XPost: rec.sport.tennis, soc.culture.china, soc.culture.usa
XPost: soc.culture.german, soc.culture.latin-america, soc.culture.canada
XPost: soc.culture.iraq
From: acoustic@panix.com
In article <87h9wkf979.fsf@wintersun.localdomain>,
jdeluise wrote:
>acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn) writes:
>
>> I have to say that it is quite amazing (or is it amusing?) to know
>> that you feel so secure behind that faith castle of yours, even after
>> the US government has repeatedly lied to us, every time it felt a need
>> to mow down some third world country by force.
>
>Just like every other world power before the US and every other world
>power to come. See, that's the difference between you and I, I see all
>world governments as capable and willing to commit atrocities, lie,
>cheat, steal.... anything really to stay in power. Yes, even your
>beloved strongholds like China or Russia who you never dare to
>speak out against.
>
>Answer me directly and without your characteristic
>verbal diarrhea, why did the US not manufacture evidence of Iraqi WMDs
>when it had the opportunity?
I don't expect that anything I say will satisfy you given your
implacable and unjustified hostility.
But I will take this opportunity to clarify my position, lest that a
casual reader would really believe your ad hominem! I will also take
this opportunity to present Paul Craig Roberts' view on the official
narrative of the 9/11 attacks. (See below.)
As for your question:
why did the US not manufacture evidence of Iraqi WMDs when it had
the opportunity?
Nobody really knows since Bush, Cheney, and Condoleezza Rice aren't
telling us.
But I can tell you what I think. In fact, I thought about this before
but I didn't include it in my previous response to keep you from
experiencing a bigger "diarrhea" - I wouldn't want that happen to
anybody!:)
Now that you ask, I can tell you. Put it simply, it's because Bush
found out that it wasn't that easy to fake evidence when the whole
world was watching!
In fact, the State Department's case against Syria using poison gas a
couple of years ago was a teaching moment for me.
Kerry wanted to begin his narrative with "Assad is the new Hitler" or
something to that effect and lead the world into the blind alley of
turning Syria into another Iraq-like shock-n-awe inferno.
Fortunately, Obama got a messiah in Tovarish Vladimir Vladimirovich
and escaped the fate to be another mass-murdering US president like G
W Bush or Truman, who killed hundreds of innocent Japanese instantly
with his two Atom bombs.
(Truman didn't have to do it to win the war, but he sacrificed
hundreds of thousands of lives in a matter of days just to warn the
USSR that we weren't gonna let its Red Army control the whole Korean
peninsula, etc, etc. and he followed up that atom bomb rhetoric with
the Korean War too, as we all know!)
(See, despite your ad hominem, I differentiate between Obama and G W
Bush or Truman. It's true that Obama's policy is indistinguishable
from that of G W's. They both serve(d) the war party. It's very
disappointing for someone who would normally vote Democratic! But
even so, even though Obama is bad, he is no G W Bush.)
Back to Iraq. Obviously G W used the false WMD pretense to go to war
against Iraq the first chance he got. He wanted it so bad, even Paul
O'Neill and others who were sort of at the edge of the neocon Cabal
could tell. In my mind, G W must have thought that he could just put
his WMD "evidence" once he got control of Iraq. Dick Cheney probably
reassured him about that too. But since WMD is an international kind
of deal - using it would be a war crime and all, international teams
would be involved in investigating any claim of locating WMD, just as
what happened in Syria. Since the findings of international teams in
the Syrian case did not yield evidence to corroborate the allegations
of the State Department, it was not a "slam dunk" and Obama knew it.
(So, who is still talking about Assad using poison gas against his
people? Not many! The truth is the allegations were only useful as a
pretext for a war. If the moment to start a war is not seized, the
allegation would instantly become stale! No point to talk any more
about it.)
The Syrian experience tells us that all kind of international experts
are ready to be watching any WMD allegations like a bunch of hawks.
For this same reason, the Bush administration found out that it wasn't
that easy to stash a pile of WMD somewhere in Iraq that would not be
revealed as fraud later. So between the choice of making a false
claim (and blaming the intelligence for it) and fabricating evidence
to support a false claim (and getting found out), G W Bush's advisors
probably told him what he should choose.
The moral: It isn't easy to fabricate material evidence like some WMD
that every legit body in the world can claim the right to examine for
itself and still get away with it.
By the way, I have repeatedly criticized Putin for his handling of
east Ukraine. And I rarely discussed Xi or his predecessors but have
been openly opposed to their efforts to restore Confucianism in China
and have posted accordingly. I have no reason to "never dare to speak
out against" them.
My only concern is that China doesn't find itself in a state of chaos
and misery like Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, or Ukraine have found
themselves in. I also happened to learn how ruthless the neocons are
in terms of sacrificing American lives, not to mention the lives of
other countries. (See John Hemington's recent article below.)
I have not criticized Russia or China like I have my country because
those countries have not waged cynical and ruthless wars like my
country has.
I have also repeatedly said that government in every country is more
or less ruthless in its way of governing and that's why it makes no
sense to single out Saddam or Qaddafi or Assad or N. Korea's Kims, or
Iran's Mullahs, when you said nothing about Chiang Kai-shek when he
ruled China ruthlessly. So, criticism goes to where criticism is due.
But trying to talk about monsters at a state level without considering
the context is just demonizing the head of state in preparing the
American people for more war the war party wants and nothing more.
lo yeeOn
--------
1) It's Time to Declassify Those 28 Pages
http://28pages.org/
Seeking the American government's analysis of the 9/11 attacks, most
people look to the 9/11 Commission Report. There is, however, another
report that merits equal attention: the Joint Inquiry into
Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
