I have no idea what your mumbling on about.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
Printable View
I have no idea what your mumbling on about.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
The planning has been understood and promoted for years see DIA, now unclassified, report section 8c.
2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State ?in order to isolate the Syrian regime? ? Levant Report
2012 Defense Intelligence Agency document: West will facilitate rise of Islamic State ?in order to isolate the Syrian regime? ? Levant Report
"Astoundingly, the newly declassified report states that for “THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY [WHO] SUPPORT THE [SYRIAN] OPPOSITION… THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME…”.
The DIA report, formerly classified “SECRET//NOFORN” and dated August 12, 2012, was circulated widely among various government agencies, including CENTCOM, the CIA, FBI, DHS, NGA, State Dept., and many others.
The document shows that as early as 2012, U.S. intelligence predicted the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS), but instead of clearly delineating the group as an enemy, the report envisions the terror group as a U.S. strategic asset."
The culprits should be tried, sentenced and pauperised. Their families as well. Unfortunately how do you jail entire populations. I didn't see much rebellion against the go to war decisions just token marches.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
Albright considered 5,000, 000 an acceptable number of deaths to end the Iraqi war machine. Lets vote for the top say, 100, 000, from each coalition partner country and put them in a hole in the ground for a year or two and then upon release stick a sharpened knife/stick up there arses until they bleed to death. Seems to work for ex ME/A "responsible" dictators.
^
Sounds reasonable to me, but how does that actually change what is happening in Iraq and the middle east right now.
There is no one leader in the west who has any real plan on how to defeat ISIS. This is one of the main problems when it comes to what the world should do, if anything. What would be the result if there was such a leader and they said to back off the ME and see what happens. Obtaining consensus from numerous coalition countries is much more difficult than if there were one defined leader.
Would ISIS, or whatever controlling faction then come after the world if everyone left? I don't think so, hence the fighting will go on as long as there are multiple factions of muslims trying to be the dominate one in the world. This will never happen, therefore the fighting will go on until there are no muslims left. The west just needs to realize this and then back away to let them fight it out.
Mr. G, you and I have been on different wave lengths before, and I think it has just happened again.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
I'ii let you believe Bush and Cheney are solely to blame.:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Gotta keep the oil flowing though.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
Milk the bastards dry first, then you'll never have to worry about them again. You can flog them old old tanks and warships every now and again so they can keep playing in their cesspit of simulated humanity.
The ones will all the money will be living in Europe, Australia or the USA by then.
Those two have become the scapgoats/whipping boys but what the mushy-headed liberals here don't want to acknowledge is their personal heros in Congress voted for the war too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower
Put that in your Bong and hit it! :D
Not to worry, Iraqi PM Haider Al-Abadi has a "comprehensive plan" to liberate all of Anbar province.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2015/05/754.jpg
And here it is, apparently, although it doesn't look like much of a plan to me...
Statement by Council of Ministers
May 19 2015
The Council of Ministers called, in its session chaired by H.E. PM Dr. Haider Al-Abadi, for all Iraqi people to be more nationally cohesive and stand unified against Da'esh in order to protect our people in Anbar and save our families in Nineveh from these criminal groups. The Council asserted on the determination of the Iraqi government to liberate every inch of the Iraqi immaculate land from the filth of Da'esh terrorist gangs.
The Council of Ministers, after discussing the military condition, has unanimously issued the following decisions:
1) The Council of Ministers supports the call of the Commander-in-chief to liberate all the province of Anbar with the participation of Iraqi military forces, volunteers of public mobilization, and tribe fighters under the leadership of the Iraqi forces general command.
2) Calling for voluntary recruitment to add new forces in the army especially in the squads which have shortages in number including the 7th squad in the west of Anbar, in addition to terminating the contracts of escapees.
3) Emphasis on the training and readiness of the local police to be able to control the land properly after liberation.
4) Confirming the Iraqi government's obligation to recruit and arm the tribal fighters in coordination with Anbar province.
5) Honoring combatants who have persevered in the face of the terrorist attack while directing harsh penalties to the indolent who led to negative impacts in Ramadi.
6) Prosecute circulators of false rumors who aim at undermining high spirit of the citizens and combatants.
7) The Council of Ministers is committed to continue supporting the displaced people and extending necessary supplies to them.
8) The Council of Ministers calls for the International Community together with the International Coalition and the neighboring countries to support and assist Iraq in its war against terrorism with the provision of armament and supplies as well as contribution to the fund for Reconstruction and Re-stabilizing of the Devastated Areas by the terrorist gangs Da'esh.
Is No8 a invite for the west to come back.:sssh:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRIf America wants to mend fences with people in the Middle East, putting Bush and Cheney on trial for war crimes and executing them would be a great start along with an apology for their actions. Sadly that's less likely than a snow storm in Bangkok.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
You are a little delusional if you think executing Bush and Cheney would have anything to do with a start to the extreme Muslims restableshing peacefully connections to the west. The extremist have been waiting for centuries to take over the entire world, if anything they would see Bush and Cheney as heroes for giving them an opening to move in. The only people who would get excited are you and a few over the top people as your self.
ISIS has already stated your hero Obama is on the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGDon't know what that has to do with Bush / Cheney's actions. We should add treason too.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
We can add Blair to the gang, but that's for the Brits to sort out.
Get a clue, the damage to Middle East countries only opened the door the desire has been there for ages.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
That invasion is already starting. What do you think the bombings in Europe are about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
I guess if you ignore the the murders of thousands of Saddams own people you could say relatively peaceful, and let's not forget the chemical weapons used on Iran.
So you admit your desire has nothing to do with stopping the extremist, it is only a personal vendetta against Bush and Cheney, I am sure if the truth were known that would include the entire GOP as it is easy to see from your posts you are a hater.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Thank you for making my point.Yes, and marching your army into a keg of dynamite like the ME in 2003--made so largely by the Westen Powers at the end of WWI--without an exit strategy, then releasing all the generals and soldiers with their weapons to form the basis of ISIS, alienating the population you are supposed to be there to help form the "Athens of the Middle East" as Boy George put it, is a policy of disaster. It's like they wanted it to happen. Oh yeah, Cheney was on hiatus from Haliburton at VP. Sure drummed up a lot of business with that decision. .Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
Sounds about right just remove yourself from the equation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Your drugs are getting the best of you again today.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
I want justice, or some semblance of it, and maybe regain a little respect around the world for standing by those principles that make us that "exceptional" country everyone likes to hoot about.
And you believe executing Bush and Cheney would actually achieve that, not as long as your buddy Obama is at the helm.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Obama has nothing to do with the Bush/Cheney decisions. Quit trying to conflate the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65And you believe executing Bush and Cheney would actually achieve that, not as long as your buddy Obama is at the helm.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Here, read something besides Breitbart. Don't worry, it's short.
George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public | Mother JonesQuote:
George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public
On "Hardball," Michael Morell concedes the Bush administration misled the nation into the Iraq War.
For a dozen years, the Bush-Cheney crowd have been trying to escape—or cover up—an essential fact of the W. years: President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and their lieutenants misled the American public about the WMD threat supposedly posed by Saddam Hussein in order to grease the way to the invasion of Iraq. For Bush, Cheney, and the rest, this endeavor is fundamental; it is necessary to protect the legitimacy of the Bush II presidency. Naturally, Karl Rove and other Bushies have quickly tried to douse the Bush-lied-us-into-war fire whenever such flames have appeared. And in recent days, as Jeb Bush bumbled a question about the Iraq War, he and other GOPers have peddled the fictitious tale that his brother launched the invasion because he was presented lousy intelligence. But now there's a new witness who will make the Bush apologists' mission even more impossible: Michael Morell, a longtime CIA official who eventually became the agency's deputy director and acting director.
Appearing on MSNBC's Hardball on Tuesday night, Morell made it clear: The Bush-Cheney administration publicly misrepresented the intelligence related to Iraq's supposed WMD program and Saddam's alleged links to Al Qaeda.
Host Chris Matthews asked Morell about a statement Cheney made in 2003: "We know he [Saddam Hussein] has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." Here's the conversation that followed:
MATTHEWS: Was that true?
MORELL: We were saying—
MATTHEWS: Can you answer that question? Was that true?
MORELL: That's not true.
MATTHEWS: Well, why'd you let them get away with it?
MORELL: Look, my job Chris—
MATTHEWS: You're the briefer for the president on intelligence, you're the top person to go in and tell him what's going on. You see Cheney make this charge he's got a nuclear bomb and then they make subsequent charges he knew how to deliver it…and nobody raised their hand and said, "No that's not what we told him."
MORELL: Chris, Chris Chris, what's my job, right? My job—
MATTHEWS: To tell the truth.
MORELL: My job—no, as the briefer? As the briefer?
MATTHEWS: Okay, go ahead.
MORELL: As the briefer, my job is to carry CIA's best information and best analysis to the president of the United States and make sure he understands it. My job is to not watch what they're saying on TV.
The discussion went on:
MATTHEWS: So you're briefing the president on the reasons for war, they're selling the war, using your stuff, saying you made that case when you didn't. So they're using your credibility to make the case for war dishonestly, as you just admitted.
MORELL: Look, I'm just telling you—
MATTHEWS: You just admitted it.
MORELL: I'm just telling you what we said—
MATTHEWS: They gave a false presentation of what you said to them.
MORELL: On some aspects. On some aspects.
There's the indictment, issued by the intelligence officer who briefed Bush and Cheney: The Bush White House made a "false presentation" on "some aspects" of the case for war. "That's a big deal," Matthews exclaimed. Morell replied, "It's a big deal."
And there's more. Referring to the claims made by Bush, Cheney, and other administration officials that Saddam was in league with Al Qaeda, Morell noted, "What they were saying about the link between Iraq and Al Qaeda publicly was not what the intelligence community" had concluded. He added, "I think they were trying to make a stronger case for the war." That is, stronger than the truth would allow.
Morell's remarks support the basic charge: Bush and Cheney were not misled by flawed intelligence; they used the flawed intelligence to mislead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGObama has nothing to do with the Bush/Cheney decisions. Quit trying to conflate the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65And you believe executing Bush and Cheney would actually achieve that, not as long as your buddy Obama is at the helm.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Never did I say he did, but as long as he and his crew lead the US there will be know respect for America, brainless, gut less, devisive, scum.
Funny, it seems we are saying the same thing, but in different ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65Get a clue, the damage to Middle East countries only opened the door the desire has been there for ages.Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
Not really an invasion of numbers and it does not really affect daily life as in Iraq. Yes, ISIS is unable to launch a full invasion and would rather have the west come to them to fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65Quote:
Originally Posted by rickschoppers
That invasion is already starting. What do you think the bombings in Europe are about?
Actually, the situation in Iraq is more worrying than ISIS.
In what way?Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff
Yes, which is the reason for inserting the word into the sentence. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by RPETER65
We must assume there were different objectives then, as no sane government officer would willingly put their name to recommending a disastrous policy. A few as illustrated above, were "just following orders". Did not a few "order followers" hang after WWII? Will the same justice be metered out to the appropriate men and women.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
Will compensation to the people and facilities annihilated/destroyed/infected/irradiated be paid or refurbished similar to some, but not all, "victims" after WWII? The countries involved need to ask themselves whether they have any feelings of guilt and not continually blame some "Officer of the Government".
As I said above, a hole in the ground, followed by a sharp stick anally inserted would be not only efficient but something the current generation of insane men and women would remember.
Sunnis are becoming increasingly marginalized and the Iran-backed Shiite militias who are helping to fend off ISIL are the foremost threat. When Daesh is finnally defeated the Iranian-backed Shia militia could emerge as the preeminent power in the country.
Recommend you read March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
After read you may wish to rephrase the above. :)
Right so it was World war 1 now that was to blame.:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG
That flaming queer Lawrence of Arabia has a lot to answer for. :yup:
You forgot about Gengkis khan.:)
You don't think the past affected the present? That's a pretty unique perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower
What about him?Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower
If the British had listened to Lawrence instead of breaking all the promises they'd made to the Arab leaders who'd helped them defeat the Turks the Middle East would be a far more stable place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
The past can effect the future, though you have to go back to the past to clear the future,which hasn't happened in 98 yrs since WW1.
Blaming the past for the future is a cop out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrB0bYou don't think the past affected the present? That's a pretty unique perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower
Agree 100% :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DrB0bIf the British had listened to Lawrence instead of breaking all the promises they'd made to the Arab leaders who'd helped them defeat the Turks the Middle East would be a far more stable place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
Blame does not fix the present but historical insight sure enhances the ability to predict the outcome of a particular action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower