To avoid these questions, Lookout123 argues that Franks did not have a mini-explosion even though we know any honest general in his position would have done same. Why does he waste time defending this nonsense? To avoid hard questions. Same questions that Lookout123 characterizes as condescending - so that he need not answer them. A sample of posts Lookout123 avoids so that he can support a mental midget president. Ignore what you cannot disupte? He hopes all other readers will forget these were even posted:
Quote:
It was common knowledge that Frank was not the only general furious with this Iraq invasion nonsense. Military analysts even demanded to see the only evidence George Jr had that Iraq was building nuclear weapons. The only evidence were speculations about aluminum tubes. Today we know that technical analysts by the dozens were correct - those tubes were only for making rockets - to duplicate an Italian rocket called Medusa. Even the company (Zippe?) who made centrifuges that George Jr claimed Saddam was duplicating said those aluminum tubes were wrong - completely wrong - for uranium processing.
|
Quote:
[Too] many sources - especially the video of him sitting in the FL classroom - say this president does not make his own decisions. He is told what to think.
...
He just sat [there] in that FL classroom for seven minutes. He did not even ask if anyone was in charge. I ask others repeatedly what they would have done if Andy Card said to them, "A second plane has just hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack." Everyone - yes everyone - says they would have gotten up and left the classroom immediately. George Jr never even asked one question for seven minutes. Seven minutes when fighter pilots still had no authorization to fire - to protect America. Why?
|
Quote:
If we had intelligent leadership, then the army and police would never have been disbanned. Today's American deaths and the resulting double or tripling of insurgency is directly traceable to George Jr ...
|
Quote:
So lookout123 - do you deny this insurgency is directly traceable to George Jr? Or do you assume this was inevitable. Any leader with even basic knowledge - or who had even seen the end of the movie Patton - knew disbanning of military and police was wrong.
Please tell us that George Jr did not make Iraq ripe for insurgency. Please explain where he made an intelligent decision to disban the military and police?
|
Quote:
Again you promote the George Jr mantra. You mix Afghanistan and Iraq as the same war. How is it that a war justified by virtually every nation in the world is same as the war condemned by most every nation? Only those who would promote George Jr propaganda or are completely misinformed would imply an Afghanistan war and an illegal invasion of Iraq are same.
Lookout123 - where does the invasion of Afghanistan - with approval of virtually the entire world - have anything to do with the invasion of Iraq - that was not justified according to most of the world including Canada, Mexico, and the UN Secretary General? Where do you find any logic in associating and justifiying wars in Iraq and Afghanstan as one in the same?
|
Quote:
In a previous post, I listed 14 successful, thwarted, or possible attacks by bin Laden on the US. Name one attack by Saddam during those last ten years. By mixing Saddam with bin Laden, you intentionally confuse the issue. Its called propaganda. A technique often used to mask the truth or to promote outright lies. Do you feel personally spoken of in a "condescending manner" because I exposed your propaganda?
|
Quote:
An idea that [Zarqawi] is as dangerous as bin Laden is more White House propaganda. When did [Zarqawi] conspire to take out 10 Pacific airliners, kill hundreds outside an American embassy, or kill thousands in an American city. Get real. [Zarqawi] is only a major threat when the president is promoting hype to justify his illegal war. You are representing the George Jr logic which is why your positions are exposed and not based upon facts.
|
The last and most major question that George Jr supporters must ignore.
Quote:
When will we go after bin Laden?
|
Not if - when. Not al Qaeda - bin Laden. Why those "Not..." clauses? Because George Jr supporters would have us believe we are looking for terrorists in Iraq. Lookout123 - when will we finally go get bin Laden? A supporter of George Jr clearly must know this answer because, after all, George Jr is constantly talking about waging a war on terrorism. Good. When does it start? When do we go after bin Laden?
We are talking here about supporting the troops. When the public blindly follows a lying president, then the troops suffer first and most. It was called Vietnam and Nixon. Support for the troops means we must demand competant leaders and never reelect lying leaders. Again lessons well taught by history. Blunt hard questions are asked here. To relect this president, George Jr supporters must avoid answering these questions. Still waiting for a George Jr supporter to answer these questions.
Maybe if we don't answer, he will stop asking, "When do we go after bin Laden?" Or was the invasion of Iraq just another honest mistake?