, Russia didn't attack Georgia. There is enough evidence that Saakashvili's army (I am saying Saakashvili's, because Georgians hate him and tried to rise against him several times this year) invaded South Ossetia and started mass killing of Russian citizenships during the Olympic games, when both Putin and Medvedev took a rest. Then, he called Western journalists to show how "Russia invades Georgia and kills people", what that was BS. Russia wanted to save its people and send its army against Georgians, who were killing not only men, but also women and children. Saakashvili again used it as a "proof" of "Russian invasion". The number of killings of South Ossetians reached 2,000. Considering the fact that there are only 700,000 Ossetians in the world (including those of North Ossetia), that's crazy.

What about the case with Poland, I think the fact that it puts Russia under the threat is enough to explain why Medvedev acts so.

So....why didn't the Russian citizens that live in South Ossetia, (sovereign Georgian land) move to Russia....where they are citizens.
 
So....why didn't the Russian citizens that live in South Ossetia, (sovereign Georgian land) move to Russia....where they are citizens.

Because South Ossetians ARE Russian citizens like the rest of North Caucasus, which is a part of Russian Federation.
 
These Congressmen and Senators went with the information that was given to them at the time. And the information given to them by the Bush administration said that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. They acted accordingly, based on the information they had. It wasn't their fault that it was manipulated by the Bush administration, and that the justification for war was a colorful fairy tale.

What man? Seven of those quotes were before Bush took office...

They all had the same intel... hell some of them had sat in and or lead releavant committees..
 
Because South Ossetians ARE Russian citizens like the rest of North Caucasus, which is a part of Russian Federation.

But they live on sovereign Georgian land......

I have no problem with them wanting to be a part of Russia.....but just because you want to be Russian, and live in Russia doesn't mean you can take your land with you.....
 
But they live on sovereign Georgian land......

I have no problem with them wanting to be a part of Russia.....but just because you want to be Russian, and live in Russia doesn't mean you can take your land with you.....

About 90% of people living in South Ossetia (including other nations of Caucasus) are Russian citizens, so killing them is equal to killing Russians, and that's one of the reasons why Russia had to fight against Georgians, as they simply started killing people for nothing (I am not even talking about hurting Russian peacetakers).

Now the land. As South Ossetians and Abkhaz people don't consider themselves as Georgians (and they actually aren't), they want to have their own republics united with Russia, because Georgia has been continuing the war with those two for more than ten years.
 
What man? Seven of those quotes were before Bush took office...

They all had the same intel... hell some of them had sat in and or lead releavant committees..

Did I respond to your quotes?

No...

Which means that I don't deny that some of them had pre-existing opinions on Iraq...
 
About 90% of people living in South Ossetia (including other nations of Caucasus) are Russian citizens, so killing them is equal to killing Russians, and that's one of the reasons why Russia had to fight against Georgians, as they simply started killing people for nothing (I am not even talking about hurting Russian peacetakers).

Now the land. As South Ossetians and Abkhaz people don't consider themselves as Georgians (and they actually aren't), they want to have their own republics united with Russia, because Georgia has been continuing the war with those two for more than ten years.

I understand exactly where you are coming from......and please I mean this as no disrespect.....BUT

That IS NOT their sovereign land.....it IS NOT sovereign Russian land.....as of right now, and according to NATO and the UN....it will remain sovereign land of Georgia.....

Did the Georgian government go extremely overboard......oh yes........ooooooh yes. But I'm sorry, peacekeeping troops are sent to areas via the UN, not because a country decides they need to send what they call peacekeepers into a sovereign country. Russia sent troops onto another countries land.....


And please don't say...."the US did as well with Iraq..." I agree......but that doesn't give Russia the right to do it, nor does it make it right.

Is the UN doing enough in this situation? NO, they dropped the ball like they usually do.....:o
 
I understand exactly where you are coming from......and please I mean this as no disrespect.....BUT

That IS NOT their sovereign land.....it IS NOT sovereign Russian land.....as of right now, and according to NATO and the UN....it will remain sovereign land of Georgia.....

Did the Georgian government go extremely overboard......oh yes........ooooooh yes. But I'm sorry, peacekeeping troops are sent to areas via the UN, not because a country decides they need to send what they call peacekeepers into a sovereign country. Russia sent troops onto another countries land.....


And please don't say...."the US did as well with Iraq..." I agree......but that doesn't give Russia the right to do it, nor does it make it right.

Is the UN doing enough in this situation? NO, they dropped the ball like they usually do.....:o

The thing is that Saakashvili's army started killing people, who live in South Ossetia, and most of them are citizens of Russian Federation. If in any other country the same happened to US citizens, how would USA act in your opinion? I doubt US government would leave their people dying. That's the case. Besides, Russia remains a guarantor of peace on the land of Caucasus.

It was negotiated that there must be Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, where Georgians started attacking them.

I wasn't going to mention USA-Iraq as an example, because I think American government should answer for itself. And I think it's not America's problem to decide whether the another country is right or wrong. Russians saved their people, that's all.

What about the UN, they lost my trust. They approved the separation of Kosovo from Serbia, but they don't want to do the same with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
 
The thing is that Saakashvili's army started killing people, who live in South Ossetia, and most of them are citizens of Russian Federation. If in any other country the same happened to US citizens, how would USA act in your opinion? I doubt US government would leave their people dying. That's the case. Besides, Russia remains a guarantor of peace on the land of Caucasus.

It was negotiated that there must be Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, where Georgians started attacking them.

I wasn't going to mention USA-Iraq as an example, because I think American government should answer for itself. And I think it's not America's problem to decide whether the another country is right or wrong. Russians saved their people, that's all.

What about the UN, they lost my trust. They approved the separation of Kosovo from Serbia, but they don't want to do the same with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.


I think there are emotions on both sides......

And IMO, Russia needs to move its troops out....AND AT THE SAME TIME....the Georgian government needs to put a leash on it's troops.....

Kosovo had the backing of Europe, NATO, the UN etc.....I'm sorry, no matter how strongly you feel about this......Russians in South Ossetia and Abkhazia do not.....that is reality.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,232
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"