[tw]

Originally Posted by Radar

Iraq never attacked America, never helped anyone else attack America, never planned any attacks against America, and had no connection or collusion with anyone who has done these things.

Basic history. Saddam was doing everything possible to remain a close American ally. He simply made one mistake. Saddam completely misread what Americans told him as permission to attack Kuwait.

Remember the real reason why Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, Feith, etc needed to attack Iraq. Their legacy. Goes right back to the purpose of war - settlement at the peace table. When responsible men are leaders, then terms and conditions for surrender are defined up front. Military victories are thrown away when 'plans for the peace' are not made. Instead of making those plans, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc were busy drinking champagne. Swartzkopf had to make up those terms 'on the fly' because Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc did not do their jobs.

Well, Saddam would have been gone AND without a Baghdad invasion. 'Big dic' types too often misunderstand how diplomacy can accomplish so much more without excessive warfare. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, etc did not do their jobs. Saddam remained because these 'big dic' types did not do their jobs.

Why must Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc get a hard-on about Saddam? If they did not take out Saddam, then history will blame Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, etc. Neo-con legacy is at stake.

Now here is the part that totally mystifies me. Having not learned basic military doctrine, then, well, ... 'Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice...' And yet Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfovich, etc again made the same stupid mistake. Instead of planning for the peace, they again thought everything is won only using military conquest. These fools actually thought that democracy and prosperity would spring up as soon as the 3rd ID took Baghdad. They did nothing - zero - for seven months to plan for the peace. These idiots - Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc - even created the Iraq insurgency. They probably even financed it.

Ask yourself where 65 tons of American money disappeared into Iraq - with no accounting. $12 billion in American currency has probably financed the insurgency ... just like in Vietnam.

UG said he was reading Thomas P.M. Barnett's Blueprint For Action: A Future Worth Creating in this post on 9 Nov 2006. Why is UG so silent? These concepts of 'planning for the peace' are more complex than Animal Farm. Concept contrary to his political agenda. So UG only comprehends what agrees with his political agenda? Surprise UG. Thomas Barnett was brought into the White House when they thought he was talking about their political agenda. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, etc had but another chance to learn how not to make the same mistake again. And like Urbane Guerrilla, their political agenda is more important than reality. Neo-cons failed to understand what Barnett was talking about - because extremists only know things defined by a poltical agenda.

Saddam was never a threat. Saddam was doing everything possible to remain a close American ally. So close that we gave him access to the most secret satellite photographs. How did America end up at war with Saddam? Well, how did America end up at war with another American ally - Ho Chi Minh? It is called learning the lessons of history - as even defined in military doctrine 2500 years ago. And yet still the 'big dic' types such as UG refuse to learn from facts. 'Big dics' instead 'know' using a political agenda.

“Mission Accomplished” is about the legacy of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, and those other neo-cons who failed to 'plan for the peace'. Failed in Desert Storm because they used political agendas rather than logic from history to make decisions. Just another reason why intelligent people are centrists. Richard Reed (another extremist) demonstrated same intelligence when he could not give himself a hot foot.

“Mission Accomplished” is about the legacy of extremists AND now about protecting George Jr's legacy. American soldiers are as expendable as 65 tons of American cash. And yet Urbane Guerrilla calls Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovich, Feith, etc good men? Good extremists maybe. Good men. No. They have a political agenda and a legacy to protect. We are nothing more than cannon fodder for their political agendas. Protecting their legacy is the reason for "Mission Accomplished". Protecting George Jr's legacy is why they ignore the Iraq Study Group and other intelligent solutions.

Meanwhile, Urbane Guerrilla suddenly went very quiet about reading Thomas Barnett. Barnett was not promoting UG's political agenda. Thomas Barnett, instead, demonstrated by UG's favorite extremists had to attack Saddam again (to protect their legacy) - and made the same mistake again (did not plan for the peace).