Secret Gov't Documents Will be Declassified 12/31

mozzwald writes "This New Year's Eve, at midnight on the dot, hundreds of millions of pages of U.S. government secrets will be revealed. Or at least they'll no longer be official secrets — it may actually take months or more for the National Archives and Records Administration to make those pages available for public consumption."

in other words

[macadamia_harold]

it may actually take months or more for the National Archives and Records Administration to make those pages available for public consumption.

in other words, it takes the government a few months to go over every line on every page with a black marker. The pages might be declassified (but see if you can read the information!)

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

in other words, it takes the government a few months to go over every line on every page with a black marker. The pages might be declassified (but see if you can read the information!)

That's not censorship! They're just making us a favor by highlighting [theonion.com] all the good stuff.

Re:in other words

[WgT2]

Don't worry. Perhaps they'll release the blacked-out material as Word docs.

You'll be able to read everything then!

Re:

[Charcharodon]

,i.in other words, it takes the government a few months to go over every line on every page with a black marker. The pages might be declassified (but see if you can read the information!)

Yes but the real reason for the slow up is not the actual marking out things with a black marker, but the bidding process to provide the government with the correct mil-spec markers.

Re:

[Charcharodon]

hahaha, great minds think a like I guess. :D Maybe they'll give me a job?!

Re:

[mwilliamson]

black marker...that's so old school. White-out tape + xerox is the new way of doing this.

elvis

[rucs_hack]

At last, we shall discover which aliens took elvis :-)

I can see what will happen though

govt: Here you go, everything we know about aliens, i.e, they haven't been here.

Conspiracists: Ah yes, but you'd say that wouldn't you...

govt: No really, it's true, look, it's got official stamps and everything.

Conspiracists: Well that may be so, but if we believe you, our million dollar book and convention industry will go down the pan [koff], ah no, we mean that you'll have succeeded in hiding the truth.

govt: ok, let u

Re:in other words

[amliebsch]

Maybe, but the real challenge will be to read them before Sandy Berger stuffs them in his pants and "misplaces" them.

Too many exeptions.

[packeteer]

The least of acceptable exceptions is too long. If a document involves multiple agencies it wont be free. This will do nothing to calm down conspiracy theories, but it will be interesting for historians.

Re:

[Vengeance]

It's redacted, to be released in 30 years, if requested.

Finally

[Psychotria]

The secret invasion by aliens will be revealed. I, for one, welcome our new overlords. I've been watching them for years on Lost in Space, Star Trek, V, Battlestar Gallactica and The Smurfs. I am looking forward to the secret being revealed and my release from the asylum.

Re:

[nra1871]

V is an excellent documentary on the Reptoids' plans for us. Don't be fooled, the best place to hide the truth is in plain sight.

Re:

[Sponge Bath]

...my release from the asylum.

There is no release except death.
Now get back to posting inmate #953670

attack of the twelve-foot lizard people ..

[rs232]

"the Illuminati are a race of reptilian humanoids [wikipedia.org] known as the Babylonian Brotherhood, and that many prominent figures are reptilian, including George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, Kris Kristofferson, and Boxcar Willie."

It's in Wikipedia, so it must be true ..

was Re:Finally (Score:3, Funny)

Call it cynicism, but...

[paganizer]

I'll be pretty shocked if anything actually of use turns up. I'll definitely try to take a look myself; I've been searching for years for some of the info on the nuclear tests done in the late 50's, as my dad was in 13 of them.
Hearing him talking about how much fun it was being in a foxhole 1.5 miles from ground zero, and digging out the rad badges and other stuff he kept as a souveneir, then seeing that there is no record to be found ANYWHERE that his unit was anywhere near where the tests were done has always fascinated me with the subject; hopefully someone will slip up and release a unit list for the Guinea Pig troops.

Re:

[TodMinuit]

I've been searching for years for some of the info on the nuclear tests done in the late 50's, as my dad was in 13 of them.

What kind of super powers does he have?

Re:Call it cynicism, but...

[vertinox]

What kind of super powers does he have?

Apparently to have the ability to still have children after 13 nuclear tests.

Re:

[Anonymous Cowpat]

I love (meaning deplore) it when common knowledge is an 'offical secret'. Example, the BT Tower [wikipedia.org], a 175m tall structure in London was an offical secret until 1994, so it didn't actually exist (Reference [urban75.org])... This is, of course, extremely stupid because it gives an opening for people to be prosecuted over the taking a photo of it if the government of the time happens to have a grudge against that person.

It's nice to see they've solved the problem

[MarkusQ]

I was recently pleased to discover that our leaders have hit upon an ideal solution for the perennial problem of that pesky public eventually getting their hands on documents like this. It's so simple, I don't know why they didn't think of it sooner.

Don't produce the information that will make you look bad in the first place.

For instance:

• After a government report showed an increase in terrorism around the world, the administration announced it would stop publishing its annual report on international terrorism.
• A rule change at the U.S. Geological Survey restricts agency scientists from publishing or discussing research without that information first being screened by higher-ups at the agency. Special screening will be given to "findings or data that may be especially newsworthy, have an impact on government policy, or contradict previous public understanding to ensure that proper officials are notified and that communication strategies are developed.
• The Treasury Department stopped producing reports showing how the benefits of tax cuts were distributed by income class.
• After the Bureau of Labor Statistics uncovered discouraging data about factory closings in the U.S., the administration announced it would stop publishing information about factory closings.

Of course, the old trick of covering up / reclassifying things is still in use as well:

• The FBI attempted to retroactively classify public information regarding the case of bureau whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, including a series of letters between the Justice Department and several senators.
• President Bush issued an executive order limiting the public's access to presidential records. The order undermined the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which required the release of those records after 12 years. Bush's order prevented the release of "68,000 pages of confidential communications between President Ronald Reagan and his advisers," some of whom had positions in the Bush Administration.
• The Federal Communications Commission blocked access to a once-public database of network outages affecting telecommunications service providers. The FCC removed public copies and exempted the information from Freedom of Information Act requests, saying it would "jeopardize national security efforts."
• The Federal Communications Commission ordered destroyed all copies of an unreleased 2004 draft report concluding that media consolidation hurt local TV news coverage, which runs counter to the administration's pro-consolidation stance.
• ...and so on.

Still, I think the new approach is much more elegant and will probably save the taxpayers a lot in the long run.

--MarkusQ P.S. Sources and many more examples here [tpmmuckraker.com].

KEEP MODDED UP PLEASE

[macdaddy]

If it was possible to mod you even higher I would.

Re:

[kalirion]

At the moment, he only has +3 Informative. There's room for another mod in there. I'm guessing you saw the Karma bonus or something. I don't think Karma bonuses affect how much a post can be modded.

Re:

[jafac]

Here is an additional (recently compiled) list of Bush Administration coverups:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002237.php [tpmmuckraker.com]

Re:

[jafac]

There's speculation on reports out there of US use of Chemical Weapons in Vietnam, Panama, and Iraq (GW1+2).

And of course, there was strong evidence of CW use by the Soviets in Afghanistan and Chechnya.

Interesting to know if any of this was true or not.

An unnecessary secret is a failure

[Bromskloss]

I'm not very much for the state having secrets to its people -- the state is created by the people because they needed one, after all. If there still is a great need to keep a secret (just a small need doesn't cut it for me), then so be it, I guess. BUT, any fact kept secret without reson to do so i an abomination! There should be measures taken to ensure that everything that can be revealed is revealed (not the other way around).

I'm not talking specifically about the USA here -- I'm not an american -- but the same thing applies to any state.

Re:

[sbben]

There should be measures taken to ensure that everything that can be revealed is revealed

And there are such measures! And you are looking at them. It is required that US documents be declassified after a certain period of time. That's the point of an article like this.

What I think you meant is why are secrets ever kept in the first place. Well, for very good reason. You can't have military plans circulating weeks before an attack can you. Secrets are there for good reason. The public can't be trusted with everything. This is the very same reason why the US doesn't use a popular vote to elec

Re:

[xappax]

Secrets are there for good reason. The public can't be trusted with everything.

The ability to keep secrets from the public is a form of power. This power can be used sparingly and responsibly - like your example of keeping battle plans secret before the battle. I don't think anyone would claim that absolute transparency should be expected - I don't want the nuclear launch procedures and authentication information to be public information!

Like most forms power, the ability to keep secrets can also be

Re:

[freedom_india]

The public can't be trusted with everything. This is the very same reason why the US doesn't use a popular vote to elect its president. The electoral college was put into place to keep too much power being placed on the layman.

Who decides who is the Public? The elected president, or the King? You seem to be like Dick Cheney, who thinks Executive power is absolute and anything NOT specified in the constituion belongs to the President by Right. Which includes detention of US citizens without trial in Gitmo

Re:

[cdrguru]

During the second world war, just before the Normandy Invasion, Allied reporters were briefed in FULL by Eisinowher (the then commanding C-in-C). He told them exactly when and where the invastion would happen, but told them it is their responsibility to keep it secret. The reporters cried "dirty pool", but kept their mouths shut UNTIL the invasion had taken place. No One, i mean NO ONE sold the secrets to the Enemy. FFW to 3 years ago, and the families of the troops were offiically NOT told about their spou

Re:

[um... Lucas]

Except that the members of the electoral college aren't necessarily bound to vote in the way that the constituents in their district voted. Which serves as a "buffer", i suppose, so that if everyone wanted to elect an ax-murderer who won the majority of votes, the electoral college could still nix it. So yes, the electoral college had a place due to lack of communications, but it also serves other rolls as well..

Released... as Confetti

[Junior J. Junior III]

So that's where all that NYE confetti comes from! I always wondered. Thanks, Feds! Party on!

UFOs!!!!!!!

[curtisk]

Wow. The 25 most used search terms in the last month [ucia.gov] at the CIA's FOIA document request.

UFOs are at the top!

Considering the rest of that list, its very interesting how pervasive the questions around UFOs are. Sadly, sasquatch has fallen out of public favor...

the date is wrong?

[name*censored*]

uh, if they're being declassified at exactly the start of the new year(ie, 1 second after 11:59:59 12/31), then wouldn't that mean that they're ACTUALLY being declassified on the 1/1? The new day actually begins at 00:00:00...

Also with this september 11/conspiracy theory/craziness spin that this thread has taken... If they were clever enough to blow up (their own) building and cover it up, surely they would be clever enough to

1) Do a good job of covering it up (recycled argument from moon landing conspiracy)

2) Pick something that wasn't so difficult to orchestrate (rigging an inner city building with explosives with no credible witnesses willing to testify) eg, a chemical attack (like the 95 subway thing), a car/truck-bomb (terrorists seem to like those), or attacks on foreign US embassies.

3) Pick something that more strongly supports attacking Iraq - they had to do an AWFUL lot of fancy footwork to get from "an afghani terrorist blowing up a US building" to "attack a regime which had little to do with 9/11 (although still guilty of terrible atrocities)"

4) Forget trying to attack anything.. the government spin engine is an incredibly powerful one, it would be just as easy to justify a war with no 9/11 than having to orchestrate a 9/11 attack AND THEN justify a war with it.

It's a little ignorant to say what SHOULD happen and compare it to what DID happen, considering there are thousands of variables involved that we'll never accurately know (how much fuel the plane had, its exact speed, its exact mass, the exact condition of the building, its weight load, its natural fault lines, the fault lines created by the impact of the plane, other environmental elements etc etc etc). Plus, if the conspirators didn't expect it to fall over (enough to put use secondary explosives, which would be a big giveaway) just from a plane crash, then why would they think that we wouldn't figure it out? There are enough demolition experts out there that it would be a glaring omission to ignore the fact that the experts would notice that a plane couldn't do that on it's own. It's much like how you cannot see the stars in the background of the moonwalk, it's too obvious for such a big conspiracy to miss, the "moon's reflection makes too much contrast" argument is so weak that it must be true. It's much more sensible to disregard the conspiracy given that it's unnecessary and far too difficult a conspiracy to organise.

um.....

[ClioCJS]

A lot of us "conspiracy theorists" think that that's exactly what they did. Hire those terrorists. Bin Laden has been paid by the C.I.A. in the past, and the C.I.A. has not proven itself to be a trustworthy agency.

http://del.icio.us/ClintJCL/911 [del.icio.us] http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/?s=911 [wordpress.com]

How is that "will" to be understood?

[Opportunist]

Is it a will as in "they will do it", or one as in "they should, but will come up with a reason not to do it"?

I've seen my share of US politics lately, so I'm compelled to ask.

Media Apathy

[MrSteveSD]

Actually I am always amazed at the amount of incredibly damaging stuff that gets released in the US. For example, things like Operation Northwoods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods ), which although never carried out, was a plan to stage terrorist attacks on US assets and blame it on Cuba as an excuse for war.

Then there are minutes of meetings that provide evidence of war crimes by certain individuals. For example, minutes were released of Henry Kissinger saying "Anything that flies on anything that moves" , which were his bombing orders for Cambodia. If they had evidence like that against Milosevic, his trial would have been over within days.

Fortunately these damning revelations are largely ignored by the US media. If they were not, perhaps they would stop releasing them in the first place.

Re:

[c6gunner]

For example, minutes were released of Henry Kissinger saying "Anything that flies on anything that moves" , which were his bombing orders for Cambodia. If they had evidence like that against Milosevic, his trial would have been over within days.

Considering that the only genocide in Canbodia was the one carried out by the Khmer Rouge, do you suppose that you might be taking things out of context a wee bit?

Google Classified Secrets Engine

[Buzz_Litebeer]

I cannot wait for google to index this stuff!

Expected response to information request

[haggie]

"In order to protect our children and prevent terrorist attacks, the information you requested has been classified. In addition, if you aren't doing anything illegal, you don't need this information anyway. You aren't doing anything illegal, are you?"

2007 = Sputnik + 50

[spaceyhackerlady]

I've been looking forward to 2007 for a while, since it's 50 years since Sputnik 1, and lots of stuff gets declassified after 50 years. Witness the enormous amount of new WW2 material in the 1990s. Let's see some real dirt!

The U.S. government isn't the only one with secrets.

...laura

Re:Can't wait...

[Threni]

> Can't wait 25 years to know how my president mislead us into this Iraq quagmire. We just lost 100 people so far this month and
> counting! Very sad indeed. More American lives have now been lost in Iraq as compared to those that died on 9/11.

I don't know what you expect to find. There's nothing unique about the US intervention in Iraq - it's for exactly the same reasons as all the other meddling in other countries affairs going back through most of the 20th century. No cover ups or conspiracy theories are required - it's been taking place quite openly. You might want to start with `manufacturing consent` or `hegemony or survival` by Noam Chomsky for what's been going on, and how the a free media like that in the US handles it.

Re:

[baldass_newbie]

Yes, Chomsky's a professor of linguistics.

And yet he only speaks one language. How funny is that?

Umm...

[jkauzlar]

Do your research... he knows Hebrew and has done studies on languages worldwide including aboriginal languages. And that was only in the 1950's. What were YOU doing in the 1950's?

Re:

[Jeremy Erwin]

Set the field back by decades? Explain. Where would your field be without Chomsky?

Mod Parent Troll

[crabpeople]

Yeah wow with all that proof you've given how could anyone NOT be convinced?

People like you hate chomsky because he has a history of critizing/exposing american foreign policy to the world. Chomsky owns EVERYONE who he debates with. He is a cunning linguist and a maverick political thinker. Stop being so jealous of chomsky ok mr internet troll?

Re:

[Jeremy Erwin]

Yes, Chomsky's a professor of linguistics. Period.

You like sticking people into nice little labeled cubbyholes, don't you?
this 1972 article [chomsky.info] reprinted from the New York Review of Books, should go some way towards explaining what linguistics are, and Chomsky's reputation in the field.

And if linguistics still sounds rather esoteric, and inapplicable to, other things, say, Artificial Intelligence, what of it? Would he be more qualified to speak of East Timor if he taught political science or worked for Fox News

Re:

[Hatta]

I'm also puzzled as to how a Jew can be deemed anti-semitic.

Never heard of a self-hating jew?

Re:

[fuzzix]

Yes, Chomsky's a professor of linguistics.

Oh, well that completely excludes him from being able to comment on the semantics and euphemisms used by the mass media to mask the truth.

Re:

[gt_mattex]

Che Guevarra wasn't a pompous asshole.

Che Guevarra was a notorious pompous asshole. He was known in particular for belittling anyone who he felt was intellectually inferior. Please read your own source in its entirety.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Excuse me, your tin-foil hat's on crooked.

Re:Can't wait...

[q-the-impaler]

Conrete is VERY dusty. Take a small chunk of conrete and throw it on the ground. Examine the dust that fell off. Now imagine a Beowulf cluster of these, and there's your frickin cloud.

I only slightly jest. The concept is the same. Potential energy is a lot stronger than you think. I've been next to an avalanche and I could see how a landslide as such can make you think there was an explosion. The sound is spectacular. Probably a similar idea, only there was no slide, just buckling girders wrapped in concrete falling straight down 1300 ft.

Re:

[c_forq]

To add to that an amazingly high amount of people in America see flashes as a result of loud noises (I can't remember the name of the disorder, but it is extremely common).

Re:

[bberens]

I think that's called lightning.

Re:

[geekoid]

Not to mention the force of the air being shoved down as the building collapsed.
Substantially more force the a cat 5.

Peopelalso neglect to relize that the weight is designed onlt to be in specific points, want ot shifter a certien number of degree beyond it's design, it will fall STRAIGHT down.

I have seen computer simmulations of many different types of building collapses, there all pretty much the same visually.

But the most telling way that there is nothing wrong with the way it fell is all the simulations

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

What about hundreds of Iraqi people's lives that were lost? That doesn't count eh?

Re:Can't wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hundreds? Try hundreds of thousands.

Re:

[slughead]

What about hundreds of Iraqi people's lives that were lost? That doesn't count eh?

How many would Saddam have killed if he'd remained in power?

He had gassed his own people, killing far more than have died in this current 'war'. The Iraq/Iran war was so horrendous it was almost like WWI was in Europe, only with more effective weaponry including but not limited to--yep, you guessed it--chemical weapons. Iran had some soldiers whose job it was to walk, unarmed and unequipped, over land mines to clear them out f

Re:

[A beautiful mind]

He had gassed his own people, killing far more than have died in this current 'war'.

What crack are you on? There were reports coming out even years ago saying that in 2003 alone, the US led invasion on Iraq killed more people than Saddam killed in the last 20(!) years combined!

I don't think it's worth a single American life to help people who are not among our own

Your own what? Race? A more important human?

Re:Can't wait...

[slughead]

What crack are you on? There were reports coming out even years ago saying that in 2003 alone, the US led invasion on Iraq killed more people than Saddam killed in the last 20(!) years combined!

Sources:
182,000 [yahoo.com] gassed in the late 80's by Saddam.

57,617 MAX [iraqbodycount.org] Iraqi deaths in this war.

Your own what? Race? A more important human?

My beliefs were not the point of my post, I was just revealing my 'bias'. I will now further elaborate on my beliefs:

I don't feel this country owes anybody else a thing. Meddling in the affairs of others is likely the most avoidable cause of terrorist attacks on this country and a poor public image in the eyes of other nations. All we have to do is nothing, and nobody can blame us for anything. Obviously, we don't have the cash to be doing this stuff anyway (look at our deficit), and we NEVER get paid. IMO, if we're to go out and be the world's police, the world should pay us back (and more than just buying our Gov't bonds).

If the US had stayed out of WWI, there may have never been a WWII. If the US hadn't helped the Sudan kick Bin Laden out, he may not have been in Afghanistan. How big do we have to F'up, and how much money (which we don't have) do we have to waste before we stop with this foolishness?

Re:

[kestasjk]

But what if the US had stayed out of WWII?

By the way did the Versailles Treaty have anything to do with the US? I know there were other causes of WWII but wasn't that the main one? (My history is genuinely poor, I'm not being rhetorical)

Re:

[A beautiful mind]

The best methods available for surveying casualties tells us [bbc.co.uk] that the body count is around the most probable number of 655 thousand, which is backed by the statistical community. The iraqi body count page only operates from news reports, it is bound to be only the fraction of the real number.

So, I stand by my original post.

Also, it have to be noted that the 182k figure that you're quoting came up in the Saddam trial, which is not impartial by any standards and I wouldn't rely on it. The internationally

Re:

[cold fjord]

The best methods available for surveying casualties tells us that the body count is around the most probable number of 655 thousand....

I wouldn't be so sure that study is reliable.

655,000 War Dead? A bogus study on Iraq casualties [opinionjournal.com]

The Iraq Body Count project take on it [iraqbodycount.org].

Some additional discussion [seixon.com].

Re:

[Malfourmed]

57,617 MAX Iraqi deaths in this war.

The Iraq Body Count website only tallies deaths on an incident-by-incident basis that are reported in reputable media. A minimum of two independent agencies need to publish a report before they are willing to add it to the count.

There are many deaths that are never reported for a variety of reasons (eg lack of journalistic coverage in many areas), let alone twice. As such, even the "max" number on the website can be considered to be a "minimum" actual number.

Re:

[geobeck]

The Iraq/Iran war was so horrendous it was almost like WWI was in Europe, only with more effective weaponry including but not limited to--yep, you guessed it--chemical weapons.

So you're saying there were no chemical weapons [wikipedia.org] used in World War One?

Bush did not go into Iraq to stop Saddam from killing Iraqis; he went in because of an imagined threat [wikipedia.org] to US national security.

Re:

[slughead]

So you're saying there were no chemical weapons used in World War One?

I didn't mean to, but I guess I sort of implied that.

I knew about the chem weapons on WWI, but they weren't very effective, just really horrible. The nerve agents the Iraqi Gov't used were far more effective at killing people, but the corpses didn't look as ugly and the survivors weren't physically maimed like in mustard and chlorine gas attacks.

As a side note (and not directed at you), keep in mind when reading about 'casualties', they m

from a compassionate perspective ..

[rs232]

What about hundreds of Iraqi people's lives that were lost? That doesn't count eh?

How many would Saddam have killed if he'd remained in power?

It didn't matter how many he killed as long as he was an ally [gwu.edu] of the US.

"He had gassed his own people, killing far more than have died in this current 'war'. The Iraq/Iran war was so horrendous it was almost like WWI was in Europe, only with more effective weaponry including but not limited to--yep, you guessed it--chemical weapons"

With weapons and machin

Re:

[Timesprout]

Firstly there wont be a lot of documentation, why would you document crap you just make up about WMD and Al Quaida links although perhaps the source of the hilarious and utterly incompetent Nigerian yellow cake forgeries might emerge.

Secondly, and most importantly, no one will care. In 2002 the documents which showed the US had basically been knowingly supplying Sadam with materials to develop chemical weapons (yes Mr Rumsfeld you) emerged and no one batted an eyelid.

Re:Can't wait...

[oggiejnr]

You would be suprised about the anount of documentation. If people lower down in the food chain want to cover themselves the first thing they do is put it in writing. Take the Suez Crisis for example. There is clearly documentation to show that the British used sexed up intelligence to manufacture a war against Egypt to reclaim Suez. If documentation exists to show this then I wouldn't be at all suprised if the same is true of Iraq

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but the point is no one will care.

We don't need to open secret archives to know the Iraq war was a bunch of bullshit but no one really cares.

Re:

[Timesprout]

You point is taken, and I agree is usually the case. However you are overlooking the stunning arrogance and self deluded incompetence of the Bush administration. These are people who believe the world is the way they say it is and not the way reality dictates. When they said Iraq had WMD that was enough for it to be true and explains why no supporting evidence was needed or produced and in all likelyhood does not currrently exist in reality of forgery.

Re:

[InThane]

The kind of people who do this kind of documentation aren't the ones who came in with the administration - they're the rank and file of the federal bureaucracy, who predated the administration, and the administration can't easily get rid of them due to union laws.

Those are the guys who write the memos that embarrass the heads of state.

Re:

[Denial93]

Actually, "25 years ago" includes the beginning of the Iran-Iraq War [wikipedia.org], which the US were involved in to an extent unclear as of yet [wikipedia.org]. So that could certainly shed some light on the history of US involvement in Iraq. However, since that information heavily involves George Bush senior, I very much doubt it will actually see light.

Re:Can't wait...

[Malc]

"More American lives have now been lost in Iraq as compared to those that died on 9/11."

Why exactly did you draw that comparison? They're two unrelated events. Why not say: more American lives have been lost in Iraq than in Pearl Harbor? Even if 10,000 lives had been lost on 9/11, there would still be no justification for attacking Iraq based on it, and thus no bench mark to compare against.

Re:Can't wait...

[Charcharodon]

There was plenty of justification for attacking Iraq.

The president said "Hey let's attack Iraq" and Congress said "America!...Fuck Yea!" and then Congress said to Americans "Hey let's attack Iraq" and they said "America!...Fuck Yea!" and that's all there is to it.

There are no bench-marks or justfications for war just details and more importantly the willingness to goto war.

Re:

[geobeck]

Besides that, a senior administration official gave this justification [snopes.com].

Oh wait... he wasn't in the Bush administration.

Re:

[Charcharodon]

It doesn't matter what I believe.

All that is required for anything is willingness and maybe ability, justifactions be damned. Justifications are the details we use to paint a pretty picture we paint for ourselves to make events appear moral or imoral, but since there are no such thing as morals, only things we are willing or unwilling to do, we end up right back where we started.

My whole point was to make fun of people who go on and on about how the President missled everyone, which was horseshit. The

Re:

[El Torico]

Funny how you mention the Gulf of Tonkin; I expect a similar incident to soon take place in the Persian Gulf.

Re:

[El Torico]

The other country that starts with an "I" and has four letters.

Re:

[(A)*(B)!0_-]

I really don't see that happening. Of course, it's easy to make these kind of predictions on the Internet because no one is going to follow you up on it but I will break the rule and mark you as a friend. If this prediction of yours is to ever come true, I will acknowledge your mystical powers

Re:

[FrostedChaos]

Ok. I know that this issue has been discussed to death, and it's hard for people to think rationally about it. But bear with me for a moment.

Sadam killed everyone in Iraq...everyone that stood against him. Terrorists, Muslims, Christians, football (soccer) players, left handed people, right handed people, . So what exactly is your point?

Saddam Hussein was a secular leader who kept a lid on the power of the religious radicals in the country. He fought a war [wikipedia.org] against the Islamic fundamentalist government of Ir

Re:

[TheNinjaroach]

Why exactly did you draw that comparison? They're two unrelated events.

Those two events are closely related. Nobody would have supported our "War on Terror" or the invasion of Iraq had we not been attacked on 9/11.

Re:Can't wait...

[Guuge]

It makes perfect sense to compare two deadly events by counting deaths. For example, the Asian tsunami was far deadlier than hurricane Katrina. That doesn't make hurricane Katrina justified, but it does give one some perspective.

In this case, it's clear that Bush is deadlier to Americans than Osama bin Laden. The comparison suggests that we reevaluate our priorities.

Re:

[theskipper]

But, per President Bush himself, one event (9/11) was directly responsible for the second (attacking Iraq).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20 030319-1.html [whitehouse.gov]

Seems black and white, no?

Re:Can't wait...

[Hatta]

"More American lives have now been lost in Iraq as compared to those that died on 9/11."

Why exactly did you draw that comparison?

Look at it this way:

By his orders Bin Laden sent 2,700 Americans to their deaths.

By his orders George W. Bush sent 3,000 Americans to their deaths.

Who is America's enemy?

Re:Can't wait...

[WindBourne]

Nothing of interest will be there. The interesting info would be in Reagan's term. But just before the info was to be release, W. did an executive order that allows a president or their heir or a current admin to redact any info that they think would damage their reputation. Hopefully the next president will have some morals and allow us none people to see exactly what what past presidents have been and done. That should include ALL of the reagan info including his irangate as well as his work in having Iran hold our hostages before the election and his dealings with Sadaam as well as OBL.

Mod Parent Up

[PopeRatzo]

How is the Parent a Troll?

There's been some serious wingnut misuse of moderation points lately. People modding comments as troll or flamebait just because they disagree.

That's how the right-wing works in this country. Small-minded bullies. Every one.

Re:

[Iron (III) Chloride]

It's true that automobile deaths are extremely prevalent, but they are usually more the result of 1) poor training or 2) excessive alcohol consumption or 3) road rage. It's something that cannot be easily dealt with because it concerns the whole of society. People will always get angry, people will always get drunk, and people will always get mad. It's part of human nature that probably is very hard, if not impossible, to change. It's unlike racism, where you have one clearly defined ethnic group targeting

Re:

[Copid]

Yes, it was abundantly clear that Bush simply had no choice other than starting a ground campaign to topple and replace the Iraqi government. We were all just fresh out of ideas by the time it all started.

Re:

[Schemat1c]

In addition, you could also blame the vast majority of todays Iraqi deaths on:

1) Muslim clerics who continue to stir up the populace.
2) Foreign terror groups who intentionally target civilians.
3) Iran and Syria, for funding the insurgency and the terrorists.
4) Iraqi politicians/clerics who maintain their own personal armies.
5) Corrupt leftovers of the Saddam era regime, who are currently trying to subvert the ING and IP forces to their own purposes.

In other words, war is a complex business, and saying that it's "a single product of a single administration" is so ignorant that it shouldn't even warrant a response.

Every reason you gave would mean diddly if our troops were not in Iraq. Who sent the troops there? The current administration.

Now go back into your hole, shill.

"Where is the outrage? Where is the horror?"

[Pink Tinkletini]

I know you didn't really ask, but right here [streetsblog.org]. Scroll down to "Weekly Carnage."

Re:

[kalirion]

Perspective? I'm guessing that WAY more people die of old age every day in China than are murdered in the U.S. Does that make Chinese old age more tragic than murder in the states? Numbers aren't everything.

Re:Can't wait...

[elrous0]

Tell me more of this "automobile" you speak of.

It sounds like a dastardly good killer. But does it offer the value and performance I've come to expect with my laser sharks?

-Eric

Re:

[xappax]

The automobile is, ironically, one of the central causes of some of the more politicized problems in society.

American automobiles have created the greatest single demand for oil in the world. Demand for oil and the need to control oil supplies was one of the key reasons for invading Iraq, and why we are so reluctant to leave now.

Automobiles are one of the greatest contributors to atmospheric pollution, which kills many people from things like cancer and severe lung problems.

There are definitely peopl

Re:

[MrJynxx]

There isn't 300 million americans physically fighting the war in iraq. So your perspective is a little off as well.

MrJynx

Re:

[Guuge]

Every history book on the Iraq War is going to mention 9/11, just as every history of World War I mentions Francis Ferdinand. The plain truth is that 9/11 was used to stir up fanatical nationalism and loyalty to the central government, which set the stage for the abuses of power that led to the Iraq War. I'm not saying that 9/11 was necessary for Bush's plan; it was simply available. Similarly, the assassination of Francis Ferdinand was not necessary for WWI to ignite.

I suppose comparing the Iraq War to 9

Re:What do they have to do with each other?

[c_forq]

Has everyone forgotten our invasion of Afghanistan? Seriously, after 9/11 the push was to Afghanistan and NO ONE protested. Before the Iraq war millions protested, with some cities having the largest protests in their entire history Iraq's debacle with the UN inspectors set off the start to invading Iraq, and than Saddam kept bluffing and refusing to say he didn't have chemical weapons or to allow UN inspections to resume. I swear people are trying to rewrite current history to make Iraq immediately after 9/11 and completely caused by 9/11. Maybe that works better for the conspiracy theories, but it doesn't really fit the reality I lived through.

Re:

[Rone]

Seriously, after 9/11 the push was to Afghanistan and NO ONE protested.

What version of CNN were you watching?

IIRC, most of the pundits at the time were doom-and-glooming the US' plans to take Bin Laden from Afghanistan by force. Although they tried to hide it through sheer quantity of verbiage, the underlying message seemed to be, "How can the lowly US POSSIBLY succeed where the mighty Soviets failed for so many years?"

In fact, the pre-Afghanistan protests were what enabled GW to get a free pass (

Re:

[Guuge]

No one said boo in WWII when 17,000 died in a few months

Actually, people were extremely upset in the months after WWII began. Hitler claimed that the invasion of Poland was an act of self-preservation but everyone knew that he really wanted to expand his dominion. In the end, WWII was a tremendous disaster. The death toll was huge and it didn't get Hitler anything but an early grave. I'm not sure I'd put even the Iraq War in the same category of disaster as WWII.

Re:

[dbcad7]

So religious nutjobs want to come here and kill me, and the best solution is for us to send people over there to kill them first... I see.

I served in the Army. I was ready to defend my country. I am thankful, that I was not in the military when this all went down, because it's a mistake and wrong. To perpetuate it is even more wrong.

If a cop was given information that a van was stolen, sure he has a right to stop it and arrest the people in it. When it is determined that it ISN'T stolen, then you say oop'

MOD PARENT UP

[throbbingbrain.com]

That link should have been in the article summary.

Everyone else, RTFEO (read the freakin executive order) before posting.

Re:

[Klaus_1250]

AFAIK you'll need to wait at least another 10 years. (didn't bookmark the story about it, sorry) But, do you really think they will ever release the truth about the JFK assassination? Or that the how and why is properly documented? I would be surprised. My only question is if LBJ knew about it.