How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms Intelligence

eL eS said:
Guess what president this is in regards to and what war.
Behold the power of google!

A Lesson on Dealing with Terrorism

Joe Pitts, September 9, 2004

More than 200 years ago the United States, a fledgling state, made its first attempt to fight a battle overseas to protect its citizens and advance its interests.

Our enemy then was the Barbary Pirates of North Africa. They were supported by the North African states of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers and provided a means of income for their bosses: hostages to ransom, slaves to trade, treasures to invest, and weapons to protect themselves.

In 1784, as United States Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson surmised that these pirates presented the biggest threat to shipping U.S. products into Europe and the Mediterranean. With no navy, our fledgling democracy could not defend its vessels against this threat. Jefferson disagreed with Europe’s approach to the pirates: both France and England paid the pirates off, despite knowing that they used the money to expand their own arsenal and terrorize more ships and people. Far from mollifying these pirates, the policy of bribery led only to the enslavement and killing of innocent people.

Jefferson did not believe that purchasing peace from these terrorists could be a long-term solution. However, Congress followed Europe’s lead above Jefferson’s objections.

In July 1785, Algerians captured two American ships and Algiers held their crews of twenty-one people for a ransom of nearly $60,000. Jefferson opposed the payment of the ransom. Paying the tribute would merely invite more demands, he argued. A strong navy would end these demands once and for all. "t will be more easy to raise ships and men to fight these pirates into reason, than money to bribe them," argued Jefferson in a letter. He was overruled; the tribute was paid.

As Secretary of State, Jefferson pushed the navy to build warships whose primary mission would be to rescue American hostages held in North Africa. In 1792, he commissioned John Paul Jones to go to Algiers under the guise of diplomatic negotiations, but with the real intent of sizing up a future target of a naval attack.

A year later as Jefferson prepared to leave his post as Secretary of State, America was attacked. In the fall of 1793, pirates seized 11 U.S. merchant ships and enslaved more than 100 Americans. Word of the attack reached New York, causing a stock market crash. Ports were closed. Shipping companies went out of business. Longshoremen lost their jobs.

The incident caused widespread panic and economic hardship here in America. Like 9/11 prompted 21st century America to reassess our security apparatus and foreign policy, this incident spurred an 18th Century Congress into action; they began to build a fleet of warships four months later.

The captors demanded a ransom. And though Secretary Jefferson had declared to the American consul to Morocco in 1791 that it is "lastly our determination to prefer war in all cases to tribute under any form, and to any people whatever," the United States negotiated a cash settlement: $1 million and a new warship, "The Crescent," to the ruler of Algiers in exchange for the release of the surviving hostages.

During the ensuing year, the United States paid nearly a million dollars in cash, naval stores, and a frigate to ransom 115 sailors from Algiers. Annual gifts were then settled by treaty with Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli.

In 1801, a newly elected President Jefferson refused Tripoli’s demand for an immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual tribute of $25,000. Tripoli declared war on the United States. President Jefferson sent the American navy to the Mediterranean.

The American show of force caused Tunis and Algiers to break their alliance with Tripoli. Despite severe losses and opposition from his own cabinet, Jefferson stayed the course for four years. When American forces threatened to capture Tripoli, a treaty brought an end to hostilities. However, the treaty did not bring to a complete end the payment of tributes to these nations. That happened following our second war with Algiers in 1815 when several major naval victories convinced pirates that we could not be bullied any longer.

Piracy worldwide declined after this. Even the European nations began to distance themselves from the pirates and the bribery policies.

The lesson from our first war overseas rings true today. One of our nation’s greatest heroes was right then: you cannot buy terrorists off and you cannot appease them. The 9/11 Commission has said the same thing about our enemy today.

Congressman Joe Pitts, a Republican, represents Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District, which includes Lancaster County and parts of Chester County and Berks County.
 
MonsterMark said:
The Democratic goal to reach the top is to model their life like an ant hill. And I know these same liberals like to live in these ant hills. Every major US city is an ant hill. I mean, just look at every major US city and how it votes. Mostly Democratic. The poor and powerless workers are forced to pile up the sand so the 'elite' ants can crawl their way to the top of the pile. It is so true. They like to get together and throw parties with all these 'causes' they support. Then they hop in their Jags and Benzs and its off to the Hamptons or Hollywood for them. They NEED the worker ants to remain totally dependent on the 'elite' ants for their survival.

Social Security is the perfect example. If any group of people need Social Security reform and private accounts, it is the youth and poor in this country. They are the ones that most desperately need to get into the compounding game so they can build not only a future for themselves and their families, but for future generations to come. Conservatives look to empower people. Libs look to take that power to keep theirs.

Let's not forget, it's a Declaration of War when one violates the terms of a treaty. Saddam piled up his fair share of violations and we were free to take him out without anybody's permission and without further provocation.

Indeed it is an ownershiop society they fear most. They give the facade of being for the people but what they do not reveal of their position is that they, the liberal policy makers, are the people that are looking out for and it comes at the expense of the citizens who have to divest themselves of freedom and prosperity.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty,to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Ben Franklin
 
Kbob said:
Behold the power of google!

A Lesson on Dealing with Terrorism

Joe Pitts, September 9, 2004

More than 200 years ago the United States, a fledgling state, made its first attempt to fight a battle overseas to protect its citizens and advance its interests.

Our enemy then was the Barbary Pirates of North Africa. They were supported by the North African states of Tripoli, Tunis, Morocco, and Algiers and provided a means of income for their bosses: hostages to ransom, slaves to trade, treasures to invest, and weapons to protect themselves.

In 1784, as United States Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson surmised that these pirates presented the biggest threat to shipping U.S. products into Europe and the Mediterranean. With no navy, our fledgling democracy could not defend its vessels against this threat. Jefferson disagreed with Europe’s approach to the pirates: both France and England paid the pirates off, despite knowing that they used the money to expand their own arsenal and terrorize more ships and people. Far from mollifying these pirates, the policy of bribery led only to the enslavement and killing of innocent people.

Jefferson did not believe that purchasing peace from these terrorists could be a long-term solution. However, Congress followed Europe’s lead above Jefferson’s objections.

In July 1785, Algerians captured two American ships and Algiers held their crews of twenty-one people for a ransom of nearly $60,000. Jefferson opposed the payment of the ransom. Paying the tribute would merely invite more demands, he argued. A strong navy would end these demands once and for all. "t will be more easy to raise ships and men to fight these pirates into reason, than money to bribe them," argued Jefferson in a letter. He was overruled; the tribute was paid.

As Secretary of State, Jefferson pushed the navy to build warships whose primary mission would be to rescue American hostages held in North Africa. In 1792, he commissioned John Paul Jones to go to Algiers under the guise of diplomatic negotiations, but with the real intent of sizing up a future target of a naval attack.

A year later as Jefferson prepared to leave his post as Secretary of State, America was attacked. In the fall of 1793, pirates seized 11 U.S. merchant ships and enslaved more than 100 Americans. Word of the attack reached New York, causing a stock market crash. Ports were closed. Shipping companies went out of business. Longshoremen lost their jobs.

The incident caused widespread panic and economic hardship here in America. Like 9/11 prompted 21st century America to reassess our security apparatus and foreign policy, this incident spurred an 18th Century Congress into action; they began to build a fleet of warships four months later.

The captors demanded a ransom. And though Secretary Jefferson had declared to the American consul to Morocco in 1791 that it is "lastly our determination to prefer war in all cases to tribute under any form, and to any people whatever," the United States negotiated a cash settlement: $1 million and a new warship, "The Crescent," to the ruler of Algiers in exchange for the release of the surviving hostages.

During the ensuing year, the United States paid nearly a million dollars in cash, naval stores, and a frigate to ransom 115 sailors from Algiers. Annual gifts were then settled by treaty with Algiers, Morocco, Tunis, and Tripoli.

In 1801, a newly elected President Jefferson refused Tripoli’s demand for an immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual tribute of $25,000. Tripoli declared war on the United States. President Jefferson sent the American navy to the Mediterranean.

The American show of force caused Tunis and Algiers to break their alliance with Tripoli. Despite severe losses and opposition from his own cabinet, Jefferson stayed the course for four years. When American forces threatened to capture Tripoli, a treaty brought an end to hostilities. However, the treaty did not bring to a complete end the payment of tributes to these nations. That happened following our second war with Algiers in 1815 when several major naval victories convinced pirates that we could not be bullied any longer.

Piracy worldwide declined after this. Even the European nations began to distance themselves from the pirates and the bribery policies.

The lesson from our first war overseas rings true today. One of our nation’s greatest heroes was right then: you cannot buy terrorists off and you cannot appease them. The 9/11 Commission has said the same thing about our enemy today.

Congressman Joe Pitts, a Republican, represents Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District, which includes Lancaster County and parts of Chester County and Berks County.



yep. Thomas Jefferson. The very man that fought so hard to stay out of war and went so far as to pay ransoms chose to wage war when he became president. Sadly, it resulted in a treaty that continued to pay ransoms for nearly 12 more years after having already paid ransons for decades.

No doubt it is easy to take the passive position when you are not responsible for the well being of millions of people as well as ensure the economic stability of your country.
 
MonsterMark said:
The Democratic goal to reach the top is to model their life like an ant hill. And I know these same liberals like to live in these ant hills. Every major US city is an ant hill. I mean, just look at every major US city and how it votes. Mostly Democratic. The poor and powerless workers are forced to pile up the sand so the 'elite' ants can crawl their way to the top of the pile.

LOL, ya don't know much about how "ant hills" work, do ya? Lemme give you a hint, the goal is NOT to get to the top of the pile of sand.

MonsterMark said:
It is so true. They like to get together and throw parties with all these 'causes' they support. Then they hop in their Jags and Benzs and its off to the Hamptons or Hollywood for them. They NEED the worker ants to remain totally dependent on the 'elite' ants for their survival.

No diffrent for the GOP. As far as I'm concerned, all politicians are full of crap. Ever see the movie "Bullworth"?

MonsterMark said:
Let's not forget, it's a Declaration of War when one violates the terms of a treaty. Saddam piled up his fair share of violations and we were free to take him out without anybody's permission and without further provocation.

So these treaties that Saddam violated, were they treaties with the UNITED STATES, or with the UNITED NATIONS?? You right-winged nut jobs just can't seem to shake that god complex. That's the first sign of a doomed society.
 
The first sign of the doomed society was when the liberals embraced satan and his legions of malcontents.

The watered down words of a dem. - Maria Cantwell, her last name says it all Can't well... lets over look it.

"My colleagues all agree Iraq must be disarmed.

What my colleagues can't agree on is how to best achieve this goal.

I believe that the best way to deal with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein is to build a multinational coalition and engage the United Nations. "

We had a multi-national coalotion called the UN. Misguided, misinformed and missed the boat with every opportunity to address the issue. Yeah any way lets create another multi-nantional coalition to engage/attack/persude the current multi-national coalition to wake up and do something. Only problem is it would be made up of folks from the same countries that have already permittied the proliferation of CBR technologies AND turned a blind eye to the genocide commited
 
eL eS said:
The first sign of the doomed society was when the liberals embraced satan and his legions of malcontents.

Oh, so now liberals are "satan embracers", eh? Nice of you to stoop to the level you despise. "When you sleep with dogs..........."


eL eS said:
We had a multi-national coalotion called the UN. Misguided, misinformed and missed the boat with every opportunity to address the issue. Yeah any way lets create another multi-nantional coalition to engage/attack/persude the current multi-national coalition to wake up and do something. Only problem is it would be made up of folks from the same countries that have already permittied the proliferation of CBR technologies AND turned a blind eye to the genocide commited

Once again, you refuse to acknowledge the FACTS that those treaties were, IN FACT, apparently working, as evidenced by the FACT that NO WMDs were found in Iraq. WMDs, after all, was the justification used by your "hero" GWB to declare war on Iraq. I know that's a tough pill for shrub worshipers to swallow, but that, my friend, is the way this cookie crumbled.

*owned*

When it comes to "genocide", Saddam is a small player compared to other countries to which the US has "turned a blind eye", so don't start getting all self-rightous about that.

If GWB would've put ONE HALF of our armed forces' resources towards FINISHING THE JOB in Afghanistan, as was put into Iraq, Bin-Ladin SURELY wouldv'e been aprehended by now. But, NOOOOOoooooooooooo, shrub had a completely different agenda, and the SECURITY of the US CITIZENS were NOT part of it!! :Bang
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Oh, so now liberals are "satan embracers", eh? Nice of you to stoop to the level you despise. "When you sleep with dogs..........."




Once again, you refuse to acknowledge the FACTS that those treaties were, IN FACT, apparently working, as evidenced by the FACT that NO WMDs were found in Iraq. WMDs, after all, was the justification used by your "hero" GWB to declare war on Iraq. I know that's a tough pill for shrub worshipers to swallow, but that, my friend, is the way this cookie crumbled.

*owned*

When it comes to "genocide", Saddam is a small player compared to other countries to which the US has "turned a blind eye", so don't start getting all self-rightous about that.

If GWB would've put ONE HALF of our armed forces' resources towards FINISHING THE JOB in Afghanistan, as was put into Iraq, Bin-Ladin SURELY wouldv'e been aprehended by now. But, NOOOOOoooooooooooo, shrub had a completely different agenda, and the SECURITY of the US CITIZENS were NOT part of it!! :Bang


Do you want to talk facts?
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Oh, so now liberals are "satan embracers", eh? Nice of you to stoop to the level you despise. "When you sleep with dogs..........."




Once again, you refuse to acknowledge the FACTS that those treaties were, IN FACT, apparently working, as evidenced by the FACT that NO WMDs were found in Iraq. WMDs, after all, was the justification used by your "hero" GWB to declare war on Iraq. I know that's a tough pill for shrub worshipers to swallow, but that, my friend, is the way this cookie crumbled.

*owned*

When it comes to "genocide", Saddam is a small player compared to other countries to which the US has "turned a blind eye", so don't start getting all self-rightous about that.

If GWB would've put ONE HALF of our armed forces' resources towards FINISHING THE JOB in Afghanistan, as was put into Iraq, Bin-Ladin SURELY wouldv'e been aprehended by now. But, NOOOOOoooooooooooo, shrub had a completely different agenda, and the SECURITY of the US CITIZENS were NOT part of it!! :Bang


Yeah lets talk evolution certainly one of satan's teachings; children have just as much of a right to learn about iteligent design as they do evolution. Yet the liberal agenda is to block any thing that leads one down a path of rightousness and promote behaviors that undermine all people.

The fact is that this president is the first to be commited to ridding the world of genocide. WJC couldn't even stand the heat of one fight and only chose to bombs Iraq, well an aspirin factory, after he got his willie worked on by the tall cool woman in blue dress, spoof on the hollies song ;), So your side capitulates on stopping genocide are you for it or against; if you are for it then how can you argue that outing Saddam was a bad thing.

Sure there are others but they are not as much of a threat to the citizens of this country. But if you are for stopping them then lets. Just pick a side and stop hiding behind the weak minded excuses.

Look how long Russia spent in Afghanistan without so much as a major victory so the fact that one man has eluded us and the coalition does not suprise me considering he has home court advantage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Speaking of "weak minded excuses".......

eL eS said:
Look how long russia spent in Afghanistan without some much as a major victory so the fact that one man has eluded us and the coalition does not suprise me considering he has home court advantage.

And the others:

"Saddam has WMDs, so he needs to be removed from power or we are all going to DIE!! What? No WMDs found in Iraq? Oh, OK."

"Saddam is a bad man, he needed to be removed from power because he was killing his own people!! What? Millions more are dying from the same thing in other countries and we are doing nothing about it? How may Iraqi civilian casulties resulted from the US invasion? Oh, OK. (shh! Dont tell anyone else)"

"We are spreading democracy in the mid-east so the world will be a better place for all of us. Yeah, THAT's the TICKET! A....a.........and the Iraqis are holding their elections! What? Car bombings and US military deaths keep mounting? There's no end in sight?"

I can't wait to see the NEXT excuse.
 
eL eS said:
Yeah lets talk evolution certainly one of satan's teachings; children have just as much of a right to learn about iteligent design as they do evolution. Yet the liberal agenda is to block any thing that leads one down a path of rightousness and promote behaviors that undermine all people.

So now Evolution is Satan's work. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Intelligent Design HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Liberal agenda underminining all people. HAHAHAHA!!!
:sleep:
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Speaking of "weak minded excuses".......



And the others:

"Saddam has WMDs, so he needs to be removed from power or we are all going to DIE!! What? No WMDs found in Iraq? Oh, OK."

"Saddam is a bad man, he needed to be removed from power because he was killing his own people!! What? Millions more are dying from the same thing in other countries and we are doing nothing about it? How may Iraqi civilian casulties resulted from the US invasion? Oh, OK. (shh! Dont tell anyone else)"

"We are spreading democracy in the mid-east so the world will be a better place for all of us. Yeah, THAT's the TICKET! A....a.........and the Iraqis are holding their elections! What? Car bombings and US military deaths keep mounting? There's no end in sight?"

I can't wait to see the NEXT excuse.


So you belive he just had toy and asprin factories even Billary Clinton belived it now it is suddenly not feasible. I suppose he just didn't have them and even if he did he would have not interest in shipping them outside his country or bury them some where like he has done with all sort of munitions. No no an fine upstanding dictator like your hero Saddam. Total compliance is what he was all about.
 
barry2952 said:
So now Evolution is Satan's work. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Intelligent Design HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Liberal agenda underminining all people. HAHAHAHA!!!
:sleep:

Yes, absolutely and without a doubt. ha, ha, ha and ha whatever that means I was totally convinced.
 
eL eS said:
So you belive he just had toy and asprin factories even Billary Clinton belived it now it is suddenly not feasible. I suppose he just didn't have them and even if he did he would have not interest in shipping them outside his country or bury them some where like he has done with all sort of munitions. No no an fine upstanding dictator like your hero Saddam. Total compliance is what he was all about.

AMAZING! You certainly have a knack for reading so much into my post. Typical of shrub worshipers, you ASSUme way too much about us who are not out there in the fringes with you.
 
Hmmm, maybe it's because in Rumsfelds rush to undermanned war he didn't have enough troops to guard all the ammo depots that since have been raided by the insurgents and anyone else with the desire to do so. Seems like all he did by going in undermanned was provide them with enough explosives and equipment to make IED's for a long time to come, and the ones paying the price are the Iraqi citizens and troops caught in the blasts. We never should've gone there in the first place, but the planning for this war has been pitifull !!!
 
97silverlsc said:
Hmmm, maybe it's because in Rumsfelds rush to undermanned war he didn't have enough troops to guard all the ammo depots that since have been raided by the insurgents and anyone else with the desire to do so. Seems like all he did by going in undermanned was provide them with enough explosives and equipment to make IED's for a long time to come, and the ones paying the price are the Iraqi citizens and troops caught in the blasts. We never should've gone there in the first place, but the planning for this war has been pitifull !!!


Huh? Evidentally you did not understand what is going on or you are retrating from the liberal position of their were no WMD or materials/supplies to manufacture WMDs. Can you explain why the non existent materials/supplies and weapons that you all so actively hung you hat on disappeared?

Anyone? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller, BUELLER?

I think you guys look cute when you pretend like you didn't see/hear/comprhend what is really going on. sophomoric at best.
 
7 hours and 20 minutes and nothing of substance from the pundits? What gives, is this not covered on the speaking points sheet you guys get?
 
What can they say?... Their argument is laid to waste. *owned*

Anybody with common sense knows Saddam had WMD. Everybody knew it. The Russians hauled of hundreds of thousand of tons away, alot was buried, and most of rest is resting comfortably in Syria and Iran. Just like all of Saddam's jets are sitting in Iran. That is why Iran has to be next. Then Syria.

And most of the bombs and materials being used now have the good house-keeping seal from 'France' stamped on them.
 
MonsterMark said:
What can they say?... Their argument is laid to waste. *owned*

Anybody with common sense knows Saddam had WMD. Everybody knew it. The Russians hauled of hundreds of thousand of tons away, alot was buried, and most of rest is resting comfortably in Syria and Iran. Just like all of Saddam's jets are sitting in Iran. That is why Iran has to be next. Then Syria.

And most of the bombs and materials being used now have the good house-keeping seal from 'France' stamped on them.

Well I wish those lacking common senmse would oblige us with some answers.
 
It would appear that all their foaming at the mouth hath rusted the zipper shut.

nb105B[1].JPG
 
eL eS said:
7 hours and 20 minutes and nothing of substance from the pundits? What gives, is this not covered on the speaking points sheet you guys get?

LOL, we've got BETTER things to do on a Friday night than pointless debates with imbiciles.
:F

We've already laid out the pieces of the puzzle, and showed you how it all fits together. Its now up to you to figure out for yourself how they all fit together. You don't want us to treat you like a child, do you?
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top