WWIII Prediction

[Nonnie]

I am unfamiliar with the British Chilcot inquiry...

Hi NightTrain, this is the link to the official Iraq Inquiry.

http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/

[Drummond]

I fail to see how stirring up the hornets nest is classed as, "Prevention is better than cure" because that has really been the result.

If a 'prevention is better than cure' approach had been applied pre-9/11, this is what could've happened ...

Intelligence spots terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Investigations are carried out, the nature of the threat posed is assessed.

The Taliban are approached, given the instruction 'Clean this up, or, expect us to act'. This would've been legitimate and reasonable, since the Taliban themselves are a form of terrorist, not legitimate Government.

Refusal would've sparked off the necessary remedial action.

Results:

1. A brewing terrorist threat would've been eliminated, quickly and effectively, and BEFORE any possibility of a '9/11' could've been enacted.

2. The Taliban gets to learn, early on, not to mess with superior forces.

3. The legitimate Afghan Government gets a lesson on responsible conduct. They want to avoid further such incursions .. fine, then they act like responsible world leaders SHOULD, and take responsibility for those doing wrong in their country. They work to eliminate the terrorist threat, THEMSELVES.

4. The world at large gets to likewise understand that terrorism has no future, not from a force, and a nation, that has the power and a determination to stamp it out.

None of this is 'stirring up a hornets nest', since the hornets nest would be destroyed, rather than 'stirred up'. However ... delay too long, and other hornets nests get created (as has actually happened).

In an ideal world, of course, none of this would ever happen. Sad to say, though, that being soft on terrorist transgressors only empowers them. The antidote is implacably-applied force which is effective in dealing with them.

.. job done !

[Drummond]

Hi NightTrain, this is the link to the official Iraq Inquiry.

http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/

NightTrain, this may give you a better insight into why exactly the Chilcot Inquiry was ever brought into being.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/chilcot-inq...ot-over-report

The Chilcot report will condemn senior political, military and intelligence officials, as well as Tony Blair, for Britain's military role in the Iraq war, a source has revealed.

The long-awaited report will apportion blame for the decision to go to war "well beyond Blair" and his inner circle of advisers at Downing Street, The Guardian reports.

Although the former PM is expected to bear the brunt of the criticism, blame will be extended further than previously thought.

Figures are likely to include the then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, MI6 head Sir Richard Dearlove, chairman of the joint intelligence committee Sir John Scarlett, Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon and Clare Short, former International Development Secretary.

Senior officials in the Ministry of Defence, Foreign Office and Cabinet Office are also likely to face criticism once the six-year-long investigation finally concludes.

"One source said it would suit the former prime minister to see a wide range of targets blamed when it is published," the newspaper reports.

The inquiry has been plagued by countless delays and the families of the soldiers killed in Iraq are considering taking legal action against Sir John Chilcot unless a deadline for its publication is set.

Meanwhile, David Cameron has been warned not to push forward with a Commons vote on military action against Islamic State in Syria until Chilcot has published his report, The Times says.

I think this says it all.

[Gunny]

Bush and Blair did not lie, IMO, and no one has ever really proven otherwise. They reported based on the international communities intelligence, the intelligence that was eerily similar around the world. The intelligence didn't pan out perfectly, but that doesn't mean these folks lied to us. Here in the USA, we have national security committee, comprised of both republicans and democrats. At the time, it was lead by democrats. They too saw the intelligence first hand and also voted based on what they saw. Blaming folks AFTER the fact is easy to do. But given the raw intel, the majority here in the US, and the international community, almost all saw the same and responded the same.

And there were enough WMD weapons found to kill hundreds of thousands, or more, depending on who used it and their expertise. The non-weaponized chemicals that were accounted for in1998, and mysteriously disappeared up inspectors return in 2001, have still never been accounted for. And these weren't just a few chemicals, but TONS of chemicals. Once weaponized they have a shorter shelf life, but much of it would have lasted a long, long time in the manner in which it was stored. Saddam REFUSED to account for their disappearance, and even inspectors called it out as a material breach, right up until the invasion. But I suppose that's just to be forgotten.

Nope, they could have killed millions. Saddam played a cat and mouse game with weapons that were ALREADY BAGGED AND TAGGED AND ACCOUNTED FOR and then went missing. If he complied, end of story. But KNOWING they were there, and knowing they could potentially kill millions, the international community wanted them destroyed. Saddam thought otherwise. We went in to hopefully find what he did with them and to ensure he didn't get to use them. I would imagine a shitload of it was hidden in various locations (hence NT's map showing such), and as feared from the beginning, much of it went to Syria.

Some will now say that ISIS has a lot of these weapons. Some will say that it's the fault of the US that they have them, because of the invasion. I say its the fault of Iraq and their community that failed to give them to inspectors, those that hid them from inspectors, and those that laughed and refused to work along with the international community.

I'm going to say this and I ain't picking on any one person in particular. Taking out Saddam was one of the dumbest moves strategically we ever made. He was the wedge between the Sunni and Shia. Now there's a vaccum in the ME where each is trying to win. Add a gutless sack of shit for a President to the mix and we have ISIS.

I don't know that anyone lied, but I think they should have bought a map.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If a 'prevention is better than cure' approach had been applied pre-9/11, this is what could've happened ...

Intelligence spots terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Investigations are carried out, the nature of the threat posed is assessed.

The Taliban are approached, given the instruction 'Clean this up, or, expect us to act'. This would've been legitimate and reasonable, since the Taliban themselves are a form of terrorist, not legitimate Government.

Refusal would've sparked off the necessary remedial action.

Results:

1. A brewing terrorist threat would've been eliminated, quickly and effectively, and BEFORE any possibility of a '9/11' could've been enacted.

2. The Taliban gets to learn, early on, not to mess with superior forces.

3. The legitimate Afghan Government gets a lesson on responsible conduct. They want to avoid further such incursions .. fine, then they act like responsible world leaders SHOULD, and take responsibility for those doing wrong in their country. They work to eliminate the terrorist threat, THEMSELVES.

4. The world at large gets to likewise understand that terrorism has no future, not from a force, and a nation, that has the power and a determination to stamp it out.

None of this is 'stirring up a hornets nest', since the hornets nest would be destroyed, rather than 'stirred up'. However ... delay too long, and other hornets nests get created (as has actually happened).

In an ideal world, of course, none of this would ever happen. Sad to say, though, that being soft on terrorist transgressors only empowers them. The antidote is implacably-applied force which is effective in dealing with them.

.. job done !

We have hornets nests here and their sting is wickedly bad--as such they represent a constant danger to ourselves and even more so to our kids.
How do we handle that?
Answer- We destroy then before calamity strikes.
Simply ignoring the threat invites it to strike at its own good time.

Which is always a bad way to go IMHO.

An ounce of prevention tis' worth a pound of cure!!-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm going to say this and I ain't picking on any one person in particular. Taking out Saddam was one of the dumbest moves strategically we ever made. He was the wedge between the Sunni and Shia. Now there's a vaccum in the ME where each is trying to win. Add a gutless sack of shit for a President to the mix and we have ISIS.

I don't know that anyone lied, but I think they should have bought a map.

Yes it created a huge vacuum in the M.E. One that has been exploited by the usual suspects there, the muslim terrorists/Iran/ISIS /ETC...
However, Saddam had to be dealt with--how else to do it is a massive debate on hypotheticals IMHO.

Now looking back with hindsight we may think-the cure was far worse than the disease but most of that is because of how the muslim in the White House has handled it all IMHO.-TYR

[jimnyc]

I'm going to say this and I ain't picking on any one person in particular. Taking out Saddam was one of the dumbest moves strategically we ever made. He was the wedge between the Sunni and Shia. Now there's a vaccum in the ME where each is trying to win. Add a gutless sack of shit for a President to the mix and we have ISIS.

I don't know that anyone lied, but I think they should have bought a map.

Strategy for Iraq with their leader in position - and the existence of WMD's and that leader hiding them and ignoring sanctions and agreements - <----- 2 totally different issues here.

And quite frankly, a dictator who gets comfortable with killing his own people and threats with WMD's, they shouldn't get a free pass simply because taking them out would be a hardship. If you're TOO good of a criminal we then leave you in place? I agree with what you're saying, I know it caused mass mayhem, but somehow, someway, the mass murdering scumbag needed to go, or preferably die.

[Drummond]

We have hornets nests here and their sting is wickedly bad--as such they represent a constant danger to ourselves and even more so to our kids.
How do we handle that?
Answer- We destroy then before calamity strikes.
Simply ignoring the threat invites it to strike at its own good time.

Which is always a bad way to go IMHO.

An ounce of prevention tis' worth a pound of cure!!-Tyr

... and the longer we wait, the greater the opportunity the enemy has to plan and then act.

The Left will hide behind legalities, behind anything that will cause dithering and delay.

[gabosaurus]

I'm going to say this and I ain't picking on any one person in particular. Taking out Saddam was one of the dumbest moves strategically we ever made. He was the wedge between the Sunni and Shia. Now there's a vaccum in the ME where each is trying to win. Add a gutless sack of shit for a President to the mix and we have ISIS.

I don't know that anyone lied, but I think they should have bought a map.

Whatever his faults were, Saddam was a secular leader who had no ties to religious extremists. Muslim sects were equally persecuted.
Invading Iraq with no exit strategy was a move only a clueless bunch of idiots could come up with. Bush then left the whole mess in Obama's lap. Obama had no clue how to deal with it either.
Muslim extremists are not all assimilated into one groups. There are dozens of them. Even ISIS fights among itself.
The invasion of Iraq fully opened the terrorist Pandora's Box. I doubt the lid will ever be successfully closed.

[Drummond]

Whatever his faults were, Saddam was a secular leader who had no ties to religious extremists. Muslim sects were equally persecuted.
Invading Iraq with no exit strategy was a move only a clueless bunch of idiots could come up with. Bush then left the whole mess in Obama's lap. Obama had no clue how to deal with it either.
Muslim extremists are not all assimilated into one groups. There are dozens of them. Even ISIS fights among itself.
The invasion of Iraq fully opened the terrorist Pandora's Box. I doubt the lid will ever be successfully closed.

The 'exit strategy' was obvious. Leave Iraq, only when the terrorist threat had been eliminated, OR, local forces were totally capable of seeing to that for themselves.

Obama had his own exit strategy, though, which he implemented just as soon as he could. It was ...

1. Disregard the actual readiness of Iraqi forces to deal with terrorists. Instead -

2. Announce, YEARS in advance, as publicly as possible (so no terrorist could miss the announcement ?) exactly when troops would leave.

3. Again, with no regard to local forces' capability to cope, NONETHELESS, troops were withdrawn according to TERRORIST expectations.

With exit strategies like that, Gabby, who needs enemies ? Even so, we have one, one which took full advantage. They're called ISIS.

[Jeff]

The 'exit strategy' was obvious. Leave Iraq, only when the terrorist threat had been eliminated, OR, local forces were totally capable of seeing to that for themselves.

Obama had his own exit strategy, though, which he implemented just as soon as he could. It was ...

1. Disregard the actual readiness of Iraqi forces to deal with terrorists. Instead -

2. Announce, YEARS in advance, as publicly as possible (so no terrorist could miss the announcement ?) exactly when troops would leave.

3. Again, with no regard to local forces' capability to cope, NONETHELESS, troops were withdrawn according to TERRORIST expectations.

With exit strategies like that, Gabby, who needs enemies ? Even so, we have one, one which took full advantage. They're called ISIS.

Bingo, and then came along two idiots that had a D after their names, one said she would have to troops home in a month after taking office and Obozo said he would be a little more realistic, he would take 3 months ( yea that was his first response, then it went longer and longer ) but we all knew this war would be a long drawn out process, only the liberals thought it a good idea to get out quickly.

[Gunny]

They don't threaten our survival.



That is not correct.

Yeah. Just unless you're one the unlucky few they target. As long as it doesn't happen to you, right?

[Gunny]

Bingo, and then came along two idiots that had a D after their names, one said she would have to troops home in a month after taking office and Obozo said he would be a little more realistic, he would take 3 months ( yea that was his first response, then it went longer and longer ) but we all knew this war would be a long drawn out process, only the liberals thought it a good idea to get out quickly.

Look at what I nice mess had. The left sent 10 years doffing Bush for declaring victory over a campaign; yet, their asshole in chief declared a war over that produced ISIS.

Well, got his "legacy" for him ... dumbest President EVER. Taylor lasted only 9 weeks in office and he was better.

[Gunny]

Look at what I nice mess had. The left sent 10 years doffing Bush for declaring victory over a campaign; yet, their asshole in chief declared a war over that produced ISIS.

Well, got his "legacy" for him ... dumbest President EVER. Taylor lasted only 9 weeks in office and he was better.

This whole spell check crap is getting on my nerves. It corrects shit into something stupid when I don't want it corrected.

[Nonnie]

Saddam didn't want weapons inspectors in because he wanted to implant in the Iranians that he had a WMD so Iran wouldn't invade. If he let weapon inspectors in then the cat would be out of the bag and Iran would invade.

NO WMD were ever found in Iraq. Not one. If anyone, for whatever reason, believes that WMD were found, please post a link.

Bush said,

"But what wasn't wrong was Saddam Hussein had invaded a country, he had used weapons of mass destruction, he had the capability of making weapons of mass destruction, he was firing at our pilots. He was a state sponsor of terror. Removing Saddam Hussein was the right thing for world peace and the security of our country."

And now we all live in peace???