Don't Start the Second Gulf War

National Review Online ^ | 8-12-02 | Doug Bandow

[Chancellor Palpatine]

"have been"

[HardStarboard]

Yep TJ, I read your diatribe. It's copycat drivel available from virtually any leftwing source.

I suggest you read Jeffery Goldberg's piece in the March, 25th New Yorker Magazine - "The Great Terror". If you still feel the same way, call me and I'll schedule you for a spine transplant.

Pacifism In the Face of Terrorism is Cowardice.

[LowOiL]

[HardStarboard]

>>> Common sense says that if we had connected the dots before 9/11, we should have done everything we could to stop it. Now we are connecting dots about Iraq, and many of the same people want to ignore it. <<<

Beautiful Point Miss Marple! Rumsfeld made similar point in his Warsaw news conference earlier.

My version is this: These anti-war-Demos (Pacifist/Cowards) want it both ways - they want to blame the Bush Adminsitration for not connecting the dots prior to 9/11/01. Now they want the Admin to stop connecting the dots on Iraq. They look at Iraq/Terror/WMD dots and say they are not worthy of being called dots.

If there were a terrorist attack in the US tomorrow, and Iraq took credit, these same critics of Bush's policy would be saying that he didn't do enough to .... you guessed it, connect the DOTS

Gore's speech was notable for his equivication: wanting to be on both sides of the issue. You can't have it both ways - dots are dots and if you connect them you sometimes end up with disturbing facts. Democrats just don't like what the dots are telling them - because it won't be them that fixes it. They are culturally incapable of the toughness required to face the dots.

[Amelia]

They were trying to destroy me in a very personal way and were directly aided in their crimes by despicable rat scum like you got my personal info right off my home page to do it.

It's despicable to read your home page?

[CWOJackson]

A good question I would like to know is where in your job description does it allow an employee of the Pentagon, to publicly post on an open internet site, accusations against the Commander-In-Chief?

Specifically your claim at 12:40PM (Pacific):

"The Administration has invented a lot of so-called "evidence" to help serve as a pretext for their planned unprovoked invasion of Iraq."

Now I was always under the impression that we elected our national leaders, and that the Pentagon is responsible to the Commander-In-Chief, not responsible for posting this kind of accusations against him. Or are career bureaucrats free to post such claims on an open internet site using Pentagon computers?

Our tax money at work.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

You know, when he said "despicable", I had this distinct mental image of Daffy Duck lisping it, complete with tongue and spittle.

[sinkspur]

Reckon this clown's the one who's been leaking the "plans" to the New York Times?

On second thought, seeing as how easily he coughs up the fact that he has access to national security information, he's probably not allowed anywhere near anything of substance.

Maybe he's making up the classified information claim.

[CWOJackson]

"I only reposted this to defend my personal reputation as a patriotic veteran who loves America and is willing to do anything to defend it, which has been savaged by America-haters and Commie smearmeisters who lack any regard for the truth whatsoever."

Yes sink, he only reposted to defend his personal reputation as a patriotic veteran who loves America. Any patriotic American working at the Pentagon would go on an open internet site and claim the President is "falsifying evidence" against Iraq, claim that Iraq is posses no threat to us in direction contridiction to the President, then when pressed to qualify his claims site his access to Joint Chiefs of Staff level classified reports on other nations.

Yes, this is indeed the actions of a patriotic American defending themselves.

[CWOJackson]

Strange how I always had this silly notion that our Pentagon employees were busy doing the nation's work not crusing the internet posting accusations against the Commander-In-Chief.

Who's in charge over there? The Secretary of Defense or the general services employees?

[justshe]

~~~Yes, this is indeed the actions of a patriotic American defending themselves. ~~~

Not.

In fact, damned scary. I hope the appropriate agencies are investigating as we type.

[Amelia]

You know, when he said "despicable", I had this distinct mental image of Daffy Duck lisping it, complete with tongue and spittle.

Oddly enough, I had the same mental picture!

ROFL!

[woofie]

How dare you question a patriotic American who is only doing his duty wasting time...What do you want this man to do? work? Also since Rebeckie is certain that he is a great patriot,we can all be secure in the knowledge that all is right with the world....Next thing you know you will be questioning the Demcratic Senate and accusing them of wasting taxpayers money...Ha! Wasting time and money is a proud tradition and I for one am happy to see my fellow citizens induging in it.

[justshe]

~~~Yes, this is indeed the actions of a patriotic American defending themselves.~~~

Oh....you are SO toasted now! :-)

[Chancellor Palpatine]

The grand coalition which former President George HW Bush organized to challenge the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait has long since been broken thanks to the polarization of the Arab world with the US-led war on terror and the Israeli war against Palestinian terror. If the US were to invade Iraq, it would likely do so virtually alone without any coalition allies. Even America's closest ally, the UK has voiced opposition to the US plan to invade Iraq. Only Israel would support such a war even though Israeli intelligence publicized the fact that Iraq has no discernable connections to the 9-11 terrorists. However, any Israeli military intervention against Iraq would further anger the entire Arab world against the US and possibly even risk an enlargement of the conflict.

From the mouth of the moron - such an "esteemed" analyst.

I'd like to think they keep him around just to have something to giggle at when they're in the can.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

The Administration is not getting any international support for its planned invasion of Iraq because it would constitute an unprovoked, aggressive war against Iraq waged in blatant violation of international law and time-honored principles of just war.

More words of "wisdom".

[jwalsh07]

There was no evidence linking Khadafy and his family to the bombing. None. Reagan didn't need evidence that stood up in a court of law, he knew where the danger was. So does Bush.

Try to be consistent at least. Either Reagan and Bush are wrong to strike preemptively at the enemy or they are both wrong.

Honest debate requires honesty.

[jwalsh07]

Slight correction.

Either Reagan and Bush are wrong to strike preemptively at the enemy or they are both right.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

The Just War Doctrine is a time honored principle.

Clickhere for more info.

[Protagoras]

Oh well, hindsight's always 20-20 isn't it? I thought at the time we should have taken him out too.

bold mine

Me too, and I proclaimed it then. So much for hindsight.