Declassified 9/11 Pages

[GMDino]

(07-17-2016, 01:04 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Hindsight is 20 20. I don't think that we should have went now, but in the moment it wasn't the wrong idea. Of someone has the weapon to do a massive attack and then act the way they were it's better safe then sorry.

I knew it was a bad idea from the get go.  But Nationalism and Patriotism won out and now look.

[Benton]

(07-17-2016, 04:48 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: And what was stopping them from reclaiming one or two and detonating them in a major city? They had WMDs, they said they were going to use them on the USA, and America took the threat seriously. Waiting around for them to attack isn't a smart thing to do.

(07-17-2016, 01:04 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Hindsight is 20 20. I don't think that we should have went now, but in the moment it wasn't the wrong idea. Of someone has the weapon to do a massive attack and then act the way they were it's better safe then sorry.

Take a globe. Put your thumb over Europe and your hand over Canada. Everything not covered up has threatened to use some kind of weapon on America in the last half century. (Ok maybe not Australia either, but that messes up the visual).

The world is full of guys trying to keep what they have. Some of them think that means they have to show how tough they are. They have to be the guy in the bar who talks about how he'd beat the crap out of [insert whatever athlete or boxer or whatever] if they walked through that door.

That loud mouthy guy was Saddam. We'd already knocked him off his bar stool once. The only thing he was doing was keeping his fiefdom under his control by running his mouth.

[Rotobeast]

(07-17-2016, 12:59 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: And how do you know they don't have more? They were able to produce them before. Why couldn't they produce them again?

Plus they found those 5000 warheads/ shells under the ground. Those weren't in UN control.

And the convoy that trucked into Syria, before the war started.
I haven't seen any solid proof on what the cargo was though.

(07-17-2016, 02:42 PM)Benton Wrote: Take a globe. Put your thumb over Europe and your hand over Canada. Everything not covered up has threatened to use some kind of weapon on America in the last half century. (Ok maybe not Australia either, but that messes up the visual).

I'm counting Paul Hogan and you cannot stop me !

[*jason*]

(07-17-2016, 01:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: I knew it was a bad idea from the get go.  But Nationalism and Patriotism won out and now look.

This... One hundred percent.

Hindsight had nothing to do with it. Saddam was a petty SECULAR dictator. We are at war with radical jihadists right? Even if he did have WMD. He can't hit us with them. Israel can defend itself from his scuds. What do we care? Defending Saudi Arabia from him is what initially made us a target for the jihadists... Defending a tyrannical monarchy from a tyrannical punk ass dictator that we once supported... Nevermind the fact that it was a poorly planned and executed war up to, and including Obama's withdrawal. Many lives were lost or ruined over that nonsense. I love the fact that the veterans I've met from that war are proud of their service. I'm proud of them too. I just don't think they should have been put in harm's way in Iraq. I also find it ironic that Colin Powell went along with the whole thing, it seemed to me like it violated his own doctrine.

[fredtoast]

(07-17-2016, 12:59 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: And how do you know they don't have more? They were able to produce them before. Why couldn't they produce them again?

Plus they found those 5000 warheads/ shells under the ground. Those weren't in UN control.

They were not able to produce more because of the UN sanctions and the weapons inspectors enforcing those sanctions.

And all the warheads were under the control of the UN weapons inspectors before they were forced out of the country.

[fredtoast]

(07-17-2016, 01:04 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Hindsight is 20 20. I don't think that we should have went now, but in the moment it wasn't the wrong idea. Of someone has the weapon to do a massive attack and then act the way they were it's better safe then sorry.

Hindsight has nothing to do with it. i knew it was a bad decision from the very beginning.

And I am not just "anti-war". I fully supported the use of our military to fight Al Queda in Afghanistan. In fact that was what made me so angry at the time. Instead of concentrating on the people that attacked us we went into Iraq.

[GMDino]

(07-18-2016, 01:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Hindsight has nothing to do with it.  i knew it was a bad decision from the very beginning.

And I am not just "anti-war".  I fully supported the use of our military to fight Al Queda in Afghanistan.  In fact that was what made me so angry at the time.  Instead of concentrating on the people that attacked us we went into Iraq.

That's the part I never understood.

[McC]

The military wanted to be established in the ME. Afghanistan was not the kind of place where you launch an all out invasion. They needed to go into Afghanistan through Iraq. They needed an excuse for the world to go in and they would deal with any consequences later. And they could feel good about taking a genocidal maniac former ally out of power.

[Brownshoe]

(07-18-2016, 01:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They were not able to produce more because of the UN sanctions and the weapons inspectors enforcing those sanctions.

And all the warheads were under the control of the UN weapons inspectors before they were forced out of the country.

You keep ignoring that fact that they found 5000 unaccounted warhead / shells.

[fredtoast]

(07-18-2016, 08:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You keep ignoring that fact that they found 5000 unaccounted warhead / shells.

I must admit that I had this story confused with another one.

These munitions you are talking about were ancient artillery shells from the early 90's. They were nasty, but they were not chemical WMDs. They certainly were not "warheads"

If they had been viable weapons then they would have been used against the invading US forces.

[Brownshoe]

(07-18-2016, 11:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I must admit that I had this story confused with another one.

These munitions you are talking about were ancient artillery shells from the early 90's.  They were nasty, but they were not chemical WMDs.  They certainly were not "warheads"

If they had been viable weapons then they would have been used against the invading US forces.

The army is the ones who labeled them warheads, so I'm going to take their word for it. Even if it was from the 90s that doesn't mean that they couldn't do damage 10 years later.

Not being used on invading US forces doesn't mean that they weren't viable. You don't know if they were able to reach them or not by the time they realized we were invading. They were viable enough for the US army to dispose of them.

[fredtoast]

(07-18-2016, 11:35 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Not being used on invading US forces doesn't mean that they weren't viable. You don't know if they were able to reach them or not by the time they realized we were invading.

Don't be ridiculous. it was not exactly a surprise attack.

[*jason*]

(07-18-2016, 11:35 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: The army is the ones who labeled them warheads, so I'm going to take their word for it. Even if it was from the 90s that doesn't mean that they couldn't do damage 10 years later.

Not being used on invading US forces doesn't mean that they weren't viable. You don't know if they were able to reach them or not by the time they realized we were invading. They were viable enough for the US army to dispose of them.

The US put a date on both invasions. We ordered Saddam to get out if Kuwait by such and such date 1990. In 03 it was get outta Iraq and take those punk ass sons of yours with you by this date ...or else. They had plenty if time to ready their defenses. Iraq was not a threat to the US. He was a local tyrant who had never attacked the US.

[Benton]

(07-18-2016, 11:49 PM)jason Wrote: The US put a date on both invasions. We ordered Saddam to get out if Kuwait by such and such date 1990. In 03 it was get outta Iraq and take those punk ass sons of yours with you by this date ...or else. They had plenty if time to ready their defenses. Iraq was not a threat to the US. He was a local tyrant who had never attacked the US.

That was the part that troubled me, the "get your kids and you out or else" line.

It wasn't "step down and let your country move forward."

It wasn't "help us find radical terrorists."

It wasn't even "you're a jerk, prepare to die."

It was "we got attacked by someone, so you personally and your family are going to pay because we've got no freaking clue what else to do but we're going to settle this old score as an example to everyone else."

[Brownshoe]

(07-18-2016, 11:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Don't be ridiculous.  it was not exactly a surprise attack.

You already know how disorganized Iraq was. They still might not have been able to get it in time. Someone put them there, so they knew they were there. Or maybe they were saving them to use them another time. You don't know.

[*jason*]

(07-19-2016, 12:19 AM)Benton Wrote: That was the part that troubled me, the "get your kids and you out or else" line.

It wasn't "step down and let your country move forward."

It wasn't "help us find radical terrorists."

It wasn't even "you're a jerk, prepare to die."

It was "we got attacked by someone, so you personally and your family are going to pay because we've got no freaking clue what else to do but we're going to settle this old score as an example to everyone else."

It's interesting that you bring up the alternative dialogues. I always thought Saddam was a counter to Al Qaeda. In a twisted way, he could have been an ally against the new enemy. Al Qaeda certainly made itself known in Iraq after we toppled his government. Prior to 2003 I really only heard about their presence in Afghanistan, The Philippines, places in Africa like the Sudan, and apparently the US at times.

[fredtoast]

(07-19-2016, 12:35 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: You already know how disorganized Iraq was. They still might not have been able to get it in time. Someone put them there, so they knew they were there. Or maybe they were saving them to use them another time. You don't know.

Yeah, right, Saddam was completely in control of the military, knew we were coming long in advance, but just decided to get captured and executed instead of using his massive chemical weapon stash to defend himself.

That makes perfect sense.

[Brownshoe]

(07-19-2016, 01:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yeah, right, Saddam was completely in control of the military, knew we were coming long in advance, but just decided to get captured and executed instead of using his massive chemical weapon stash to defend himself.

That makes perfect sense.

Maybe he couldn't get to them when he wanted to use them.

[fredtoast]

(07-19-2016, 02:06 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Maybe he couldn't get to them when he wanted to use them.

He knew we were coming.

He had complete control over the military.

How the hell would he not be able to get to them?

[Brownshoe]

(07-19-2016, 02:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote: He knew we were coming.

He had complete control over the military.

How the hell would he not be able to get to them?

Maybe he didn't want to use them until the US military was in the best position to be attacked by them, and then the American military cut off the route to get the warheads.