Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Ten Years and Nothing Learned


Ten years ago today the US went to war.

War with Iraq had been on their minds since before the 2000 election. Bush spoke of being a “war president” in order to have “political capital”.

All the chickenhawk warmongering talk had done its job. Half of America believed Saddam had something to do with 9-11, that he had a nuclear weapons program, (complete with “nukular aluminum tubes) and vast stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.

The corporate media had dutifully parroted, without question, every line from Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and all the other wrong-headed Neocons.

Time for the Fearless Chidkenhawk Decider to lead America to glory.

The corporate media quickly and cowardly fell in line. Here's a snapshot of what the corporate media had to say ten years ago this week.


March 18, 2003:

Bill O'Reilly makes a promise on ABC's Good Morning America:

“If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again, all right?


March 19, 2003:

War based on lies is launched.

John Burns of the New York Times writes: "The striking thing was that for many Iraqis, the first American strike could not come too soon."

NBC's Tom Brokaw: "We don't want to destroy the infrastructure of Iraq, because in a few days we're gonna own that country."

March 20, 2003:

Oregonian editorial: "In our view, President Bush has built a strong case for the invasion of Iraq, a case that will be overwhelming with the inevitable discovery of the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein is hiding."

March 21, 2003:

The New York Post reports that talk radio is solidly behind the war: "And if you were looking for a debate on 'Operation Iraqi Freedom,' fuhgeddaboudit." The paper reports Don Imus saying, "We got stabbed in the back by those assholes in France and the rest of them. Enough of Tom Daschle, who is disgraceful, and all the rest—enough of that."

The Post also quotes Rush Limbaugh proclaiming on his show: "I'm not messing with people who want to say this attack is illegal, it's not warranted, it's not justified--I'm not going to argue with you people anymore. Take your propaganda to somebody else who might believe it." And adds: “It's beyond me how anybody can look at these protestors and call them anything other than what they are: anti-American, anticapitalist, pro-Marxist communists.”

March 23, 2003:

Fox News Channel posts a headline that reads, "HUGE CHEMICAL WEAPONS FACTORY FOUND IN SO IRAQ.... REPORTS: 30 IRAQIS SURRENDER AT CHEM WEAPONS PLANT.... COAL TROOPS HOLDING IRAQI IN CHARGE OF CHEM WEAPONS." ABC's John McWethy promotes "one important new discovery: U.S. officials say, up the road from Nasarijah, in a town called Najaf, they believe that they have captured a chemical weapons plant and perhaps more important, the commanding general of that facility. One U.S. official said he is a potential 'gold mine' about the weapons Saddam Hussein says he doesn't have."

NBC's Tom Brokaw described the story thusly: "Word tonight that U.S. forces may have found what UN inspectors spent months searching for, a facility suspected to be a chemical weapons plant, uncovered by ground troops on the way north to Baghdad."

The next day, a Fox correspondent in Qatar quietly issues an update to the chemical weapons story: The "chemical weapons facility discovered by coalition forces did not appear to be an active chemical weapons facility." U.S. officials admit that morning that the site contains no chemicals at all and had been abandoned long ago

The Associated Press runs a story on war protests, the title of which sets up a dubious dichotomy: "Protesters Rally Against War; Others Support Troops."

March 28, 2003:

The Washington Post reported that broadcast news consultants are "advising news and talk stations across the nation to wave the flag and downplay protest against the war." Advice includes patriotic music, avoiding "polarizing discussions" and ignoring protests, which "may be harmful to a station's bottom line," according to tests conducted by one firm. The same firm "advised clients to find experts in some 30 categories --including 'veterans of Desert Storm,' 'Former G Men,' 'Military Recruiting Offices' -- most of whom would be unlikely to offer harsh criticism of the war."

- Thanks to FAIR:

Wow. That's some "liberal media" we had there.

Since there was zero accountability for the politicians, officials, and pundits for being wrong, let along punished for treasonous lying to congress and taking us to war on falsehoods, this scenario will in all likelihood be repeated.

Iran will likely be the target.

Why? Because Bush called Iran a part of the “Axis of Evil”. They are surrounded by the US military, and the Israeli Right is rattling its sabres. For wanting nuclear weapons as a deterrent against the US and Israel, Iran will be demonized as a threat to us.

Never mind that no other country has been as threatened as Iran for developing such weapons. The USSR did it. China did it. Pakistan did it. But for Iran to do the same? Hell No! This means war!

And who cares whether they have a weapon or not? Since when does reality matter in our wars? 

-----

Update:

So how did the Iraqis celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Neocon Crusade?

By midafternoon, the numbers had stacked up: 57 dead and nearly 190 wounded in separate attacks that included 17 car bombs, 2 adhesive bombs stuck to cars, and a killing with a silenced gun.

We can only wonder, when are they going to erect that statue of their "liberator" on George W. Bush Boulevard?

76 comments:

free0352 said...

10 years ago I was there, on the Kuwaiti boarder preparing to go into combat for the second time since my first deployment to Afghanistan in 2001.

I can't speak to what was going on back in the states. Our main link to the outside world at our staging area - was the BBC which we could program into our SINGARS radios.

I remember the day before we crossed the line of departure into Iraq, General Natonski our TF commander gave us copies of General Mattis' "Message to all hands." That was the actual order for us to attack. 3 days later I would be in my first serious battle of my military career in the city of Nasiriyah as we desperately attempted to rescue the Army's 507th Maintenance Company. A member of that unit would become famous... Jessica Lynch. We would later be present at her rescue, helping to secure the hospital complex where she was found, and would secure the doctor who helped arrange her rescue... the same doctor my unit had shot at the day before as he drove PFC Lynch towards our positions in an ambulance. We fired because EMS vehicles were being used by Fedayeen forces to move mortar units. That sure foreshadowed the character of the war in Iraq that I would return to 2 more times. During those days and later in towns outside Baghdad and Al'Amarah we would engage the forces that would come to be known as Al'Qaeda in Iraq. We would fight an old foe from Afghanistan, Abu Musab al'Zarqawi who would later take his Afghan veteran Arab fighters and become our most vicious opponents in the years to come.

free0352 said...

Weeks later TF-Tarawa would find its self in the city of Al Kut. My unit would peel off from TF-Tarawa and help elements of the 1st MAR DIV to take Tikrit... Saddam Hussein's home town. Huge portions of the 101st AB and 1st Mar Div, my unit included - witnessed the removal of one of Saddam's Chemical Weapons stockpiles.

We were to a man ordered to keep our mouths shut about it on pain of courts martial.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion,

Small must be a relative term, because we saw several truckloads. Enough to kill millions if dumped into a water supply or thousands if burned off in a NASCAR stadium. It was a terrorist's goldmine.

And it was only one of hundreds of cachets found.

We -the thousands of veterans who witnessed the finding of the cachets- would for years to come quietly and among ourselves wonder why this was not reported to the American people even as our mission was demonized in the media. "Yes there were WMD in Iraq," we said to ourselves. "Lots and lots of it."

We -myself included- can only speculate why the full scope of the Iraqi WMD program was never fully revealed with only bits and pieces coming to light after the Wikilinks scandal. Bradley Manning only had a SECRET clearance. Who knows what a Top Secret clearance would have revealed? I know for sure... much, much more from what I saw and what the memos eluded to.

For years I couldn't even discuss this with even my wife -let alone blog about it- without fear of criminal prosecution. But now I am retired and time has passed. I suppose there is still a threat from big brother... but not much of one. More and more vets are talking, and this anniversary will spark more discussion. But alas, it will be 65 years before it is all declassified. And by then most of the records will be "lost."

Because most likely they have already been sanitized to protect Dick Chaney and Donald Rumsfeld. At least that's what I think.


free0352 said...

Why I believe there was an attempt to keep this secret, is of course pure speculation. I suppose I could be wrong. All I can be sure of is there without a doubt was VX and mustard gas in Iraq stored in metal containers throughout the country.

Why was this fact hidden? I believe it was because of what was on those metal containers. DOW Chemical lot numbers.

We all saw them. They weren't in Arabic, they were western numbers, with old faded western letters.

I think Donald Rumsfeld as special envoy to Iraq in 1983 arranged the sale of chemical weapons to Iraq to fight the Iranians. This would be in keeping with the Reagan administration's policy of using proxies to fight its conflicts. Iran was and is a hated enemy of this country. The Reagan administration was selling Iraq weapons to fund its shadow wars in Latin America. This is well documented. US foreign policy demanded Iraq had to be checked... behind the scenes. Clearly the US supported Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war. I think we did it with nerve gas, and that gas could be traced back to a lot of important Reagan administration officials. Iran/Contra was bad enough. Can you imagine the fall out of selling WMD? I think Casper Weinberger and GHW Bush were in on it. I think Saddam thought he could use the sale as blackmail to force no US intervention for his invasion of Kuwait. I think when Chaney found out as SecDef during the Gulf War, he got involved in a cover up.

I think we invaded Iraq because al'Qaeda operatives were inside Iraq in 2003 hiding from US forces having just invaded Afghanistan. I think there was utter terror that either Saddam or one of his crazy sons would hook up an Al'Qaeda operative with even a small ammount of VX... enough to kill thousands.

I think no one wanted a WMD attack on the home land... especially when the forensics of said attack would lead back to very important Republicans dealing arms back in the 80s. I think no one in the Bush administration was even a little bit willing to risk that possibility.

Thats why we went to war... there was WMD in Iraq. There was Al'Qaeda in Iraq. Had the two mated up? Nope. No one was willing to risk them doing that. Not with VX gas involved. And it was all covered up so Don Rumsfeld and others wouldn't go to jail for selling Saddam Hussein the gas he used to kill thousands of Iranians and Kurds with.

Its a much more likely speculation than any the left has made.

But it doesn't totally demonize George Bush... so who knows if they will ever accept it.

Well, we'll know for sure in 65 years. Maybe.

free0352 said...

The Reagan administration was selling Iraq weapons to fund its shadow wars in Latin America. This is well documented. US foreign policy demanded Iraq had to be checked..

Whoops, should read IRAN not IRAQ lol. The Iran/Contra affair involved the sale of weapons to Iran to fund the Contras. Hence its not the IRAQ/Contra affair lol. Exucse the typo.

Dave Dubya said...

Interesting story, but what are the facts behind the anecdotes?

Bush first said there were, and then has admitted there were no WMD stockpiles. You’re saying there were, only with Dick and Rummy’s name attached. Someone must be lying, as usual.

So what you’re saying is Cheney, Rummy and co. are being protected from their war crimes of providing chemical weapons to Saddam. You see, we already knew that the US, under Republican Administrations, provided such weapons.

No active labs were found. No stockpiles of Iraqi-produced WMD’s were found. None were used against US troops.

What was the threat of the degraded remnants, even if they were handed to AQ, which was most unlikely?

Weapons Inspector David Kay noted:

It is an extraordinarily -- even using the advanced technology we have to draw off those chemical agents from Iraqi weapons. These weapons are badly corroded. They were never produced in a quality that would be acceptable in our military. And while it is possible to draw it off, you are more likely to result in the death of the people likely to draw it off.

So what threat did the degrade weapons pose to Americans?

The former top US weapons inspector testified at a House hearing on Thursday that close to 500 degraded chemical munitions found in Iraq, and revealed last week, constitute weapons of mass destruction, although they haven't "killed a single American or Iraqi," and that his report didn't note them because his team wasn't concentrating on pre-1991 weapons

Kay noted:
First, the general technical assessments that I was provided was that Iraq sarin that was produced -- and this was the bulk of Iraq sarin -- was produced between 1984 and 1988, a huge amount of which had been collected by the U.N., had been analyzed not only here but in other places around the world -- that that sarin was of such poor quality, it lacked any stabilization agent,... While it's not something I would like to rub up next to, it was not going to be a major concern.
The nerve agent, advanced sarin, the small amounts of VX that had been produced after 1988 and prior to 1991, the production data looked like, in fact, the U.N. had done a pretty good job of bringing most of that under control.


And yes there were “small amounts” and “remnants” of pre-1991 degraded ordinance according to your article. The word “stockpiles” is not in the article. Your anecdotal opinion is one thing, but if stockpiles were found, they would have been paraded out as justification for the war. If not, then there was yet another war crime cover-up. Either way your neocon heroes have caused a lot death and suffering. It continues to this day.

Here’s a question. What “blessings of liberty” have we bestowed on Iraq with tons of depleted uranium?

We shall see there gratitude soon enough.

Here’s the important question. How many Americans were killed by those remnants of degraded chemical weapons?

The war was all about the false assertions and “well, maybe” and “what ifs”. Not very good reasons to go to war. The invasion is exactly what boosted AQ numbers. Killing enemies you create is not such a noble endeavor.

But guys like you and your neocons will make up any excuse.

free0352 said...

but if stockpiles were found, they would have been paraded out as justification for the war.

Not if they had Don Rumsfeld's finger prints on them.

Here’s the important question. How many Americans were killed by those remnants of degraded chemical weapons?

None. And none ever will be. Thats why we went there.

Killing enemies you create is not such a noble endeavor

We didn't create Saddam Hussein or Abu Musab al'Zarqawi - or their tens of thousands of loyal Soldiers and fighters.

And they, and those like them, must be exterminated. There can be no peace for this country while the likes of Zarqawi are walking the Earth. Only our blood will appease them. All of it.



okjimm said...

I remember the start of the war.....was having drinks when the news came on TV. Most of the ensuing discussion was whether the NCAA basketball tournament would be canceled. Warren Basketball...America gets it's priorities right. gees.

Free
//None. And none ever will be. Thats why we went there.///

I think Free has gone off the deep end without his life jacket. An echo of what the Grunts said during Nam'
"...the only way to save that village was to burn it to the ground"

free0352 said...

We didn't go to Iraq to save Iraqi villages. We went there to kill the Baath Party and Al'Qaeda. Any Iraqis we helped were a pleasant side effect.

Ambassador Truth 101 said...

We helped Malaki. That's the only Iraqi I can think of that did okay from the war.

Ambassador Truth 101 said...

Other than the kooks who use hatred of America and it's invasion to get the deluded to become suicide bombers for them also

Dave Dubya said...

We didn't create Saddam Hussein or Abu Musab al'Zarqawi

No, we only propped up Saddam and bin-Laden when we thought they'd do our dirty work for us. Oops.

The invasion of Iraq was the greatest recruitment tool we handed AQ. Now Iraqis are still being killed by the nuts we cultivated. That's our little gift of "freedom". We gave them their own al-Qaeda problem that didn't exist before. Mission accomplished.

Where's that statue of Bush?

Funny thing, we went to Vietnam to save us from VC peasants killing us over here. We went to Iraq to save us from Iraqi insurgents killing us over here. Impeccable logic for the pronounced amygdala crew.

okjimm,
There's that "logic" again. No Americans were killed by WMDs while invading Iraq, but we had to kill them because neocons could read minds and predict the future slaughter of Americans by the weapons not used against us over there. Very devious of those folks.

Shoot first, ask questions later. That's our policy now. It's worked out so swell for everybody...who profits from war.

Dave Dubya said...

Truth,
We helped Iran. They benefited greatly from the war. And they can safely say the US is an aggressor nation, and threat to peace in the world. If I were them, I'd sure as hell not trust the US and would work on a bomb for deterrence against the "Axis of permanent war".

USA! USA! USA! We're number one!

okjimm said...

Free, you truly are obtuse.


//Any Iraqis we helped were a pleasant side effect.//

Estimates on Iraqi deaths due to the ten year conflict range from 115,000 to over a million. I betcha they all just died of a pleasant side effect.
The refugees, displaced citizens, destroyed homes .....other pleasant side effects. gees.... I know the Vietnamese are forever grateful, too.

free0352 said...

No, we only propped up Saddam and bin-Laden

We never propped up Bin Laden. Ever. We backed Massoud's council of the North, not Bin Laden's Arab fighters in Afghanistan's resistance against the Soviets. Learn your history Dave. Bin Laden had "our guy" assassinated. I don't know how you think your comments look when you don't know history ... but a number of terms come to mind.

As for Saddam, we did hook him up in the 80s. I think that was a mistake. We made it right in 2003. The world is better off with he and his sons dead.

The invasion of Iraq was the greatest recruitment tool we handed AQ

For the first year or two. However once the Arab world got a load of how Al'Qaeda ran al'Anbar they turned on them. Even the Iraqi tribal leaders. In fact the tribal leaders joined forces with us in 2007 and together we hunted thousands and thousands of AQ operators down and killed them... which is of course the reason we were there. It wasn't to build roads or pass out soccer balls. We were there to kill terrorists, any benefit to the Iraqis was a happy coincidence. And some indeed were greatly helped.

We helped Iran. They benefited greatly from the war

How's that? Firstly I don't care if Iran thinks of us as an "aggressor nation." In fact, I'd like it if the world's largest exporter of terrorism thought of us as aggressive. That goes for other mid east countries. They understand strength. That's what works in that part of the world.

If I were them, I'd sure as hell not trust the US and would work on a bomb for deterrence against the "Axis of permanent war".

They would do that anyway, no matter what "we" did. They need the cover to export the Islamic Revolution. Thats why we should finish the job, and kill the Iranian leadership as soon as possible. If any citizens want to get in on the 72 virgins because their dictators are foolish... so be it. I save my sympathy for the victims of jihadists, not their supporters.

Estimates on Iraqi deaths due to the ten year conflict range from 115,000 to over a million

Estimates from who? No source? Yup, didn't think so. Likely your "sources" count Iraqis murdered by Al'Qaeda as well as the Al'Qaeda members themselves. That is typically the best way for anti-war morons to inflate the numbers.

Senior Al'Qaeda affiliates who had attacked Americans before (Zarqawi) were co-located with Saddam Hussein and his crazy sons, and a stockpile of Sarin and VX gas.

Why take a chance?

George Bush wasn't kidding when he said we'd chase those people where ever we could find them. We found Zarqawi in Iraq - and Iraq was hardly a permissive environment for us to go get him. That alone is good enough reason.













okjimm said...

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

or for a variety- several sources cited

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

oh boy, you sure are good about your own 'sources'
//George Bush wasn't kidding when he said we'd chase those people where ever we could find them.//

he was only kidding about the Mission Accomplished bullshit

say, hows the security guard thing going. Finding any terrorist thugs in those parking lots?

free0352 said...

or for a variety- several sources cited

Iraqibodycount? Maybe you could just site Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 as a less partisan source.

Some sources? If we're going to go that partisan, I'll use Dick Chaney's numbers.


free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

Finding any terrorist thugs in those parking lots?

Seems lately the business agents have mostly given up. I guess I taught them the lesson that my customers are off limits. I've been pretty bored the last few weeks. I guess I can declare mission accomplished. That's cool, we're expanding into security consulting for schools. That should keep me busy.

Dave Dubya said...


So much certainty, so little accuracy.

Despite the fact you “know everything”, I’m really glad you’re not my history teacher.

Frankenstein the CIA created

Bin Laden arrived in Afghanistan from Saudi Arabia in 1979, aged 22. Though he saw a considerable amount of combat - around the eastern city of Jalalabad in March 1989 and, earlier, around the border town of Khost - his speciality was logistics.
From his base in the Pakistani city of Peshawar, he used his experience of the construction trade, and his money, to build a series of bases where the mujahideen could be trained by their Pakistani, American and, if some recent press reports are to be believed, British advisers.

However, bin Laden's Office of Services, set up to recruit overseas for the war, received some US cash.


We helped Iran. They benefited greatly from the war

How's that? They have Shiite Iraq as friends now. See how many Iraqis will side with us against Iran when the next war for no reason is started,

Plus all of Saddam’s jet fighters fled to Iran. I though you knew everything?

Why take a chance?

And there you go. Shoot first, ask questions later. What could possibly go wrong?

So were do you get your notions about Sheehan, anyway? Breitbart? Rush? You never source your claims for some reason.

But why should you when you know everything?

okjimm,
You understand this by now. Free asserts, therefore it is true. Evidence and documentation are for sissies.

free0352 said...

Sorry Dave, but the Guardian is full of shit.

We'll just ignore for right now the CIA reports that it never gave a dime to Bin Laden.

Instead, we'll check an even better source.

Al'Qaeda its self.

In his book "Knights Under The Prophet's Banner" Al'Qaeda's current leader Ayman al-Zawahiri say's "The victory in Afghanistan goes to God and the mujahideen in Afghanistan. The Americans played no role."

Bin Laden himself said as much in his interview with CNN's Peter Bergen where he denied EVER working with the CIA. Bergen himself debunked the claim. My favorite quote of his

"The story about bin Laden and the CIA -- that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden -- is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s"

So sorry to burst your urban legend Dave. But it was the Saudis who funded Bin Laden and most of that came from his personal fortune.

See how many Iraqis will side with us against Iran when the next war for no reason is started,

I'll see that bet. The Iraqi people are sick of war.

Plus all of Saddam’s jet fighters fled to Iran. I though you knew everything?

Which suggests there were some friendly Shia ties long before the conflict in 2003, as they did the same thing in 1991.

So were do you get your notions about Sheehan, anyway?

She only got Casey a headstone after it came to light she hadn't done it. To which she offered a lame excuse and then did a morbid photo op of her lying next to his tomb stone.

As to her links to Hugo Chavez, here it is in her own words with her own pictures.

Oh, and here she is speaking at a communist party rally.

Not all anti-war protesters were communists. But Cindy Sheehan was.

free0352 said...

So lets go through it shall we?

The CIA had no link to Bin Laden? True.

Al'Qaeda operatives were in Iraq prior to March 20th, 2003? True

The Iraqi regime was in possession of WMD? True.

Cindy Sheehan was a communist who tried -and thankfully failed- to launch a political career on the back of her dead son? True.

As for my admittedly speculative narrative for the possible connections of Don Rumsfeld and WMD in Iraq as it relates to the Iraq War, it sure as hell makes more sense than... well whatever it is you've suggested that has something to do with oil we never took a drop of.

free0352 said...

Despite the fact you “know everything”

Well I'd like to think I'd know something about the history I actually participated in.

Dave Dubya said...

Sorry Dave, but the Guardian is full of shit.

Well there you go. You know everything, and what you don't know, you believe al-Qaeda's version over anything else.

The US helped the Mujahadeen. Bin-Laden was part of the Mujahadeen. Pretty complicated, huh?

Your ignorant contempt for a mother's loss is a typically cold blooded reflection of your sociopathic tendencies.

Facts:

Only remnants of degraded shells. No stockpiles. No active labs. No nukular aluminum tubes. No drones. No US deaths from such degraded weapons. No threat to anyone in this country. None.

Iraqi insurgents and AQ were operating only because of the invasion.

No active AQ or relations with Baathists.

You as a true believer, must accept the Cheney lies. If you don't then the fact that lives were wasted is there for you to confront. You are afraid of that fact.

You only know what you participated in. Believe it or not, stuff happened you don't know about.

No single veteran is an expert on an entire war, only the rare arrogant ones like you who know everything.

free0352 said...

Well there you go. You know everything, and what you don't know, you believe al-Qaeda's version over anything else.

Well there IS myself, most journalists, the CIA, Al'Qaeda, CNN... It seems you believe something that just isn't so. The true fact is that the Arab fighters in Afghanistan were hostile to westerners and would have killed CIA operatives on site... or at least kidnap them.

The US helped the Mujahadeen. Bin-Laden was part of the Mujahadeen

Thats certainly a shallow view. That's not even logic. Its like saying "America fees poor people. Jeffery Dalmer was poor. America fed Jeffery Dalmer."

Please. You're reaching.

Only remnants of degraded shells

Actually whole canisters. The contents of one could kill the entire city of Chicago. VX is the most deadly substance ever created by man.

No threat to anyone in this country

Really?

Does [America] realize the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can cross to countries and cities?"

Saddam Hussein, September 29, 1994

Every Iraqi was a potential weapon of Saddam, and with something the size of an eyedropper hundreds or even thousands could have been killed. Worse, one of his lunatic sons could have handed a jihadist a bottle in what to them was little more than a drunken prank but to the world would have been a massacre.

Iraqi insurgents and AQ were operating only because of the invasion.

Hardly. They came before. They came a year before, because Iraq was a non-permissive environment for the US to hunt them in... and they had to hide from us somewhere. That's why Zarqawi chose Iraq. He couldn't stay in Iran because as a radical Sunni he hated the Shia. Iraq was the nearest safe place to go once he had been cut off from Pakistan, and he being Jordanian, he and his 100s of followers who came with him could best blend in.

You as a true believer

No my friend. You are. Despite all evidence you can't look beyond your Bush Derangement Syndrome to see the evidence.












free0352 said...

And I'm not too shocked you let the Cindy Sheehan thing alone.

Guess even your true believing self can't hope to defend that train wreck. You but you can't admit the heart of the anti-Iraq war movement was authored by communists who were dropped the instant their political usefulness to the Democrat party was finished for being the ugly baggage they were/are.

Green Eagle said...

I only got through free's first two comments.

Here is what we all know to be the truth: Our forces never found one shred of chemical or biological weapons in Iraq. If they had, Bush and Cheney would have been running through the streets cheering about it. Why in God's name would people be ordered to hide the fact?

The Jessica Lynch "rescue" was rapidly revealed to have been a total fraud.

free claims to have been involved in both of these things. Until now, I thought he was just a crackpot. Now I understand that like practically all Conservatives, he is nothing but a malignant liar.

Dave Dubya said...

GE,
He certainly is a malignant ego maniacal liar. His opinion is all that is offered to counter weapons inspector Kay and the Guardian.

And despite this fact he projects "true believer" at me. Ha. How "Right" of him. Classic displays of projection and "commie, commie" hysteria.

We may have found nothing in Iraq, but what we lost something. America lost its humanity, as Free lost what little humanity he may have had. We now believe war is justified on suspicion alone. Those who were wrong and lied are unpunished.

our mission was demonized in the media.

Once again Free proves he didn't even read the original post before spouting his neocon propaganda and revisionist lies and exaggeration.

He claims "stockpiles" in the link that mentions "small amounts".

"I came to the conclusion that there were no weapons of mass destruction as described in the NIE in Iraq." David Kay


"Woulda, could, mighta" - Free





okjimm said...

One of the greatest social sins is to be boring. It is magnified when the boring individual does not realize it.

Free...
"...is of course pure speculation. I suppose I could be wrong. All I can be sure of is there without a doubt was VX and mustard gas in Iraq stored in metal containers throughout the country."

Free speculates, he allows that he could be wrong....but he is dead certain that there were stockpiles of chemical weapons .....and the fact that they were not found...PROVES IT.
Free loves to attack others for not citing sources....while steadfastly never offering any of his own. But a man of such self-proclaimed military capabilities, such acute political acumen, such superior social intellect.... is too busy guarding parking lots to bother with such trivialities.
Free you are boring and do not realize it.

Now, ten years after Bush's peccadillo that bankrupted our nation, killed hundreds of thousands, tainted the USA international reputation.....it is has generally been proven that there were no provocations to justify the war.
Dave... you can spar with him if you like, but as a chef once told me...'add too much celery to anything and you kill the flavor of the whole dish'


free0352 said...

He claims "stockpiles" in the link that mentions "small amounts

"Small" is a relative term when the amount of material in a glass of water can kill a city. Saddam didn't have thousands of gallons, from what I saw it looked like hundreds.

He wasn't allowed to have any.

Once again Free proves he didn't even read the original post before spouting his neocon propaganda and revisionist lies and exaggeration.

As time went on the coverage got less and less positive or for that matter accurate as most journalists would not venture into Iraq's cities themselves.

But truly the only propaganda here is yours.

1. There was WMD in Iraq.

2. There was Al'Qaeda in Iraq.

You can't refute these facts.

You can try to move the goalposts. You can say, well there wasn't a lot of WMD in Iraq and Zarqawi and Saddam weren't BFF. But that is typical of you guys - shoving the goalpost for truth when proven wrong.

The facts are, Al'Qaeda was in Iraq and so was poison gas. You can't deny either.


Dave Dubya said...

So we agree on the facts:

Only isolated remnants of degraded shells. No stockpiles. No active labs. No nukular aluminum tubes. No nukular weapons development, No drones. No US deaths from such degraded weapons. No threat to anyone in this country. None.

Iraqi insurgents and AQ were operating only because of the invasion.

No active AQ or relations with Baathists.

"I came to the conclusion that there were no weapons of mass destruction as described in the NIE in Iraq." David Kay

okjimm said...

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.

George Bush March 18, 2003

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

George W. Bush January 28, 2003

We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.

Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003

Gees, Dave, Rumsfeld and Cheney and B ush all said there WERE tons of the stuff...AND FREE SAW THEM!

See, Rumsfeld explained it clearly.

"There are known knowns; there are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say, we know there are some things we do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know. ”

—United States Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

Open the pod bay doors Hal.

Il n'y a aucune excuse aux idiots. Ils sont une vérité de leur propre réalisation.

okjimm said...

"gees, Laura, I think the goalpost would look good over by the TV. Let me ask Dick if we can move them."
George W. Bush

Dave Dubya said...

unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know

Poor Rummy. All he needed to do was ask Free.

free0352 said...

They weren't in shells, they were in storage containers Dave, get it right.

As for the amount, how much would have been enough for an invasion in your book? 20 gallons, 200, 2000, 2000000? I bet all the VX in the world wouldn't have been enough. I bet had Iraq actually passed it off to Al'Qaeda it wouldn't have been enough for you. Hell, you're against our conflict in Afghanistan and there is no doubt terrorists using that country as a base killed over 3000 Americans.

Dave Dubya said...

Since there's never proof for your claims, we learned not to trust your words.

Just more,,"Woulda, coulda, mighta"

free0352 said...

Since there's never proof for your claims, we learned not to trust your words.

That look like an artillery shell to you Dave? That picture was from the Wikilinks files, and was published in Wired magazine. That is exactly what I saw, about 20 of those canisters on the back of a truck. What I saw, was documented and was only released by leak.

Just one of the vials in that canister has enough poison gas to kill thousands of people.

So just admit it. No amount of WMD would have been enough for you to invade Iraq. No amount of dead American citizens would have been enough for you to invade Afghanistan. Your yard stick for war is obvious.

You'd rather never support a war let alone fight, for any reason. Of course if I'm wrong, please tell me what horrific circumstances would be enough to meet the Dave Dubya threshold for war? Do they actually have to nuke a US city before you'll consider it?



Dave Dubya said...


Just one of the vials in that canister has enough poison gas to kill thousands of people.


Yeah, yeah, we heard that line from Powell, who's integrity was demolished after he displayed the same non-evidence at the UN.

I noticed nothing was identified in the photo of vials. Just a scary picture of....what?

So what is it, and what proof is there of the contents? We all know of cases of "suspected" WMD's and remnants. I remember video of barrels with scary markings too.

We do know most remnants that were in shells were just old mustard gas.

The Wired article says:
Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War...

A small group — mostly of the political right — has long maintained that there was more evidence of a major and modern WMD program than the American people were led to believe. A few Congressmen and Senators gravitated to the idea, but it was largely dismissed as conspiratorial hooey.

The WMD diehards will likely find some comfort in these newly-WikiLeaked documents. Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.




free0352 said...

I noticed nothing was identified in the photo of vials

Here is the link where I got the picture.

As for what agent are in the vials, I have no idea. Could be mustard, sarin, VX. I don't know. I'm not a CBRN guy. I'm an Infantry guy. What I do know is prior to the invasion of Iraq everybody there was shown pictures of what WMD in its non-weaponized state looked like.

It looks like that picture.

What I do know, is that military CBNR techs did find this stuff and continued to find it for years. They tested it and I believe the results because those men and women are good at what they do.

As for the capabilities of those agents, again I'm not a CBRN guy but I've been trained enough to know what we're dealing with in a chemical environment - and that includes how potent that stuff is.

Colon Powell wasn't kidding. VX is an area denial chemical weapon - meaning it is designed to stay potent on the ground and kill people, even after its been there a for months. You don't have to take that from me, you can look it up. Being area denial, it remains potent for a long time. Environment won't delude it. It can be exposed to atmosphere, wind, dust, rain, whatever. Its designed to remain potent for as long as possible. Its designed in that role to resist the environment by being so potent - so it only takes a few thousand molecules of that stuff to get on your skin and it can kill you. It gets into your body and interrupts the brain's ability to send nerve signals. It basically makes every muscle in your body turn into the equivalent of a clenched fist that can't release. Your hear seizes up and very quickly after that you die. Just a drop has enough toxin to kill 10 people. If those vials in that picture is VX and you dumped it into a city water supply everybody who drinks the water dies. The molecules tiny so only filters specific to it will stop it. Its basically the nastiest shit known to man. I have no idea what they were thinking selling that shit to Iraq in the 80s, but its well established we did.

Bottom line Saddam Hussein and Iraq at large singed a legal document after the Gulf War that they wouldn't possess even a drop of VX, Sarin, Mustard or whatever. Not one drop. Clearly they didn't follow the cease fire agreement, and frankly didn't try. That is undeniable. Its undeniable that members of Al'Qaeda were in Iraq and no one realistically would suggest Saddam's government would let us enter Iraq to go get them. That's undeniable. And for those two reasons we invaded Iraq. It was the right decision to make. I'd have made the same call as President Bush. Most Democrats voted for that, and only turned later to affect the 2004 election. The core of the anti-war movement was lead by socialist -here comes your favorite word- agitators. More over if President Obama decides to strike Iran I'll back that too for what one citizen's support is worth. Them having a nuclear program is totally intolerable, the same as Iraq having even one drop of VX was.

Jefferson's Guardian said...

Dave Dubya: "America lost its humanity, as Free lost what little humanity he may have had."

Not to mention his mind...

Dave Dubya said...

So, for neocons and warmongers, it’s intolerable for Iran, surrounded by hostile forces, to have defensive nuclear capability. For an "axis of evil", and unlike the US, they never invaded another country based on falsehoods.

Fine. What about China? N. Korea? Pakistan? Shall we invade them all, or is it “tolerable” for them and just not Iran? “Coulda woulda mighta” is still the argument. Better kill ‘em all just to be safe.

The vials in the photo and what you saw could have been empty or inert.

That’s what happens. Reality is often not what is asserted.

The reasons for war were not truthful. If the Bush Cartel said, “Saddam has remnants of chemical weapons, in violation of the agreement, we need to invade”. Then your position would be more defensible.

Instead they lied. Bush wanted political capital as a war president. Cheney wanted war. They both wanted the oil for cronies, but Iraqis didn’t quite agree with their plan. They spoke of Saddam allied with AQ and supplying AQ with WMD’s, had active bio-chem labs, and that they were using “nulular aluminum tubes” to build a bomb. Then the diverted from the mission in Afghanistan.

Colon (sic) Powell wasn't kidding.

He was passing false information. No kidding.

As long as you’re in the “coulda woulda mighta” world, suppose it was the war, destabilization of the country and disbanding of the military in Iraq that gave AQ the best opportunity to freely roam the country and to obtain chemical weapons.

Hmm? What if that is what really happened?

Unintended consequence happen, bud. But who cares? There’s far more, and active, AQ in Iraq now than before Bush’s war mongering attracted them there. Cheney and Rummy were free to sell Saddam the WMD’s and then go to war for him having them. Now they’re free to keep telling the same lies. Brilliant. Sick, and criminal, but brilliant. We are such a beacon of light to the world.

And now, thanks to the war, AQ or any other band of nuts may indeed have picked up some of those weapons.

Meanwhile the slaughter continues in Iraq.

Well done.

okjimm said...

"As for what agent are in the vials, I have no idea."

So...Free saw something...he isn't sure what it was, but it looked like a picture. He has no idea what is in the containers in the picture.

"As for the capabilities of those agents, again I'm not a CBRN guy but I've been trained enough to know what we're dealing with in a chemical environment - and that includes how potent that stuff is."

...and...whatever it was that he saw, and he really isn't sure, he is even more unsure of what it might be capable of doing.

Well, hot-shit, Free, you have just made a great case for 'self-hospitalization' I have ever heard. I do believe you are delusional and paranoid...and could be a danger to yourself and others who use the parking lot you guard.

or better yet....get a job at Dept of Homeland Security. You certainly are a man who knows a dangerous weapon when he doesn't see one.
gees, break me up!

Dave Dubya said...

JG and okjimm,
Our veterans are killing themselves, by homicide and suicide, at an alarming rate.

The U.S. military said in January that suicides hit a record 349 last year among active-duty personnel, outpacing combat deaths.

The madness of empire takes a toll.

okjimm said...

Dave...it is serious. Most are not getting the help they need. Most get a lotta rah-rah shit when they come home, and that's it.
A very close family friend,three years older than I, fought at Hamburger Hill, South Vietnam, in 1969.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hamburger_Hill

On the third day, the third assault, he stepped on a mine. Lost a leg at the thigh, parts of his other leg, most of his left hand, part of his right, one eye and a whole lot of his face. He was evaced and in SF within 48 hours. Spent six years at a VA in Denver. they 'kinda' put him back together.

.....then, he spent the rest of his life fighting with the VA for treatments, benefits, care....
....in 1999 he finally said 'fuck-it' and ate a bunch of pills with some whiskey.
At the funeral his Mom told me, "he really died in Vietnam....it just took thirty years."

Our little episode of Empire Building in Afghanistan and Iraq will be much of the same. To say that ONLY about 4500 is a fiction. I guess the way stats are counted...if you die of wounds 'out of country' you are not listed as a combat death. '

Fun with numbers, huh?

oh...ten days after Hamburger Hill, the US abandoned the area as having, "No Military Value"

free0352 said...

What about China? N. Korea? Pakistan? Shall we invade them all, or is it “tolerable” for them and just not Iran?

We can't invade them. If we did, our invasion force would get blown sky high. All we can do to a nuclear armed country is nuke them first. China, North Korea, Pakistan had better watch it, because if they step out of line we'd have to obliterate their whole country. You want to talk about civilian casualties - that's overwhelming. Millions and millions die. Not a good scenario. Thats why its important to keep Iran from getting a bomb. Nobody wants to have to kill 5, 6, 10 million people to get the job done there - and we'd have to because their government is a crazy theocracy that is undeterable. Even President Obama admits this, and he's right.

Well done.

So...Free saw something...he isn't sure what it was

Per the report our CBRN guys tested it. Nuff said there. They are the best in the world at that.

It was well done. We left too soon however - which wasn't our idea. But that' the breaks. We should have stayed in Iraq like we did Germany, Japan and Korea.

Dave...it is serious. Most are not getting the help they need. Most get a lotta rah-rah shit when they come home, and that's it

Its not a good system. Its not that the intent isn't there. It just proves you really can't depend on the government to take care of you in the "help" department.




S.W. Anderson said...

"The Iraqi regime was in possession of WMD? True."

None are so blind as those who are so full of it they can't see.

The Iraqi regime was in possession of chemical weapons in the late 1980's. After the first Gulf War, Saddam was told to divest of all WMD's, chemical, biological and/or radiological. He was scared spitless by the way his forces had folded like a cheap card table and by how close he came to being deposed. So, Saddam complied with the order.

Those are the facts.

free0352 said...

So, Saddam complied with the order.

Then explain why we were finding chemical weapons all over his country for 5 years.

Green Eagle said...

Ravings of a self-made lunatic:

"I bet all the VX in the world wouldn't have been enough."

Right, because what was found were abandoned shells that were over a decade old. These binary gases have a life of less than five years. After that they are useless, which is why the shells were just dumped.

"As for what agent are in the vials, I have no idea. Could be mustard, sarin, VX. I don't know."

Could have been mustard. Could have been ketchup too, I guess. Free doesn't know, so he feels free to believe whatever suits his purpose. Not much of an argument really.

"China, North Korea, Pakistan had better watch it, because if they step out of line we'd have to obliterate their whole country."

Free, you are an out of control infant in an adult's body. You do not deserve a shred of respect. You will not accept this, but the rest of us all know it. You are a disgrace to the uniform you claim to have worn.

Dave Dubya said...

“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" --Charles Darwin

free0352 said...

Free doesn't know, so he feels free to believe whatever suits his purpose

You're right. So I'll take the word of the military chemical weapons experts. After all, they are the professionals.

You are a disgrace to the uniform you claim to have worn.

Really? How many wars have you fought in so you would know that?

Truth is when you have a nuclear armed opponent, you only have one option. MAD.

Call me crazy, but I'm not a fan of assured destruction.

okjimm said...

Dave...ten years after the invasion America has learned nothing. But we have forgotten much. Over 1,500 veterans have lost an arm or a leg. Hundreds are multiple amputees. Over 16,000 have been evacuated from the battlefields with permanently disabling wounds. Many are only in there early twenties and are looking at a life time of advanced medical care needs and support.
It is a debt never really considered as the total cost of the war is calculated. And it must be paid.
It is the cost of lies told.

free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

But we have forgotten much. Over 1,500 veterans have lost an arm or a leg. Hundreds are multiple amputees. Over 16,000 have been evacuated from the battlefields with permanently disabling wounds.

I was evacuated from the battlefield. Twice. One of those times I was temporarily paralyzed. It took six surgeries and a year of traction to return to duty. I never returned to full duty. I live with the consequences of my choices every day.

So if you really want to support people like me... people who have given way more than I have. Then yes, by all means fund the VA. Better yet streamline it so it isn't such a cluster fuck. Fund the hell out of it. Not many people deserve a government entitlement. Veterans wounded in combat certainly do. They earned it, and then some. But that's only half the equation. Support the mission they volunteered for. Don't fight to make their sacrifice for nothing. Stand behind the men and women this country sends in to harms way, and see that the job they fought so hard to complete gets done. Support victory in Afghanistan. Yes it can be had. Don't give up. If you really respect those who fight for this country, then give them the respect to support the mission so many have died to accomplish.

Dave Dubya said...

"Support the mission" sounds like code for "the only way to support the troops is to send them, without question, to death and maiming."

What the corporate media and radical Right fail to understand is this: Opposing war based on lies IS supporting the troops. Your buddies would be alive and uninjured if our "support" was taken seriously, but is was ignored, by the politicians and the corporate media.

Funny how being pro-war is the only way to "support the troops" isn't it?

free0352 said...

Funny how being pro-war is the only way to "support the troops" isn't it?

This might blow your mind, but the troops contrary to the progressive meme aren't morons. They volunteered, in a time of war. They knew and know where they are going and what they will be doing. Many thousands like myself have reenlisted multiple times specifically for combat tours.

You can support the war, or not. But you can't not support the war and support the troops at the same time. We have a mission we chose to accept. You can support us in that or not. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You aren't necessarily with us or against us. You're just not with us.

And that isn't support.

You don't have to believe in it. But obviously the vast majority of military members do. If you're against what we signed up to do, you aren't for us. That doesn't mean you root for the enemy. It does mean you aren't rooting for us.

Dave Dubya said...


But you can't not support the war and support the troops at the same time.

Bullshit... again. You're pretty damn ignorant if you think I didn't support by brother in Vietnam while opposing that damn waste of human life.

Funny how being pro-war is the only way to "support the troops" isn't it?

Your answer in your brain is yes, then. Your Right Wing black and white world is showing again. Only in that simplistic head can objections to sending people to their deaths in a war based on lies be construed as "not supporting" them.

Remember Pat Tillman? What mission did he choose to accept? He and thousands of others volunteered to fight terrorists, not Iraqi resistance to occupation.

You also ignore the support we provide by taxes for pay and health care and rehabilitation. We pay for survivor benefits, too. We willingly support the troops, and their families, in that way without being warmongers.

Suicide rates are higher than ever too. We support treatment for the depression and stress their choice, or non-choice, induced.

But not in the narrow simplistic vision of your black and white world.

okjimm said...

Dave
Free is full of Bullshit, indeed.

I may not be a doctor...but in my experience....six surgeries and a year in traction translate .....
in todays's advanced medical care spending a year in traction pretty much equates to a disabling wound and a medical discharge.
Free is full of Bullshit.

free0352 said...

if you think I didn't support by brother in Vietnam while opposing that damn waste of human life

Wishing someone wouldn't die isn't the same thing as support. And you were doing all the opposing next to people who threw dog feces and spit on people like him.

You also ignore the support we provide by taxes for pay and health care and rehabilitation.

Paying your taxes is mandatory. It isn't support, you have to do it. If you don't they'll put you in jail. Start giving to the Wounded Warrior Foundation and you'll impress me.

Suicide rates are higher than ever too

Definitely had some experience with this too. Hey, a good friend of mine just recently was murdered by a friend of his with PTSD, - but I could still tell you worse stories than that.

These are just a few of the cases I've had touch my life. I won't go into their very personal reasons for their actions. What I will tell you is none of them did so out of guilt for anything they did in combat and all of them looked back on their combat experience as the most positive thing they had ever done in their lives.

n todays's advanced medical care spending a year in traction pretty much equates to a disabling wound and a medical discharge.

I did 15 years, if you rate out over 30% and do over 8 years you get a medical retirement. I retired back in December as you'll recall. I was in the service for 2 years after I was last wounded because it took that long to recover from my wounds before I could be retired.








Dave Dubya said...

And you were doing all the opposing next to people who threw dog feces and spit on people like him.

I bet you think this happened all the time. Arrogant, semi-literate punks would assume they know all what happened before their time.

This is crossing the line to adding asshole to bullshit. Just what the hell do you think you know about me or what I did? Or anything else you crow about, for that matter.

Your opinion is not fact.

Start giving to the Wounded Warrior Foundation and you'll impress me

Maybe I already have, but I don't need to blow my own horn by telling you. Let's just say I don't consider a bumper sticker or ribbon amount to most of the so called "support".

I won't go into their very personal reasons for their (suicidal)actions

Why not? You act like you know what's in everyone else's head.

Dave Dubya said...

Paying your taxes is mandatory. It isn't support

Illogical.

Mandatory support through taxes would be logical. At least I don't try to dodge those taxes offshore like your heroes. Also unlike your heroes, I don't whine about paying taxes for such support.

free0352 said...

I bet you think this happened all the time. Arrogant, semi-literate punks would assume they know all what happened before their time

So you're saying that didn't happen? Really? Hey Dave, if I was trying to hang a small minority around your neck I'd just use this.

Just what the hell do you think you know about me or what I did?

No idea. But I know what the Vietnam anti-war movement was. I can read, and seeing as I come from a military family (Dad, two uncles and a grandfather in Vietnam) I have some idea of what they were like from personal accounts.

It was obvious whose side they were on.

If you were standing with them while your brother was in Vietnam do you know who was standing with him? A guy like me.

Let's just say I don't consider a bumper sticker or ribbon amount to most of the so called "support".

Neither do I. I showed my support by going on four deployments.

Why not? You act like you know what's in everyone else's head.

I do know what was in their heads. Because they all told me or in the case of Scott Zaur he explained it for all in a voice mail. However, its none of your business. What I can tell you, is nobody regretted going to Iraq.

Illogical.

Okay Dave. Lets use your logic. I pay taxes. Taxes help pay for food stamps. Therefore I must support food stamps and everyone on them.

Would you really suggest that of me Dave? I think you're the one whose being a bit illogical here. After all, you can't support these people -notice the flag they're flying- and at the same time support this guy.












free0352 said...

Let's just say I don't consider a bumper sticker or ribbon amount to most of the so called "support".

Like I said, I showed my support by going on four deployments. What have you done? Oh, you paid your taxes.

For that you don't even rate the yellow ribbon. Somebody better get you one quick.

Dave Dubya said...

So you're saying that didn't happen? Really?

There you go again. I said what I said, not what you say I said. You never get that, do you?

At least that “small minority” didn’t send over 50,000 Americans to their deaths, did they?

I know what the Vietnam anti-war movement was.

Yeah, yeah, in your mind they were all a bunch of anti-American, freedom-hating commies....just what you think about those calling Bush and Cheney liars.

You are so simple.

I do know what was in their heads.

Illogical.

Taxes help pay for food stamps. Therefore I must support food stamps and everyone on them.

Unwillingly perhaps, but logical.

What have you done?

It is beneath me to crow about what I have done. And it amuses me to leave you in doubt, with your inflated certainty on everything being black and white.

free0352 said...

Unwillingly perhaps

Exactly.

. And it amuses me to leave you in doubt,

Translation: Nothing.

Just admit it Dave. You don't like this war. You don't hate American Soldiers, but you don't like the war.

They like the war, obviously.

You don't support them fighting the war they want to fight in.

Thats fine. Its a free country.

But don't blow smoke up anyone's asses about supporting the troops by protesting them and their mission. Then in the 60s, or now.

yeah, in your mind they were all a bunch of anti-American, freedom-hating commies

I noticed you shut up pretty quick about Cindy Sheehan when I proved definitively she is a communist. Seems like you got fooled not once by the anti-war left but twice.

Simple? Simple is getting fooled twice. Only this time around, nobody cared when many of the exact same people got into protesting this generation's conflict because since nobody was getting drafted, nobody really cared. With the election of pro war Barack Obama, the grey ponytails of the radical 1960s left were once again forced into the darkness of politics... they're laughable (and unsuccessful) purpose of undermining GWB complete.

okjimm said...

//going on four deployments.//

early in the thread you spoke of '3'

...and please, you do not know shit about Nam. Don't even try. The Math does not add up. Neither do four deployments and dwell time.

Fraud, fake and troll.

Dave Dubya said...

Unwillingly perhaps

Exactly.


Good, you finally see the logic that you are, in fact, an unwilling supporter of feeding the poor.

”>to leave you in doubt,”
Translation: Nothing


Real translation: Nothing is what you know. You cannot separate your opinion and fantasy from fact.

You don't support them fighting the war they want to fight in.

Some of them do, some don’t. You ignored my point about Tillman. Why?

Never mind, we know.

And I did support them with my tax dollars, willingly, and will continue to do so. Perhaps in other ways you shall never know.

”yeah, in your mind they were all a bunch of anti-American, freedom-hating commies”
I noticed you shut up pretty quick about Cindy Sheehan when I proved definitively she is a communist.


Well, then let me bring her up again. You didn’t prove she’s a commie, but you are proving my “all a bunch of anti-American, freedom-hating commie”s point again. Thank you.

“Fooled”? About what? Fooled about fighting Vietcong peasants over there so we don’t have to fight them here? Or fooled into thinking we needed to fight Iraqi insurgents over there so we don’t have to fight them in Kokomo?

Who is fooled? The dupes who believe the lies, or the ones who call out the lies? You are hilarious, as well as simple.

No need for “undermining GWB”. He did it himself. He’s the liar. History has written that he lied us into war. Want to know what the lies were? Hint: One of the many is about “nukular aluminum tubes”.

That one still sticks in your craw, doesn’t it? You have nothing honest to say about it. So who’s fooled? It’s called projection, but you will never understand that either.

He and Cheney cannot freely travel the world for risk of prosecution for war crimes. Say, where are those statues of your chickenhawks? Why is nobody “fooled” into building them?

How ‘bout them apples?

free0352 said...

you finally see the logic that you are, in fact, an unwilling supporter of feeding the poor.

Conversely you are an unwilling supporter of the war. While paying is mandatory, support is not. You only "support" the troops because otherwise you go to jail.

Some of them do, some don’t. You ignored my point about Tillman. Why?

I've never claimed that 100% of veterans agree on anything. Just the vast majority.

Well, then let me bring her up again

Okay lets do that. We have her on her own blog self identifying as a communist, speaking at a communist rally, crying over Hugo Chavez, claiming friendship and agreement with Fedel Castro. What more could we possibly need to paint her with that brush? She stood as the socialist party of the USA's VP nominee. Thats the American communist party. What more has this woman to do? Tattoo a picture of Stalin on her face?

That one still sticks in your craw, doesn’t it? You have nothing honest to say about it.

Its such a simplified and idiotic claim I mostly avoid it yes. There were a lot to the allegations behind claims to Saddam's nuclear program. Clearly he had one, he had a working reactor at one time. But you simply jump to conclusions. You go from CIA had intelligence wrong, to lies. Thats your bias talking. And please spare me every little CIA report that seemingly denies an Iraq nuclear report. They did turn out to be right. They were also a quiet micro-minority prior to 2003. Nobody took them seriously, perhaps they should have. Most of them said Saddam had VX nerve gas. Which he did. Are you ignoring that side of their assessments?

But we were talking about Afghanistan and your support of the CURRENT operations there. Those you do not support, and only pay for on threat of jail...

Some support. 3000 Americans died on 9-11. Its amazing that isn't enough for you to support ongoing operations against Al'Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan or for that matter where ever they may be.











Dave Dubya said...


We have her on her own blog self identifying as a communist

No, we don’t. More assertions, opinion and fantasy.

Nukular Tubes Lie: That one still sticks in your craw, doesn’t it? You have nothing honest to say about it.

Ditto. No you don’t. More assertions, opinion and fantasy.

Military love for Iraq War:

“Some of them do, some don’t. You ignored my point about Tillman. Why?”
I've never claimed that 100% of veterans agree on anything. Just the vast majority.


Here you go with your “vast majority” from Military Times:

Dec 26, 2008

Among troops, Bush’s approval rating on handling the war peaked at 63 percent in 2004, then dropped to 54 percent in 2005 and bottomed out at 35 percent in 2006 before rebounding last year and again this year, according to previous Military Times surveys.
Bush’s job approval rating as president remained unchanged among respondents at 48 percent, down from a high of 71 percent in 2004. That compares to 29 percent of the general public, according to a recent USA Today/Gallup poll.
Moreover, the percentage of respondents who said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq dropped to 42 percent, down from 46 percent last year and a high of 64 percent in 2003.


More proof the “vast majority” of Free’s assertions are bullshit.

But we all know that. What is hilarious is it continues in the face of all reason and evidence. This is what is known as a “true believer”.

And one more for the road from the assertions, opinion and fantasy part of an authoritarian brain:

3000 Americans died on 9-11. Its amazing that isn't enough for you to support ongoing operations against Al'Qaeda

It was fun playing, but I have other things to do now.

free0352 said...

Dave,

My opinion of George Bush wasn't high (well below 30%) in 2006 and its lower now. What does that prove? George Bush and the war are not tantamount to one another.

Another flaw in your logic. No one here, NO ONE WHO READS THIS would EVER claim I like Barack Obama as a President. Yet I'd support him in military action against Iran and I do support him in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If anything, he isn't aggressive enough. Clearly I wasn't alone. People continued to reenlist and during the worst of the war in Iraq years 3004-2008 reenlistment rates were increasing.

It was fun playing, but I have other things to do now.

I hope one of those things is learning the history of the anti-war movement in America and the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.





okjimm said...

aw, Dave, don't be so hard on Free.
He is suffering from PTSD he didn't get a date for the Prom...and is, after all, on his fifth deployment at the Walmart parking lot.

Ambassador Truth 101 said...

I used to have a kook who was much like Free troll my blogs. Has Free quoted Col. Kurtz from Apocolypse Now yet? That's what my all American, war hero, Purple Heart wearing, Bronze Star winning, turned down the Medal of Honor out of humility and patriotism troll usually ended up posting when he was out of other bullshit he could make up on his own.

Dave Dubya said...

okjimm and Truth,
You know what? Unlike our hero who knows everything, we're the ones with the handicap. We just can't warp our minds to accept the "Doctrine of Flexible Reality".

Damn that Stephen Colbert and his, "Reality has a liberal bias" observation. He was correct. But that doesn't deter the Right.

Since money is free speech, and the corporate world has more of that "right" than the rest of Americans combined, we can only chime in beneath the roar of Big Money.

The Bush Administration told reporters their job was to report the reality decided upon by the White House. And O'Brian in 1984 also made it clear to Winston Smith, "Reality is in the human brain", and "He who controls the present, controls the past".

All we have is whatever isn't pitched down the memory hole. No wonder the "Doctrine of Flexible Reality" is invoked for making arguments against us.

Ignorance is strength here in Oceania.

okjimm said...

"Reality has a liberal bias" & Doctrine of Flexible Reality... both have an element of truth.

I still know people that believe there is no climate change, the Pope cannot be wrong, there is enough fossil fuel to last forever, and who needs clean oceans anyway. Besides, the world could very well we flat.

re Free
“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference” ~Twain

I am just convinced he is a Troll, perhaps an imaginative one, but as you observed, he cannot decide between spreading bullshit or being an asshole.

S.W. Anderson said...

free0352 wrote, "... you can't not support the war and support the troops at the same time."

America's military is duty-bound to support the war, the mission, but America's civilian population has no such obligation. Indeed, a fool of a leader and his troops are soon parted, and citizens sensible enough to see it happening are duty bound to say and do what they can to end the madness. That's what divided the country so badly during the Vietnam war.

Opposing a war is not at all the same as opposing the troops fighting it. It's telling political leaders to cut the crap and get our troops out of the war. It's not denying the troops anything they need for their safety and ability to fight the war for as long as they're engaged. It's about ending the engagement.

I wonder if your injuries were such that you have trouble comprehending distinctions like the ones I just explained. I hope not.

S.W. Anderson said...

okjimm wrote about free0352, "He is suffering from PTSD he didn't get a date for the Prom...and is, after all, on his fifth deployment at the Walmart parking lot."

That made me LOL, until I remembered that two or three years ago some poor low-wage worker at a New York-area Wal Mart was killed when a stampeding Black Friday crowed trampled him in their mad rush to get at the bargains. There are times when deployment at a Wal Mart really is dangerous.

(Dave, did I mention lately what a godawful PITA your captchas are?)

okjimm said...

SW
//deployment at a Wal Mart really is dangerous.//

another reason not to shop there!
Seriously....I would rather go without an item then to purchase anything at Walmart. They have decimated the American landscape just like clear cutting a forest. Plus...they seem to have goons for parking lot guards.

Dave Dubya said...

okjimm,
Part of me thinks he can't help himself. His authoritarian personality and pronounced amygdala are strong forces within his psyche.

SW,
Opposing a war is not at all the same as opposing the troops fighting it.

We know this, but the black and white world view of the right wing authoritarian personality cannot process such a concept. You're either with them, or you're a commie/terrorist supporter. Simple minded, but by all evidence true of their mentality.

I agree captcha is a pain. So is spam.