Did Iraq have WMD?

[ztim]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

We gave them all the time in the world to move/hide any WMDs before we went in.<br /><br />We are in a fight against an enemy without borders. Taking Sadam out happened to be a plus.<br /><br />9-11 took more American lives than Pearl Harbor. We spend more time trying not to hurt anyone. We also are doing more good in that area of the world than the meidia wants to report. The good outweighs the bad. <br /><br />I don't like the idea of going into conflict w/o congress. Checks and balances are there for a reason, but I dislike more the killing of 3000+ American inocents and we not doing anything.

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

So, PW2, I am going to get you to go on the record.<br /><br />Prior to the latest Iraq war, did you suspect Saddam had WMD?<br /><br />Are you certain that Saddam did not have WMD prior to the latest Iraq war?<br /><br />If you were the president, would you have invaded Iraq?<br /><br />Ken

 

[gafteci]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Skinnywater wrote:<br /><br />

quote:<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />The conservatives have been using him for the past six years. Personal responsibility is one of the mantras of the GOP. Oh, but I forgot, so is blaming Bill Clinton. <br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />If you're interested in learning to be more effective in your arguements, you may want to drop your own style hypocritical mantra. <br />Todays Republican party is hardly a conservative one.<br />

Please tell me what was hypocritical about what I wrote. Here is the meaning of hypocrisy:

The term hypocrisy is also commonly used in a way which should be more specifically termed a double standard, bias, or inconsistency. An example would be when one honestly believes that one group of individuals should be held to a different set of morals than another group.<br />Hypocrisy also refers to the act of criticizing others for behavior which one engages in as well, or in other words, not practicing what you preach.

I don’t see where I did that in what you quoted from me. Please explain.<br /><br />But, you are right about the Republican Party not being conservative. It has gone WAY to the right in the past 10 years. Neo-Con fits (for now).

 

[Bondo]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

We are in a fight against an enemy without borders. Taking Sadam out happened to be a plus.

Ayuh,.........<br /><br />And,... What I see as an even Bigger Plus,..........<br /><br />It set up the Battlefield,.............. In Iraq,.......<br /><br />Not the US of A.................

 

[rodbolt]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

HE HAD WMD's. Bush said so. get over it.<br /> they disguised them all, to fool our satilites, as camels and took a couple hundred tons of them across the mountains one night.<br /> they also had hundreds of mobile Bio labs disguised as ice cream trucks, the mobile chemical weapons labs were disguised as farm fertilizer trucks.<br /> man yall never seem to listen to Donald or condi. they had it pegged from the outset.<br /> good thing both are such excellent strategic and tactical planners or we may have lost the war long before mission accomplished.<br /> god bless em both for killing gods enemies.

 

[gafteci]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

QC – O.K., here’s my two cents on WMDs. <br />Yes, I believed that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons. But that proves nothing. I’m a systems administrator, not the President of the United States!!! There is plenty of evidence that GWB and his cabal cherry picked intelligence, we’ve all seen it. <br />Here is part of a blog from David Corn , a Liberal columnist for sure, but what he says is true. <br /><br />

What the Iraqi generals knew about Iraq's WMDs is not the same issue as what Bush told the American public about Iraq's WMDs. One could write a book on the latter--and I wrote two chapters on the topic in my last book. But here are a few basics that I've presented before.<br />* Bush said that Iraq had stockpiled large amounts of biological weapons. The best intelligence at the time--and it was wrong--concluded that Saddam had an active biological weapons R&D program, which is not the same thing as a massive stockpile.<br />* Bush said in December 2002 that it was possible that Iraq already had nuclear weapons. No intelligence indicated that was a possibility, and no intelligence analyst or expert in the matter believed this. The CIA had concluded that Iraq was years away from developing a nuclear weapon. <br />* Bush said that Saddam was "dealing" with al Qaeda. The intelligence possessed by the US government did not support that assertion. <br />* Bush said the International Atomic Energy Agency had released a new report stating that Iraq was rebuilding its nuclear weapons facilities. There was no such report.<br />* Bush said there was "no doubt" about the WMD intelligence possessed by his administration. There was doubt about most of the significant WMD findings: the aluminum tubes (supposedly bought by Iraq to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons but actually purchased for rocket launchers), the mobile biological weapons labs (which did not exist), the uranium-shopping in Niger (which did not occur), Iraq's development of unmanned aerial vehicles that could hit the United States with biological and chemical weapons (which also did not exist). Within the intelligence community, there were analysts and experts that questioned each one of these assertions used by the Bush administration. And the Defense Intelligence Agency noted in a classified report in the fall of 2002 that there was no specific evidence to back up the presumption that Iraq had stockpiles of chemical weapons. So there was plenty of doubt about the intelligence. It just wasn't shared with the American public. <br />

The fact that Saddam had chemical weapons wasn’t enough to persuade the American people to war, so the White House had to come up with the “nuclear solution”. I think the WH clearly lied to America and the World, and as a result over 2,300 American service men and woman have been killed and over 17,000 wounded!!!!<br /><br />Am I happy he’s out of power? Of course!!! But not at the price America has paid.<br />

 

[ob]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Originally posted by gafteci: The fact that Saddam had chemical weapons wasn’t enough to persuade the American people to war, so the White House had to come up with the “nuclear solution”. I think the WH clearly lied to America and the World, and as a result over 2,300 American service men and woman have been killed and over 17,000 wounded!!!!<br /><br />Am I happy he’s out of power? Of course!!! But not at the price America has paid.<br />

Pursuade the American people??I don't remember having any say.Who was pusuaded was several of the people of your party who did have some say.Are they to be held accountable for being naive enough to buy into the lies you speak of?

 

[gafteci]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Come on ob, you know that the American people were going to have to be supportive of going to war and if you don’t think so, you are very, very naïve. <br />One thing that I noticed, though, was that you didn’t dispute what David Corn wrote. What about them Aluminum tubes, the mobile biological weapons labs, the unmaned aerial vehicles and such?<br />And about the people in ‘my party’ who voted for the war. I don’t see it that way. What I saw was not a vote for war, but a vote to use force. That vote was given after GWB said that he would use force as a last resort. He lied. He also had different intelligence then what was given to Congress.<br />Everything I just wrote has been proven. I’d give you the links but I know that you'd just say that it is lies from a liberal media.

 

[PW2]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Ok, Ken, I'll go on the record now just exactly as I went on the record before the war began:<br /><br />That is, I felt it was likely he did indeed have WMD's of some sort, excluding nukes.<br /><br />I also thought that in itself was not a good enough reason to start a war as he had no way of delivering them, and certainly not threatening us. Israel wasn't particularly worried about them either, and I trust their intelligence far more than ours, because they have more at stake.<br /><br />We had him well contained in a box, he had no air power, the inspectors were back in, and we had more important issues to deal with.<br /><br />Now in my view, outside of North Korea, Osama was the biggest threat we faced, and still face, followed closely by Iran and Pakistan, in no particular order. I know Pakistan is our friend for now, but if Musharaf gets killed, look out, and they do have nukes. Iran was a far greater threat than Iraq, before the war began as well as now.<br /><br />As far as threats go, Iraq didn't even make page 1 in my view---I held it then, before the war, and not a thing has happenened to change my view.

 

[Kalian]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Gafteci, if all that were really true GWB woulda been out on his a** a long time ago. It would have been all over the news, and there would have been so much international saber rattling (or worse) there is no way the American public could have been shielded from it. I will say exactly what you said we would say. It's more liberal spin.

 

[KRS]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Originally posted by Kalian:<br /> ... We all know that Saddam was bluffing, and Bush lied so he could kill inocents for oil....

I don't know this, and I don't think it either. Yes they had them.

 

[Kalian]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

KRS, I was being sarcastic. I guess the spoken word is much clearer than the written word.(at least with me, anyway.) I was taking a page from texaswinner and rodbolt. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[PW2]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Kalian, who would throw GWB out on his a**, as you say? We've had lots of international hand wringing, of course, but who would dare to do anything?<br /><br />And the beauty of having one party in control of everything is there is effectively no oversight.<br /><br />And Ken, not only do I believe what I wrote, but there is no doubt in my mind it is accurate. Every independent source, from Richard Clarke's book, to the downing street memo, to the PNAC treatise, to a new book from England that I forget what the title is, to everything else I have heard and read, all say effectively the same thing.<br /><br />Nothing else makes any sense.

 

[ob]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Originally posted by gafteci:<br />And about the people in ‘my party’ who voted for the war. I don’t see it that way. What I saw was not a vote for war, but a vote to use force. That vote was given after GWB said that he would use force as a last resort. He lied. He also had different intelligence then what was given to Congress.<br />Everything I just wrote has been proven. I’d give you the links but I know that you'd just say that it is lies from a liberal media.

A vote to use force but not war? Can you elabotate?Bush had inteligence that was withheld from Congress? Do you know of any intelligence sources that Bush now has that he is concealing from you and the Congress?I guess not or it wouldn't be an intelligence "secret" now would it.

 

[gafteci]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Kalian - Take a look at this link and then get back to me.<br /> Full text: Conclusions of Senate's Iraq report

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Please tell me what was hypocritical about what I wrote. Here is the meaning of hypocrisy:....

I own a dictionary and use it often. ", a pretense of virtue, piety, etc." <br />Your request was simple. <br />You point a finger of ridicule at those who label or paint broad pictures. And you turn around and do it yourself.<br />Unfortunately, two days in, you're already predictable.<br />--------------------------------------------------<br />

Did Iraq have WMD?

Weather Iraq did or didn't is a moot point.<br />Our President said our mission (in part) was to "rid the world of these dangerous weapons."<br />Over three years later we have failed in that mission.<br />In fact it isn't part of the mission anymore.

 

[Kalian]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Who would dare to do anything? How about China, Russia and a host of others. <br /> Hey I'll be honest. I don't know for a fact that there were WMD's there. I believe there were, but that doesn't mean anything. I don't have access to the inteligence GWB has and regardless of what others here say, they don't either. And it may be that what you said about them needing a reason to invade was true. I would still agree with the war simply because it's a good strategic place to have a base for other matters. The fact that we forced the issue with al-qeida is good also. Now we are in a do or die situation where we need to dismantle al-qeida,which we should have been doing 10 years ago. Al-qeida was always a potential problem, and no matter what we would have done diferently with our foriegn policy, we would have been a target eventualy. GWB recognized that and acted. <br /><br /> With all the spin out there, I certainly am not ready to accept anything the democrats have to say regarding the legality or strategy of GWB, just as you are not willing to accept anything that comes from our side. I certainly hope I haven't been lied to, but I won't attack GWB just because the democrat spin machine says he lied to us. <br /><br /> Oh, and I understand your point about the ones in power make the rules. I would hope that it's not really like that, but then again, I'm not naive.

 

[Kalian]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Gafteci, don't make the mistake of thinking that your condescending attitude will inspire me to do your bidding.

 

[tuahcodem]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

iraq has/had wmd before and after and will contine to have them iran as well

 

[Kalian]

Re: Did Iraq have WMD?

Oh great Allah, please tell me, will there be peace in the middle east?