60 Minutes Bush Iraq Story

[Dari]

hagbard, send it to me or let me copy it from you. I was watching the jets game and took an accidental nap, missing all of 60 minutes.

 

[ElFenix]

they're not liberals, they're mild socialists. can we please stop confusing the two?

 

[ElFenix]

heck, you could see the dismay on many reporters faces when they were recounting the election...

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
its always about liberals vs. conservatives, republicans vs. democrats on ATOT.

Get out of the 'team mentality.' This isn't a football match people. Gather all the information you can, by yourself, from various (international, national, local) news sources, editorials, reports, and then judge for yourselves what you think is true or false. Don't just shoot something down so quick if its something you DONT LIKE to hear. Open your mind, just for a minute or two. Judge for yourself if you think a war with Iraq is justified/unjustified. But conservatives whining about liberals and vice versa won't really get you anywhere. But if you guys are basing your comments off of JUST American channels, you are missing a lot. And those that are basing theirs JUST off of International/"liberal"are missing a lot. I've educated myself from several different sources and have made up my mind what i feel about this U.S. vs. Iraq situation. I suggest you do the same.


.02

This is as it should be... how many Americans watch or read anything not originating from within the US? If they did, they wouldn't so easily fall into Bush's traps.

Funny how you think all non-American content is correct.

Charrison, i can't read Hagards mind,

but if he is merely saying we should read both international and local news reports, he is correct. I'll give a personal example: I'm very concerned about the terrorism in Kashmir. I read both the Times of India and Dawn (Pakistani newspaper) as well as local Kashmiri newspapers and THEN I decide what i feel. Is that going to provide me with a 100% accurate picture? Of course not. The INdians will write shiet that suits them, the Pakistanis will and the Kashmiris will as well. I'm suspect of EVERY media report for it being politically tilted. But i assure you, doing what i do is the best short of flying to Kashmir myself and seeing first hand, or interviewing Kashmiri people of various religions. I think the same approach can be taken with Iraq.

I do agree reading multiple sources is a good idea, as every media outlet has its own bias. However hagbard is a very anti-American canadian, so I am pretty sure that is what he meant. If I am wrong I will wait to be corrected.

 

[everman]

There is no denying that Saddam is a madman. He's gassed citizens of his own country, and Iraq regularly fires upon allied forces patrolling no fly zones. The 12,000 pages of documentation + several CD's to say they don't have any UN weapons violations are hard to take seriously.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
they're not liberals, they're mild socialists. can we please stop confusing the two?

I stand corrected.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
its always about liberals vs. conservatives, republicans vs. democrats on ATOT.

Get out of the 'team mentality.' This isn't a football match people. Gather all the information you can, by yourself, from various (international, national, local) news sources, editorials, reports, and then judge for yourselves what you think is true or false. Don't just shoot something down so quick if its something you DONT LIKE to hear. Open your mind, just for a minute or two. Judge for yourself if you think a war with Iraq is justified/unjustified. But conservatives whining about liberals and vice versa won't really get you anywhere. But if you guys are basing your comments off of JUST American channels, you are missing a lot. And those that are basing theirs JUST off of International/"liberal"are missing a lot. I've educated myself from several different sources and have made up my mind what i feel about this U.S. vs. Iraq situation. I suggest you do the same.


.02

This is as it should be... how many Americans watch or read anything not originating from within the US? If they did, they wouldn't so easily fall into Bush's traps.

Funny how you think all non-American content is correct.

Charrison, i can't read Hagards mind,

but if he is merely saying we should read both international and local news reports, he is correct. I'll give a personal example: I'm very concerned about the terrorism in Kashmir. I read both the Times of India and Dawn (Pakistani newspaper) as well as local Kashmiri newspapers and THEN I decide what i feel. Is that going to provide me with a 100% accurate picture? Of course not. The INdians will write shiet that suits them, the Pakistanis will and the Kashmiris will as well. I'm suspect of EVERY media report for it being politically tilted. But i assure you, doing what i do is the best short of flying to Kashmir myself and seeing first hand, or interviewing Kashmiri people of various religions. I think the same approach can be taken with Iraq.

And there's another issue. How is invading Iraq going to effect the situation in Kashmir? So, it might end up being a war about WMD, but it will be the people of S. Asia that will feel the effects. This is a *far* more dangerous situation than you'd think by watching the N. American media.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Dari
hagbard, send it to me or let me copy it from you. I was watching the jets game and took an accidental nap, missing all of 60 minutes.

You want me to send you a 2GB file?

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm just so terrified of weapons of mass destruction that only a huge oil reserve will calm me down. I just need some help not being blatant about it, because I learned in kindergarten that I wasn't supposed to just take what I want. Even at my age with all my experience I don't like seeing myself as a pig. That's why I just know that Saddam needs his country taken from him.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
heck, you could see the dismay on many reporters faces when they were recounting the election...

I was in the Senate press gallery when Reagan was re-elected, they were sobbing.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: hagbardAnd there's another issue. How is invading Iraq going to effect the situation in Kashmir? So, it might end up being a war about WMD, but it will be the people of S. Asia that will feel the effects. This is a *far* more dangerous situation than you'd think by watching the N. American media.

As far as I know there is no correlation between Kashmir and Iraq. Are you implying the US should invade Kashmir/India? India has a large enough force there to keep things in check. MAD seems to be working there right now.

 

[ScottyB]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I'm just so terrified of weapons of mass destruction that only a huge oil reserve will calm me down. I just need some help not being blatant about it, because I learned in kindergarten that I wasn't supposed to just take what I want. Even at my age with all my experience I don't like seeing myself as a pig. That's why I just know that Saddam needs his country taken from him.

hehe

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: charrison

I do agree reading multiple sources is a good idea, as every media outlet has its own bias. However hagbard is a very anti-American canadian, so I am pretty sure that is what he meant. If I am wrong I will wait to be corrected.

I'm anti-Bush, because I think he's an extremely dangerous man. Unforunately, most American's are blindly following him off the cliff.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: everman
There is no denying that Saddam is a madman. He's gassed citizens of his own country, and Iraq regularly fires upon allied forces patrolling no fly zones. The 12,000 pages of documentation + several CD's to say they don't have any UN weapons violations are hard to take seriously.

What do you expect the Iraqis to do when they're fired on, on a regular basis by US and British planes?

 

[SherEPunjab]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab
its always about liberals vs. conservatives, republicans vs. democrats on ATOT.

Get out of the 'team mentality.' This isn't a football match people. Gather all the information you can, by yourself, from various (international, national, local) news sources, editorials, reports, and then judge for yourselves what you think is true or false. Don't just shoot something down so quick if its something you DONT LIKE to hear. Open your mind, just for a minute or two. Judge for yourself if you think a war with Iraq is justified/unjustified. But conservatives whining about liberals and vice versa won't really get you anywhere. But if you guys are basing your comments off of JUST American channels, you are missing a lot. And those that are basing theirs JUST off of International/"liberal"are missing a lot. I've educated myself from several different sources and have made up my mind what i feel about this U.S. vs. Iraq situation. I suggest you do the same.


.02

This is as it should be... how many Americans watch or read anything not originating from within the US? If they did, they wouldn't so easily fall into Bush's traps.

Funny how you think all non-American content is correct.

Charrison, i can't read Hagards mind,

but if he is merely saying we should read both international and local news reports, he is correct. I'll give a personal example: I'm very concerned about the terrorism in Kashmir. I read both the Times of India and Dawn (Pakistani newspaper) as well as local Kashmiri newspapers and THEN I decide what i feel. Is that going to provide me with a 100% accurate picture? Of course not. The INdians will write shiet that suits them, the Pakistanis will and the Kashmiris will as well. I'm suspect of EVERY media report for it being politically tilted. But i assure you, doing what i do is the best short of flying to Kashmir myself and seeing first hand, or interviewing Kashmiri people of various religions. I think the same approach can be taken with Iraq.

And there's another issue. How is invading Iraq going to effect the situation in Kashmir? So, it might end up being a war about WMD, but it will be the people of S. Asia that will feel the effects. This is a *far* more dangerous situation than you'd think by watching the N. American media.

I can't say for sure what effect it will have. I can, however, say that after the coalition led attack on the Taliban and Al Qaeda in AF, the number of terrorist attacks in India increased and became more lethal and bold. i.e. the parliament attack, more brazen suicide 'fiyadeen' squad attacks directly on Indian military positions. This was an expected result, as the Taliban and al qaeda were fleeing east of Afghanistan. Pakistan has always used these mercenaries as a tool against Kashmir (india).

I think attacks on Iraq will probably lead to some serous consequences in South Asia. It may galvanize even more U.S. opposition by the Pakistani general public. This, may result in them voting for islamic harliners (they have already won many seats in Pakistans govt, they may get full control). If Islamic hardliners get in control, the entire world can be doomed, as they are the only Islamic nation with nuclear weapons. India will be attacked, as it is an old enemy, and India will suffer millions of losses due to the proximity, but then India will certainly fully retaliate and Pakistan will be wiped off. China (backing PK and weary of Indian power in Asia due to the collapse of PK at this time) and Russia (old allies with India) may get involved and then... WW3 begins...
i still think that the country we must all keep an eye on is PK. things can change their overnight, and the people there are VERY devout and we all know that common sense gets thrown out the door when people get religiously riled up. They (if the islamic fundamentalists do take power)will not care about nuclear fallout, or what the effects of a nuclear war will have on their people or country.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

I do agree reading multiple sources is a good idea, as every media outlet has its own bias. However hagbard is a very anti-American canadian, so I am pretty sure that is what he meant. If I am wrong I will wait to be corrected.

I'm anti-Bush, because I think he's an extremely dangerous man. Unforunately, most American's are blindly following him off the cliff.

And why do you find him dangerous?

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard
Good reporting, told just how full of sh*t and manipulative the Bush administration is regarding Iraq.

yet another content free post brought to you by hagbard.

 

[everman]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: everman
There is no denying that Saddam is a madman. He's gassed citizens of his own country, and Iraq regularly fires upon allied forces patrolling no fly zones. The 12,000 pages of documentation + several CD's to say they don't have any UN weapons violations are hard to take seriously.

What do you expect the Iraqis to do when they're fired on, on a regular basis by US and British planes?

So you're saying the Iraqis are being harrased and are victims here? Maybe if they'd stop with the anti-aircraft defenses and firing upon allied forces they wouldn't have that problem.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbardAnd there's another issue. How is invading Iraq going to effect the situation in Kashmir? So, it might end up being a war about WMD, but it will be the people of S. Asia that will feel the effects. This is a *far* more dangerous situation than you'd think by watching the N. American media.

As far as I know there is no correlation between Kashmir and Iraq. Are you implying the US should invade Kashmir/India? India has a large enough force there to keep things in check. MAD seems to be working there right now.

I like how you say "India has a large enough force to keep things in check". The US moving further into the region is only going to inflame things further with the Pakistanis.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Lucky[/b

Your signature line forgot "under god"

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbardAnd there's another issue. How is invading Iraq going to effect the situation in Kashmir? So, it might end up being a war about WMD, but it will be the people of S. Asia that will feel the effects. This is a *far* more dangerous situation than you'd think by watching the N. American media.

As far as I know there is no correlation between Kashmir and Iraq. Are you implying the US should invade Kashmir/India? India has a large enough force there to keep things in check. MAD seems to be working there right now.

I like how you say "India has a large enough force to keep things in check". The US moving further into the region is only going to inflame things further with the Pakistanis.

You are the one that implied a US invasion over there....

 

Yep, I watched the show. It was so funny. To be honest, CBS has a lot of guts to have spilled it as they saw it. Next thing you know, public relations will be campaigning to restore the president's honour and put down CBS' reporters.

But what was reported was legitimate in bringing out the sceptic's reasoning. You question things instead of accepting everything as utter truth. Most of what was reported there I had already suspected, as the president has never offered any evidence. The argument is always, oh, it's classified information.

It's simply a propaganda war. Propagandas aren't backed.

 

[Mje]

Wow, there's a lot of posts in this thread.


I don't really care about the news sources or how they lie, or how bush lies. But if Iraq does really have weapons of mass destruction, we should do something about it. Media manipulation takes place all the time, they are just being paid by the government now... Well, not 60 minutes apparently....

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

I do agree reading multiple sources is a good idea, as every media outlet has its own bias. However hagbard is a very anti-American canadian, so I am pretty sure that is what he meant. If I am wrong I will wait to be corrected.

I'm anti-Bush, because I think he's an extremely dangerous man. Unforunately, most American's are blindly following him off the cliff.

And why do you find him dangerous?

Like you have to ask me that?

 

[Moonbeam]

Does Pakistan have any oil or are they a good place to build a pipeline? In order to be a threat you need to have something to exchange.