Al-Zarqawi is dead, the Pro's from Dover Strike again!
-
Bot
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:38 pm
-
Brains
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:14 am
lol
oh about that DeLong had better intelligence than Clarke? hmm well. then how come Clarke was able to pinpoint Al Quaeda's strike more accurately than DeLong?
or going from another route. You have a guy Clarke - being security adviser for four consecutive presidents - who says that Al Quaeda is a threat. How come the Bush administration completely ignores the guy. I mean, even if he does not have all intelligence like this DeLong guys says, he sure has some word to listen to after such a track record or has he been wasting four consecutive presidents' times? then again. no he did not, because apparently he turned out to be right in his assessment...
what do you want Kramer? plenty of questions for you already and all you do is reply with "lol. read it a third time".
oh about that DeLong had better intelligence than Clarke? hmm well. then how come Clarke was able to pinpoint Al Quaeda's strike more accurately than DeLong?
or going from another route. You have a guy Clarke - being security adviser for four consecutive presidents - who says that Al Quaeda is a threat. How come the Bush administration completely ignores the guy. I mean, even if he does not have all intelligence like this DeLong guys says, he sure has some word to listen to after such a track record or has he been wasting four consecutive presidents' times? then again. no he did not, because apparently he turned out to be right in his assessment...
what do you want Kramer? plenty of questions for you already and all you do is reply with "lol. read it a third time".
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
highlife
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 1:54 am
Dont ask me to prove this cause i dont care enough to research it but here is what i recall hearing.There was a lot of info that should have been able to point to people wanting to fly planes and who one or two of them were.The info wasn't being shared and dots were not being conected becouse of the riivelry between the agensies.Clinton new there were problems with sharing so when big threats made them selves apparent he would bring in the top guys from CIA and FBI and force them to talk about and work together on those threats.Bush dosn't believe as much in round table disscussions.He prefers to be given seperate reports,than he and his top adds,Cheney Rice,Rumsfeld come up with a plan.Its just a different style.I dont know if they were aware of the problems between the CIA and FBI but there style didn't force the agencies to work together.Clarks argument was they should have included him in the disscutions and been willing to do what clinton did at least for a time untill they could come up with a new strategy for afganistan
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Buffmaster
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:37 am
- Location: The Alamo
Brains, you need to drop this shit about Clarke, no matter how much you wish this to be true. Clarke didn't know shit before, during or to this day, his book with all it's facts has been squashed. This is almost as bad as the Plame Saga, her cover was blown by the KGB in 1996, once a cover is blown that agent will NEVER see field work again. I know that the truth hurts your agenda, but pushing lies to fit your agenda only makes you out to be a fool.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Brains
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:14 am
err. like pushing lies about a connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda? or like Iraq has WMD's? lol
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
-
Brains
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:14 am
-
raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
let's see:
raum: Here is an interview with the woman who was the Grem Doctor of iraq, who made chemical and WMD for Saddam. she says "yes, we made some, but weren't going to use them."
brains: Here is a story about a US inspector closing the book on WMD inspection after no specific evidence, and saying no official record of transport of WMD exists.
you make a compelling argument, there.
raum: Here is an interview with the woman who was the Grem Doctor of iraq, who made chemical and WMD for Saddam. she says "yes, we made some, but weren't going to use them."
brains: Here is a story about a US inspector closing the book on WMD inspection after no specific evidence, and saying no official record of transport of WMD exists.
you make a compelling argument, there.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Bot
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:38 pm
Goddamn, I love you raum! lol I don't see how anyone can think Iraq didn't have WMD... boggles my mind.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Brains
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:14 am
compelling it is indeed.
let's see: we have video, eye-witness and doctor's reports that - and I hope I am not shocking anyone here - Saddam indeed USED chemicals... ... back in the 80'ies. We have a doctor - a lovely lady called Dr. Germ - who has been head of research on it for seven years until - hold your breath - 1995. We have a war almost a decade later because a pre-emptive strike was needed as Iraq was a clear and present WMD danger. We got sattelite, radars, all kinds of the most advanced technology to seek out WMD. They are in the hands of a very very very qualified team of dozens of highly educated individuals on the matter. That group is able to use each and every archive the "enemy" has to pinpoint the exact location to these huge huge stockpiles of chemicals. They work on it for two complete years in a row without being hindered by anybody. They conclude there are none to be found and STILL you guys believe that Iraq had WMD at the time of attack?!
lmao!
propaganda truely is a strong weapon! lol
let's see: we have video, eye-witness and doctor's reports that - and I hope I am not shocking anyone here - Saddam indeed USED chemicals... ... back in the 80'ies. We have a doctor - a lovely lady called Dr. Germ - who has been head of research on it for seven years until - hold your breath - 1995. We have a war almost a decade later because a pre-emptive strike was needed as Iraq was a clear and present WMD danger. We got sattelite, radars, all kinds of the most advanced technology to seek out WMD. They are in the hands of a very very very qualified team of dozens of highly educated individuals on the matter. That group is able to use each and every archive the "enemy" has to pinpoint the exact location to these huge huge stockpiles of chemicals. They work on it for two complete years in a row without being hindered by anybody. They conclude there are none to be found and STILL you guys believe that Iraq had WMD at the time of attack?!
lmao!
propaganda truely is a strong weapon! lol
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |