Comments on: Feith: Iraq Attack Was Preemptive

Pentagon Insider Douglas Feith Tells 60 Minutes Attack On Iraq Was Anticipatory Self-Defense; Not 9/11 Retaliation

[michael0004]

Read what Douglas Firth has to say and the only fair conclusion one must come to is that this Administration is more than just simple liars. They are liars and they are incompetent. It is bad enough they lied, made up facts, and exagerated other facts to convince Congress and the American people that we ought to invade Iraq. But after accomplishing part one of their goal, you would think that they could have at least have executed a competent invasion plan. But they did not. Of course, part of the lie that used to sell the invasion was that they could do it relatively cheaply. As a consequence, we did it with too few U.S. troops and we disbanded the Iraqi army and sent the Iraqui troops home with the AK 47s and other weaponry that they used against us, in large part because they no longer had regular pay checks. Not to mention all the Iraqui armories that were left unsecured after the invasion and which were looted by anti-American Iraquis. I could go on and on but am limited here to only 1,500 characters.

[achilles281]

minuteman; We all know that sadam was a bad man when he attacked iran at the encouragement of the united states...he was friend of the u.s.originally then turned enemy like osama bin laden fought against the russian with help of the united states and then turned against the u.s.Now we are looking for him to take revenge and in the process losing thousands of more innocent lives on both sides.....something is sreiously wrong here in our foreign policy.....

[latrocinor-2009]

You''''re introducing irrelevant topics to cover up the lack of arguments and logic in your posts.

Posted by jon2012
.. .. ..

Just like you did.

[jon2012-2009]

Honestly I don''''''''t know how these lyers sleep at night. ..

Posted by singingrick
.. .. ..
Theres no bigger liar than you grick
How''''s the stalker molester tricks going?
Posted by Latrocinor at 11:45 AM : Jul 07, 2008

You''re introducing irrelevant topics to cover up the lack of arguments and logic in your posts.

[dogsoul]

"Yet in previous posts you accuse liberals of wanting to lose "the war on terror" and backstabbing America.
Odd you would be relying on quotes from Liberals to boost your arguments. You can''''t have it both ways. So which is it. "

Liberals would want to WIN in Iraq & the larger war on terror if a Democrat were at the helm - because that would be good for liberals... but given the choice of failure versus allowing any such victory to happen during a Republican Presidency and liberals clearly favor failure....

So thank you for proving out my point - the ''side'' liberals are on at any point in time can change dramatically - and it''s got absolutely NOTHING to do with any construct of patriotism...

they''ll gladly backstab America for their own gain....

[minuteman-1]

BTW minuteman - I think we pretty much laid waste to that whole ''''bush lied'''' mantra liberals love to throw about....


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by dogsoul

We sure did, but the problem is that Democrats, specifically liberal will never admit that they are in the wrong, will never admit partial responsibility, and never stop trying to use the war and exploit America''s suffering for their own selfish political gain, due to their empty platform, that is basically higher taxes and wish programs to create dependency among the poor. other than that, nothing

[latrocinor-2009]

BTW minuteman - I think we pretty much laid waste to that whole ''''bush lied'''' mantra liberals love to throw about....

Posted by dogsoul
.. .. ..

These aren''t liberals - they''re haters.

[tejasdemo]

And I agree, I dont know how these crooks sleep at night.

[jon2012-2009]

This idea of anticipatory self-defense seems just another theory to provide a moving target for critics of Iraq given that the link to Al-Qaeda hadn''t panned out and no WMDs were found to justify the invasion. Regardless, it still must meet the same standards of evidence concerning the threat Saddam represented that go beyond reasonable doubt to put the lives of thousands of young Americans on the line. And, again, anything less than an impartial and thorough gathering of this evidence destroys the case for war.

As part of the so-called war on terror, this new view of Iraq does not deflect the high costs of this countermeasure--in American and Iraqi lives lost, continuing drain on the U.S. economy, the consequent increased risks from terrorism, and the image of the U.S. as an aggressor and itself a threat to world stability. We would have done much better just staying focused with Afghanistan and improving our security at our borders and within. To say Bush has kept the U.S. safe as a result is to ignore that this safety is being paid for with more American dead than 9/11 no end in sight.

[tejasdemo]

We always have a general belief in this country that rich people are smart people.

Maybe that will change.

[dogsoul]

BTW minuteman - I think we pretty much laid waste to that whole ''bush lied'' mantra liberals love to throw about....

[latrocinor-2009]

Honestly I don''''t know how these lyers sleep at night. ..

Posted by singingrick
.. .. ..
Theres no bigger liar than you grick

How''s the stalker molester tricks going?

[dogsoul]

"I feel more under attack from right wing Christian extremist zealots than I ever have, or will have, felt from Islamist extrenmist zealots "

Typical liberal statement - not a bad word to say about radical Islamic fanatics who have in the past, are trying to in the present, and vow to in the future kill you and your children... and are dedicated to the destruction of your country.

and yet they''ve got nothing but venom for Christians & Americans...

[kayaker1963]

Post quotes all you want from democrats, that just proves our point. That restraint was called for. Not one of them said we need to attack and occupy Iraq

[wdrussell1]

The one thing you looney wingers haven''t taken into account with your cut and paste quotes.

Not one of those people invaded Iraq.
The single stupidist decision any president ever made.

[kayaker1963]

I feel more under attack from right wing Christian extremist zealots than I ever have, or will have, felt from Islamist extrenmist zealots

[dogsoul]

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Saddam Hussein''s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

[achilles281]

minuteman;its all true what you said about the democrates and their tecit involvement in approving this war....I am for all AIPC democrates to be held accountable for over one million loss of innocent lives....its just unconscionable that no one is being held responsible thus far....shame on good for nothing congress.....

[minuteman-1]

Al Gore September 23, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

John Kerry February 23, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East

[dogsoul]

The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002