The real October surprises in national newspapers (updated)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 05:37:42 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  The real October surprises in national newspapers (updated)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The real October surprises in national newspapers (updated)  (Read 3638 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 25, 2004, 01:16:06 AM »
« edited: October 25, 2004, 02:27:45 AM by jfern »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_10_24.php#003777

Here's the article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/25/international/middleeast/25bomb.html?hp&ex=1098763200&en=fd35fdf4b6d46d61&ei=5094&partner=homepage

and if that isn't enough

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-10-24-insurgence-intel_x.htm

Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2004, 01:27:48 AM »

Equally unimportant.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2004, 01:28:53 AM »


Yeah, terrorists with nukes, who cares?
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2004, 01:30:57 AM »

I thought Saddam wasn't interested in nukes or WMDs?

It was just a happy, peaceful wonderful place.  Michael Moore told me so.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2004, 01:33:05 AM »

I thought Saddam wasn't interested in nukes or WMDs?

It was just a happy, peaceful wonderful place.  Michael Moore told me so.

We're not talking about Saddam. We're talking about nationless terrorists. You know, like Al Qaeda? The IAEA was guarding it during the Saddam regime. The US didn't give a sh**t about guarding it.

Why anyone trusts you guys with a war on terrorism is beyond me.
Logged
Trilobyte
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 397


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2004, 01:37:49 AM »

I thought Saddam wasn't interested in nukes or WMDs?

He was interested, yes. But it's already been said that intent without capability is not an imminent threat.
Logged
njsketch
Rookie
**
Posts: 38


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2004, 01:42:22 AM »

I thought you guys were more upset about the looting that took place at the local Baghdad museum?  Seems to me now that we're a few days out of an election, these weapons matter.

According to Kerry, this is the war wrong at the wrong place at the wrong time.  So who cares where these weapons go...wrong war...

Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2004, 02:06:55 AM »

I thought you guys were more upset about the looting that took place at the local Baghdad museum?  Seems to me now that we're a few days out of an election, these weapons matter.

According to Kerry, this is the war wrong at the wrong place at the wrong time.  So who cares where these weapons go...wrong war...



I thought you guys claimed to be concerned about national security. We knew exactly were the 700,000-760,000 pounds of high powered explosives was until we invaded. Then we didn't inform the IAEA after they were missing, hoping that this story wouldn't get out.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 25, 2004, 02:07:29 AM »

We're not talking about Saddam. We're talking about nationless terrorists. You know, like Al Qaeda?

There is no such thing as nationless terrorists.

So the terrorists in Iraq own Iraq? Gotcha.
Logged
Citizen James
James42
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,540


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -2.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 25, 2004, 02:18:26 AM »

We're not talking about Saddam. We're talking about nationless terrorists. You know, like Al Qaeda?

There is no such thing as nationless terrorists.

riiiight.  And terrorist orginizations like the KKK are actually supported by uncle sam.   And the mafia doesn't exist either because it couldn't possibly exist without the sponsorship of the state.  Makes perfect sense, if your big on conspiracy theories anyway...
Logged
freedomburns
FreedomBurns
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,237


Political Matrix
E: -7.23, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 25, 2004, 02:23:44 AM »

This is a huge scandal.  What gross incompetence.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 25, 2004, 02:41:27 AM »

We're not talking about Saddam. We're talking about nationless terrorists. You know, like Al Qaeda?

There is no such thing as nationless terrorists.

riiiight.  And terrorist orginizations like the KKK are actually supported by uncle sam.   And the mafia doesn't exist either because it couldn't possibly exist without the sponsorship of the state.  Makes perfect sense, if your big on conspiracy theories anyway...

Let's look at this a few different ways:

Definition of Nation

na·tion (plural nations)
noun
1. people in land under single government: a community of people or peoples who live in a defined territory and are organized under a single government

Under that definition, it's taken that if someone live in an area with a government, that's a nation.  Where were the terrorists born?  Where are they living...in a Nation, thus not nationless.
--

2. people of same ethnicity: a community of people who share a common ethnic origin, culture, historical tradition, and, frequently, language, whether or not they live together in one territory or have their own government

Under this definition, the fact that they are Arabic or Muslim defines them as a nation, not nationless here either.
--

3. Native American people or federation: a Native American people or a federation of peoples
the Apache nation

4. land of Native American nation: a territory occupied by a Native American nation

Both of these definitions wouldn't even come close to the topic.
--

5. group with common interest: a group of people united by a common interest

This one is very interesting, so they are a Nation just by having a common interest.  hmmmm terrorism seems like it would fit this one.  They are all united, al Qaeda and HAMAS to name a few.  So whatever definition you use, they are not nationless.  They fit into a Nation, they were born somewhere in some nation, they live somewhere and have some government, and they are organized and set to a single goal.  Where are they nationless?

How about country? Where is the Al Qaeda capital? They are weakly allied, lots of splinter groups with a somwhat common goal.


Logged
khirkhib
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 967


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 25, 2004, 02:55:46 AM »

I think the point is we didn't go in with enough troops to protect the oil, capture the weapon depots, and maintain peace in the urban areas.  We went in with enough troops to capture the oil supplies.  The lack of the other aspects is gross incompetiance.  It was the wrong war but hell we went there anyway so we may as well do it right.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,320
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 25, 2004, 04:08:42 AM »

I've read somewhere that Al-Q want to create a pan-Islamic Caliphate, centred on Baghdad.
Logged
MODU
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,023
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 25, 2004, 07:42:44 AM »



I've guess no one has heard of "The nation of Islam."  They don't have a "country."
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 25, 2004, 09:11:39 AM »

At best a blip.

Kerry blew it with the argument about the war.  He really isn't capable of effectively exploiting it.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,735


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 25, 2004, 02:17:28 PM »

We really blew it.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.047 seconds with 12 queries.