LOL, hilarious alternate history

[MKSheppard]

You generally try not to kill several hundred people with an Air National
Guard AIM-9 Sidewinder up their aircraft's engines without concrete proof,
y'know? Careers are broken, presidencies destroyed over that kind of stuff.

God Damn quote fuck up - I was replying to this:

Do you have any idea how inane that excuse is? That's like saying that JFK and EXCOMM should have waited for "proof" about just what the Soviets were going to do with those missiles they were setting up on Cuba before being silly enough to slap up that naval blockade when they did.

[KrauserKrauser]

Degan are you like 4? Do you not grasp political realities?

The bomb plot was a completely different situation. While with the plot you had concrete evidence and even a cooperating witness to get information from which is easy to act upon, the situation for 9-11 was far less concrete. At what point can I as a president justify the actions necessary to take out civilian airliners? Hijacking? Well now that might be the case but even with previous vague warnings of possible hijackings with more lethal intentions, how do I know this is the one? What if the 9-11 attackers were just planning to fly over NY to jazz off the goveernment before flying to Libya? What if they got too near and then I blew them up? They weren't going to suicide mission, they were just normal hijackers with a civilian crew that could have otherwise survived. Were I a president that did such a thing, I would be crucified, possibly impeached.

You are too naive in this situation, trying to bring your hate of Bush into a situation where it does not belong.

[MKSheppard]

Lets not forget that the information contained in the August 6th PDB
was three-year old information from the Clinton Administration,
not hot new intelligence, according to Bob Graham.

[Sam Or I]

The US government was asleep, no doubt about it. It is easy to look back on something and say what we SHOULD have done. Clinton Pretty much did the same thing during the first WTC attack, and only by luck the trucks were placed incorrectly or it would have happened in 1993. The FBI knew of the first WTC attacks before hand.

It is not one administrations fault, but how these kind of threats were dealt with in the past.

[MKSheppard]

The FBI knew of the first WTC attacks before hand.

Yeah I think they wanted to keep that cell operating so they could go
further up the food chain; too bad the cell moved one step ahead of them

[Joe]

The US government was asleep, no doubt about it. It is easy to look back on something and say what we SHOULD have done. Clinton Pretty much did the same thing during the first WTC attack, and only by luck the trucks were placed incorrectly or it would have happened in 1993. The FBI knew of the first WTC attacks before hand.

Actually, the first WTC would have been far worse than 9/11 had everything gone to plan. They wanted to release a large cloud of cyanide as well, but luckily they fucked that up too.

There's also Operation Bojinka, which we managed to prevent but only was discovered because one of the perpetrators was kind enough to get his stupid ass caught by the Filipino cops.

[Patrick Degan]

Degan are you like 4? Do you not grasp political realities?

No, but I often have to answer the questions of two-year olds like you, it seems.

The bomb plot was a completely different situation. While with the plot you had concrete evidence and even a cooperating witness to get information from which is easy to act upon, the situation for 9-11 was far less concrete. At what point can I as a president justify the actions necessary to take out civilian airliners? Hijacking? Well now that might be the case but even with previous vague warnings of possible hijackings with more lethal intentions, how do I know this is the one? What if the 9-11 attackers were just planning to fly over NY to jazz off the goveernment before flying to Libya? What if they got too near and then I blew them up? They weren't going to suicide mission, they were just normal hijackers with a civilian crew that could have otherwise survived. Were I a president that did such a thing, I would be crucified, possibly impeached.

And all this handwaving of yours demonstrates what, exactly?

You are too naive in this situation, trying to bring your hate of Bush into a situation where it does not belong.

Nice little Appeal to Motive fallacy. Try again.

[Patrick Degan]

Um, yes. That's what responsible Commanders-in-Chief actually do. I'm sorry this is beyond your intellectual grasp.

I'm sorry to report that Bush had an entire schoolroom in that florida School packed jam full of communications equipment as was the SOP for wherever the president goes;

And yet for some strange reason he doesn't let word of what's happening interrupt StoryTime with the kids.

and unfortunately he hasn't ever lost the nuclear football once. [/quote]

Uh huh. Instead, he lost two buildings and 2800 lives.

[Iceberg]

Um, yes. That's what responsible Commanders-in-Chief actually do. I'm sorry this is beyond your intellectual grasp.

I'm sorry to report that Bush had an entire schoolroom in that florida
School packed jam full of communications equipment as was the SOP
for wherever the president goes; and unfortunately he hasn't ever lost
the nuclear football once.

A responsible Commander in Chief would have said "Something's come up and I have to go" the SECOND he heard that something even SLIGHTLY out of the ordinary was going on in his country. Instead, Bush fucked around in a classroom in fucking South Florida for fucking half an hour while his country was under attack, and you're sitting around here saying that's even the slightest bit excusable?

[Patrick Degan]

You generally try not to kill several hundred people with an Air National Guard AIM-9 Sidewinder up their aircraft's engines without concrete proof, y'know? Careers are broken, presidencies destroyed over that kind of stuff.

We're talking about a situation which could not wait for absolute, concrete proof. Sure, it would have been a most terrible decision for any president to have to make, and it's likely he'd never escape the consequences of it. Unfortunately, that's why the Big Man is in charge and that's why decisions like that cannot be subject to political considerations either. It's a judgement call and woe betide you if you're wrong, but when the consequences of not acting are weighed in the balance, you have to err on the side of caution.

And the president who has to make that choice also has to be prepared to take the hit for it afterward.

[0.1]

Bah, of course they (the Republicans) knew ahead of time. Don't you believe the Arab media when they said all the Jews were evacuated ahead of time to minimize their casualties in the twin towers.

Bush knew about 9/11 just like Dean intimated and did nothing, so he can go to war in Iraq to finish off what daddy started. It so plainly black and white and you'd have to be a fanatical Republican to totally miss it.

All of this was planned out way in advance, given how absolutely diabolical Bush is, he staged the phony election in 2000, if you look hard enough, I'm sure you'd find that most of those 19 hijackers voted for Bush too. It's amazing how someone so diabolical could be simultaneously so stupid.

To Degan, I disagree on only one point, Bush is not negligent in his duties, he is a mass criminal terrorist. uh huh... yup. Eventually he'll supplant the UN with his cronies, and start up the invasion of Canada. Only the UN can help us now, where are those brave Russians and French who would be at the forefront of the opposition to American imperialism just as they had done in the 40s against the evil Nazis.

[Durandal]

I'm no fan of Bush, but are you seriously suggesting that the President of the United States stood by and signed off the lives of almost 3000 innocent civilians (most of whom were American citizens)? Bush's fundamentalism is a source of great injustice in the nation today, but it also pretty much guarantees that he'd never let such a thing just happen.

[phongn]

I'm no fan of Bush, but are you seriously suggesting that the President of the United States stood by and signed off the lives of almost 3000 innocent civilians (most of whom were American citizens)? Bush's fundamentalism is a source of great injustice in the nation today, but it also pretty much guarantees that he'd never let such a thing just happen.

I think 0.1 was being sarcastic.

[MKSheppard]

A responsible Commander in Chief would have said "Something's come up and I have to go" the SECOND he heard that something even SLIGHTLY out of the ordinary was going on in his country. Instead, Bush fucked around in a classroom in fucking South Florida for fucking half an hour while his country was under attack, and you're sitting around here saying that's even the slightest bit excusable?

You forget that he didn't leave until after the SECOND plane hit the WTC.

Until Plane #2 hit it, everyone was pretty much thinking, WTF? Pilot had
a heart attack, lost control, but the second time it happened...

[Natorgator]

A bit of relevant text from the PDB:

Al-Qa'ida members - including some who are US citizens - have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparation for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations through the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives."

The day after the president saw this memo, he was on vacation in Texas and what was he talking about? Saddam Hussein, WMDs, and missile defense. He was on vacation the entire fucking month. I guess the memo wasn't important enough.

And how can they honestly say with a straight face that it contained no new information? Rice herself admitted that there were high levels of chatter in spring/summer of '01. I realize hindsight is 20/20, but they could have fucking tried, for crying out loud.

[MKSheppard]

And how can they honestly say with a straight face that it contained no new information?

Even Bob Graham says it was three year old information

[MKSheppard]

We're talking about a situation which could not wait for absolute, concrete proof. Sure, it would have been a most terrible decision for any president to have to make, and it's likely he'd never escape the consequences of it. Unfortunately, that's why the Big Man is in charge and that's why decisions like that cannot be subject to political considerations either. It's a judgement call and woe betide you if you're wrong, but when the consequences of not acting are weighed in the balance, you have to err on the side of caution.

Sort of like Iraq?

[Darth Wong]

We're talking about a situation which could not wait for absolute, concrete proof. Sure, it would have been a most terrible decision for any president to have to make, and it's likely he'd never escape the consequences of it. Unfortunately, that's why the Big Man is in charge and that's why decisions like that cannot be subject to political considerations either. It's a judgement call and woe betide you if you're wrong, but when the consequences of not acting are weighed in the balance, you have to err on the side of caution.

Sort of like Iraq?

How is it "caution" to initiate a massive invasion which will tie up the bulk of your military for years without a shred of evidence?

[MKSheppard]

So Deegan, you think it's okay for the US president to order
hundreds of american citizens to be killed by their own military
on sketchy intelligence and suspicious behavior?

If so, why is it evil that Bush went into Iraq, despite some very
strong signals and probable cause that Saddam was fucking with
us, violating the cease fire agreements, and developing WMD?

I mean shit, U-2R imagery showing UN Weapns inspectors stopped at the
gates of a suspected WMD facility, while tractor trailers full of god knows
what pull away from the site, and only after the last trailer is gone, are
the UN inspectors allowed in....

You know, I'd say saddam was up to something...

It wasn't all those camel porn videos of him from the 70s that they were
hiding

[MKSheppard]

How is it "caution" to initiate a massive invasion which will tie up the bulk of your military for years without a shred of evidence?

We can free up a lot of the miltiary by simply withdrawing from
Europe. We have something like 40,000 people sitting around in
Europe for no real reason. Same thing with Korea, albeit in
smaller numbers, now that the ROK can defend itself quite handidly.

[Darth Wong]

If so, why is it evil that Bush went into Iraq, despite some very strong signals and probable cause that Saddam was fucking with us, violating the cease fire agreements, and developing WMD?

"strong signals and probable cause" are not synonymous with "evidence", even of the sketchy variety.

[MKSheppard]

"strong signals and probable cause" are not synonymous with "evidence", even of the sketchy variety.

So it's evidence you want? What about some Sudanese soil samples that
showed conclusively that said Asprin plant was producing chemical weapons,
even though it wasn't?

[Darth Wong]

"strong signals and probable cause" are not synonymous with "evidence", even of the sketchy variety.

So it's evidence you want? What about some Sudanese soil samples that
showed conclusively that said Asprin plant was producing chemical weapons,
even though it wasn't?

A cruise missile launched at a Sudanese Aspirin plant is hardly comparable to a massive invasion which ties up the bulk of your military for years, creates massive rifts in geopolitical alliances, kills thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans, costs tens of billions of dollars, and inflames worldwide anger against your nation immediately upon the heels of what was virtually unprecedented international support.

[MKSheppard]

A cruise missile launched at a Sudanese Aspirin plant is hardly comparable to a massive invasion which ties up the bulk of your military for years, creates massive rifts in geopolitical alliances, kills thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans, costs tens of billions of dollars, and inflames worldwide anger against your nation immediately upon the heels of what was virtually unprecedented international support.

Yet Osama Bin Laden was an unknown before we attacked him in Operation
Infinite Reach, and we boosted him to international superstardom with
ineffective missile strikes, as well as pissing all over our international image...yeah, sounds familiar.

[Darth Wong]

A cruise missile launched at a Sudanese Aspirin plant is hardly comparable to a massive invasion which ties up the bulk of your military for years, creates massive rifts in geopolitical alliances, kills thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans, costs tens of billions of dollars, and inflames worldwide anger against your nation immediately upon the heels of what was virtually unprecedented international support.

Yet Osama Bin Laden was an unknown before we attacked him in Operation Infinite Reach, and we boosted him to international superstardom with ineffective missile strikes, as well as pissing all over our international image...yeah, sounds familiar.

The poison is in the dose, Shep. Sketchy evidence => limited response with limited consequences. In the case of Iraq, no real evidence => massive response with massive consequences. See the problem?