Gitmo

[KRAM1]

Now, there is a headline in today's Wall Street Journal (5/20) I thought I would never see: "DEMOCRATS PLAN TO BLOCK GITMO CLOSING".....man, how fast things can change. I seem to recall a certain presidential candidate that promised to close GITMO as the first thing he would do upon taking office. Hmmmmmmmmmm, perhaps reality is not quite stacking up quite like someone thought it would. The article goes on to say; "Bowing to political pressure, Senate Democrats said Tuesday that they planned to withhold funding to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until President Barack Obama presents a plan for handling its 241 detainees. Democrats also plan to prevent the admisistration from spending any money to transfer Guantanamo detainees to the U.S. during the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30."

Do you think the administration thought it could strong-arm its way with everything? Looks like it just might not be as easy as the administration thought it would be. Interesting how reality sets in to allow for a little re-thinking of some of the "change" that was promised while on the campaign trail...sort of like the release of those prisoner photos, etc., etc, etc.

Life does have a way of setting its own parameters for "change" now doesn't it...maybe we should ask Dirk about that right about now!

[UNT90]

Now, there is a headline in today's Wall Street Journal (5/20) I thought I would never see: "DEMOCRATS PLAN TO BLOCK GITMO CLOSING".....man, how fast things can change. I seem to recall a certain presidential candidate that promised to close GITMO as the first thing he would do upon taking office. Hmmmmmmmmmm, perhaps reality is not quite stacking up quite like someone thought it would. The article goes on to say; "Bowing to political pressure, Senate Democrats said Tuesday that they planned to withhold funding to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, until President Barack Obama presents a plan for handling its 241 detainees. Democrats also plan to prevent the admisistration from spending any money to transfer Guantanamo detainees to the U.S. during the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30."

Do you think the administration thought it could strong-arm its way with everything? Looks like it just might not be as easy as the administration thought it would be. Interesting how reality sets in to allow for a little re-thinking of some of the "change" that was promised while on the campaign trail...sort of like the release of those prisoner photos, etc., etc, etc.

Life does have a way of setting its own parameters for "change" now doesn't it...maybe we should ask Dirk about that right about now!

Just say what you think people want to hear without challenge from a press that is a) to busy covering American Idol or Lindsey Lohan rehab or to in love with you to challenge you on any issue, and, presto, you become President and then can go back on everything you said in your campaign. Where are the proclamations of "Obama lied"?? Nowhere, because he can do no wrong in the eyes of his biggest fans, the American media.

Double standards a plenty.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Just say what you think people want to hear without challenge from a press that is a) to busy covering American Idol or Lindsey Lohan rehab or to in love with you to challenge you on any issue, and, presto, you become President and then can go back on everything you said in your campaign. Where are the proclamations of "Obama lied"?? Nowhere, because he can do no wrong in the eyes of his biggest fans, the American media.

Double standards a plenty.

Iraq has WMD and we know where they are. (guess who)

Obama is not the only Democrat... many others were opposed its complete closing. Also once he got into office I am sure things start looking a bit different. He has removed most of the prisoners from there... just as he said he would... just not closed it. Things change.... as did the economy in the final half of 2008.. which Bush presided over.

[UNTflyer]

Iraq has WMD and we know where they are. (guess who)

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

--- He was pretty much following orders of the guys in White House... and what they provided to him and told him to present... it was that or resign... which he did pretty quickly after that. The prez and VP were claiming the same and he basicly was their employee. It was obvious in the beginning he wasn't gung-ho about it but he chose to serve the administration when he likely should just resigned.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2042072.ece

That is a British source not some political site biased to either party. As a former military person he also understood the problem better it seems. Give it up... this was an all Bush/Cheney war.

Back to-- "the truth and what you want to believe is true"..... they aren't the same.

Edited May 20, 2009 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[untbowler]

--- He was pretty much following orders of the guys in White House... and what they provided to him and told him to present... it was that or resign... which he did pretty quickly after that. The prez and VP were claiming the same and he basicly was their employee. It was obvious in the beginning he wasn't gung-ho about it but he chose to serve the administration when he likely should just resigned.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2042072.ece

That is a British source not some political site biased to either party. As a former military person he also understood the problem better it seems. Give it up... this was an all Bush/Cheney war.

Back to-- "the truth and what you want to believe is true"..... they aren't the same.

ok we get it you hate Bush, but guess what Bush is gone, so when will you start holding Obama accoutable for his many flubs??

Maybe 2012, 2016? Just curious or will everything still be Bush's Fault for the next Century?

Edited May 20, 2009 by untbowler

[Censored by Laurie]

ok we get it you hate Bush, but guess what Bush is gone, so when will you start holding Obama accoutable for his many flubs??

Maybe 2012, 2016? Just curious or will everything still be Bush's Fault for the next Century?

Probably after he can actually assess his "flubs"

Historically speaking...its too early to judge GW Bush...hell, for that matter Clinton. One should probably actually give our President the chance to see the fruits of his labor before you tell him the juice is sour.

Unless, of course, you hate America.

[greenminer]

When will it be okay to start the "Enjoy Obama while you can" thread?

[Baby Arm!]

Ah yes, the normal Screaming Eagle defense. "BLAME BUSH" But it's the a standard play out of the liberals playbook.

Never ceases to amaze me how SE can take any issue critical of BHO and make it Bush's fault. Talk about wagging the dog. Thread about BHO's failure to keep a campaign promise by closing Gitmo, SE starts talking about GWB and WMD's. Anything to divert attention from the BHO broken promises/lies.

[UNTflyer]

Give it up... this was an all Bush/Cheney war.

Yup, you're right. Well, except for those 296 members of the House and 77 members of the Senate who voted yes, including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Tom Daschle. And the Brits, South Koreans, and Australians. And the Italians, Poles, and Danes. And pretty much all of Eastern Europe.

But yeah, except for all those people, it was an all Bush/Cheney war.

[UNTflyer]

When will it be okay to start the "Enjoy Obama while you can" thread?

Election night, 2012.

[hickoryhouse]

Yup, you're right. Well, except for those 296 members of the House and 77 members of the Senate who voted yes, including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Tom Daschle. And the Brits, South Koreans, and Australians. And the Italians, Poles, and Danes. And pretty much all of Eastern Europe.

But yeah, except for all those people, it was an all Bush/Cheney war.

Bush lied to all of those people in congress that is the only reason they voted for the war. They all got the same intelligence that the president did, in some cases congressmen received more in depth intelligence than the president did, but Bush lied and people died.... hey that rhymes!

[Mean Green 93-98]

Bush lied to all of those people in congress that is the only reason they voted for the war. They all got the same intelligence that the president did, in some cases congressmen received more in depth intelligence than the president did, but Bush lied and people died.... hey that rhymes!

Is there some type of intended irony with this contradiction?

Position A: Bush lied to all of those people in congress that is the only reason they voted for the war.

Position B: They all got the same intelligence that the president did, in some cases congressmen received more in depth intelligence than the president did

If everyone in Congress received the same or more in depth intelligence than the president, they were fully capable of making their own informed decision.

So which is it?

[hickoryhouse]

I personally believe that the people who think that Bush started the war because of some unfulfilled vendetta against Sadam are misled and wrong.

I suppose that I need to figure out how to type my poor attempt at sarcasm a little more sarcastically.

[Mean Green 93-98]

I personally believe that the people who think that Bush started the war because of some unfulfilled vendetta against Sadam are misled and wrong.

I suppose that I need to figure out how to type my poor attempt at sarcasm a little more sarcastically.

I re-read it again, and I get it. Sorry, I'm a little slow on the take today.

[CMJ]

Probably after he can actually assess his "flubs"

Historically speaking...its too early to judge GW Bush...hell, for that matter Clinton. One should probably actually give our President the chance to see the fruits of his labor before you tell him the juice is sour.

My personal opinion is you really can't judge a president until they've been out of office for about 50 years. I say this because you need people who weren't caught up in the politics of the time period to be the arbiters of their record. Since most of the historians who were of age when Ike was in office are dying off, he's about as recent as you can go IMHO. Too many people with too vivid of memories of Kennedy, much less the Vietnam presidents to fairly judge them yet.

[SUMG]

The Senate voted 90-6 today, to deny funding for the closure of Gitmo.

Here are the 6 Dems who voted against the bill:

Durbin (D-IL)

Harkin (D-IA)

Leahy (D-VT)

Levin (D-MI)

Reed (D-RI)

Whitehouse (D-RI)

[DeepGreen]

Before mouthing off about promising to close Gitmo, Obama should have first given thought on where to send those terrorists after their release.

[Rudy]

--- He was pretty much following orders of the guys in White House... and what they provided to him and told him to present... it was that or resign... which he did pretty quickly after that. The prez and VP were claiming the same and he basicly was their employee. It was obvious in the beginning he wasn't gung-ho about it but he chose to serve the administration when he likely should just resigned.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2042072.ece

That is a British source not some political site biased to either party. As a former military person he also understood the problem better it seems. Give it up... this was an all Bush/Cheney war.

Back to-- "the truth and what you want to believe is true"..... they aren't the same.

I still find it unbelievable that so few people understand that Iraq could have had WMD's but did something with them prior to the war. Saddam knew he was going to go to war. Why is it sooooo impossible to consider he hid them. We found tunnels underground big enough to drive a semi through. The WMD's could have very easily been driven underground to a neighboring country, maybe Syria. Once the last truck had left, blow the tunnel that let to the border, thus creating a dead end. This way when we did invade, it would make us look bad.

Is anyone here willing to bet their life that this is NOT a possibility?

[hickoryhouse]

people also forget that they did have them and had used them in the past. Sadam actually used them on his own people to commit mass murder in the 80's. It is not a stretch to say that if they had them, could make them, and had used them in the past that they could still. It ended up that they did not have any admittedly but to blame bush and accuse him of creating the entire contrversy in order to fulfil some disjointed family vendetta is ludicrous.

[oldguystudent]

Obama should have first given thought on where to send those terrorists after their release.

Send them to those Pacific islands that are slowly disappearing as a result of global warming. They can do anything they want as long as it doesn't involve phones, the internet or airplanes. Then, when Al Gore flings his magic fairy dust onto the Arctic Circle, they will die a slow and agonizing death by rising tropical beach.

[eulessismore]

I still find it unbelievable that so few people understand that Iraq could have had WMD's but did something with them prior to the war. Saddam knew he was going to go to war. Why is it sooooo impossible to consider he hid them. We found tunnels underground big enough to drive a semi through. The WMD's could have very easily been driven underground to a neighboring country, maybe Syria. Once the last truck had left, blow the tunnel that let to the border, thus creating a dead end. This way when we did invade, it would make us look bad.

Is anyone here willing to bet their life that this is NOT a possibility?

Not me, but it does sound like kind of a stretch, especially with the size of hole in which he was residing at the time of his capture.

[Rudy]

Not me, but it does sound like kind of a stretch, especially with the size of hole in which he was residing at the time of his capture.

He was in power for a long time, long enough to build them. They actually showed a tunnel on the news once. The tunnel came comlete with hazmat uniforms (in robot Greggo voice)

[UNTflyer]

Not me, but it does sound like kind of a stretch, especially with the size of hole in which he was residing at the time of his capture.

January 26, 2006

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.

"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."

[UNTflyer]

Not me, but it does sound like kind of a stretch, especially with the size of hole in which he was residing at the time of his capture.

April 8, 2008

Yesterday, the Jerusalem Post ran a short story about a soon-to-be released US-Israeli report on the September 6, 2007 attack on the alleged North-Korean supplied Syrian nuclear facility. The Post says the (Israeli) attack was related to Saddam’s WMD. This is the text of the relevant part:

'Report on Sept. 6 strike to show Saddam transferred WMDs to Syria': An upcoming joint US-Israel report on the September 6 IAF strike on a Syrian facility will claim that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein transferred weapons of mass destruction to the country, Channel 2 stated Monday.