P.K. Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Like I could give a toss. I was using "art" in it's common form that those who are not anally retentive would immediately recognise to wit: "the expression or application of human creative skill". Zzzzzzzzzzzzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Like I could give a toss. I was using "art" in it's common form that those who are not anally retentive would immediately recognise to wit: "the expression or application of human creative skill". Zzzzzzzzzzzzz Don't ya just love creative debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I was using "art" in it's common form that those who are not anally retentive would immediately recognise to wit: "the expression or application of human creative skill". Perhaps that was the problem, too much 'creative skill' and not enough attention to facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Here's another little tip: Intelligence gathering isn't only a science, it's also something of an art. Sure things like aerial recce are going to show buildings etc - but not what's going on inside i.e. it's often not going to be factual but include rumour, supposition and so forth. So all the idiots who claim the Intelligence was "wrong" somehow are talking through their rear-ends. It is what it is, simple as. Zzzzzzzzzzzzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Zzzzzzzzzzzzz The signature sound of those who accept what government and intelligence services tell them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 The signature sound of those who find the minutiae of the anally retentive saps their will to live. Fixed! Since Thatcher does anyone accept on face value what politicians tell them? Having worked in the intelligence services it does amuse me how the anti-Blair anti-war give-peace-a-chance faction still bang on and on that the intelligence on Iraq's wmd was "flawed" somehow. By it's very nature it's always going to be all sorts of rumour, supposition etc etc with some facts thrown in to confuse things. It's up to ordinary mortals to try and make sense of it all. Being mere mortals they don't get it absolutely accurately every time - what a surprise not. As if that matters in the case of the removal of Saddam's nasty regime - because it doesn't. Like the "no wmd found" lot it's an irrelevance: The real issue is the plain and simple fact that Iraq had demonstrated many times in the past that they not only had the means to produce wmd but also the will to use it, even against their own. Couple that to the other plain and simple fact that Iraq had invaded two of it's neighbours in a region where the west requires stability to function and the invasion and the regime's removal was not only inevitable but neccessary. What are you going to try next - willy sizes perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Let's make it simple: the politicians in the USA/UK wanted an excuse to invade Iraq in order to protect their interests, i.e. oil. It was a bit difficult because they'd made Saddam a hero when he was at war with Iran, but he made the mistake of invading Kuwait and, from then on, they could begin to portray him as a threat to world peace. Unfortunately, apart from a nasty little habit of killing his own people (as tyrants have done throughout history and continue to do now) there wasn't much to link him to threats to world peace or terrorism. In fact, he was one of the few in the Middle East who actively opposed Al Quaeda. So the powers that be, i.e. the major oil companies, told GWB to find some evidence that would stand up to scrutiny and, from his safe position in their pockets, he proceeded to do so. Of course, having little or no intelligence of his own, he called upon his 'intelligence services' and those of his poodle pal, Tony Blairperson, in the UK. Following their masters' instructions, the lickspittle civil servants who make up the inappropriately-named 'intelligence services,' did their best to compile all kinds of dossiers specifically designed to prove what their masters were asking them to prove, and ignore any embarrassing facts to the contrary. They were so successful that enough gung-ho senators etc - and MPs who didn't relish having to face an election - suspended belief for long enough to 'make the world a safer place.' The fact that a huge majority of the general populace saw through the facade never seemed to faze them at all - neither did the fact that they had nothing planned to replace the Hussain regime once they'd battered the country into submission - nor any real plans to restore it. Incidentally, I'm not going to get into an argument about willy sizes as you're probably the biggest cock on the Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.