PDA

View Full Version : The atrocities of the Bush years



Ales
13-07-2007, 16:31
Now that this chapter of history is finally coming to a close, I wanted to reflect about what has happened to our country. Many questions come to mind: How was this man allowed to become president twice, and what does it say about a society that makes such a choice? Why has he still not been impeached and brought to justice? How was it possible in such a short time to do away with several of the basic principles of freedom and democracy in the U.S. and where were the mechanisms which were supposed to preserve these rights? Having spent the last 10 years in Europe, I saw with my own eyes the image of the U.S. disintegrate into hatred. Will America ever be able to regain its standing in the world? And most importantly, why do so many people passively accept the horror of what was perpetrated during the Bush years?

Sidney Bliss
13-07-2007, 17:41
History will (rightly) not be kind to Bush but the American people as a whole will (I'm sure) always have the respect of the world.

fenrir
14-07-2007, 15:21
Now that this chapter of history is finally coming to a close, I wanted to reflect about what has happened to our country. Many questions come to mind: How was this man allowed to become president twice, and what does it say about a society that makes such a choice? Why has he still not been impeached and brought to justice? How was it possible in such a short time to do away with several of the basic principles of freedom and democracy in the U.S. and where were the mechanisms which were supposed to preserve these rights? Having spent the last 10 years in Europe, I saw with my own eyes the image of the U.S. disintegrate into hatred. Will America ever be able to regain its standing in the world? And most importantly, why do so many people passively accept the horror of what was perpetrated during the Bush years?

1: He was 'allowed' to become president because he was elected twice.

2: He has not been impeached because the effort will fail and only give the democrats more headaches than they already have.

3: What basic principles of freedom and democracy were done away with? You grossly exaggerate.

Ales
14-07-2007, 16:05
1. There are many doubts about whether he was honestly "elected" the second time.
2. I agree that the effort will fail. What bothers me is "why".
3. Do I really exaggerate?
- U.S.citizens' phones are being tapped, e-mails checked 24 hours a day (ordinary citizens, not just "terror" suspects)
- people are being held for years without trial, secret jails all over the world, torture
- Freedom of speech? Professors who denounce Bush and the war are being fired from universities. Same with media personalities and news agencies.
- The entire system of checks and balances has been compromised. Etc.etc.

fenrir
14-07-2007, 16:37
1. There are many doubts about whether he was honestly "elected" the second time.
2. I agree that the effort will fail. What bothers me is "why".
3. Do I really exaggerate?
- U.S.citizens' phones are being tapped, e-mails checked 24 hours a day (ordinary citizens, not just "terror" suspects)
- people are being held for years without trial, secret jails all over the world, torture
- Freedom of speech? Professors who denounce Bush and the war are being fired from universities. Same with media personalities and news agencies.
- The entire system of checks and balances has been compromised. Etc.etc.

1: The Supreme Court doesn't doubt it and they are the final authority. Anyone else who doesn't agree is just a sore loser.

2: Do you really believe every phone call and email is being monitored? It is physically impossible, even with NSA computers. The volume is just too big.

3: How many people are being held without trial? Very few. Secret jails? Where? Torture? There is not even agreement on its definition.

4: Freedom of Speech. Who has lost their job? So many people in America say so many bad things about Bush (some bordering on libel and slander) and nothing happens to them. Look at what Rosie and Michael Moore say on a regular basis. Has anything happened to them?

5: The system of checks and balances is alive and well. How has it been compromised? Your list of complaints makes the US sound like North Korea.

Kingwillhe
14-07-2007, 16:38
The world is unbalanced, self interest rules. It’s pointless to criticize the world powers anymore.

There’s no accountability anywhere and the history books mean nothing, just create your own (creationalism, the Nixon library, Putin’s new school texts).

90% of the world is trying to get what 10% have, and the 10% are just trying to hang on to it

The worst is yet to come..

boscoe
14-07-2007, 16:48
Secret jails? Where?

They wouldn't be secret if we know that!

Ales
14-07-2007, 17:07
1: The Supreme Court doesn't doubt it and they are the final authority. Anyone else who doesn't agree is just a sore loser..

Oh, don't be so naive... do you really believe that the Supreme Court of the Bush administration is "balanced" and fair? Just look at the biographies of its members.


2: Do you really believe every phone call and email is being monitored? It is physically impossible, even with NSA computers. The volume is just too big...

Of course not every phone call and e-mail. Just some of them - but even some are too many for me.


3: How many people are being held without trial? Very few. Secret jails? Where? Torture? There is not even agreement on its definition....

You have not read about the proof of secret jails in several European countries on BBC, CNN, etc.? Just take a few minutes. How do you define torture? According to your logic, it's perfectly fine to deprive prisoners of sleep and chain them naked to the floor, as long as these acts are not "defined" as official torture by the U.S.


4: Freedom of Speech. Who has lost their job? So many people in America say so many bad things about Bush (some bordering on libel and slander) and nothing happens to them. Look at what Rosie and Michael Moore say on a regular basis. Has anything happened to them?....


Hundreds of professors all over the U.S. have. Ok with you? Reminds me a little bit of the 1950s-70s in the Soviet Union.


5: The system of checks and balances is alive and well. How has it been compromised? Your list of complaints makes the US sound like North Korea.

The "complaints" are facts. Now I just want to ask, how was it allowed to happen in such a short time? It is impossible to compare the U.S. and North Korea, but the passivity of the populace is alarming. Ever heard of the Patriot Act and about how it was passed?

fenrir
14-07-2007, 17:45
Oh, don't be so naive... do you really believe that the Supreme Court of the Bush administration is "balanced" and fair? Just look at the biographies of its members.



Of course not every phone call and e-mail. Just some of them - but even some are too many for me.



You have not read about the proof of secret jails in several European countries on BBC, CNN, etc.? Just take a few minutes. How do you define torture? According to your logic, it's perfectly fine to deprive prisoners of sleep and chain them naked to the floor, as long as these acts are not "defined" as official torture by the U.S.




Hundreds of professors all over the U.S. have. Ok with you? Reminds me a little bit of the 1950s-70s in the Soviet Union.



The "complaints" are facts. Now I just want to ask, how was it allowed to happen in such a short time? It is impossible to compare the U.S. and North Korea, but the passivity of the populace is alarming. Ever heard of the Patriot Act and about how it was passed?

1: Balanced and fair is relative. I happen to like this Supreme Court. Many others do too and many don't. It will always be that way.

2: Proof? Why haven't I seen video of these secret jails on BBC and CNN? Where are all the lawsuits from people who have allegedly been held in them? Legions of lawyers would be lining up for such cases.

3: Hundreds of professors? Sources please. They can't even get rid of that idiot Ward Churchill after 6 years. And look at point 2 about the lawsuits that would result from such firings.

4: Sleep deprivation and chains are fine with me. Waterboarding too. It is still a lot milder than what happens to prisoners in Russian custody.

5: 'Reminds me a little bit of the 1950s-70s in the Soviet Union.' We have gulags and send prisoners to work in uranium mines without the proper protection?

Packman
14-07-2007, 20:36
Well I guess the first thing to realize is that you can get less than 50% and still get installed as president if your less than 50% are spread out in the right manner.

Well as far as the second election goes, people did go to jail in Ohio for fraud. Did Bush win fairly in 2004...I really haven't a clue...and the republicans want to keep it that way, its been a long standing policy that democracy is useful only if the right side wins...look at Iran in the 50's, Chile in the 70's, US in 2000.

koshka
14-07-2007, 21:00
if you're from the states, so nice to meet you! you're the first person i've ever met who is/was ever in favor of bush.
except, if i may say, a nice man who i met on the streets of brooklyn in late september of 2001. he made a comment about my a**, and when i politely replied:devilish:, he said (and this is a quote) "hey! this is America! maybe i assume too much in thinking he was a bush supporter... i dunno.... but anyway, i assume you weren't among the hundreds of thousands of people who bush called an "interest group". hooray for you. it's so exciting! who shall we bomb Next????

Packman
14-07-2007, 21:59
if you're from the states, so nice to meet you! you're the first person i've ever met who is/was ever in favor of bush.
except, if i may say, a nice man who i met on the streets of brooklyn in late september of 2001. he made a comment about my a**, and when i politely replied:devilish:, he said (and this is a quote) "hey! this is America! maybe i assume too much in thinking he was a bush supporter... i dunno.... but anyway, i assume you weren't among the hundreds of thousands of people who bush called an "interest group". hooray for you. it's so exciting! who shall we bomb Next????

Well there is a gov't policy generally not to let them out of the country unless to invade other countries!:D

koshka
14-07-2007, 23:45
Lol:)

fenrir
15-07-2007, 00:18
Yes, I am from the states. I can't possibly be the first person you have met who is in favor of Bush since he has won two presidential elections. I can't take the credit for stuffing THAT many ballot boxes!

Regarding your final question: So many bombs, too little time.

Ales
15-07-2007, 00:54
Regarding your final question: So many bombs, too little time.

That is really sickening, as well as your other comment about torture. A while back there was another proponent of torture on this site, but he was banned.

koshka
15-07-2007, 00:55
you're the first bush supporter I've "met".
The closest I've come is meeting Bush apologists (who didn't vote for him but wanted to bomb the hell outta the Middle East anyway, maybe...)
And I'm very curious about your story... and I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know.
I seriously want a dialogue between people of different opinions on this issue

fenrir
15-07-2007, 01:20
One, I am not afraid of being banned.

Two, what is torture? I have already stated that there is no agreed upon definition. Sleep deprivation, chains and waterboarding are not torture in my book. Electricity, beatings, etc. are and I do not approve of those.

Three, my bomb comment was in response to your ridiculous question.

fenrir
15-07-2007, 01:21
And I'm very curious about your story... and I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know.
I seriously want a dialogue between people of different opinions on this issue

Sounds good to me.

koshka
15-07-2007, 01:42
I'm going to assume that your comment about bombs is a joke, but it's an awfully lame joke.

I want to understand your position.

I protested Everything, from the start. I was marching in DC that very month because I knew that by modern warfare, CIVILIANS would bear the brunt. And they did, and still do. I was not against retaliating, per se, but I'm not a fan of killing civilians for the deeds of others.

As for Iraq, the reasons for war were not honest. Can you say you think they are?

fenrir
15-07-2007, 12:05
You have to remember that the reasons for the invasion of Iraq were based on the intelligence available at the time. Even Clinton publicly stated that Saddam was developing WMDs. That was how widespread the belief was then.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 12:12
I think it is clear that the WMD angle was cooked, established as fact actually.

fenrir
15-07-2007, 12:18
I think it is clear that the WMD angle was cooked, established as fact actually.

You have proof of that? I am sure the dems in control of Congress would love to see it.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 12:35
I have nothing, just a working stiff looking at the world I live in and the information available, all of it that I can read..

But, from Nigerian yellowcake to the neo con agenda as adopted before Bush was even elected to Powel being served up as a dupe with cooked intel again and again to further the invasion plans it in obvious now on just about any level you could approach it from. To this day there isn't even a consistent reason for the invasion, it tends to change depending on which speechwriter is on call.

And the Dems did support it all, yes. Something that provides me with another reason to drink my face off when I look at the 500+ days Bush has left and what will follow after him.

It's all the same to me. I suppose if it had been done right we wouldn't be having this conversation, but it wasn't. And the same apparatus is rolling against Iran.

Really, enough is enough.

I have posted this on many sites but I don't think I have done so here, so, what happens when Pakistan is taken over by the Mullahs in a democratic election with 100+ operational nukes at their disposal. Much like the Palestinians elected a terrorist organization, again, democratically. You guys really don't see the whole picture do you?

fenrir
15-07-2007, 13:03
And the Dems did support it all, yes. Something that provides me with another reason to drink my face off when I look at the 500+ days Bush has left and what will follow after him.

I agree with this. So far, this next election is the least inspiring of all in my experience. I can't say that I like any of the candidates from either party.

[/QUOTE]I have posted this on many sites but I don't think I have done so here, so, what happens when Pakistan is taken over by the Mullahs in a democratic election with 100+ operational nukes at their disposal. Much like the Palestinians elected a terrorist organization, again, democratically. You guys really don't see the whole picture do you?[/QUOTE]

I see this along with other alarming trends, like the Muslim electorate in France slowly but surely getting ever larger. This world is in for a hell of a ride in the next few decades and it won't be because of Bush or the US, though they are who many will blame.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 13:07
But, Pakistan is our friend! How can you not lay that at Bush's feet?

Packman
15-07-2007, 13:18
You have proof of that? I am sure the dems in control of Congress would love to see it.

Claimed as executive priveledge!:evilgrin:

fenrir
15-07-2007, 13:42
But, Pakistan is our friend! How can you not lay that at Bush's feet?

I am worried about the scenario you laid out about an Islamic government being voted in. They won't be friendly to Russia, the US, the EU, etc.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 13:53
And well you should be. They won't be friendly at all.

Think about your average Mullah and his male peasant supporters with hundreds of functioning nukes. Now compare that with a bunch of sacrificial lambs with belts and cars.

And before anyone tries to draw a comparison with North Korea just remember that they were/are isolated. Even the Islamists wouldn't touch them.

Just wait until India and China get going on this, wheeeee!

fenrir
15-07-2007, 14:09
India and China will be forced onto our side because the Islamists are after them too, just not so openly or actively at the moment.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 14:22
India and China are not likely to be forced into a coalition with the US, their interests are different. They will pursue their own paths as will Russia. The great experiment is over, and what a short one it was.

It will take years of concerted effort to repair the damage of the Bush Regime. It may never happen.

fenrir
15-07-2007, 14:36
I didn't say coalition. They can cooperate against the Islamists without any strong relationship.

Kingwillhe
15-07-2007, 14:47
I understand your point but there is a lot of infighting that has to occur within the US political system before anything coherent will emerge. During this time events will move very quickly, it is after all exactly why Putin does what he does when he does. He has played his cards very well and other countries take notice.

The US is very rich and can accomplish much so it's not like the funds are not available, but will they be allocated? And can the US continue to buy the wrong countries off for the wrong reasons as that has been the pattern through more administrations then I can remember, can they do it across party lines so it is a viable policy that is not subject to the whims of local politics and has a clear line into the future? Looking at the Presidential candidates I see weasel faces and not leaders.

Just my thought but it would take more than just one real US President, it would lake some real leadership from some other countries.

Here's another problem you guys should take care. It's all over the news today so you can source it elsewhere as well.

Sunni extremists from Saudi Arabia make up half the foreign fighters in Iraq, many suicide bombers, a U.S. official says.
Sign Up (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-saudi15jul15,1,6916057.story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage&ctrack=2&cset=true)

Ales
16-07-2007, 16:03
You have to remember that the reasons for the invasion of Iraq were based on the intelligence available at the time. Even Clinton publicly stated that Saddam was developing WMDs. That was how widespread the belief was then.

Like Koshka, I am also really interested in your angle. I mean, what makes you tick? Have you perhaps thought, that history is not what the history books tell you? That current events are not exactly like Fox news lay them out? Have you researched who controls the media? Be critical, have your own opinions.
It has been proven time and again that Bush and his administration lied. What do you feel when your nation invades a sovereign country, pride? Three times in recent history: Yugoslavia, Afghanstan, Iraq. Thousands of civilians dead, thousands of U.S. soldiers dead for money and oil. How do you justify this? They are criminals who have lead america astray for their personal interests and this will never be repaired. Wake up.

fenrir
16-07-2007, 21:50
Like Koshka, I am also really interested in your angle. I mean, what makes you tick? Have you perhaps thought, that history is not what the history books tell you? That current events are not exactly like Fox news lay them out? Have you researched who controls the media? Be critical, have your own opinions.
It has been proven time and again that Bush and his administration lied. What do you feel when your nation invades a sovereign country, pride? Three times in recent history: Yugoslavia, Afghanstan, Iraq. Thousands of civilians dead, thousands of U.S. soldiers dead for money and oil. How do you justify this? They are criminals who have lead america astray for their personal interests and this will never be repaired. Wake up.

Yugoslavia was Clinton's brainchild and that is the only attack I disagree with. Europe should have been able to handle that one on its own.

German, Russian and French intelligence also said Saddam was developing WMDs. Do you think they took their cues from FOX?

What money and oil are we getting from these conflicts? We are SPENDING money, not making it. Did US oil companies get all the contracts in Iraq? I think not.

This will never be repaired? Ha! Germany repaired its image and international relations after WW II and so did Japan. Anything is possible in international politics.

Ales
16-07-2007, 22:48
Yugoslavia was Clinton's brainchild and that is the only attack I disagree with. Europe should have been able to handle that one on its own.

German, Russian and French intelligence also said Saddam was developing WMDs. Do you think they took their cues from FOX?

What money and oil are we getting from these conflicts? We are SPENDING money, not making it. Did US oil companies get all the contracts in Iraq? I think not.

This will never be repaired? Ha! Germany repaired its image and international relations after WW II and so did Japan. Anything is possible in international politics.

How exactly do you justify the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions? I ask because you suggest that even now that you know there were no WMDs, it was still a good idea. This makes one wonder.

Proof please? The Russians have ALWAYS said it was pure nonsense.

US oil companies got most of the contracts. The US and taxpayers are spending money, yes. Cheney and his cronies, construction companies, selected corporations are MAKING money. Bush got the guy his father could not get - it's just a Hollywood western.

I have some good friends in Germany, who say that the nation has certainly not recovered. It is like you are saying, sure Hitler invaded some countries, but they said they were sorry, didn't they?

fenrir
17-07-2007, 00:01
Remember the Oil for Food sandal? Which countries were benefiting the most? What a coincidence, the very ones who opposed any use of force in Iraq.

I have already explained that Iraq was based on the intelligence available at the time and even other intelligence agencies (not politicians) agreed on the assessment at the time. Why are you questioning Afghanistan when almost no one else in the world is? Do you remember the Taliban?

The Russians want proof? Where's the proof that Chechens were responsible for the flat bombings some years ago that prompted the armed invasion of Chechnya that resulted in far more Russian combat deaths than the US has suffered so far and a vast humanitarian disaster to boot? There are a bucketload of conspiracy theories about that conflict and its causes too.

Ales
17-07-2007, 00:22
Please just start by answering the question: how do you justify the invasion of Iraq? You say that even with no WMDs, you still agree with it. It is the third time that I pose this question.

About the Taliban. So what? You keep forgetting that it's a sovereign country. Almost no one in the world opposed Afghanistan? What is america doing there? Your paragraph about Chechnya adds little to our discussion.

ericj
17-07-2007, 00:40
And most importantly, why do so many people passively accept the horror of what was perpetrated during the Bush years?


Just some thoughts on your post:

People passively accept the 'horror' of what was (sic) perpetrated during the Bush years for one reason: America is still fabulously wealthy and so are her people.

This has always been its number one concern. Many people mistakenly believe that the so-called American ideals - freedom of speech, all people created equal, the balance of powers and all the rest - are ideals that were meant to be taken primarily as political notions. They think that these ideals are meant for all people and are therefore truly universal. Then when America violates one or more of these principles (as every president from Washington (by owning slaves) right up to Bush has done) these people dust off their protest drums, make posters and gather in large crowds. On the way they listen to some inspiring music on their $400 iPod and have a quick phone conversation on a new $600 iPhone with their father, who was the fiercest of protesters during Vietnam but is now a successful corporate lawyer making $750,000 a year. He applauds his child's involvment in opposition politics.

When they arrive at the scene of the protest, they holler three word sentences in unison to the beat of a chorus of drums. One or two people may provoke the riot police and get detained so he can tell stories to his friends at the bar later that evening. After being released in time for happy hour with a $20 'disorderly conduct' ticket, he and his friends will curse the facist nature of the local police force and society in general.

The protestor, his father, and people like him have, in my opinion, mistakenly assumed that these political ideals are the ends of American society. Many of them may be the main beneficiaries of American policy but fail to realize it though stupidity or wishful thinking. They have failed to consider that the only ends that America has ever been interested in from the very beginning were economic and more precisely capitalistic. I do not want to say that this drive towards economic prosperity is in anyway a hidden or evil 'corporate conspiracy'. In fact, I believe that the true genius of the founding fathers is that the economic system they had in mind was so closely tied to, and even dependent on the 'good' humanistic political ideals mentioned above. Did they themselves live up to these ideals? Absolutely not. What must be realized is that the political ideals are secondary to economic aims. Any president would sacrifice the purity of a political ideal in a situation if it was sacrificed in the name of defending or even promoting the economy. There may be no better time to see what America is than the present. In its way, the Bush Administration brings the nuts and bolts of American life into harsh perspective.

fenrir
17-07-2007, 01:43
Please just start by answering the question: how do you justify the invasion of Iraq? You say that even with no WMDs, you still agree with it. It is the third time that I pose this question.

About the Taliban. So what? You keep forgetting that it's a sovereign country. Almost no one in the world opposed Afghanistan? What is america doing there? Your paragraph about Chechnya adds little to our discussion.

1: I have answered the question about Iraq already. WMDs were thought to be there and all the Monday morning quarterbacking can't change that.

2: The attack on Afghanistan had/has the approval of most of the world (notice NATO is involved there) as well as its current government.

3: I added Chechnya to show that conspiracy theories and allegations of illegal/unwarranted attacks don't only work against Bush.

Packman
17-07-2007, 11:08
1: I have answered the question about Iraq already. WMDs were thought to be there and all the Monday morning quarterbacking can't change that.

2: The attack on Afghanistan had/has the approval of most of the world (notice NATO is involved there) as well as its current government.

3: I added Chechnya to show that conspiracy theories and allegations of illegal/unwarranted attacks don't only work against Bush.

Were thought to be there, but when push came to shove the CIA really didn't have the goods did they. Before you launch an invasion Clinton I'm sure would have been more sure and he certainly wouldn't have fit the reports to suit the policy.

Bottom line is all this stuff about Clinton thinking they had them and Europeans thinking they had them is irrelevant...because they didn't start a war on false pretenses.

One question for you...why did George Tenet get the Medal of Freedom from Boy George if he was responsible for incorrect information? Maybe because the reports I actually read he was simply loyal?

fenrir
17-07-2007, 12:25
Bottom line is all this stuff about Clinton thinking they had them and Europeans thinking they had them is irrelevant...because they didn't start a war on false pretenses.

It is extremely relevant because if they all thought they were there then there was NO DECEPTION, just misperception. There is a huge difference between the two.

Ales
17-07-2007, 15:35
Fenrir, you keep missing the question. Let me try again: I know that you believed the funny story about WMDs. But now that you know there really were none, do you still think that the war was a good idea? If so, why? I am not being sarcastic, I really do want to know your opinion. Generally speaking, people who support the "war" do it for the following reasons:

1. Get Saddam, he was such a bad guy anyway
2. Show them that we are the best, shock and awe
3. Spread democracy (heh, that's a nice one)
4. Get those militants

Now we all know that Bush simply INVADED a sovereign country. It has happened all throughout history, no surprise, no regrets. Only now we have humanitarian reasons and the all-mighty media. Have you read about all of the reasons Hitler gave for his invasion of Poland? Any connections between the story about the burning of the Reichstag and 9-11?

xSnoofovich
17-07-2007, 15:45
Tri-City Herald: Local (http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tch/local/story/9139635p-9056168c.html)


Iraqi scientist exposes Saddam' s nuclear ambitions


For years, Mahdi Obeidi quietly worked in an Iraqi lab to help produce what could have been Iraq's nuclear bomb.

Love of research, fear and patriotism kept Obeidi, a nuclear scientist, busy with the former dictator Saddam Hussein's secret military projects through the late 1970s until the fall of Baghdad in 2003.

Obeidi is in the Tri-Cities this week to share his story with the scientific community and offer insights about the rogue nation obsessed with nuclear weapons.

On Monday he gave a presentation at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland and today he'll address Department of Energy employees.




It was very easy for Iraq to get its hands on nuclear technology in the black market, Obeidi said. He said he paid two retired German scientists and a technician about $1 million to get blueprints for critical nuclear technology in the late '80s.

People must be concerned about the dangers of nuclear technology falling into the wrong hands, said Obeidi, who is visiting the Mid-Columbia at the invitation of DOE.

With nations such as Pakistan, North Korea and Iran willing to sell and buy nuclear secrets, the potential for disaster never is far, Obeidi said.

Obeidi made headlines in 2003 after the fall of Baghdad when he showed American officials parts of a gas centrifuge system for enriching uranium hidden underground in his backyard. He had concealed the parts and design papers in a 3-foot plastic drum under orders from Saddam's top lieutenants more than 12 years ago, he said.

The first Gulf War put the brakes on Iraq's nuclear program but by hiding key pieces of nuclear technology, Iraqi rulers probably wanted to restart their nuclear program at some later date, Obeidi said. Under Hussein's orders, Obeidi was not introduced to the U.N. nuclear weapons inspectors until 1995.

Scientists in Iraq operated in an atmosphere of fear and deception yet they managed to develop technologies that were sometimes better than Western ones, said Obeidi, who earned a degree in chemical and petroleum refining engineering at Colorado School of Mines in 1967.

He said he went to American authorities after the invasion because he didn't want criminals and tyrants to find Iraq's nuclear secrets and use them for evil purposes.

But getting in touch with U.S. officials was not easy. With help of American journalist Kurt Pitzer, Obeidi reached David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector, in Washington, D.C. Albright helped him connect with American intelligence officials in Baghdad.

"I was 18 when I first came to the U.S in 1962," said the former Iraqi scientist.

Obeidi and his family moved to the U.S. in 2003. A year later he and Pitzer wrote The Bomb in My Garden: The Secrets of Saddam's Nuclear Mastermind.

Obeidi said Johnny Depp has purchased the book rights for a film. And, recently Obeidi saw Steven Spielberg about the possibility of directing the film, he said.

Ales
17-07-2007, 15:54
Many people mistakenly believe that the so-called American ideals - freedom of speech, all people created equal, the balance of powers and all the rest - are ideals that were meant to be taken primarily as political notions. They think that these ideals are meant for all people and are therefore truly universal...
There may be no better time to see what America is than the present. In its way, the Bush Administration brings the nuts and bolts of American life into harsh perspective.

An honest and realistic, although quite cynical vision. I agree but have always wanted to see America as being greater than this nuts and bolts perspective. All true if you judge the wealth of a population only by its economy. How about spiritual wealth, an intelligent and informed society, respect by other nations? You will see (though it will take centuries) that America will collapse from within if reduced to its bare capitalist structure.

koshka
17-07-2007, 17:40
Ericj, while i can see where you're coming from in saying that U.S. atrocities are accepted because of the comfort and wealth of its citizens- and i would even be caught making similar statements- I'm not sure it really explains it. I find Russians to be at least as politically and socially passive, and I don't think it's because they're rich and comfy. It's just a thought.

As for protesting, of course we all saw people involved who couldn't have formulated opinions longer than 3 words, and people who were just playing some weird role-- painting flowers and peace signs on their faces, etc. But we weren't all like that. Many of us were passionately dedicated to trying to find a way to turn things around, and lived pretty darn frills-free lives. What it came down to was trying to change a complicated situation without any 'connections'. What can the average working-class person do beyond educating themselves, writing letters (which are never read, of course) to politicians, and hitting the streets???
At a rally or protest, it doesn't matter much what you say btw. You're surrounded by 1)people who already agree with you and 2)people who will never in a zillion years agree with you. You go to be counted (the gov't stopped making official counts, but you know they were counting anyway), to make the group bigger, the opposition more visible... even though it'll only be mentioned in passing in the media...
In the end, I wore myself out beating my fists against a brick wall. Bush opponents are impotent-- I finally accepted that fact and left. Didn't want to live like that forever. Our most effective tool, protests, has finally lost its last bit of effectiveness.

2nd
17-07-2007, 18:44
Noam Chomsky, the foremost critic of US foreign policy and domestic democracy, or lack thereof, could not get published in the US. His main fora for long time were public lectures at universities.

fenrir
17-07-2007, 19:49
Fenrir, you keep missing the question. Let me try again: I know that you believed the funny story about WMDs. But now that you know there really were none, do you still think that the war was a good idea? If so, why? I am not being sarcastic, I really do want to know your opinion. Generally speaking, people who support the "war" do it for the following reasons:

1. Get Saddam, he was such a bad guy anyway
2. Show them that we are the best, shock and awe
3. Spread democracy (heh, that's a nice one)
4. Get those militants

Now we all know that Bush simply INVADED a sovereign country. It has happened all throughout history, no surprise, no regrets. Only now we have humanitarian reasons and the all-mighty media. Have you read about all of the reasons Hitler gave for his invasion of Poland? Any connections between the story about the burning of the Reichstag and 9-11?

First of all, the WMD scare was not a funny story. Saddam had already invaded two countries and was responsible for over a million deaths by that time.

Do I think the war was a good idea now. Of course not but fantasizing about what could have been, would have been, should have been accomplishes nothing. We have to deal with the here and now. If everyone had jumped on Hitler before 1939, the world would be a much better place but they lacked the courage to do so and the world has to live with the consequences.

Hitler's reasons for invading Poland were just a smoke screen to try and play the liberal appeasement crowd a little longer before getting down to real war.

I really hope you aren't going for that Reichstag/9-11 angle. I will lose all respect for you if you really believe that nonsense.

Ghostly Presence
18-07-2007, 12:31
All great empires sooner or later fall and either descend into oblivion or take up a position of lesser prominence in the world. Usually, it is their drive to conquer and dominate the world beyond their national borders that eventually brings them to their knees. Yep, America comes across as an aggressive and militant power and not the herald of freedom and human rights that it once was. Maybe things will change. And maybe the last decade was just the beginning of the end for that country….

Kingwillhe
18-07-2007, 14:36
I think an argument can be made that the priorities were wrong, if you accept that everything else becomes irrelevant, sort of. As I have tried to point out, it is much easier now to legitimately acquire power in a country that already has nuclear weapons and a large fundamentalist Islamic population, surely a more immediate threat.

That path to power has been made easier by the activity in Iraq. Any move against Iran is just fuel on the fire.

Many, many wrong decisions made by the Bush administration, and the blinders are still on apparently, very disturbing!

Ales
19-07-2007, 00:27
I find Russians to be at least as politically and socially passive, and I don't think it's because they're rich and comfy. It's just a thought..
True, but remember that Russians have a slightly different understanding of personal will and independent thought, ruled with an iron hand for centuries (and quite enjoying it).


I finally accepted that fact and left. Didn't want to live like that forever. Our most effective tool, protests, has finally lost its last bit of effectiveness.
I also just left, although I never participated in public protests. Leaving was a personal protest. I had an ugly spat with a good friend a few months back - he was saying: "but how can you not say anything, you must make noise about things like this!" I answered that it will not make any difference, why waste the energy. Before, maybe, yes (MLK, women's rights, some progress was made). Now it is hopeless, america is too far gone. The government is corrupt to the core, society hypnotized by TV and of course totally passive.

Ales
19-07-2007, 00:39
First of all, the WMD scare was not a funny story.
If you remove your media blinders and do just a little bit of research, you will see that it is a proven fact that Bush and the entire administration knew that there were no WMDs from the very beginning. There is tons of evidence, and a lot of it has been revealed now even in the mainstream media. Therefore, they LIED, and all of your lovely thoughts of a courageous invasion, saving the world from another Hitler (though many will argue that it is the other way around!) are just fantasies. The soldiers, by the way, have realized a long time ago that courage and honor are not what they once were... And did everyone in the U.S. enjoy the hanging? Back to the dark ages.

fenrir
19-07-2007, 09:13
So, you are saying that French, German and Russian intelligence all joined the CIA for a big lie just to help Bush? That's interested considering all three countries were extremely opposed to US armed intervention because it would screw up THEIR illegal business dealings with Saddam.

And about Saddam. The Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the gassing of the Kurds (WMDs in action kiddies - this proved he had no qualms about using any weapon at his disposal), the destruction of the Marsh Arabs' homeland, the intentional ecological devestation of the air and Persian Gulf following his defeat in the First Gulf War, and the torture and execution of at least several hundred thousand of his own people for political 'crimes' were all done under his rule. Do you deny any of this? I can see now who is really wearing the blinders.

J.D.
19-07-2007, 09:17
So, you are saying that French, German and Russian intelligence all joined the CIA for a big lie just to help Bush? That's interested considering all three countries were extremely opposed to US armed intervention because it would screw up THEIR illegal business dealings with Saddam.

And about Saddam. The Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the gassing of the Kurds (WMDs in action kiddies - this proved he had no qualms about using any weapon at his disposal), the destruction of the Marsh Arabs' homeland, the intentional ecological devestation of the air and Persian Gulf following his defeat in the First Gulf War, and the torture and execution of at least several hundred thousand of his own people for political 'crimes' were all done under his rule. Do you deny any of this? I can see now who is really wearing the blinders.

All true Fenrir, but who's wearing blinders now.
He said the Bush administration new there were no WMD's.
There were plenty of legitamate reasons to go into Iraq. Why Bush choose this bogus one is beyond me.

fenrir
19-07-2007, 14:17
And I am saying he didn't know because of what all the various intelligence services said, including the foreign ones. It only came out later that they were wrong.

dick
21-07-2007, 02:41
Makes me sick too, It's really bad that americans think they have the right to bomb and kill other people just because they think they're the most powerful nation in the world, and won't be held acountable for their acts. Torture people because their way of life is better than yours. I'm glad I don't live there anymore, makes me sick!

ezik
21-07-2007, 11:50
How wealthy is America anyway? What is the national debt and to whom do they owe it? And how is the wealth distributed?

fenrir
21-07-2007, 22:37
I'm glad I don't live there anymore, makes me sick!

I'm sure America doesn't miss you either!

dick
22-07-2007, 01:06
If you like it so much why aren't you there?
The U.S. is not very rich, they have very little resorurces left. Why they need to go to the middle east and get oil. It's the first thing you need when taking over the world. And yes that's what it looks like. Why should we care what happens in other peoples countries? Is the U.S.A. perfect? nothing to worry about there everybodys happy! The U.S. never did anything wrong never tried to kill it's own people. Well except for those pestky natives. And then there is those dam poor people living in those slums, they just won't die fast enough. I mean Regan gave them all that crack cocaine and that didn't work. This Bush guy is a genuis he can draft them all and send them off to kill more poor people all over the world!
And yes the CIA was bringing coke back to the U.S to get money to buy guns for a war we weren't suppose to be fighting.
How did the U.S know Sadam had WMD? They gave them to him.
You know people who point fingers don't want you to look at them.

Russia is the richest country in this world.

Judge
22-07-2007, 01:18
And about Saddam. The Iran-Iraq War, the invasion of Kuwait, the gassing of the Kurds (WMDs in action kiddies - this proved he had no qualms about using any weapon at his disposal), the destruction of the Marsh Arabs' homeland, the intentional ecological devestation of the air and Persian Gulf following his defeat in the First Gulf War, and the torture and execution of at least several hundred thousand of his own people for political 'crimes' were all done under his rule. Do you deny any of this? I can see now who is really wearing the blinders.

Why Saddam had no qualms about doing some of the above? Because America backed him in the war against Iran and they also gave him the gas which he used on the Kurds.
Saddam was a killer but the ones who helped him have more blood on their hands.

Judge
22-07-2007, 01:27
If you like it so much why aren't you there?
The U.S. is not very rich, they have very little resorurces left. Why they need to go to the middle east and get oil. It's the first thing you need when taking over the world. And yes that's what it looks like. Why should we care what happens in other peoples countries? Is the U.S.A. perfect? nothing to worry about there everybodys happy! The U.S. never did anything wrong never tried to kill it's own people. Well except for those pestky natives. And then there is those dam poor people living in those slums, they just won't die fast enough. I mean Regan gave them all that crack cocaine and that didn't work. This Bush guy is a genuis he can draft them all and send them off to kill more poor people all over the world!
And yes the CIA was bringing coke back to the U.S to get money to buy guns for a war we weren't suppose to be fighting.
How did the U.S know Sadam had WMD? They gave them to him.
You know people who point fingers don't want you to look at them.

Russia is the richest country in this world.

It's not just coke,even heroin is on the rise in America.

dick
22-07-2007, 01:38
Thats because coke wasn't kill them fast enough. The heroin started around 1993.

Judge
22-07-2007, 01:44
We can go back to the 70's during the Vietnam war, heroin was being shipped out of the Golden Triangle and made its way to the west.

dick
23-07-2007, 11:09
I think in the 70s it was just some army guys trying to make money. Now it's the CIA making money for all their dirty opps they don't want congress to know about.

koshka
24-07-2007, 15:45
On the very day of the attacks, despite already mounting evidence pointing to Bin Laden and none pointing to Hussein, this is Donald Rumsfeld: "Judge whether good enough hit SH at same time." "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."
Quote is from CBS News.
cbsnews.com

dick
24-07-2007, 16:20
It makes you wonder, did they know and let it happen? it's been done before.
Daddy Bush keep those hostages in Iran so Regan could win. Can't believe nothing was done about that. I think they've been planning this for years.

karen:)
26-07-2007, 11:02
HELLO FROM COLOMBIA
President Uribe is a sort of micro-Bush in here. We have the same kind of trouble with his authoritarism. At his second period of government there are many doubts about whether he was honestly "elected" for the first (2002-2006)(and second2006-2010) time, he has been vinculated by members of the opposition with many illegal activities like drug traffic and paramilitarisme, many people who had speeched against the government have been dissapeared or murdered (with their honor in question because they appear with - many times trustless- vinculations with guerrilla, drugs and other illegal activities), human rights of the people are being vulnerated by unfair comercial arrangements with private enterprises... members of oposition parties and university students and teachers are under surveillance... many are being assasinated in strange conditions...Etc
Uribe and Bush are great friends (Colombia is the most important partner for the US in Latin america as Bush says) oh and i forgot to say Mr. Uribe´s b-day is 4th july....

fenrir
26-07-2007, 15:45
HELLO FROM COLOMBIA
President Uribe is a sort of micro-Bush in here. We have the same kind of trouble with his authoritarism. At his second period of government there are many doubts about whether he was honestly "elected" for the first (2002-2006)(and second2006-2010) time, he has been vinculated by members of the opposition with many illegal activities like drug traffic and paramilitarisme, many people who had speeched against the government have been dissapeared or murdered (with their honor in question because they appear with - many times trustless- vinculations with guerrilla, drugs and other illegal activities), human rights of the people are being vulnerated by unfair comercial arrangements with private enterprises... members of oposition parties and university students and teachers are under surveillance... many are being assasinated in strange conditions...Etc
Uribe and Bush are great friends (Colombia is the most important partner for the US in Latin america as Bush says) oh and i forgot to say Mr. Uribe´s b-day is 4th july....

Take the names out and you have pretty much described Putin and Chavez.

Ales
27-07-2007, 17:49
So, lots of good comments but we have gotten off track. The point is, america is a completely different place from what it was 20 years ago... some may say that it is doomed now, others will argue that it has bounced back from many other disasters such as Vietnam, etc. One thing is clear - that the general cultural level (except for the intellectual niches, such as university towns) is the lowest in history. This population hypnotized by the media is easy to manipulate and, therefore, corrupt governments can do as they wish. Will a different president change anything? I used to believe that a united Europe would take america's place, but now it seems more like the Russia-China-India triangle, albeit in a very distant future.

fenrir
27-07-2007, 18:22
now it seems more like the Russia-China-India triangle, albeit in a very distant future.

Won't happen. Russia and China are destined to be opponents just by geographical positioning and demographic and resource pressures. India can and will be used as a counter-balance to China. That is why both the US and Russia are courting her at the moment and will continue to do so.

dick
02-08-2007, 02:20
Sorry guy China needs oil and Russia needs someone to buy it, that's why China is sucking up to Russia, pipe line babe! India has for a long time traded with Russia, tea for weapons man.

Judge
02-08-2007, 02:42
Gotta agree with fenrir on this one, oil isn't going to be around forever.

dick
02-08-2007, 03:10
But until it's gone it's going to be buddy, buddy,

fenrir
02-08-2007, 09:35
But until it's gone it's going to be buddy, buddy,

No buddy, buddy. At a recent international meeting, Putin spent little time with the Chinese leader (against expectations) and this was taken as a bad sign. And China is developing and expanding its military at a much greater rate than Russia is. Remember that they share one hell of a land border.

Judge
02-08-2007, 10:24
No buddy, buddy. At a recent international meeting, Putin spent little time with the Chinese leader (against expectations) and this was taken as a bad sign. And China is developing and expanding its military at a much greater rate than Russia is. Remember that they share one hell of a land border.

And the Chinese are moving over this border into Russia every day.
Dick,recently, there was violent clashes between russians and chinese youths on a beach .