NationStates Jolt Archive

read it, and comment if you want

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041025-020600-3030r.htm

You're right. The Moonie article is much more important than letting terrorists get their hands on 380 tons of high explosive.

Oh my god, he forgot Bulgaria!

You're right. The Moonie article is much more important than letting terrorists get their hands on 380 tons of high explosive.

Oh my god, he forgot Bulgaria!
i know that i personally am far more worried about the attendance of one of John Kerry's meetings than i am worried about the dangerous weapons that the Bush administration has failed to account for. i mean, Kerry misremembering who is at a meeting is clearly much more of a danger to the American people than the Bush administration lying for months about the status of explosives stockpiles in a country we are currently occupying.

it's just a no-brainer, really.

You're right. The Moonie article is much more important than letting terrorists get their hands on 380 tons of high explosive.

Oh my god, he forgot Bulgaria!

well...if kerry takes over for bush he will still have the same army...are we going to blame him for people not overseeing the duties as assigned...
i would gladly blame bush for this if he were over there on guard duty but since he isn't and its actually military generals handling war details ..i am not gonna lay this at his feet..you can if you feel like it...

well...if kerry takes over for bush he will still have the same army...are we going to blame him for people not overseeing the duties as assigned...
i would gladly blame bush for this if he were over there on guard duty but since he isn't and its actually military generals handling war details ..i am not gonna lay this at his feet..you can if you feel like it...

When informed specifically about the explosive explosives situation, the Bush administration issued no orders and set no priorities for securing explosive materials. They were more interested in protecting the oil...which they also failed at. Perhaps if Bush and Rumsfeld had been willing to send more troops (as was asked of them on several occasions,) or get more international troop support by not acting like arrogant twats, they could have secured the dangerous materials.

But damn, Kerry forgot Bulgaria. String him up!

Too bad we have no idea exactly WHEN those explosives went missing. Hell they could have been removed from the bunker when America started bombing the place.

Infact Saddam could have removed alot of things before we started bombing or when we started bombing Iraq, but that's another story.

Gladdis: I agree with you, it's not Bush's fault that the military lost the explosives (Assuming they were there when we got there).

Too bad we have no idea exactly WHEN those explosives went missing. Hell they could have been removed from the bunker when America started bombing the place.

In fact Saddam could have removed alot of things before we started bombing or when we started bombing Iraq, but that's another story.

Gladdis: I agree with you, it's not Bush's fault that the military lost the explosives (Assuming they were there when we got there).

The reports, if accurate, state that 345 of the 380 tons of material were still there in 2003. Bush's people were warned that they were unsecured.

When informed specifically about the explosive explosives situation, the Bush administration issued no orders and set no priorities for securing explosive materials. They were more interested in protecting the oil...which they also failed at. Perhaps if Bush and Rumsfeld had been willing to send more troops (as was asked of them on several occasions,) or get more international troop support by not acting like arrogant twats, they could have secured the dangerous materials.

But damn, Kerry forgot Bulgaria. String him up!

kerry forgot nothing..he outright lied to the people to gain their votes..all while preaching on how integrity and honesty set him apart...

Actually, Kerry told the truth about lieing before he decided to lie about lieing.

The reports, if accurate, state that 345 of the 380 tons of material were still there in 2003. Bush's people were warned that they were unsecured.

The only problem is, is that we don't know if the report was accurate. Nor have I seen the report or the warning, and I assume most of us here havn't either. So unless we can see those we can only speculate as to if he is to blame for it.

If anyone could provide a link to the report and warning it'd be much thanked.

Interesting investigation by the "neutral and objective" Washington Times. Doesn't this slant miss the more important point that Senator Kerry ACTUALLY MET WITH MEMBERS OF THE SECURITY COUNSEL PRIOR TO CASTING HIS VOTE? <sorry for shouting>

You have to give him credit for taking time to discuss the issue and actually form a more global perspective on the issue of the need to oust Saddam Hussein. Can President Bush make the same claim?

Bah! The Washington Times?

There are a ton of credible news sources with a conservative perspective. The Washington Times isn't one of them. It's owned by the damned moonies, for pete's sake.

Interesting investigation by the "neutral and objective" Washington Times. Doesn't this slant miss the more important point that Senator Kerry ACTUALLY MET WITH MEMBERS OF THE SECURITY COUNSEL PRIOR TO CASTING HIS VOTE? <sorry for shouting>

You have to give him credit for taking time to discuss the issue and actually form a more global perspective on the issue of the need to oust Saddam Hussein. Can President Bush make the same claim?
a global perspective..hmmm.. besides the fact that this issue of saddam rested with the u.n. for a decade..and the numerous attempts the u.s. made to get them involved..why should we need countries with obvious financial interests in a country to give us permission for anyhting we do that is in the best interests of our own country?

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts

Bah! The Washington Times?

There are a ton of credible news sources with a conservative perspective. The Washington Times isn't one of them. It's owned by the damned moonies, for pete's sake.

now where is all that tolerance for other religions and cultures you liberals are always whining about?
does it not apply to moonies also?

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts
snippets of stories...some i might agree with and some are actually reasons i dislike bush...some are completely out of context..some attck bush's admin. when the previous admin.'s handled the issues in even worse fashion...

besides the fact remains how can you believe Kerry will do any better when he is already lieing to you before he is even elected?

a global perspective..hmmm.. besides the fact that this issue of saddam rested with the u.n. for a decade..and the numerous attempts the u.s. made to get them involved..why should we need countries with obvious financial interests in a country to give us permission for anyhting we do that is in the best interests of our own country?

Why is it you people read "global perspective" and think "ask for permission"?

I mean, what's wrong with you? Can you really not see the difference between those?

Why is it you people read "global perspective" and think "ask for permission"?

I mean, what's wrong with you? Can you really not see the difference between those?


lessee how can you not understand to ask a bunch of countries their perspective on a situation is to ask them for their personnel perspective on something..can you not understand that their response will be what is in the best of interest their nation and not necessarily your country..why should we even care what France or the U.N. ,who were both pocketing money due to the status quo, have to say on an issue...they could give a flip about our interests as long as they keep gettin there cut...still to this day we are finding french and german manufacted r.p.g.'s being used by insurgents in iraq...if someone is providing bullets to be shot at your children by the family across the street how could you insist on their perspecctive before protecting your family

your globilization people will not trust your own gov't but by all means lets ask goverments of every other nation,including some very anti-U.S., what they think should be done....

wake up the international community is made up of a bunch of governments trying to get their own advantages in the world...how does that make them trustworthy or somehow more intelligent than our own?

The reports, if accurate, state that 345 of the 380 tons of material were still there in 2003. Bush's people were warned that they were unsecured.
The President, although Commander-in-Chief, handles absolutely no military strategy. He leaves it up to his Generals, a lesson learned by many politicians who, in their fallacy, actually believe they possess any real grasp of what needs to be done. Thus, if explosives were left undefended, I would consider that to be the province of the general, or generals, who should have been responsible for said explosives.

But, going back to what someone else said in like the 2nd post. yes, I agree with you, it is far more important that we ignore Kerry's lies on national television while in a debate with Pres. Bush, a debate he won, and now possible only because he lied during on (assuming this isn't the only issue he stretched the truth on), and to concentrate on trying to blame Bush for matters he could not control.

The President, although Commander-in-Chief, handles absolutely no military strategy. He leaves it up to his Generals, a lesson learned by many politicians who, in their fallacy, actually believe they possess any real grasp of what needs to be done. Thus, if explosives were left undefended, I would consider that to be the province of the general, or generals, who should have been responsible for said explosives.

But, going back to what someone else said in like the 2nd post. yes, I agree with you, it is far more important that we ignore Kerry's lies on national television while in a debate with Pres. Bush, a debate he won, and now possible only because he lied during on (assuming this isn't the only issue he stretched the truth on), and to concentrate on trying to blame Bush for matters he could not control.

*shrug* Kerry lied. Bush lied more. Look it up on any impartial site (such as factcheck.org, recommended by your own Vice-President.)

First Poland, now Bulgaria?!

...Wait.

**checks map**

Oh, it does exist. Damn. Why can't he forget the important countries, the ones people actually know about?

First Poland, now Bulgaria?!

...Wait.

**checks map**

Oh, it does exist. Damn. Why can't he forget the important countries, the ones people actually know about?

at least he didn't forget france..you know that militarily mighty and socially advanced culture that will someday lead us again to vietnam..oops i meant liberty

The cliche' "how do you know when kerry is lying"? It fits all politicans, not just Mr kerry. But, this 380 tons that is on every news channel, and every 30 seconds on CNN headline. That is the biggest liberal media horse malarkey to date. This was a known fact, and even in the interview, and the written response shown on the news today was all-inclusive to the fact it transpired 18-MONTHS ago. Yes, Mar/Apr 2003, is when this happened, and was reported. But, holy cow, President Bush is barely ahead in the polls, so the liberal media does a hail mary to the public with over one year old news. Whats next, the President wears boot in the White House?

*shrug* Kerry lied. Bush lied more. Look it up on any impartial site (such as factcheck.org, recommended by your own Vice-President.)
so if kerry also lied than it makes it even more tiresome to hear how bush lied.
When even the dems know their candidate is a liar it kinda invalidates voting against bush because he is a "liar"...
yes we know the argument "he lied to lead us to war"..we were also led to ww2 based on a lie..led to nam based on a lie...politicians lie...bush "lied" to get us behind removing a real threat..Kerry is just lieing to get his ass in the white house..which if either is more reprehensible...
i personally believed bush really thought we would find more than we did..i personally think it was a mistake not a lie..i personally believe Kerry would tell whatever lie it takes just for his own personal prestige...