Say Anything Blog

Rob it wasnt an email, it was during one of our discussion in comments. I dont remember the subject.

JadeGold is right Rob, that is my concern. I want to know if a conservative like you is outraged and if you will finally acknowledge how poorly managed the war has been.

That should outrage everyone regardless of how they feel about the war.

Did you not read the post, or are you just reacting viscerally at this point? 

I am angry over this.  You assume that because I am not calling for the removal of troops from Iraq that I’m trying to cover it up or something.  I am not.  I have addressed the issue and called for an investigation.  Read the paragraph after the blockquote again.

Rob it wasnt an email, it was during one of our discussion in comments. I dont remember the subject.

Hmm...I have no memory of such a discussion, I must have missed it.  Please point me to it, if you would be so kind.

Put in perspective, Canada’s entire annual defense budget is about $8B.

America: Super Power
Canada: Not so much.

Our military and foreign aid spending is, I’m quite certain, several times more than Canada’s.  Thus, $9 billion is a much different amount to Americans than it is to Canadians.  You’re comparing apples and oranges.

Not that this excuses those responsible for losing track of this money.  As I stated before, I want full accountability.  If it turns out the President is some way responsible I will gladly condemn his actions.  I’m just not willing to jump to that conclusion yet, even if you are.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

You’re missing the point.

There are plenty of good reasons why we shouldn’t be in Iraq.  What this points out is yet another example of Bush’s gross incompetence WRT planning and managing a post-war Iraq.  How do you lose $9B?

BTW, I’m hearing the number may be closer to $12B.

Who appointed Bremer?  Wasn’t it Condi and that guy who went AWOL from the Texas National Guard?

Outraged.  Should it be proven that funds ended up in the hands of those other than they were earmarked, of course, conservatives will be outraged.  The only thing to be outraged about now, is the implications that some are making.

Funds that are at this point untraceable don’t reflect on the overall character of the war in Iraq nearly so much as the presence of an ecstatic electorate does.

I agree with you both on this one.  Clearly this was mismanaged.  Those responsible should face the consequences.

However, compared to other conflicts America has been involved in Iraq has been one of the most efficiently prosecuted wars in history.  Yes, the terrorists we have gone up against have been tough customers, but that does not give us license to cut and leave the job half finished.  That will leave the situation worse than before we went in.  Nor is “mismanagement,” either perceived or real, a good enough reason.

Cutting and running is not an option now.  We went into Iraq for the express purpose of removing a tyrant who we felt had the potential to do great harm to America and the world.  If we leave the job half done there is a very high possibility that Iraq will once again become a hotbed of oppression and terror sympathy.

Rob, can you imagine a scenario where Bush isn’t responsible for this lost money?

Yes.  Obviously the President has more on his plate than tracking where every dollar sent to Iraq goes.  I will, however, withhold judgment until more details emerge.

And David, when did you email me about responding to this issue?  I never received it.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"Yes. Obviously the President has more on his plate than tracking where every dollar sent to Iraq goes”

Understood. But we’re not talking about a few dollars gone wasted or missing.

We’re talking about $9B.

Put in perspective, Canada’s entire annual defense budget is about $8B.

"I hope that the proper authorities launch an investigation into where this money has gone and take the proper steps toward ensuring that it does not happen again.”

Rob, can you imagine a scenario where Bush isn’t responsible for this lost money?

Forgive me for laughing but I can’t Imagine a Democratic Administration losing 9 Billion Dollars and the Right not foaming at the mouth. And I am implying nothing, the facts speak for themselves, which has NOTHING to do with the election. 9 Million Dollars gone with no accountability. That should outrage everyone regardless of how they feel about the war.

You mean, we haven’t publicly tarred-and-feathered them to appease Bush’s political enemies.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

To you, perhaps.  I think he and his administration have done about as good a job as can be expected given the situation.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Would you hold a store owner responsible for a cashier over-charging customers?

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Yes, I would, Rob.

After all, the cashier was hired by the store owner.  The store owner is responsible for the conduct of his business.

Think, Rob, think.

Let’s say you discovered you were overcharged at your dry cleaners.  You go back to the store and demand to see the owner.  The owner tells you he’s not responsible--it’s the cashier’s fault.  Would you take that as an acceptable answer?

But we’re talking more than a few bucks.  It’s $9B, Rob.

Who at command level or above has been held responsible for any of the missteps in Iraq Rob? Name one and I will shut up.

Jumping to conclussions? Comeon Slarrow, you are much more rational than that. We are not talking about a few bucks here, we are talking Billions, and every conservative out there ought to be pissed that billions of dollars of our money has been spent with NO accountability.

Name a misstep in Iraq they should have been held accountable for.

And I’m still waiting for you to point me at that comment.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

JadeGold and David are jumping to conclusions. The article does not state that $9 billion is missing. It’s saying that it was not properly accounted for in the existing paperwork.

What happened to the money? We don’t know. But this is largely a function of accounting, not disbursement. There isn’t evidence to support the claim that we’ve been “overcharged” as in JadeGold’s laundry example.

Nor is it accurate to say we “lost” the money. Rather, this is analogous to you having $50 in your pockets on payday and having $1.50 a week later. Did you lose that money? Nah, you spent it, but you may not remember where it went.

Now, am I happy if the report is true? Not particularly. But I am sensitive to the context and the considerations Bremer mentions at the end of the article. Therefore, I don’t jump to ridiculous conclusions about the actual use of the money, nor do I consider it evidence of anything larger as JadeGold would have us do.

Ok, I’ll grant that Bush is responsible in that he is the person in charge of choosing who runs things in Iraq.  Be that as it may, it is misleading to claim that “Bush lost 9 billion” in Iraq.  Of course, you’ll be more than willing to spin it into exactly that.

But lets go back to the cashier/store owner example.  After you spoke with the store owner lets say he corrects the situation and fires the cashier responsible.  Would you continue to frequent that store?

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

” Would you continue to frequent that store? “

Depends on a number of factors including whether I’ve been happy with the level of service on previous visits.

But bringing this back to Iraq--isn’t it crystal clear Bush’s management and planning has been pretty incompetent?

Well lets see Abu Gharib, The lack of proper armor for troops, The poor planning for manpower resulting in hardships to thousands of National Guard Families and Stop Loss orders… Shall I go on?
And I already told you it was in a comment here on your site. I have no clue as to how to find the question, but isnt that just an obvious attempt at changing the subject. Okay, say I am mistaken and I did not specifically ask you the question, SO WHAT? You have now answered it, and you are now against the wall and grasping at straws to divert attention away from the obvious… This is proof possitive that the administration has badly mismanaged the war.
Now please answer the question…

See that is where we dissagree Rob, and the store analogy was horrible, of course you hold the owner responsible. But I want to address another issue. I have not and will not call for withdrawal from Iraq. As Collin Powell said, “We broke it, we own it.” My issue is that NO ONE so far, except for a bunch of lowlevel GI’s has been held responsible for anything in Iraq.

"America: Super Power
Canada: Not so much.”

You’re missing the point.  My purpose in bringing in the Canadian defense budget was just to provide a frame of reference for just how large $9B is.

Again, wasn’t Bush responsible for the management of post-war Iraq?

Oh, how could I forget?  Hat tip to David.

Making the US synonymous with torture.

"Name a misstep in Iraq they should have been held accountable for.”

No WMDs.

No Al Qaeda/ Saddam link.

“Mission Accomplished”

Not greeted as “liberators”

Not enough troops

Failure to secure munitions dumps

Discharging the entire Iraqi military

Ahmed Chalabi

$12B Missing

Diversion Away From Terrorism

Failure to build Coalition

Ill-equipped Troops

...that’s a start.

"What happened to the money? We don’t know. But this is largely a function of accounting, not disbursement.”

Hahahahahaha.  No problem with disbursement, Slarrow.  To make $9B disappear is a great feat of disbursement.

Slarrow is engaging in a bit of dishonest sleight-of-hand.  He’d have us believe accounting is a mystical art akin to alchemy.  According to Slarrow, it’s likely the $9B might turn up in the front pocket of Bremer’s weekend chinos.

Nope, accounting is a bit more concrete than Slarrow intimates.

And, to be fair, in a war or other disaster situation--I’d fully expect some monies to be wasted or lost or otherwise misspent.  But $9B worth?

Bremer’s explanation: “Western-style budgeting and accounting procedures could be immediately and fully implemented in the midst of a war.”

Apparently, Bremer’s non-Western-style accounting system consisted of pushing bales of greenbacks out the rear cargo hatch of a C-130 at 10,000 feet over Iraq.

No Al Qaeda/ Saddam link.

The existing link has already been verified a year ago.  Where were you?

I want to change the subject. I want to know why all of you Conservatives arent absolutely LIVID that 9-12 Billion Dollars could be “missplaced,� with NO accounting at all

We are angry, we are calling for accountability.  Did you not read the post?  And this situation has just come to light.  Maybe we should give it some time before we start screaming about accountability.

and you arent foaming at the MOUTH?

You seem to be doing enough of that for all of us.

“WHO do you consider responsible for the fact that 9-12 Billion Dollars went into Iraq and dissapeared into a Spider Hole?�

Well we all know who you’re blaming.  I think the rest of us would like to wait for more details to emerge.

And Josh, as far as I know there is no substantial link between Saddam and 9/11.  There is a link between Saddam’s regime and members of al Qaeda, but not 9/11 specifically.

To address Jadegold’s list:

No WMDs.

George Tenet is no longer the head of the CIA.  Porter Goss is in the midst of a massive personnel change at the CIA.  On a broader scale, our country is re-shaping the way we gather intelligence.  Yes, we made a mistake.  Now we’re fixing it.

No Al Qaeda/ Saddam link.

There are links between al Qaeda and Saddam.  Zarqawi was allowed to have a camp in northern Iraq, just to name one.  There was, however, no direct link between Saddam and 9/11.

Not greeted as “liberators�

Says you.  The Kurds were certainly very happy to see us, as were others.  And its rather hard to be greeted as liberators when the first thing we’re met with is terrorist insurgency, which we are still putting down.  Of course, you’ll say that the fact the terrorists didn’t throw down their weapons and give up is reason why we should come home with our tails between our legs.  Which is very defeatist of you.

Regardless, its a subjective complaint.  Its not a black and white matter.

Not enough troops

Says you.  Our current leadership in Iraq says we don’t need more, I’m willing to believe them over your subjective, non-expert viewpoint.

Failure to secure munitions dumps

Not sure on this one.

Discharging the entire Iraqi military

Admittedly a mistake.

Ahmed Chalabi

Also a mistake.

$12B Missing

It was 8.8 billion last time I checked.  Lets not start exaggerating.

Diversion Away From Terrorism

Most of the terrorists are in Iraq.  Most of the rest are in Iran.  Seems like we’re in the right spot.

And there’s been not one single terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, and there have been several attempts.  Seems like we’re doing a fine job against terrorism.

Failure to build Coalition

We had a coalition.  Poland?  Australia?  Great Britain?  I guess they don’t count.  And who else were we going to get to join our coalition?  France?  Russia?  China?  Hell, they were all on Saddam’s payroll.  He was paying them off in order to get UN sanctions on Iraq lifted.  You think they were going to go into Iraq and kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?  Of course not.

Ill-equipped Troops

Talk to congress.  They’re in charge of funding.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Hey Josh, I know Rob wont do this since you are supporting his viewpoint. Amazing that out of that long list that is the only one you dispute though, that speaks so loudly I am tempted to let you slide on this, NOT! You want to point out WHERE it was verified, since the 911 Commissions report basiclly said that there may have been some low level contact but NO proof of any substantive ties between Saddam and AQ. And besides, arent we talking about 9-12 Billion Dollars here? I dont think I want to change the subject. I want to know why all of you Conservatives arent absolutely LIVID that 9-12 Billion Dollars could be “missplaced,” with NO accounting at all, and you arent foaming at the MOUTH? Wanna explain that, becuase there is NO WAY IN HELL, you are going to tell me that you would have let Clinton Get away with it. You wanted to throw him out of office for a Blow Job for God’s Sake. So it is time for you boys to belly up, stop being hypocrits and answer the question, not with Rhetoric and changing the subject. Let me make it simple so even an idiot can understand.
“WHO do you consider responsible for the fact that 9-12 Billion Dollars went into Iraq and dissapeared into a Spider Hole?”

David, I’m not saying the amount is minor. I’m saying that you’re misstating the nature of the report and drawing conclusions it does not support.

Let me try to make the point again. The $9 billion is not missing from the treasury; it is missing from the books. Read the article and follow the steps. The U.S. occupation authority gives the money to an Iraqi ministry; thus, the US knows where that money goes initially. The folks at the CPA were counting on the ministry itself to keep proper records when it disbursed the funds. As it turned out, in many cases their confidence was misplaced; for a number of reasons, the ministries did not keep track of the money they paid out in a satisfactory manner. Among these reasons are some nefarious ones like fraud and bribery, to be sure; the article mentions ghost employees, for example. But there are also other perfectly innocuous factors like the need to pay those administrators and security forces who were trying to put the government back together without the old glue of cronyism and threats that existed under Saddam.

There’s also a cultural divide, too. Western-style accounting and GAAP adherence takes time to learn and adjust to. (Incidentally, JadeGold, like many other things you get wrong, you mangled that quote. Bremer wasn’t saying that Western accounting wasn’t used or couldn’t be used; he was saying it is unreasonable to expect Iraqis to pick up the system immediately in the aftermath of the military action.) The CPA was also making an effort to let Iraqis do the work without US personnel always standing over their shoulder; Bremer even notes in the article that this is US and UN policy that this critical report either ignores or blithely reverses.

Now, how much of that $9 billion was “wasted or lost or otherwise misspent”? Again, we don’t know. (And thus all the insinuations about all the money being lost or stolen are jumping to conclusions not supported by the evidence.) Indeed, we may never know. For my part, though, I believe most of it was spent as it ought to be because of the huge amount involved. Even a relatively small percentage of 9,000 million dollars sets up quite a few corrupt officials as minor princelings (a la the Russian mafia.) Given that the possible theft would have well over a year ago, I would have expected such players to be making a greater move than they are; at the very least, I would have suspected the blogosphere would have picked up on it without needing this kind of audit. Granted, this is speculative, but it’s at least minimally plausible.

Now, given all that, what precisely is the mistake here? Presumably it is not demanding greater tracking of the money that got paid. But how would that have worked, exactly? If the CPA had refused to release more money until the other money had been accounted for, they would have run the risk of delaying payment to the people who were rebuilding the government as well as alienating those who were supposed to be their allies (plus the cultural friction there.) In other words, to avoid this admittedly embarrassing report, they would have risked derailing the restoration of an Iraqi civil government that was already degraded far beyond what they had expected. It is easy to second-guess now and say, “Oh, they should have done such-and-such” because you never know for certain what the negative aspects of that course of action would have been. It’s theoretical, while the costs of the action taken are real and can be seen.

Again, do I like it that we don’t know for certain where $9 billion went? Of course not, and I certainly wouldn’t accept it from an American business or governmental agency. But this ain’t home; it’s Iraq trying to feel its way to a new era after thirty years of tyranny and corruption. But while it’s easy to wail about “lost” money or that it’s in Bremer’s chinos or down a spiderhole, it’s just a brute fact that the untracked money is a consequence of a course of action designed to get the Iraqis back on their feet. Given that the sovereignity transfer was early and that the elections yesterday were so successful, it may well have been a gamble that worked. (and I hope this doesn’t post twice...but it probably will. Sigh.)

Rob, if you’re around and can kill one of my duplicate comments above, I’d appreciate it.

Minor quibble with you on a couple of points: the ill-equipped troops charge is also something of a canard. The troops didn’t seem to suffer from bad equipment during the three-week war (and let’s not forget what a surprising--and-stunning--military success that was.) The equipment became an issue as the nature of the battle changed. Given the nature of military procurement and the turf wars in the Pentagon, the re-outfitting of the troops to meet the new direction of the threat has not been that bad.

On discharging the military, that was probably a mistake. But again, we’re seeing with our eyes the costs of taking that course of action. What risks came with keeping the military intact? Possibly greater intelligence to the deposed enemy on our positions and maneuevers, a possibility of rebellion or coup from the military, a continuing distrust and fear of the army and police from the populace, and just the ever-present worry of whether the man with the uniform and gun was really on the side of a free Iraq or just another Saddam loyalist biding his time.

It’s easy to see the benefits of what might have been and bemoan the costs of what has occurred. But my complaint with the Left is that they fail to see the costs of what might have been and minimize the benefits of what has occurred. To David’s credit, he has not pooh-poohed the successes in Iraq yesterday. But I still think he needs to think about this $9 billion with a little greater rigor.

My hypocrisy?  What commentary did you add other than to mock my spelling and type “lol?” But whatever.

Logistical planning

I’d still like to know what you mean by this.  Iraq is a huge operation.  There are a lot of “logistics” involved.  It’d be interesting to know which you mean, specifically.  But since you aren’t interested in clarifying this for a response, I’ll say that my thoughts pretty much line up with Mark’s. 

On the military side I think they’ve done about as well as can be expected, given the circumstances and nature of our government.

Regarding the rebuilding efforts, more oversight is definitely needed.  Mistakes have been made that should not have been.  Regarding this $8.8 billion, I think we need to wait for more details before we start throwing condemnations about.  I know you probably won’t, David, being more interested in using the issue as fodder for more criticism of our invasion of Iraq than in actually getting to the bottom of the problem, but I will.

Abu Ghraib

The matter is not completed.  No charges have been brought against them, yet.  That doesn’t mean they won’t and I’ve read in a few places that it could be happening soon.  Anybody familiar with criminal investigations knows you prosecute the people for which you have the most evidence first, then you move on to the secondary defendants.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob, if you’re around and can kill one of my duplicate comments above, I’d appreciate it.

Did it before you even posted your comment.

As for troop armor, I think you’ve got a point.  It seems like the only people we hear complaints from about troop armor are anti-Bush politicians and pundits.

Discharging the troops, again points taken.  Hindsight is 20/20.  It was a much more difficult decision to make at the time.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Sorry David, I addressed Jadegold’s comments and not yours.  I don’t know if you’re implying about the tone of my posts, but I’m willing to take “tone” advice from someone who does entire posts about spelling errors I make in comments.

Anyway:

Abu Ghraib

The soldiers responsible have been prosecuted and sentenced.  What else do you want?

Poor logistical planning

Could you be more specific?  That can mean a lot of things.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Poor logistical planning

Not setting up adequate accounting measures to track $8.8 billion is fairly poor logistical planning.  As far as military logistical planning, I think they’ve done surprisingly well.

Okay, let me address what you said Slarrow. My issue with the 9 Billion is just what you said, it is a huge ammount of money, representing more than 10% of the 80 Billion dollars of additional funding the adminstration initially asked for.
I understand the issues with culture, expediancy, etc. You are talking about, but we will have to agree to dissagree. It seems to me that this is another example of poor pre-war planning. We knew that massive ammounts of money would be involved in winning the peace, this (Along with the Haliburton overpayments, etc.) is in my eyes an indication of a reckless diregard for the American People’s money, plain and simple.

Along with the support personnel on the ground in the aftermath of Major Combat Operations, there should have been a more robust infrastructure in place to manage disbursements and ensure accountability. This apparently was not the case. As for the Troop outfitting requirements, I dont claim to be an expert on the subject, but all things considered, this was another example of piss poor planning on the part of our intelligence and Military apparatus.
I have been an informal student of Arab Culture for years, and am well aware of the history of the region, particularly the British experience there, the idea that Neo-Cons were preaching universal acceptance of “liberation/occupation” is ridiculous to all but the most partisan thinkers.
I see that Rob has continued to ignore my specific questions about responsibility for issues ranging from Abu Gharib to poor logistical planning, so I am going to take my leave of the coversation. Thank you for your intelligent and compelling additions to the discourse. I may dissagree with you 100%, but I admire your tone in discussing them.

Can… Wont… Did you like that post on Parentship? It actually had very little to do with your spelling and more to do with hypocrisy. Did it bother you that I used (sic) in the post? I know it could not have… could it? I think you know what I am talking about with logistics, so if you dont want to address it, that is fine. And as for Abu Gharib, again my point was no senior officer was disciplined over it? Now considering the rampant nature of what happened there, dont you think there are some accountability issues there?

David Anderson says, “I have been an informal student of Arab Culture for years, and am well aware of the history of the region, particularly the British experience there, the idea that Neo-Cons were preaching universal acceptance of ‘liberation/occupation’ is ridiculous to all but the most partisan thinkers.”

Who preaches “universal acceptance of ‘liberation/occupation’”?  Aren’t we fighting people who are against the liberation of Iraqis?  Namely Al Quada and an assorted group of terrorists?  Is it “partisan” to think that most people are for freedom?

"The folks at the CPA were counting on the ministry itself to keep proper records when it disbursed the funds. “

No.  Once more, Slarrow attempts to pretend the CPA had no authority or responsibility other than to shovel money out the back door of their building and hope the various Iraqi ministries that didn’t exist would provide them with accurate quarterly accounting reports.

Let’s read what the CPA, itself, said its responsibilities were:

“

Overview

The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) is the name of the temporary governing body which has been designated by the United Nations as the lawful government of Iraq until such time as Iraq is politically and socially stable enough to assume its sovereignty.  The CPA has been the government of Iraq since the overthrow of the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and his deeply corrupt Baath Regime in April of 2003.

In addition to protecting Iraqi territorial integrity and working to provide security to the Iraqi people, the CPA has committed itself to rebuilding all aspects of Iraqi Infrastructure so that, upon turnover to the first democratically elected government Iraq has ever known, that government will assume authority over a country ready, both internally and externally, to function economically, provide basic services to its citizens, provide for its own defense, and to play a responsible role in the international community of nations.

The Authority is a coalition of many Nations from all over the world, encompassing every major religion and ethnic group.  It is led by the United States and the United Kingdom.  A list of the nations which are part of this multi-national coalition of states which have undertaken to play a role in the financial, material and military assistance of Iraq is available here.

According to the Agreement of November 15th, 2003 between the CPA and the Iraqi Governing Council, by June 30, 2004 the new transitional administration will be recognized by the Coalition, and will assume full sovereign powers for governing Iraq. Upon this transfer, the CPA will dissolve.”

Obviously, Slarrow has never taken an accounting course or had experience with auditing.

Let’s address Rob’s points:

“George Tenet is no longer the head of the CIA. Porter Goss is in the midst of a massive personnel change at the CIA. On a broader scale, our country is re-shaping the way we gather intelligence. Yes, we made a mistake. Now we’re fixing it.”

Sorry, Rob, Tenet didn’t make the decision to invade Iraq.  Additionally, there was volumes of intelligence that asserted Iraq’s WMD capability was either very exaggerated or non-existent. Remember, this administration stated there were WMDs and they knew where they were.

“There are links between al Qaeda and Saddam. Zarqawi was allowed to have a camp in northern Iraq, just to name one. “

The 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee reports directly refute you.  Additionally, Zarqawi was in a portion of Iraq under US/Allied control--not Saddam’s.

“Says you. The Kurds were certainly very happy to see us, as were others.”

Says me. Again, the Kurds were in an area of Iraq under our control, not Saddam’s.  The fact that most of our casualties have occurred after Bush declared major combat operations were complete is testament to the fact we weren’t and aren’t greeted as liberators.

“Says you. Our current leadership in Iraq says we don’t need more, I’m willing to believe them over your subjective, non-expert viewpoint.”

Says me and the current leadership. Bremer is on record as saying we needed more troops.  And we’ve added more troops belatedly.

“Most of the terrorists are in Iraq. Most of the rest are in Iran. Seems like we’re in the right spot.”

They’re in Iraq now--because if you’re out to kill Americans, that’s where the hunting is good.  Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the Taliban controls portions of the countryside.

“We had a coalition. Poland? Australia? Great Britain? “

Whoopdedoo. Look at the coalition built during the first Gulf War or, even, Afghanistan. Compare.

“Talk to congress. They’re in charge of funding.”

You mean the GOP-controlled Congress?  The GOP whose head is AWOL George?

As it happens, JadeGold, I’ve had two accounting courses as part of preparation for a B.A. in computer science (geared toward supporting business applications instead of engineering particular problems.) I also worked for a company for three years that followed an open-book philosophy, so I got to refresh my memory every quarter when they passed out the income statement and statement of cash flows. So save your bluster for somebody who can’t see through your ridiculous spiel.

“The folks at the CPA were counting on the ministry itself to keep proper records when it disbursed the funds. â€? YES. That’s what the article itself said. Your little extended quote is a non sequitur; it has nothing to say about the course of action the CPA expected to take and the one it had to take.

The proper charge here is actually not poor planning but rather poor intelligence; the plan presumed an Iraqi government with a certain level of internal professionalism it did not in fact possess. That’s unfortunate but understandable; it’s hard to get accurate information out of a police state, and we didn’t have the spies in place to get that info out (and couldn’t have in the two years of Bush’s term up until then; this was a long-term strategic blindness.)

These are the facts on the ground, and I lay them out to pinpoint the real oversights and failures instead of taking your approach, which is to overstate the charges recklessly and hope they will stick. I see you pull many of the same cheap stunts in your reply to Rob.

Pah. Lightweight.

Sorry, Rob, Tenet didn’t make the decision to invade Iraq. Additionally, there was volumes of intelligence that asserted Iraq’s WMD capability was either very exaggerated or non-existent. Remember, this administration stated there were WMDs and they knew where they were.

The Director of the CIA went to the President and said, “There are WMD’s in Iraq.  Its a slam dunk.” The intelligence he gave the President is what the WMD statements were based on.  If you were the President, what would you do in that situation?  Parachute into Iraq and gather your own intelligence?  Highly unlikey, especially given the fact that several foreign intelligence outfits confirmed our intelligence.  If you go back and pull out quotes its clear that everyone, from Ted Kennedy to Al Gore, felt that Saddam Hussein was an armed threat.  It is only now, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, that these people choose to speak up.

The 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee reports directly refute you. Additionally, Zarqawi was in a portion of Iraq under US/Allied control–not Saddam’s.

You’re flat wrong.

Says me. Again, the Kurds were in an area of Iraq under our control, not Saddam’s. The fact that most of our casualties have occurred after Bush declared major combat operations were complete is testament to the fact we weren’t and aren’t greeted as liberators.

The Kurds are Iraqis, no?  And they greeted us with open arms.  And just because we’re being attacked by a terrorist insurgency that makes up a small minority of the population does not mean most Iraqis weren’t happy we are there.  Did you read some of the quotes from Iraqis this last weekend, after the election?  Did you read the story where the mayor of Baghdad would like to erect a statue to Bush?  I’m not saying all Iraqis like us, but its no where near the ill-will you describe.

Says me and the current leadership. Bremer is on record as saying we needed more troops. And we’ve added more troops belatedly.

Again, your 20/20 hindsight means little.  As you’ve said, we’ve discovered that we need more troops and our current leadership is adding them.  I don’t see where this is a reason to pull out.

They’re in Iraq now–because if you’re out to kill Americans, that’s where the hunting is good. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the Taliban controls portions of the countryside.

Afghanistan is now under its own rule.  They have an elected President, but clearly they’re not out of the woods yet.  But how long do you think that new democracy in Afghanistan would last if we had Saddam Husseins regime right next door?  During the war in Afghanistan there were troops coming from Iraq to Afghanistan to fight us.  This would have continued had we not taken out Iraq too.

And there are some remnants of the Taliban in the region.  These people have held sway over that region for decades.  You cannot eradicate them in a few years.  Again, you need to learn patience.  The problem is that you’ve made up your mind against this war at the outset and shape all this news into something that supports what you think.

Whoopdedoo. Look at the coalition built during the first Gulf War or, even, Afghanistan. Compare.

Glad you think so highly of our allies.  Your diplomacy is amazing.

We got who we could to help us.  The rest of our major “allies” were on Saddam’s payroll (France, etc.) With the UN and these other nations so corrupted by the oil-for-food program its no wonder we couldn’t get widespread support.  Most of the international opposition to this war stemmed from the fact that they did not want the goose laying the golden eggs to be killed.

Besides, going to war without France is like going swimming without your accordian.

You mean the GOP-controlled Congress? The GOP whose head is AWOL George?

Bush is not head of congress.  You need a civics lesson. 

Given how the nature of the war changed after the invasion I think our troops have been outfitted in about as timely manner as can be expected.  Maybe it could have been faster, but anywhere there’s politics and bureacracy involved it moves slowly.  That’s sad, but certainly not something you can blame on the President.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"The Director of the CIA went to the President and said, “There are WMD’s in Iraq. Its a slam dunk.â€?”

Tenet works for Bush. Ultimately, the responsibility is Bush’s.

Rob, you say you have a stake in a family business; let me give you a brief lesson they teach to every plebe at the Academy: when you have command, you own the responsibility.  You cannot hide behind your subordinates’ errors or mistakes.

I’m Flat Right

“The Kurds are Iraqis, no? “

Actually, they don’t consider themselves to be.  You seem to want to ignore the fact Saddam didn’t control 2/3 of Iraq.

“Afghanistan is now under its own rule.”

Not really. Karzai is jokingly referred to as the Mayor of Kabul because that’s about as far as his authority extends.

“We got who we could to help us. “

And it isn’t much.  We’re footing 99% of the bill and we’re suffering 99% of the casualties.

“Bush is not head of congress”

So, you’re saying the GOP-controlled Congress ignores its party’s leader?  It’s not me who needs a civics lesson.

Tenet works for Bush. Ultimately, the responsibility is Bush’s.

Right, but you cannot classify the WMD’s as a “lie.” As far as Bush knew, he was telling the truth.  Afterward he learned the intelligence has been bad.  Steps have been taken to correct that.  And now Tenet is gone and Bush hears the WMD’s complaint daily.  The issue is over now.  What else do you want Bush to do, resign?  Pull all the troops out of Iraq?  You want him tarred and feathered in Time Square?

I’m Flat Right

Did you read the links I gave you or are you pretty much just working on knee-jerk reactions?  The media has it wrong.

Actually, they don’t consider themselves to be. You seem to want to ignore the fact Saddam didn’t control 2/3 of Iraq.

Maybe they didn’t consider themselves Iraqis because Saddam Hussein oppressed them terribly.  They certainly seem to consider themselves Iraqis now.

Not really. Karzai is jokingly referred to as the Mayor of Kabul because that’s about as far as his authority extends.

Patience.  Rome wasn’t built in a day.  Radical Islam has held sway in that region for centuries, the Taliban for decades.  It takes time to eradicate that sort of scum.

And it isn’t much. We’re footing 99% of the bill and we’re suffering 99% of the casualties.

And it would be different if France and those other countries came along for the ride?  America always shoulders the majority of the load in the “coalitions.” Though I will say that your 99% figure is likely very high.  Got anything to back it up?

And really, what does it matter to you what other countries think of our war?  Why should we determine whether or not a situation is worth fighting based on France’s opinion of it

So, you’re saying the GOP-controlled Congress ignores its party’s leader? It’s not me who needs a civics lesson.

Not all Republicans do exactly as the President says.  Just because congress is GOP controlled doesn’t mean the President gets everything he wants.

And no, the President does not head up congress.  Separation of powers, remember?  You do need a civics lesson.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"YES. That’s what the article itself said. Your little extended quote is a non sequitur; it has nothing to say about the course of action the CPA expected to take and the one it had to take.”

You’re not thinking, Slarrow.  The article said this as part of Bremer’s lame excuse.

The reality is the CPA was to function as Iraq’s interim Government until the time Iraq could assume those duties.  That’s the stated mission of the CPA.  Thus, for Bremer to claim that all he did was shovel monies to ministries and let them account for it is, at best, disingenuous.  It was the CPA’s duty to establish/re-establish the infrastructure of Iraq.

When Saddam’s regime fell, so did the governmental infrastructure of Iraq. As part of de-Baathification, virtually all Iraqi ministries were left without leadership and its senior personnel. Many of the ministries’ records were destroyed and their equipment looted. Your argument is the` sole function of the CPA was to throw money at these depleted/fragmented/leaderless ministries and hope we get an accounting.

Sorry, that’s not planning--it’s willful negligence.

Like many rightwingers, you attempt to build your arguments upon a thin tissue of ignorance.  You pretend these monies (and I assure you, the losses will amount to far more than the $9B reported) are “lost on paper.”

Nonsense.

The audit establishes these are not “losses on paper.” Like any credible audit, you not only look at receipts and funding docs--you look at the supposed results.  And that’s what they’ve found--things like payrolls for entities claiming 8,000 employees but actually employing 600.  Or receipts for building materials, supplies, and labor where no one can seem to find the construction project.

JadeGold, I’ll give you this: you’re persistent. It’s the same note over and over, but at least you don’t stop. Nothing will satisfy you until everyone acknowledges that your shallow reasoning and reckless accusations are golden truth.

I’ll go over this one more time and then leave you to spit in the wind some more. The money was given to agencies without proper accounting controls. You may claim that “they’re responsible, they should have known better, they’re negligible”, but the blunt fact is that action needed to be taken to get the ball rolling. My argument is not that the CPA’s only responsibility was to throw money; I’m saying that it was Bremer’s judgment not to put the cart before the horse and worry about getting results instead of worrying about getting everything done by the book.

The costs of such an approach include the possibilities of bribery and fraud, and this audit has discovered some of those. But unless you expect me to believe that the audit found $9 billion (or more, as you “assure” me) worth of phony employees and nonexistent building materials, don’t tell me all the money was squandered or ill-used because you cannot know. There is a difference between “unaccounted for” and “falsely accounted for”, and I am not amused to see you rush past that difference to score partisan political points.

This is my final word on the matter. I am not interested in continuing conversation with one who must at every turn accuse me of ignorance, deceit, or bad faith. Keep your poison to yourself, neighbor.

Unless, of course, you can’t go to war at all for fear of losing a stake in the family business.

Right, Jadegold.  Make it personal.  That’s very mature.

Yes, you can. And the evidence demands it.

Jadegold, a “lie” requires the “liar” to have certain knowledge that he or she is saying is untrue.  Bush had no such knowledge, thus the WMD’s issue cannot be classified a lie.  A mistake, yes.  A lie, no.

According to the evidence he had in hand, he did know Iraq had WMD’s and he did know where they were out.  It turns out that intelligence was wrong.

If you want to hold that against Bush as a mistake, feel free.  I certainly do, though I’m not willing to tar and feather him over it as you no doubt are.  But you cannot call it a lie.  That is a misrepresentation and you know it, even if you won’t admit it.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Besides, going to war without France is like going swimming without your accordian.

It was deer hunting not swimming.  Sorry for being anal.  It’s one of my favorite quotes. 

"Besides, going to war without France is like going swimming without your accordian.”

Unless, of course, you can’t go to war at all for fear of losing a stake in the family business.

Ah, I knew it was something like that.  I was too lazy to look it up.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"Right, but you cannot classify the WMD’s as a “lie.â€?”

Yes, you can.  And the evidence demands it. 

There was a lot of contradictory evidence that Iraq’s WMD capability was non-existent or greatly exaggerated.  Plus, there were UN inspectors in-country and they weren’t finding anything.

Leadership requires you weigh the evidence; even if the evidence militates against your desired path.

Remember, this administration didn’t say we suspect Iraq has WMD, they said we know it.  And that they knew where they were.  By any definition, that’s a lie.

The intelligence wasn’t wrong; Bush lied.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/06/iraq/main647743.shtml

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,974195,00.html

Let’s also not forget what Colin Powell said in Feb. 2001:  “We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions—the fact that the sanctions exist—not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein’s ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...”

Condi Rice, in Jul 2001: “But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let’s remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”

Agreed, And that’s why Bush lied. Remember–he didn’t say he ’suspected’ Iraq had WMDs, he said he knew it. And he said he knew where they were.

Well, he didn’t know. That’s a lie by your definition.

But he thought he knew Iraq had WMD’s.  He had “slam dunk” intelligence, according to his CIA.  Really, would it matter to you if instead of being positive Bush had said “I think there are WMD’s in Iraq?” I don’t think it’d matter one lick to you, and it doesn’t to me either.

Bottom line, we went into Iraq based on bad intelligence.  That is not a “lie.” Period.  You can call it a lie, but you’d be wrong.  And I’m willing to let you go on being wrong since its abunduntly clear that you don’t listen to reason and resort to petty sniping when you’re up against a wall.

Cherry-picked quotes aren’t going to win the day for you.  You’re wrong, you know it but you seem to feel that if you keep repeating these things we’ll begin to believe them and join you in your unreasonable and totally divorced-from-reality hatred of Bush and all he stands for.

As for your quoted sources...CBS and The Guardian?  Why don’t you just start quoting DNC press releases.  Weren’t you the one lecturing me about the credibility of The Telegraph?

Unless you have something substantial to add to this conversation beyond my lacok of servince in the military, I’m done.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

"Right, Jadegold. Make it personal. That’s very mature.”

You mean as mature about joking about France?  A nation that supported us in Afghanistan and provided more troops than the UK in the first Gulf War?

“a “lieâ€? requires the “liarâ€? to have certain knowledge that he or she is saying is untrue. “

Agreed, And that’s why Bush lied.  Remember--he didn’t say he ‘suspected’ Iraq had WMDs, he said he knew it.  And he said he knew where they were.

Well, he didn’t know.  That’s a lie by your definition.

Look, I have no idea what kind of car you have.  So, if I say: “I know Rob drives a 2001 Green Honda Civic."--that’s a lie.  Especially when you probably don’t own a Honda Civic.

I’m more at ease knowing that Saddam didn’t have WMDs and that the intelligence was wrong. Had the CIA been right then Saddam would have undoubtly used his WMDs against our troops.

How do people know that Saddam didn’t have WMDs?  Get real.  Saddam had time to move them out in the 14 month “rush to war”.

I’m just amazed by the people who take a dictator’s word over most of the world’s countrys’ intelligence.

Let me see...take Saddam’s word or Bush’s, Kerry’s, most major Democrat’s, most major Republican’s, Russia’s, the U.K.’s, the German’s (yes the Germans), the French’s (yes the French), and others?  Saddam or the world’s?  Hmmm...only a fool would take Saddam’s and assume that he didn’t have any.  Fact is: we don’t know now.  We gave the dictator a lot of time to get any weapons out.

Doesn’t stop the fools for saying that they know Saddam didn’t have any, and call anybody (opps..just Bush and Blair) a “liar” for saying that Saddam did have WMD.

You know, I find it odd that neither David nor Jadegold have found the time to chastise the UN for “Loosing” lots more cash. 

The US government didn’t loose the 9 Billion, we appropriated it to a black hole… :::shaking my head:::  It’s sad that we did that!!!!  But then again, it’s sad that the UN is still in New York… It’s also sad that Medicare is going to cover Viagra with the 80 BILLION entitlement… It’s sad that Jesse Jackson wields any power; It’s sad that Teddy Kennedy got away with Manslaughter; It’s sad that we didn’t take out Saddam on our first venture into Iraq; It’s sad that people forget that there was a CEASE FIRE agreement with Iraq that Saddam violated; It’s sad that people think that Osama Bin Laden is the ONLY terrorist worth getting; It’s sad that… Oh never mind… I could go on for hours, pointing out SAD things from both the Left AND the Right… but oh well, Jadegold, just let your partisanship blind you to the good things that have happened. 

Dead on Likwid!!!!  Even Saddam thought he had em… and the amounts that were discussed could have been, EASILY, burried in tanker trucks in the desert!

Time for a hit from the inhaler, Likwud?

Why doesn’t Jade start a blog where he can regurgitate lefty talking points and spare the rest of us the usual claptrap?  Rob, I don’t know where you find the patience to argue with someone spouting such nitwittery.

"Jadegold, just let your partisanship blind you to the good things that have happened. “

What good things?

The 1400+ dead American soldiers?  The 10,000+ WIA?

The $300 Billion and counting price tag?

The loss of credibility in the world?

Making the US synonymous with torture?

Yep...Jadegold proves once again that he’s a partisan hack by his above comment.

Yeah… you know what… based upon the fact that Jadegold is a louse for his dispassionate statements to Likwid, I refuse to discuss anything further with he/she/it.  Perhaps you could keep David company while you wallow about the loss of life in Iraq, but wish ill to men, far better than you, here at home.

I think I will ignore the Troll…

"But he thought he knew Iraq had WMD’s.”

Not really the same thing as knowing, is it?  Particularly when you’re putting American lives in harm’s way.

I’d also take issue with your belief Bush “thought he knew"--how do you know?  How do you know he didn’t understand the evidence about WMD and links to Al Qaeda was shaky?  After all, at the time, there was a significant amount of debate going on within the CIA, DoD, and State Dept.

"The loss of life is atrocious, true, but we lost 3000 people in one of their attacks.”

Iraq didn’t attack us on 9/11.

“Ah, whatever…”

Explain it to your kids and grandkids.  They’ll be the ones paying for it.

“How credible can you be when you say, for twelve years, shape up or we’re going to get you… “

I hold the US to a higher standard than Iraq.  In fact, I hold the US to a higher standard than any other country.

No, this comment relates to national security.  Credibility is a large factor in bour national security.  If we lose or diminish it--our national security is also diminished.

“Abu Grahib was not torture. “

Most reasonable people would disagree.

Jadegold,

The 1400+ dead American soldiers? The 10,000+ WIA?

The loss of life is atrocious, true, but we lost 3000 people in one of their attacks.  Israel has lost many more than that.  If we did nothing and allow the nut bags to do as they wish, car bombings will become a common occurrence here too.  Would that be better?

The $300 Billion and counting price tag?

Ah, whatever… We’re going to spend that on all of these entitlement programs for the lazy and the stupid.

The loss of credibility in the world?

How credible can you be when you say, for twelve years, shape up or we’re going to get you… Think, if you have kids, and they don’t clean their room even though you told them to… would you wait twelve years before you enacted your punishment???  Would you wait longer?  How credible are you then?

Making the US synonymous with torture?

Oh yeah… The US is synonymous with torture… what a crock… We stood some guys up in a naked pig pile, made them watch some dominatrix chick have sex… Torture????  If we were cutting off toes and fingers, I would call that torture… Abu Grahib was not torture.  Besides that, if we can learn something from a terrorist that will save lives, then do whatever it takes, short of REAL torture.

Likwidshoe -

This is from your link…

‘The only thing that trolls can’t handle is being ignored.’

If you are implying that Jadegold is a troll, will you follow that advice?

Every other government in the world was telling us that they had the weapons… but you seem to work from the premise that the war was ONLY about the WMD.  It was not… The war had MANY reasons, just one, of which, was WMD.  Another, and more major to me, was the cease fire agreement that was ignored.

Jadegold: you have the distinct “honor” of being the only person to ever make fun of my asthma or to try to use it as an insult.  Congratulations for showing us all how immature you are.  Truely astounding.

Rob,

Reading this Comment thread, do you realize how evasive and shifty you appear?

“Talk to congress. They’re in charge of funding.�

If you don’t seem to remember Rob, the vendor that fits the Humvees with body armor had alerted the Pentagon that he could take on the extra work, all he needed was the go ahead and work order from the Defense Dept. After Rummy got embarrassed, the manufacturer got the additional work order - which means the funds were already in the Pentagon’s budget!

Got a link to this back-and-forth between the Pentagon and the defense contractor Clive?

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Sorry Rob,

Why don’t you try proving me wrong instead, and prove to everyone here (for once) you can back up your claims with evidence! It’s obvious that my statement in response to Jadegold’s comments reflects a deeper knowledge of the issue, whereas your lame, evasive answers to him are an embarrassment.

I’m not going to waste my time offering proof, cause you’ll immediately dismiss it as Liberal bias.

I can’t wait for you to accuse Google of being a part of the Liberal conspiracy.