Skip to comments.
Rep. Rangel wants inquiry on war's cause
Waterbury Republican-American ^
| June 17, 2005
| A.P. Wire
Posted on 06/17/2005 10:54:05 AM PDT by Graybeard58
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-138 next last
They need to conduct an investigation to see if Hannity's good friend Charley Rangel has a brain.
To: Graybeard58
Here's a newspaper for Rep. Rangel, to get him up to date:
2
posted on
06/17/2005 10:56:42 AM PDT
by
thoughtomator
(The U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government)
To: Graybeard58
I'd prefer an investigation of what caused Charlie Rangel.
3
posted on
06/17/2005 10:58:56 AM PDT
by
RexBeach
To: RexBeach
I'd prefer an investigation of what caused Charlie Rangel. Thanks for my laugh of the day!
4
posted on
06/17/2005 11:00:20 AM PDT
by
sarasotarepublican
(The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.)
To: Graybeard58
Errr .. excuse me .. wasn't that what the 911 Commission was all about ..?? Why do we have to go down that road again ..??
The dems are just mad because all their carping and whining is not gaining them any ground.
5
posted on
06/17/2005 11:01:51 AM PDT
by
CyberAnt
(President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
To: thoughtomator
What is your answer to the obvious observation that Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9-11, and that the leaders who DID attack us are
still at large? I was in lower Manhattan on 9-11. I passionately desire to see Al Queda, Osama, etc captured and justice served. But Uday and Kousey getting caught had zero to do with it. Same goes for Saddam, given that the administration itself admits the WMD info was crapola. So let's have a new headline for Rangel.
6
posted on
06/17/2005 11:02:00 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Don't follow leaders)
To: CyberAnt
Actually, I think they're losing ground at a pretty good clip.
7
posted on
06/17/2005 11:03:24 AM PDT
by
JennysCool
(Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have.)
To: sarasotarepublican
You are most welcome. Enjoy your weekend!
And if you see Charlie Rangel, tell him to have a happy day!
8
posted on
06/17/2005 11:03:24 AM PDT
by
RexBeach
To: CyberAnt
Errr .. excuse me .. wasn't that what the 911 Commission was all about ..?? Why do we have to go down that road again ..?? I think the 9-11 commission had to do with 9-11, didn't it? Since Iraq has nothing to do with 9-11, I don't get the connection. Did they investigate the Iraq intel failures on the 9-11 commission? I thought they focused on 9-11 intel failures. I know, with all the failures, it's hard to keep them straight.
9
posted on
06/17/2005 11:03:31 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Don't follow leaders)
To: Graybeard58
Well, you see Charley, it all started back in 570 AD in a town called Mecca...
10
posted on
06/17/2005 11:03:38 AM PDT
by
Gator101
To: Huck
How do you answer the many ties Saddam had to terror? He had Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas, and Al Zarquawi in Baghdad just before his regime fell.
I can put you in touch with a freed Iraqi who can tell you a whole lot about what Iraq was like under Saddam and who he was connected with.
BTW, the WMD went over the border to Syria in the months leading up to the war.
11
posted on
06/17/2005 11:06:23 AM PDT
by
sauropod
(De gustibus non est disputandum)
To: Huck
It is questionable that Saddam had ties to 9-11. It is not questionable that Saddam had ties to terror.
12
posted on
06/17/2005 11:07:22 AM PDT
by
sauropod
(De gustibus non est disputandum)
To: Graybeard58
Rangel is proof that anyone, even the severely mentally handicapped can get themselves elected to Congress. Whadda country.
13
posted on
06/17/2005 11:07:58 AM PDT
by
FlingWingFlyer
(We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
To: sauropod
How do you answer the many ties Saddam had to terror? None of which had anything to do with 9-11. Even the Bush administration admits that. Lots of countries have ties to terror groups, including the United States (how much money do we send to Hamas??)
I can put you in touch with a freed Iraqi who can tell you a whole lot about what Iraq was like under Saddam and who he was connected with.
And I can find stories about Rwanda, Sudan, Cuba, China, etc etc etc. None of it has anything to do with 9-11.
BTW, the WMD went over the border to Syria in the months leading up to the war.
Total speculation, based on crappy photos from the same sources who got everything else wrong.
14
posted on
06/17/2005 11:09:45 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Don't follow leaders)
To: Huck
"crappy photos" = satellite imagery?
15
posted on
06/17/2005 11:11:03 AM PDT
by
sauropod
(De gustibus non est disputandum)
To: sauropod
The implication of post #2, repeated often by broken glass bushpublicans, is that somehow the Iraq War is the logical reaction to 9-11, which is total Barbra Streisand. Going after Al Quaida had to do with 9-11. Iraq was and is a sideshow, based on bad intel, leaving nothing but an improvised Wilsonian utopianism to paper over the abject failures and misjudgements. It's a good thing the other party is so inept and unfit.
16
posted on
06/17/2005 11:12:08 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Don't follow leaders)
To: Graybeard58
- The war was not that long ago. If Rangel cannot remember - it may be the onset of dementia. Maybe not even the onset....
- The "buildup" to the war was a protracted period during which Saddam Hussein was repeatedly told what he could do to avoid it. If Rangel wants to call it a "rush to war" or a hasty judgment - he can - but it flies in the face of what actually occurred.
- The decision to go to war was based on a number of factors, including the presence of WMD or WMD capabilities.
- Intelligence is never perfect.
- There was uncertainty as to the state of WMD capabilities in Iraq in March 2003.
- Leadership involves decision making in the face of uncertainty or imperfect intelligence.
- The President knew that whatever the true state of nature (i.e., that Iraq had WMD or that Iraq did not have WMD) in March 2003, it would be only a matter of months before the end of the war- and that would afford an investigation, and on the ground audit of the true state of Iraq's WMD capabilities. The President also knew that this audit or investigation would be completed well before the 2004 election campaign was over, and that a finding that there were no weapons or capabilities would be politically damaging.
- He erred on the conservative side by electing to go to war, given the uncertainty, in order to protect the United States. If the President had decided not to take action and the intelligence had been understated (i.e. the true state of nature was that Iraq was closer to nuclear and biological capability than we had surmised) then the nation and the Middle East would be at risk.
- The nation voted in November 2004 with full knowledge of 1-8 (above).
- Charlie Rangle is a dickhead.
17
posted on
06/17/2005 11:12:10 AM PDT
by
Wally_Kalbacken
(Seldom right, but never in doubt.)
To: sauropod
Remember Powell's embarrassingly inaccurate slideshow? Nice photos.
18
posted on
06/17/2005 11:12:42 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Don't follow leaders)
To: Huck
We went in to Iraq to remove the murderous bastard Saadam from power after he defied numerous U.N. resolutions.
He's gone and that's a good thing, his insane sons are gone too and that's another good thing.
Democracy is happening in Iraq and that's the best thing.
19
posted on
06/17/2005 11:13:03 AM PDT
by
Graybeard58
(Remember and pray for Spec.4 Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
To: Huck
1) I am NOT a broken glass Republican.
2) I DID NOT make the argument that Iraq and 9-11 were linked explicitly.
3) The War on Iraq was a just war. No sideshow. Look at a map and see where Iran and Syria and Afghanistan are wrt each other.
4) Remind yourself that we were kicked out of Saudi Arabia. Where were we gonna have a base?
20
posted on
06/17/2005 11:14:59 AM PDT
by
sauropod
(De gustibus non est disputandum)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-138 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson