Reagan was responsible for 9/11

Saddam and Reagan were buddies so that makes Reagan responsible for Saddam having weapons.

Bush Senior goes after Saddam as the bad guy which didn't play out well because he lost a second term in office and his War games trick didn't work.

Cheney conducted business with Saddam and even shook his hand and got a photo op with him.

Bush made Saddam into a bad guy when he needed a “we can’t find Bin Laden” diversion.

"Can you believe that Republicans put up with this kind of bull shit?"

Why did Reagan Arm Saddam in the first place?

Reagan armed Saddam and Bush said that Saddam was connected to OBL so wouldn't that make Reagan responsible for 9/11? :think:

nt

McKinley. Who'd have known he was capable of something like this?

Fought a violent war to save the union; which, in turn, inspired the Afgan's to save their union; which inspired Republican administrations trying to seem loyal to their roots to give money to Afgans trying to save their union. And so it goes. Thanks for everything Lincoln. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

That effing Repug.

Moby Dick elitist east coaster literary fop. Lincoln reads it and says, "Oh, I'm the captain, I'm the captain." Case of reality imitating art.

a muslim fundamentalist, as well as an eco-terrorist.

Dig him up and bury him in Guantanamo, that's what I say.

Means 'the superior craftsman'. RafterMan is 'the superior craftsMan.'

I wish I spoke Italian (then I wouldn't need any etchings). T.S. Eliot used it as a compliment once.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

for their own actions. Period.

to give Osama and his pet Taliban the money to fight their jihad against the USSR. He didn't have to deal with the consequences.

Bush Sr was the vice president at the time. Reagan was so senile that he had spit falling out of the cracks of his mouth most of the time and even someone reading Reagan his lines couldn't have helped during his second rein in office.

The point that I am trying to make is. Bush Sr. could have been responsible for arming Saddam.

Every way you look at the Oil War on Iraq it allways comes back with a Bush involved at some point.

Not Carter!

nt

YOU paid taxes to the US Gov't under the direction of the Reagan administration, which gave him the power and money to fund his 'buddy' Osama. (paste in the rest of your argument here)

How about this novel idea: Osama is responsible for 9/11.

Osama bin Laden, after being educated at Oxford University, learned how to kill effectively while working as an agent of American Cold War policy in Afghanistan. He was a helpful American ally throughout the 1980s as a ruthless and wealthy warrior against the Soviet Union. It was the desire of the American government to deliver to the Soviets their own Vietnam, to arrange a hopeless military situation which would demoralize the Soviet military and bleed that nation dry.

Osama bin Laden played the part of the Viet Cong, and he was good at it. With the help of the American government, he was able to create an army of true believers in Afghanistan. Our government believed that if one bin Laden was good, a hundred would be better, and a thousand better again, in the fight against the Soviets. So strong was this group America helped to create that it became known as 'The Base.' Translated into the local dialect, 'The Base' is known as al Qaeda.

Osama bin Laden learned something else besides the art of killing while he was working as an ally of the United States. He learned that given enough time, enough money, enough violence, enough perseverance, and enough fellow warriors, a superpower can be brought to its knees and erased from the book of history.

Bin Laden was at the center of one of the most important events of the 20th century: The fall of the Soviet Union. Political pundits like to credit Reagan and the senior Bush for the collapse of that regime, but out in front of them, in the mountains of Afghanistan, was Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, the sharp end of our sword, who did their job very well. Today, the United States faces this group and its leader, armed with their well-learned and America-taught lessons: How to kill massively and how to annihilate a superpower.

Osama bin Laden learned a few other things before he became the monster under our collective bed. When Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein began to make his move against Kuwait, bin Laden was outraged. Hussein was a despised name on the lips of bin Laden and his followers; here was an unbelieving heretic who spoke the words of Allah, a self-styled Socialist who pretended piety, a ruthless dictator who killed every Islamic fundamentalist he could get his hands on.

Osama bin Laden went to King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, home of the holiest sites of Islam. The royal family was not to be found anywhere on bin Laden's list of friends at the time. A shrewd observer of local politics, bin Laden knew that the Saudi government enjoyed having the Palestinians living in squalor, bereft of homeland and hope, because it distracted the fundamentalists within Saudi Arabia from focusing on the inequities within their own country. With the crooking of a single oil-rich finger, the Saudi royals could solve the Palestinian problem. Their refusal to do so fed bin Laden's rage, for in his mind, they were aiding and abetting what he saw as an intolerable Israeli apartheid.

Bin Laden asked Fahd to help him resurrect the army that fought with him against the Soviets so that he could fight Saddam Hussein. Here again is an irony of the times: As in the 1980s, Osama bin Laden was spoiling for a fight against an enemy of the United States - for his own purposes, to be sure, but it is difficult to avoid a shake of the head when considering all of the recent rhetoric about a Saddam/Osama alliance.

(snip)

The story of the 20th century Middle East is one of American action. We created Saddam Hussein, and then twice attacked him, leaving nearly two million civilians dead in the process. We created the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and bent our policies towards defending that house of cards and its precious oil. We created the Shah of Iran, then lost him, and propped up Hussein to checkmate our failure. We created Israel, a nation that has become our front line against the hostilities we manufactured in the region through our relentless military and economic meddling, and supported them militarily and financially as they committed acts of barbarism. We have paid great lip service to the plight of the Palestinians, but have always deferred to Israel.

More recently, we invaded Iraq on the pretext of destroying weapons of mass destruction which, according to recent comments by Secretary of State Powell, do not actually exist. We accused Saddam Hussein of collaborating with bin Laden, and of being involved in 9/11, despite the fact that bin Laden has wanted Hussein dead for years. We killed over 10,000 Iraqi civilians. We raped and tortured Iraqi men, women and children in the dungeons of Abu Ghraib. All of our poor history in the region has been distilled into that one nation, a place that now manufactures bin Laden allies by the truckload.

We created Osama bin Laden. We taught him to kill, we showed him how to destroy a superpower, and we gave him a face-first lesson in American interventionism in his back yard. Whatever predispositions towards violence and murder existed in him when he was born became honed, refined and perfected as he watched our government storm the policies, rulers and innocent people of the Middle East like so many rabbits. We have created millions more like him.

We are learning now that the game isn't much fun when the rabbits get a gun.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/091504A.shtml

We are on the same page with this theory. I have problems putting my words into the proper context. :hug:

intellect and understanding of the way things are in the world today. At least you can understand the motives and actions taken by all the people and nations involved in bringing us to where we are today. You're not puzzled by the whos and the whys and the wherefores. But that's what makes me wonder if having the insight and intellect can sometimes be a bad thing. Understanding all the horrible crimes and ramifications must be very depressing and hard on the spirit. And your view of human nature has to be pretty dismal.

Funny thing about that though. Since Shock and Awe I'm afraid that condition has spread to a lot of us here. Along with the knowledge comes the realization that it's the rats and criminals who are most influencing the evens of this world. The deck is stacked, and there are always going to be victims in this world. The ugly part now is that half of this country see it as being okay to victimize the victims.

The blame for so much of the horrible events that are unfolding in the world today are the responsibility of the United States. They have never had any qualms about using violence and death as a weapon, whether it was to fight the 'evil doers' or spread freedom (right) to the oppressed. Iran, Afganistan, Chile, Nicaraqua, where ever and whenever those in power in this country felt threatened or saw a way to make money, they either supported a renegade bunch of killers with a grudge or installed a dictator who had no qualms about killing anyone who they felt was in their way.

A good number of guys in the senior leadership of Al Qaeda were resistance fighters trained and equipped by the CIA at the direction of the Reagan Administration in order to fight the Soviet Union that had invaded Afghanistan. The goal was two-fold: To defeat the Red Army and to give the USSR their own version of Vietnam (revenge).

Afghanistan was simply another pawn in the grand chess match between the USSR and the USA, and the result was a devastated country that now is the world's largest producer of opium. There are many things our government has done that we should be less than proud of. This was just another one in a long line of abuses.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The question regards Saddam's WMD, and the majority came from the good 'ole U.S. of A.

How you lasted as long as you have here is beyond me.

:shrug:

The Repug's claim Clinton was soft on terrorism, which gave the terrorists reason to plan and execute 9/11.

Naturally they ignore Clinton's strong action against terrorism.

Reagan was the first to cut and run after a terrorist attack on U.S. soldiers in Beirut. Can't get any softer than that.

But, foreshadowing GeeDub's moves, he immediately picked up and invaded the wrong country, which redeems the Gipper in Republican eyes.

Who was the Republican Congressman who went to Afghanistan to train the Taliban?

That was Charlie Wilson, a Democrat. Supplied those fuckers with all the anti-aircraft rockets they could stand.

That idiot Dana Rohrbacher was the Repub that played footsie with the Taliban. I don't think he arranged for any training, but he thought they were a cute harmless bunch.

They're still talking about latter day Mujahadeen in Iraq. I wish they would come up with a name that would stick with the "evil doers". Hard to tell who is on the wrong side of the crusade. What we need is a program maybe an updated deck of cards.

Funny how we make our own problems? What is not funny is the number of people getting killed.

Sarcasm off Thanks, charlie

:silly:

If he hadn't built the Bagram airbase in Saudia Arabia, none of this would have happened.