Something smell fishy? (non boaty)

[Twister_Ken]

So 1200 inspectors have been ferretting around in Eyerack for 3 months, and have found nothing mass-destructionist except a test tube in a scientist's sock drawer.

But don't worry, folks, Saddam is a naughty man and he had plans to build bigger weapons. We think. Well we're pretty sure, anyway. Probably.

So, your country didn't go to war based on false information supplied by America's "intelligence" services. So that makes everything all right then, doesn't it.

And the source of this wondrous report? The CIA.

Mmmm.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[tony_brighton]

dont forget they have trebled the budget to try even harder to find some. Surely it would be easier/cheaper if the CIA just 'left' some of their own stuff lying around to be 'found'.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Evadne]

And this is from the administration that has so little faith in its own justice system that it keeps its POWs in occupied Cuba. Why the UK has not kicked up a fuss about that is beyond me, and I am speaking as a paid-up "old" labourite. It is no better than the Soviet Gulags of the late 20th century that both right and left campaigned against. If commissar Dubya doesn't like the colour of your politics, then its off to Guatanamo Bay. No charge, no trial, no appeal, just a life sentence. This is building up big trouble for the future and our Tone should know better.
Mark my words, we're all doooomed...

(Sorry, Ken, I know this was meant to be serious, and I did start out that way, but it is Friday.)

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[snowleopard]

They haven't found Saddam either. Perhaps he also was a figment of the CIA's imagination.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Evadne]

It's not often you see "CIA" and "imagination" in the same sentence.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andyball]

the fact that they found none & no sh either is concrete proof of how damned dangerously clever the iraqi government is.....if they can hide so many things so well, they're capable of almost anything: so of course we were quite right to pile in there, more so than ever, surely?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

He had them and he used them on his own people. Then he led the UN a dance for years and lied in his teeth while at the same time encouraging les autres. Then Bush and Blair dumped a pile of bricks on him and good job too.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

Not sure who the CIA are.. but I think I might put in a tender for consultancy.. I think I have some valuble experience.. along with my colleague Chingis..

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Magic_Sailor]

I\'ve seen a rubber band

I've seen a needle that winked it's eye.

I also saw Tony Blair on the David Frost show last Sunday and again when I watched the whole speech to the conference during the week.

He is in a difficult position. I cannot believe that he is lying so blatantly. although I have expressed my concern about the whole business in the past.

I think he is totally convinced that there are WMD. I don't believe he's stupid and I don't believe he'd say that he is sure they will eventually be found unless he really is.

Iraq is immense and Saddam Hussein had an awfully long time to dig a big hole and pile it all in. (Whatever it may be).

A lot of people on this forum appear to be company owners or directors or high up within their organisations. On a business level, if each once of us saw a threat to our company, we'd weigh the threat and act accordingly to safeguard it. He has done the same, the difference being it's a somewhat more difficult decision - as you can tell by looking at his face.

I'm not saying "aahh, poor Tony". That's what he wanted and what he's paid to do but it doesn't make it any less true.

Magic

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://hometown.aol.co.uk/geoffwestgarth/myhomepage/travelwriting.html>Click for website!</A>

 

[Talbot]

Re: I\'ve seen a rubber band

The fact that a labour government did this should indicate to thses doubting thomas's that there was concrete reasons for the invasion. Tony would have known what a hard job he would have with his own rank and file before taking this decision. I don't believe any prime minister commits his country to war without a justifiable reason. Saddam Hussain has had years to hide his wmd and good reason so to do. If he was not able to hide them, then it is almost certain that they were trucked into Iran or Syria, and before someone jumps up and states that neither country was Iraq's friend. I would point out that most of Saddam's air force was flown to Iran before the first conflict (where they now operate as a part of the Iranian Air Force) , and Saddam himself took refuge in Syria until US pressure caused Syria to throw him out.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

Re: I\'ve seen a rubber band

I don't believe any prime minister commits his country to war without a justifiable reason.

I was on jury duty last year at a trial where there was no way the evidence was sound enough for a safe conviction. Nonetheless, the accused got 5+ years inside on a majority verdict because no-one believed the police would arrrest someone unless they had good reason . . .

- N



<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

Why are you bothered, the man had worse morals than Hitler and the civilised world has probably benefited from the demise of his regime.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

Why are you bothered

Wasn't it Stalin who believed the end justified the means?

- N

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[l'escargot]

and your point is?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[webcraft]

I thought it was pretty obvious.

The point of Ken's post was that we appear to have gone to war under false pretences. The fact that one aspect of the outcome (ie the removal of Saddam) would appear to be 'a good thing' does not alter that fact.

Deposing the ruler of a sovereign state by force, with the consequent loss of innocent lives, is a very serious step for any 'civilised' society to take. There must be a very compelling reason.

The reason the British public was given was that of, in US security speak, 'a clear and present danger' - i.e. WMD and the 45 minutes nonsense.

It now appears that this evidence was wrong, or fabricated, or exaggerated. In other words, the premise for war was incorrect.

The fact that Saddam is gone cannot alter this argument, nor can or should it be used to mitigate the seriousness of the accusations against those who argued for the war without UN sanction.

Is this clear now? Or should I draw you a picture?

- N

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.bluemoment.com>http://www.bluemoment.com</A></font size=1>

 

[bob_tyler]

Re: I\'ve seen a rubber band

Without the Alistair Campbells and Peter Mandlesons around him, acting like ventriloquists with a dummy, TB is nothing. He is only a figurehead for the labour party so that they can con reasonably intelligent people to vote labour.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[david_e]

Do you think that Saddam and Osama are on a boat somewhere? They might appreciate an invite to Cherbourg.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Totally agree. All that TB has delivered has been empty promises,mismanagement, lies and war. In addition he is guilty on more than one occasion of misleading parliament and the nation. Whenever any of his cronies are caught out they get put out to grass for a while until the heat dies down and they're back. The only public office this man is fit for is in the dole queue. IMHO the only reason we went to war and are spending unprecedented amounts on defence is because it feeds TB's ego to be seen as a world leader consorting with the rich and powerful.
Undoubtedly SaddamH was a very bad man but to invade a foreign country in this way, under false pretences , without the support of the UN or the majority of the international community not only sets a very dangerous precedent but leaves Tony Blair as a war criminal. He should also be indicted for deceiving parliament.
The only reason he's getting away with it is because of the total ineffectiveness of any sort of opposition .. we are in reality under a dictatorship!

PS the cost of the 2 aircraft carriers would pay for several years of tertiary education .. its time we go our political system sorted out!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Magic_Sailor]

But I\'ll be dun seen

'bout everythin'

I couldn't disagree more. Going back to the business analogy; you don't get to the top of a business without being pretty tough, reasonably clever etc.

I don't mean that in a macho way. What I've noticed is that people at the top get there because they have a thought that others don't. They act where others don't. They are not so worried about what others think of them, where most people are worried etc.

Tony Blair did not get to be Prime Minister without a very good helping of leadership attributes. Leadership also means balancing a number of factions requirements as we don't shoot people who disagree with us in this country - to force agreement. Sometimes we can all get that balance wrong. Maybe he has been guilty of this.

I thought it was interesting that none of his party conference speech (either detail or in general) was leaked to the media before hand to stop spin (or claims of spin) occurring. He seemed to speak without reference to notes and with passion. As a reasonably intellligent person I believed him.

Surely by definition, a reasonably intelligent person wouldn't be conned the way you suggest. At least not enough to make a difference. (You can't fool all the people etc etc).

Magic

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://hometown.aol.co.uk/geoffwestgarth/myhomepage/travelwriting.html>Click for website!</A>

 

[andyball]

Re: But I\'ll be dun seen

So : no notes, a bit of passion, no leaks of the speech first........obviously it's all true !

Would tone have to stand there in a spiv suit looking shifty for you to possibly doubt him?.

No disrespect meant to you, but a well rehearsed public speech by one as well practised as tone may not be the ideal time to judge his honesty or intentions, notes or no notes.

<hr width=100% size=1>