Young Marine dies in Iraq - not just another casualty

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
My memory must be failing me because I don't remember George Bush ever saying anything other than the need to disarm this dangerous rogue man.

[/ QUOTE ]
What's the name of that operation currently going on in Iraq...? My memory may be failing me, but I don't recall it's Operation Disarm Saddam...

[theweatherman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My memory must be failing me because I don't remember George Bush ever saying anything other than the need to disarm this dangerous rogue man.

[/ QUOTE ]
What's the name of that operation currently going on in Iraq...? My memory may be failing me, but I don't recall it's Operation Disarm Saddam...

[/ QUOTE ]

Whatever the current state of the war is now, the original plan was not sold as the US freeing Iraq. For good reason IMO, that being everyone in the US would of said [censored] you bush.

Misleading the public is probably the worst thing an elected offical can do. It is a disgrace to the office and our contstitution. Of course you could never prove that the public was intentionally mislead so all the citizens are left to do is die for a cause they would of never agreed to.

Welcome to the lower class, my name is GWB I'll be needing your son/brother/father's life in order to make me famous and my friends a lot of money. Hope you dont mind.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever the current state of the war is now, the original plan was not sold as the US freeing Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe. WMDs were a major reason why we went to war. But freedom for the Iraqis has always been part of the reason too. Towards the end of Bush's State of the Union address in 2003, he says this:

"The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages, leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind or disfigured.

Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained: by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape.

If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning.

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country, your enemy is ruling your country.

And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. "

Couple that with the fact that since we took over the country, we began rebuilding Iraq and it's clear that while WMDs were the main cause for the war, liberating the Iraqis was also integral part of the war. We felt it was so important that we named the military operation responsible after it.

[theweatherman]

No doubt it is an integral part. I just feel that if the war was presented to the people as it is being done now there is no way in hell we'd go.

Since there are no WMDs it turns out that the only reason we went to Iraq is from regime change/ making halliburton bundles of cash. Now that reports of botched intelligence andout right lies is comingto the surface it is even more suspect what the actual goals of the operation were/are.

I'm not sure when the name is released but I'm thinking its sometime when it is too late to do anything about the war anyways so the name is entirely political talk imo.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was coined by GWB about a week after the invasion begun

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
No doubt it is an integral part. I just feel that if the war was presented to the people as it is being done now there is no way in hell we'd go.

[/ QUOTE ]
Solely for the reason of liberating Iraq? Probably not. That's why we're not in many countries right now that have horrible, oppressive leaders. The WMD aspect and the fact that Saddam has a grudge against the U.S. gives the U.S. an interest in toppling him. Liberation for the Iraqis is the cherry on top. We're stuck with just a little ice cream and a cherry, but that cherry was still part of the sunday.

[ QUOTE ]
Since there are no WMDs it turns out that the only reason we went to Iraq is from regime change/ making halliburton bundles of cash.

[/ QUOTE ]
1) No, even though there were no WMDs doesn't mean they weren't one of the chief reasons for invading. It just happened to turn out wrong.
2) From what I've heard, Halliburton hasn't made all that much off of Iraq.

Here are some interesting quotes from Bush's speech to the U.N. making his case for war Source
[ QUOTE ]
In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
United Nations' inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger . To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, I was more moved by Colin Powell's speech source

[ QUOTE ]
My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Our sources tell us that, in some cases, the hard drives of computers at Iraqi weapons facilities were replaced. Who took the hard drives. Where did they go? What's being hidden? Why? There's only one answer to the why: to deceive, to hide, to keep from the inspectors./quote]

Well Colin, where are those outdated computers?
[ QUOTE ]
Dr. Blix told this council that Iraq has provided little evidence to verify anthrax production...

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps that's because they weren't producing it.
[ QUOTE ]
we have amassed much intelligence indicating that Iraq is continuing to make these weapons.

[/ QUOTE ]
Really?
[ QUOTE ]
One of the most worrisome things that emerges from the thick intelligence file we have on Iraq's biological weapons is the existence of mobile production facilities used to make biological agents.

[/ QUOTE ]
And, how many have we found thusfar?

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger .

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm curious why you quoted this. My assumption is that it's because you disagree with it and want to show the opposite. But if Saddam was no danger, why did we still have the no fly zone and sanctions? I believe the duelfer report mentioned Saddam wishing to persue his WMD programs once the sanctions were lifted, which he was actively seeking (and even bribing UN officials).

The Houston-based firm has been given reconstruction contracts worth almost $500m so far, according to a US congressman.

Well, seeing that he did not have the weapons Bush was claiming he did, and that is the reason Bush made that statement, you tell me. Or, you just blindly accept whatever the Republican mouthpieces say?
Who did he pose a danger to other than his own people? And, if that's going to justify invading a sovergn nation, what about China? They've been oppressing their own since the cultural revolution, but we don't liberate the Chinese or Tibetan peoples. And I'm pretty friggin' sure North Korea has been in the business of slaughtering it's own since Saddam was just a boy. Tell me you don't see the hypocricy.