| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Like I have said numerous times - a dangerous; precedent was set by USA in Iraq. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 19 2004, 11:58 AM (569 Views) | |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 20 2004, 08:26 AM Post #31 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
I wonder if Scotty Lindlaw would have thought to provide the content of that speech in its entirety? Naaaaaaah. That would require a little effort, instead of putting his usual spin on the news. Here's a link to the speech: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20020601-3.html (Unlike a certain poster on here, I don't rely on the "analysis" of a reporter when the actual data exists.) Nowhere in the speech does PRESIDENT Bush mention the word "pre-emptive" or "pre-emption." Nowhere does he mention Iraq. Sorry, Somerled, I'll stick with the TRUTH, not your constant America- / Bush-bashing. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ImpulseEngine | Aug 20 2004, 11:00 AM Post #32 |
|
Admiral
|
^^^ Actually, the word "preemptive" IS there in that speech...
But Iraq is not. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| gvok | Aug 20 2004, 11:07 AM Post #33 |
|
Unregistered
|
I wonder if President Bush is using the regular dictionary defintion of "preemptive" or the other definition. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| somerled | Aug 20 2004, 11:10 AM Post #34 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
Dwayne: Come-on everyone with so much as 1/2 a functional braincell knew exactly who he meant at the time. There was plenty of tough talk about Iraq at the time. From the "text" of Bush's speech to the kiddies at the academy.
The timeline (Iraq) ie May 14, 2002 : The UN Security Council revamps the sanctions against Iraq, now eleven years old, replacing them with "smart sanctions" meant to allow more civilian goods to enter the country while at the same time more effectively restricting military and dual-use equipment (military and civilian). June 2, 2002 : President Bush publicly introduces the new defense doctrine of preemption in a speech at West Point. In some instances, the president asserts, the U.S. must strike first against another state to prevent a potential threat from growing into an actual one: "Our security will require all Americans…[to] be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives. And you will perhaps recall these events - within weeks of the above speech. US launched air war against Iraq in 2002
Case closed - he's guilty as charged. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 20 2004, 11:15 AM Post #35 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
deleted by poster |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 20 2004, 11:19 AM Post #36 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Bull puckey. Hey, how is that prescription for anti-Bush colored contacts? Comfy? You'll read anything into whatever you read. As for the allegations by the World Socialist Network, we have been destroying Iraq's air defenses THAT WERE SHOOTING AT OUR AIRCRAFT since 1991, you (self-censored)!!Funny that this supposed news item hasn't been reported ANYPLACE ELSE ON THE ENTIRE PLANET. Case closed... ![]() In addition, I don't think this guy would be talking to the Socialists: Here's his bio: http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=6545 In particular:
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Aug 20 2004, 11:49 AM Post #37 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
^^ Moving on past your automatic & total rejection of anything even remotely associated with the word socialist - and I knew you'd respond this way by the way - none-the-less much of the text of what they have said in the analysis piece is on the ball.If not how not ? Really - wasn't the Washington Post mentioned therein, and I'm pretty sure it you looked in Yahoo or Google you will find heaps of links to reports - especially on the pre-invasion airwar against Iraq (it was certainly discussed on ABC (our's - I'm so sure about the American version, and the BBC) , and wasn't you beloved Bush II's speech to the Academy widely telecast in part and in full, and reported on widely and commented on even more widely ? Strange that you seem to have forgotten these details - selective memory maybe. What was the point of posting his bio ? Excuse me - why wouldn't he be talking to a legitimate ne's service (he has to take orders from his superiors and he may well have been delegated the task , in the context of the intense bombing raids that the subject , and by the time of the story were common knowledge (jounalists having socialist views are irrelevent) ? How would he know in the context of a news conference? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 20 2004, 12:32 PM Post #38 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
I did Google it... didn't find diddley squat. I saw that the Washington Post said (I actually read the trash article) that Moseley briefed military commanders, but THEY NEVER SAID ONE WORD ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THAT BRIEFING. So, unless the Socialist SCUM are making it up, then there's a leak somewhere. If there is a leak, then it must be found and prosecuted (under the UCMJ). Lastly, of course I reject Socialism. It is a PATHETIC and LAST DITCH DINOSAUR EFFORT AT TOTALITARIAN CONTROL BY A CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT. Its followers are either deluded or have delusions of power to control the masses. The analysis MIGHT have been accurate if they had cited oh, I don't know, A SOURCE OR TWO! As I said, how could this bunch of scummy leftists have found out the content of a CLASSIFIED briefing?? I WANT TO KNOW. I want the leaker PROSECUTED. You do NOT announce the contents of a CLASSIFIED brief to the press. Lastly, you completely ignored what I stated in that WE HAVE BEEN DESTROYING IRAQI AIR DEFENSE AND COMMUNICATIONS SITES (all in the no fly zone WHERE THEY ARE PROHIBITED, but your precious socialist scum never mentioned that) SINCE 1991 because they have been shooting at Coalition aircraft. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Aug 20 2004, 01:49 PM Post #39 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
I need not add a thing, because Mr. Bill has said it all. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Aug 21 2004, 12:06 AM Post #40 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
Bill:
What leak ?So who's being a traitor (Gen.Moseley maybe who was told by his masters to zip it)?Can't have looked hard enough , try Washington Post and New York Times, who were cited in the article. You could also look at the Telegraph. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Aug 21 2004, 07:14 AM Post #41 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Maybe this is SOP in Australia, but in the US we do NOT announce the results or content of classified briefings (ALL SENIOR OFFICER BRIEFINGS ARE CLASSIFIED) to the press. Ergo, a leak! That leak must be found, and prosecuted. Understand? My Google search included the General, the dates, and the contents. NADA. (That means "nothing" in Spanish.) Tell you what, you find them for ME in the Washington Post or NY Times. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dwayne | Aug 21 2004, 01:47 PM Post #42 |
|
Profanity deleted by Hoss
|
And just to reiterate, not one of the usual suspects has proven that opening the Iraqi theatre was a preemptive war instead of a reactive war. But just to explain a bit further, one can argue it was preemptive in that it preempted the Islamofacist terrorists who were beginning to move into Iraq, but it was a reactive war against Saddam Hussein and Iraq as a nation for violating 13+ years of UN resolutions. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |


- none-the-less much of the text of what they have said in the analysis piece is on the ball.
What leak ?
to zip it)?
3:23 AM Jul 11