So then you’d be friends with the Nazi’s since they are also enemies of your enemies? Or are they also your enemies?
You gotta love these sound-byte motto philosophies they are so edgy and clever.
Dear little fellow:
Who exactly are the nazi and United States’ common enemies?
I do believe the nazi’s were allied with all of our enemies. Oh, you remember the tripartite pact? The axis? Drawing a blank. Ok, germany, italy, and japan.
Coincidentally, they were who we declared war against.
I know, you didn’t think about it.
Since you lack comprehension skills, please ask someone to help you next time. You might not look as silly.
Thanks,
JeffR
[/quote]
The Nazi’s would gladly kill any Moslem Terrorist for you…
[quote] The Nazi’s would gladly kill any Moslem Terrorist for you…
…and vice versa…[/quote]
You must be talking about the “modern nazi.”
I’ll take your word for it. In truth, I cannot bring myself to google the current manifestation of people calling themselves “nazi.”
Either way, it doesn’t advance your argument. It is inconceivable that the United States or anyone responsible would ally themselves with nazi’s.
Oh, did I strike a nerve with you? Were you one of those people who would risk civiliaztion on the argument that al qaeda and saddam would never cooperate due to “religious disagreements?”
[quote]JeffR wrote:
You must be talking about the “modern nazi.”
[/quote]
You must be talking about “Germany under Nazi rule”.
I don’t think you understood my point.
I understand the logic in ‘befriending’ your enemies’ enemies.
However, I think idiotic mantras that sound cool and make important decisions seemingly easier are far too popular these days.
Therefore, you see, I wasn’t actually attacking you, but more the phrase you used.
While I understand what you meant, what that phrase literally means is just a cynical strategy that is not applicable to real world issues. (If of course you do not wish to fall victim to the ways of hypocrisy, and deceipt and would prefer to represent honour, humanity and civility.)
I just wrote:
Judging by your posts and the way you condescend and frequently insult people, touting your purported ‘vast intellect’ in a rude and supercilious way I don’t know why I said this considering it does not seem to apply to you.
(See? Anyone can do it.)
Continue with your assesine impertenece and assume that you can judge everyone like a book by it’s cover.
A narcissitic self-proclaimed intellectual who pleasures himself by belittling others over the internet delivers me to laughter from the sheer irony.
(See?)
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Sepukku wrote:
‘The government… has just… disclosed secret Iraqi documents… which were previously collecting dust… until now… The information within them proves that we were right…’
…
‘…And they lived happily ever after…’
LOL
They weren’t translated previously – there are still a lot of documents that they took that haven’t been translated yet.
[/quote]
I didn’t say that they were translated previously? I said: secret Iraqi documents… which were previously collecting dust…
[quote]Sepukku wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Sepukku wrote:
‘The government… has just… disclosed secret Iraqi documents… which were previously collecting dust… until now… The information within them proves that we were right…’
…
‘…And they lived happily ever after…’
LOL
They weren’t translated previously – there are still a lot of documents that they took that haven’t been translated yet.
I didn’t say that they were translated previously? I said: secret Iraqi documents… which were previously collecting dust…[/quote]
Indeed, but the implication that I read in to your comments is that they were suspect because they just appeared and the government had custody over them.
There are quite a few docs that are sitting around “collecting dust” as it were because they have not been translated. See some of the above posts.
I don’t understand how these documents aren’t highest priority and being promptly translated as such. Did they sieze them upon the invasion? If so it’s been a long time since then.
[quote]Sepukku wrote:
I don’t understand how these documents aren’t highest priority and being promptly translated as such. Did they sieze them upon the invasion? If so it’s been a long time since then.[/quote]
I’m troubled by it as well – I think they should essentially make them all public and open them up for translation via the private sector – which is essentially what has been done with a subset of them, but not all of them. The rationale that makes the most sense is political: because they don’t know what’s in them, they don’t want to open them all up for fear they might turn up something embarrassing. And apparently they don’t have the translation resources to tackle the job themselves (a bunch of hard-copy documents, many hand-written, so computers won’t be a whole lot of help).
[quote]Sepukku wrote:
I don’t understand how these documents aren’t highest priority and being promptly translated as such. Did they sieze them upon the invasion? If so it’s been a long time since then.[/quote]
Translators are in extremely short supply and this is a lower priority than questioning prisoners etc.
Translators are in extremely short supply and this is a lower priority than questioning prisoners etc.[/quote]
But questioning prisoners doesn’t require nearly as many resources, surely? I agree with what BB said before this post about the private sector and also politics behind it.
I dunno, it all seems a bit suspect. Even if translators are in short supply (btw, how did you know that?) it said in the article BB quoted that these documents have just been put on the backburner for 3 years? I might be misunderstanding why that is, but it doesnt make sense to me, especially since it would help to debunk a lot of the criticism this administration has had.
My original point was secret documents could easily be manufactured.
Translators are in extremely short supply and this is a lower priority than questioning prisoners etc.
But questioning prisoners doesn’t require nearly as many resources, surely? I agree with what BB said before this post about the private sector and also politics behind it.
I dunno, it all seems a bit suspect. Even if translators are in short supply (btw, how did you know that?) it said in the article BB quoted that these documents have just been put on the backburner for 3 years? I might be misunderstanding why that is, but it doesnt make sense to me, especially since it would help to debunk a lot of the criticism this administration has had.
My original point was secret documents could easily be manufactured. [/quote]
It is very well known translators are in short supply.
It has been determined that it is more important to move forward and dedicate more resources to questioning prisoners, working with Iraqi leaders etc than it is to rehash old news.
Going through these files is more a job for a historian. No action will be taken based on translation of these documents.
As was quoted in the article I posted, only 50,000 of 2,000,000 documents have been translated. They cannot do this overnight.
One reason they do not want to just put out the documents in the public sector to be translated is since they do not know what is in them, they cannot take that risk. Iraqi’s do not need to translate the documents, and if there is one that tells where WMD’s might be hidden, (even though they do not exist,) they could go get them and use them against us.
It would do no good to have the public figure out a big terrorist hiding place if the terrorists will find out they were discovered as soon as our government does.