Lying to the leader has been done several times in the past.
Probably the most famous example is that of China under Mao.
When the Chairman visited a farm, the people who worked there actually PULLED the plants out of their original places and then replanted them in unrealistic densities near the roads that the Chairman would travel on, giving the impression that the farm was doing insanely well. There's even this photo of a kid who is apparently lying on rice plants so densely grown that they don't collapse under the weight of the child. Obviously the kid was actually on a table but the photo was taken at an angle so that it wasn't visible.
And the collective farms made up numbers about how much food they harvested and had sent.
So Chairman Mao was getting reports of record harvests all over the country, yet his country starved.
So it's not like it's not been done before.

Necons are the biggest liars in the world, King Dubya, Darth Cheney, Yoda Rove, and the rest of galactic gangs of crooks need to be taught a lesson, that day will come when there socalled victory don't happen in Iraq and the truth about the WMD in Iraq really comes out one day.

Originally Posted by The Other Guy

when I turn 18, if it isn't any better, yes I am.

Mind you, I love America. It's a beautiful country, a diverse climate, relatively low crime, and a fair justice system, opportunities are endless. But I do not support the leadership and think that it is being led into the ground. Not to mention the decrease in skilled labor (Yes we are creating jobs, but at McDonalds and WalMart. My 8 year old cousin could scan barcodes for a liviing. But no manufactuing jobs.) and the rapidly increasing defecit, coupled with the ever increasing weakness of the dollar.

Don't forget "freedom" in your list of good things. You have that regardless of who is in office. As for employment and education, you have to set your own goals, no government can do that for you.

WTF is wrong with these Middle East dictators? Why do they boast to the world that they will do anything to preserve their own security (taunting the US, one of their favorite past times, is a quick way to put their nation in jeopardy) and claim to be developing these weapons when they don't even have a program in place? All we've been hearing from Ahmedinijad (probably spelled wrong) over the last two years is "Yeah, we're building them, big woop, wanna fight about it?" and now this report comes out saying the threat is exaggerated and suddenly Iran claims it's what they've been saying all along. My god, if these guys told me the sun was the center of the solar system I would look for a second or even third opinion before believing them at this point.

They want to try to scare Israel. Not that that's going to work mind you.

Originally Posted by Damien435

WTF is wrong with these Middle East dictators? Why do they boast to the world that they will do anything to preserve their own security (taunting the US, one of their favorite past times, is a quick way to put their nation in jeopardy) and claim to be developing these weapons when they don't even have a program in place? All we've been hearing from Ahmedinijad (probably spelled wrong) over the last two years is "Yeah, we're building them, big woop, wanna fight about it?" and now this report comes out saying the threat is exaggerated and suddenly Iran claims it's what they've been saying all along. My god, if these guys told me the sun was the center of the solar system I would look for a second or even third opinion before believing them at this point.

Hang on a second Hussein after GW1 never claimed to have been building WMD's and to a large degree this was backed by the UN Inspectors who claimed to have found "no credible evidence" (political speak for buggered if we know) of them having them, Iran only claims to be building a peaceful nuclear program (aka power stations) not weapons.

The problem appears to be less about what these countries are and are not doing and more about what "information" fits the Bush administrations agenda.

Now I will admit that both Iran and Iraq are very cagey on admitting anything but given the region they live in I can understand that ,the first sign of weakness and you and up assassinated.

Saddam said Iraq was destroying its weapons that we in violations of UN sanctions forced upon that nation in 1991 but offered ZERO proof of this other than "We're doing it, but to allow outsiders to watch would be an insult to your national pride." And as we all found out later Saddam hadn't destroyed all his banned weapons, although the evidence is now lying in pieces scattered throughout the desert in Kuwait since most of the two dozen or so scuds fired into Kuwait fell apart in air and the rest were shot down. And of course coalition forces in Iraq have found hundreds of mortar and artillery rounds containing sarin although in this case the Iraqi's inability to maintain their own equipment worked to their advantage because the gas was so degraded it was no longer a viable weapon.

If Iran is building a peaceful nuclear program why do they need a heavy water treatment facility? Light water reactors would be cheaper and produce power at similar levels per dollar spent, but can't be used for making highly enriched plutonium for nuclear weapons. They've been offered all sorts of perks to end their current program but have refused. And from what I've seen of these reports, they're saying the Bush administration is "over exaggerating" but not fabricating the story. To me that says "Yes, Iran is working on a weapons program, but they're at least a decade away." as opposed to five years. I still think military strikes are not the option though. The Iyotollahs are extremely unpopular amongst the younger generations and right now Iran is experiencing a population boom. For every five 18 year olds entering the work force in the next five years, there will only be one job available. Who led the Iranian revolution in the 80's? Iranian students who were unsatisfied with the current regime. Hmm...

Originally Posted by Damien435

Saddam said Iraq was destroying its weapons that we in violations of UN sanctions forced upon that nation in 1991 but offered ZERO proof of this other than "We're doing it, but to allow outsiders to watch would be an insult to your national pride." And as we all found out later Saddam hadn't destroyed all his banned weapons, although the evidence is now lying in pieces scattered throughout the desert in Kuwait since most of the two dozen or so scuds fired into Kuwait fell apart in air and the rest were shot down. And of course coalition forces in Iraq have found hundreds of mortar and artillery rounds containing sarin although in this case the Iraqi's inability to maintain their own equipment worked to their advantage because the gas was so degraded it was no longer a viable weapon.

I think you are playing games here:
1) The proof was in the UN inspectors inability to find these weapons however it wouldn't have mattered what the Iraqi's offered as proof as long as the people making the accusations were going to ignore it.

2) By the US post war inspectors own admissions the Sarin shells they found had been buried since about 1992-93 and were about as dangerous as a muddy pond.

Seriously its time to face up to the fact that Iraq's WMD's simply didn't exist in any appreciable qualities and most of what has been touted as proof by the few desperately looking for justification has turned out to be dual purpose items that could have made WMD's, Baby food or pesticides.

If Iran is building a peaceful nuclear program why do they need a heavy water treatment facility? Light water reactors would be cheaper and produce power at similar levels per dollar spent, but can't be used for making highly enriched plutonium for nuclear weapons. They've been offered all sorts of perks to end their current program but have refused. And from what I've seen of these reports, they're saying the Bush administration is "over exaggerating" but not fabricating the story. To me that says "Yes, Iran is working on a weapons program, but they're at least a decade away." as opposed to five years. I still think military strikes are not the option though. The Iyotollahs are extremely unpopular amongst the younger generations and right now Iran is experiencing a population boom. For every five 18 year olds entering the work force in the next five years, there will only be one job available. Who led the Iranian revolution in the 80's? Iranian students who were unsatisfied with the current regime. Hmm...

1) What exactly is illegal about a heavy water plant?

2) So what if they have been offered perks to drop the program, they have decided they want nuclear power and they want it as a self sufficient program rather than relying on other nations to keep it going I personally support the idea and hope that if New Zealand ever goes down the nuclear path (I hope we don't but I suspect we will eventually) we also make it a self sufficient system.

3) As much as I am not a fan of nuclear proliferation especially in Iran and North Korea's case I have to point out that India, Pakistan and Israel have them and their programs were all carried out in secret, Israels still is therefore I think it highly hypocritical to whine about Iranian ambitions.

So as much as a nuclear armed Iran wouldn't be a boost to a safer world I don't think it would make it any less safe either.

4) As for the bit about the current regime being unpopular well I don't know and I really don't care, if Iran wants change thats for the people of Iran to determine and carry out it is really of no consequence to me.
I am a huge fan of the old maxim that the people get the government they deserve.

Well its official: Bush has been caught lying again.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/...ran/index.html

Remember I posted yesterday that Steven Hadley had stated that the Inspectors had only briefed Bush last Tuesday?

As I predicted: a Total crock of manure.

Adm Mike McConnelll the Director of National Intelligence has stated that
he warned the President back in August that the Iranian WMD program "may be suspended". Dana Perino said this:

"Director McConnell said that the new information might cause the intelligence community to change its assessment of Iran's covert nuclear program, but the intelligence community was not prepared to draw any conclusions at that point in time, and it wouldn't be right to speculate until they had time to examine and analyze the new data," Perino said in a statement issued by the White House".

With such a serious doubt cast by his own director of National Intelligence you'd think Bush would have toned down the rhetoric, but just last month Bush warned of a looming WWIII should Iran get a Nuclear device. Typical NEOCON fear-mongering tactics.

But do you know who I blame the most? Not the Bush Administration or anyone of the NEOCON clones. They have proven time and time again to be untrustworthy, deceitful, dishonest, vindictive, selfish, greedy and incompetent. A Tiger cannot change its stripes.

I blame the Democrats for having failed in their constitutional duty to impeach this totally out of control Administration.

Oh and speaking about WMD liars. I just read that the Bush Administration has just rehired Paul Wolfowitz as a arms control adviser to Condi Rice. Apparently after screwing up both his job as UnderSecretary of Defense, and his disasterous (and corrupt) tenure of President of the World Bank its the only job he could find.

Just back - I've been catching up on all those VERY GOOD posts.

On all shades of opinion , there is not much I would take up the cudgels against,( particularly as MM's contain internal US political specifics of which I am uninformed,) except perhaps in the case of one of Monty's points, a suggestion that whatever happpens politically in Iran is of no consequence to him - does he live on a different planet then?

I hope the thread continues - I'm off for a think.