Hey..he lost a hand, but he won a few, too, although his opponent wasn't
much more than a gerbil.

"ME ME ME" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I guess you are correct. Saddam played a great game of poker against GWB.
He made GWB look foolish with his statements concerning WMD. Spending the
rest of his life in prison, giving up his palaces and wealth was a small
price to pay to rub GWB's nose in it.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
First of all, unlike you and I, there are people who know quite a bit
about chemical and biological weapons. Quite a few of those people stated
clearly that some of the weapons had definite "shelf lives", and that the
weapons used against the Iraqi people in the distant past would've been
far from useful by 2001-2002.

Second, you may have to allow for the possibility that Saddam had a more
personal motive, if he destroyed the weapons secretly: Making a fool look
like an even bigger fool (GWB, in other words). Saddam is not a stupid
man. He knew full well that he could skirt the economic sanctions easily.
He didn't need to put on a show to impress the U.N.



"ME ME ME" wrote in message
...
Doug,

Don't you agree that the WMD Iraq had used in the past had probably been
shipped somewhere else? Certainly you do not believe Iraq destroyed
them secretly? If they wanted to destroy them, they would have done
that publicly so the UN would have removed the economic boycott against
Iraq.

Bush is a dummy, but even he would not believe that.



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"ME ME ME" wrote in message
...


When you say Rowe and GWB lied to the world concerning WMD, remember
if that is true, every politician in the US lied to world since 1990.

That may well be true. However, as you know by now, highly competent
inspectors found zip. This included people who did not have pansy-ass
foreign accents or work for that sissy organization, the U.N.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Saddam is not a stupid man. He knew full well that he could skirt the
economic sanctions easily. He didn't need to put on a show to impress the
U.N.

Hehehe. I bet he doesn't feel that way right now. A "show to impress the
UN" would've saved his ass the humiliation of sitting in a jail cell
awaiting trial.

I'd call him a *very* stupid man.

"ME ME ME" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I guess you are correct. Saddam played a great game of poker against GWB.
He made GWB look foolish with his statements concerning WMD. Spending the
rest of his life in prison, giving up his palaces and wealth was a small
price to pay to rub GWB's nose in it.

LOL. I should have read your reply before I posted mine.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...


Why bother with appearances, when the entire plan was designed with
absolutely no consideration for our image in the world?

Because the administration gave the French and Russians a chance to
atone for their sins of sending banned arms to Saddam. As the
Oil-for-food scandal unfurled, it became evident that neither of those
two countries would have budged and inch no matter what we negotiated.

I don't buy it, but that's just how I am.



So, please, cut the crap. If there were WMDs, your president wanted
them gone. Use your imagination and you can figure out the reasons.
I'll admit there may have been just ONE good reason to allow them to
be smuggled out: To make the country a bit safer for our troops.
But, since your president can't arrange for vehicle armor, I doubt
he really cared much whether soldiers were exposed to chemical or
biological weapons.

I can think of another good reason to allow them to be smuggled out:
We weren't ready to militarily engage the Russians who were helping
Saddam sneak the WMD from his country to Syria.

Oh boy. You think there were frightening numbers of Russian soldiers
waiting for us?

No. And I never said that. But there were plenty of Russian soldiers
elsewhere in the world that we didn't want to drag into our fight in
Iraq.

Time out. If, theoretically, president Rove actually knew which trucks
were hauling stuff out of Iraq

You mean Russian trucks?
Don't you remember the report of us hitting a Russian convoy heading to
Syria (under the guise of a Diplomatic envoy)
just a few weeks after the invasion started?

If not, here is the report:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...nvoy.attacked/



We claimed that we had no forces in the area (special-ops always operates
that way), yet Condi Rice made
an emergency trip to Moscow the next day to smooth things over:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7133-3.cfm
(You can bet she was armed with "proof" of Russian involvement in the
evacuation of Iraqi WMD-related material and technology.)

The administration obviously worked out a deal with the Russians. They'd
shut up about US future involvement in Iraq (ironically, Putin
practically endorsed Bush right before the election), and we'd keep lids
on the evidence that we had accumulated.

It was working very well, until John A. Shaw spilled the beans right
before the election:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...2637-6257r.htm

At the time that that story was released, the White House did not condone
(but did not criticize) Shaw, because the story was valuable for Bush's
re-election bid. But not long after the election, Shaw was
dismissed...most likely because the truth that he was spreading was
interfering with our on-going negotiations with the Russians regarding
their planned shipment of anti-aircraft missiles to Syria.
http://www.jeffbrokaw.net/notes/2005...ced-to-resign/

Do you think Putin wouldn't have seen any further "investigations" as
simply the cost of doing business? He was a spook, you know. Still is.

Which means he knows how to cut a deal.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Hey..he lost a hand, but he won a few, too

He didn't win anything. Bush was re-elected...and Saddam is sitting in a
jail. Syrian troops are out of Lebanon...and Saddam is sitting in a jail.
Iraq held democratic elections...and Saddam is sitting in a jail.

What did Saddam "win"?

NYOB,

GMTA


"NOYB" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"ME ME ME" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I guess you are correct. Saddam played a great game of poker against
GWB. He made GWB look foolish with his statements concerning WMD.
Spending the rest of his life in prison, giving up his palaces and wealth
was a small price to pay to rub GWB's nose in it.

LOL. I should have read your reply before I posted mine.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:03:08 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...

NOYB wrote:

The Duelfer report left open the possibility that an "unofficial"
transfer
of weapons took place from Iraq to Syria.

Man, you sure try hard to defend the current doofus in chief!!! So, let
me get this straight. Because someone didn't explicitly say something
in a report, then what he DIDN'T say is, in your eyes, what happened?
Well, then, he also didn't say that Bush is stupid, so does that mean
that Bush IS stupid???


Uh oh. Ticking logic bomb. I like it. :-) Have a beer.


He's a man after your heart, Doug!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...


Why bother with appearances, when the entire plan was designed with
absolutely no consideration for our image in the world?

Because the administration gave the French and Russians a chance to
atone for their sins of sending banned arms to Saddam. As the
Oil-for-food scandal unfurled, it became evident that neither of those
two countries would have budged and inch no matter what we negotiated.

I don't buy it, but that's just how I am.



So, please, cut the crap. If there were WMDs, your president wanted
them gone. Use your imagination and you can figure out the reasons.
I'll admit there may have been just ONE good reason to allow them
to be smuggled out: To make the country a bit safer for our troops.
But, since your president can't arrange for vehicle armor, I doubt
he really cared much whether soldiers were exposed to chemical or
biological weapons.

I can think of another good reason to allow them to be smuggled out:
We weren't ready to militarily engage the Russians who were helping
Saddam sneak the WMD from his country to Syria.

Oh boy. You think there were frightening numbers of Russian soldiers
waiting for us?

No. And I never said that. But there were plenty of Russian soldiers
elsewhere in the world that we didn't want to drag into our fight in
Iraq.

Time out. If, theoretically, president Rove actually knew which trucks
were hauling stuff out of Iraq

You mean Russian trucks?
Don't you remember the report of us hitting a Russian convoy heading to
Syria (under the guise of a Diplomatic envoy)
just a few weeks after the invasion started?

If not, here is the report:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...nvoy.attacked/



We claimed that we had no forces in the area (special-ops always
operates that way), yet Condi Rice made
an emergency trip to Moscow the next day to smooth things over:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7133-3.cfm
(You can bet she was armed with "proof" of Russian involvement in the
evacuation of Iraqi WMD-related material and technology.)

The administration obviously worked out a deal with the Russians.
They'd shut up about US future involvement in Iraq (ironically, Putin
practically endorsed Bush right before the election), and we'd keep lids
on the evidence that we had accumulated.

It was working very well, until John A. Shaw spilled the beans right
before the election:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/natio...2637-6257r.htm

At the time that that story was released, the White House did not
condone (but did not criticize) Shaw, because the story was valuable for
Bush's re-election bid. But not long after the election, Shaw was
dismissed...most likely because the truth that he was spreading was
interfering with our on-going negotiations with the Russians regarding
their planned shipment of anti-aircraft missiles to Syria.
http://www.jeffbrokaw.net/notes/2005...ced-to-resign/

Do you think Putin wouldn't have seen any further "investigations" as
simply the cost of doing business? He was a spook, you know. Still is.

Which means he knows how to cut a deal.




Seriously, we could've done absolutely anything we wanted on some deserted
highway. Putin would not have blinked.

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Hey..he lost a hand, but he won a few, too

He didn't win anything. Bush was re-elected...and Saddam is sitting in a
jail. Syrian troops are out of Lebanon...and Saddam is sitting in a jail.
Iraq held democratic elections...and Saddam is sitting in a jail.

What did Saddam "win"?

You may recall that "in the beginning", president Rove only had ONE big
reason for invading Iraq: weapons of mass destruction. He gradually added to
the list as necessary. Saddam apparently blew your president's credibility
right out of the water, not that he had much to begin with.

On 26 Apr 2005 23:52:20 -0000, er
(Larry Smith) wrote:

This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Hashcash?

What's next - crackcoins?

Later,

Tom