A guy on another board still believes Iraq was involved in 9/11

[LTR]

And I thougth the only one who still beleived that was Dick Cheney! :wtf:

Yeah, you guessed it - he's a big-time Bush apologist. Probably thinks he walks on water too.

Asked for proof that the was WASN'T necessary. :eyes:

Where do I even start with this shit?

Here's what he said:

The war in Iraq was necessary. Al Qeada had a deeper touch with Saddam and Iraq then we'll ever know.

How can you prove he didn't? Just because intel released so far doesn't have a definitive answer - PROOF positive of no problem with Keeping Saddam in Iraq and status quo to meet again with Osama - is like proving a negative.

Facts are - this was a strike on top of other reasons - to lessen the middle east of Terrorist safe havens.

Where is your proof that this was an unecessary war?

Got some simple links to get me started? I could fill up that whole board with links, but I just need an easy place to start. I also plan on turning the tables and asking for proof and links that there was a connection and a just cause for war (AH HA!!!)

Thanks in advance. I'll keep you all updated.

[genxpundit]

1. Well, first

The 9/11 commission said there wasn't a link on 9/11. Even most conseratives understand that - hell, even Hannity agrees with that statement. I don't think he got the talking points for the day.

[LTR]

3. Yeah, that's what I'm hitting him with first

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/

I need just some straight, to the point links.

He'll probably try to throw NewsMax links at me.

Oh, BTW: Welcome aboard!

[OpSomBlood]

2. If Iraq was involved in 9/11, why aren't we trying Saddam ourselves?

Ask him that.

[skypilot]

11. Yeah, ask him THAT!!!

I like that. Good one.

[Cheswick2.0]

4. he doesn't really believe that

He is cheneying with your head. He is just sucking up your energy. Post a few links and walk away from it.

[Robbien]

5. Why bother, if Bush said the sun will never shine again

That guy would believe it. That yellow ball in the sky, not there.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

6. Tell him to go see F911. If you're really anxious to prove this guy...

...wrong, give him the money to pay for his ticket.

Tell him that until he sees the movie and gets caught up, you don't have anything more to say about the subject.

You're also going to have to understand that some of these folks will NEVER believe that FratBoy and the rest of the NeoCons have lied to us since the start of the 2000 election. He may just be one of those people.

[LTR]

8. Him? See F 9/11?

This guy lives in a constant state of denial. He swallows everything BushCo throws at him, yet he thinks MM is a scumbag propagandist who uses "creative and sneaky editing" to sucker people into his 'line of bullshit'.

I even suggested to all the freeper goons to buy a ticket to "White Chicks" or some other flick, then walk into F 9/11. Even told them it's on BitTorrent. These people will never sit through a movie like that.

Yes, there really are people this naive.

I just want to drive the stake in, you know, finish him off. I am asking him for proof that Iraq did have a hand in this.

[happyExpat]

7. Dont know if this would help

A link from the Prague Post describing a former and a future PM trying to blame each other for the "Atta met iraqi intel guy in Prague" story

http://www.praguepost.com/P03/2004/Art/0624/news2.php

It's generally accepted as a fact that the initial report of Atta being here, much less of his meeting an Iraq intel agent, was completely baseless. This story only mentions the quibbling over who should get the blame for allowing it to go out. But it (this story) would easily refute the claim of Atta and the Prague connection to Iraq.

[dryan]

9. My 2 cents

I am not a Middle East expert or an expert on Islam but I know a little bit more than the average layman about both subjects. Anyone that knows anything about Bin Laden and Hussein's personal life and their religious beliefs knows that these two men hate each other. Hussein smokes, drinks, was unfaithful to his wife, and adopted many other vices attributed to "western" culture. I don't think he ever made a hajj either (that is a visit to Mecca which is the lifelong goal of every Moslem). Bin Laden on the other hand is a devout Moslem. After Bin Laden broke his promise to the Saudi Royal Family not to speak out against them (don't get me started on that one), he made overtures to several other countries for asylum -- including Iraq and Prince Abdullah asked Hussein to turn him down--which he did.

[keithyboy]

10. This is the line the new head of the Iraqi government is spewing.

He knows this will get him maximum support from the Bush regime.

[UTUSN]

12. Well, Heck, One of the 2 Iraqi Puppets Said Same to BROKAW n/t

[wadestock]

13. The Connection to 911 is as follows:

Iraq was invaded by the US after we considered allowing Iraq to take a certain section of Kuwait back after they learned of their drilling sideways into Iraqi oil fields.

But as a result of collaboration with the Saudis to assure us that it was a good idea to invade Iraq, we decided to go to war.

OBL...completely taken back by the US decision to go to war in Iraq....especially after helping the AQ defeat the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan...decides to plan the greatest terrorist attack of all time....911.

Thus the war in Iraq (Desert Storm) served as the basic impetuous for 911.

So do you get the connection? If Iraq hadn't have decided to take back what they thought was rightfully theirs....there would have been no 911.

[rpannier]

14. He probably believes....

the Earth is flat and the sun revolves around the Earth.

[LTR]

15. Here's part of the thread

My response to his post:

C'mon, I know you're smarter than this.

Was the Iraq War really necessary at the time?

Do you really still believe that Iraq had their hands deep in the 9/11 terrorist attacks? Hell, I thought the only one still spouting that line was Dick Cheney. Then again, he has been know to flip-flop on this one

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233810/

I know the 9/11 Commission doesn't think there's a concrete connection:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/
http://www.praguepost.com/P03/2004/Art/0624/news2.php

The reality was that Saddam and bin Laden didn't like each other. Saddam was too much of an egotistical prick to dally around with the likes of bin Laden, another egotistical prick. Plus, the disagree on one major thing that divides many in the region: Religion. bin Laden is a religious fanatic, and bases everything he does on a twisted interpretation of the Koran. Saddam was not the religious type. bin Laden considered Saddam to be a heathen. And one thing about dictators is that they keep their country on a virtual lock-down. Hence, the only al Qaeda terrorists with anything close to a significant presence were in remote areas not under Saddam's control. In short, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden had no use for each other. Their egos were just too big for the room.

Ever notice there's more terrorist activity in Iraq now than when Saddam ran it?

There are many other countries that are more suspect than Iraq in their involvement in 9/11. Afghanistan has already been addressed, and rightly so. What about Saudi Arabia? Most of the terrorists on the planes were Saudi. al Qaeda has gotten a lot of Saudi money. I'm not saying the Saudi government was involved in the 9/11 attacks, but I think more evidence points to them than to Iraq.

The main problem I have with the Iraq War is that it was not very urgent. Saddam was not planning to attack us anytime soon, unless spewing insults is considered a substantial threat. Our first priority was and still is Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. Remember when Bush first declared them his top priority, that he wanted them 'dead or alive' and wanted to 'smoke them out of their caves'? Well, recently he claimed that bin Laden was not much of a priority anymore, and brushed him off. HUH? The guy was responsible for the largest terrorist attack ever on US soil, and he blew him off? Do you really buy this?

There was plenty of time to go after Iraq down the road. The only significant WMD they have that can travel farther than a few miles is the shit we sold them in the 80's. The proof of links to terrorism, WMD, nuclear capabilities, etc. was far too flimsy to start a war over. This was reckless, careless and irresponsible. What Bush did was truly appalling, and will affect this country and the world for decades. It is Bush's Vietnam.

How Bush served up this steaming pile of bullshit:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=missing_link
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

Do you really support starting a war over flimsy and vague evidence?

Besides, if Saddam really is linked to al Qaeda, why is he being tried in Iraq and not in the US?

Now, I'd like to see you prove that the war was the smart thing to do.

------------------------------

Then, one of the other resident wingnuts chimed in:

can't believe you (two) are so willing to ignore threats and risks to America. It truly boggles the mind. 9/11 taught you two absolutely nothing, apparently....

Man, 45% of America is willing to get all of us killed. Never thought I'd live to see the day when half the country is more protective of an enemy than the other half of America....un-freakin'-believable.

There are no so blind as those who will not see...and the price for that blindness will be more innocent blood. If the liberal 45% of America gets power back, this country is finished...

---------------------------------

See what I have to deal with?

So, I type off a complete rebuttal to this steaming pile of bullshit, turning the warhawk position against him:

Killed? How?

With all this talk about how Bush is stompin' dem damn terrorists, we sure do have lots of threats of terrorism around these days.

I've heard all the right-wing bullshit propaganda about how the Bush Administration is going after terrorists, but I get the feeling it is all lip service.

I will say, members of al Qaeda have been taken out. Agreed. The war in Afghanistan did most of that.

But if Bush has made us so safe from terrorism, why are we always on alert? Why are there so many terrorist scares around the holidays? I honestly feel it is a way to scare the hell out of the masses, and keep them permanently on edge, living a life of fear. Remember the story of the boy who cried 'wolf'. Enough is enough.

Why isn't bin Laden in custody or dead yet? Why does it seem that Bush completely blew him off? Does it make you feel comfortable that the most tragic foreign attack on American soil happened under his watch, after he was warned about it, after his Attorney General favored reducing funds to fight terrorism, and while President Dumbfuck sat in a classroom staring at the walls and reading "My Pet Goat" after being informed that our nation was under attack? Totally irresponsible and incompetent!

Shit, if this is how Conservatives lead, give me a liberal any day!

George Bush is a buffoon, a coward, and a total pussy. He doesn't have the balls to really go after terrorism. He's all smoke and mirrors.

Your response has totally convinced me. Conservatives and Bush apologists live in a constant state of denial. Or they still believe 50's era propaganda.

I also replied to another one of his posts, saying "Talk is cheap...for armchair warriors". I posted this yesterday, and no response as of yet.

I doubt I'll get one. But I've got some of the others on the board rooting for me.