Hundreds of WMDs found in Iraq

Why was it beyond their control? Like they say in their own documents, they first needed a pretext to convince Americans that an imperial mobilization was "in our best interest".

By you're last statement I take it you have no idea what conservatism is or was before it was co opted by you're neoliberal heros.

 

You're right! They didn't want them found. Lends too much credence to the Bush administration in the face of their unreasonable hatred of the man. :thumbs:

 

They needed nothing. They have 12 years of Hussein snubbing his nose at inspectors (most during the Clinton administration, I might add) as reason enough to have removed him. Remember, Saddam AGREED to UN sanctions, and DELIBERATELY broke them. Bush had reason enough to invade based of the Clinton administration!

 

Who said the chemicals were not weapon grade? I don't know what that is supposed to mean? Sarin is sarin and it has to be made in a chemical plant--therefore, it is weapon grade?

If something can kill, it is obviously WEAPONS GRADE. The term weapons grade is used for nuclear material to determine whether or not it is pure enough to "go critical" if it were used in a nuclear bomb. It is not used on chemical shells.

Bush explained very carefully to us that he invaded Iraq because he had weapons of mass destruction program. He was a threat to his neighbors. Have you not read about Saddam using gas on the Northern Regions of his own country? Have you not seen the rotting bodies of children, men and women who were exposed to this stuff? NOT WEAPONS GRADE? NO WAY TO DELIVER IT?

Give me a BREAK!

He used the stuff on thousands of Iranians. We don't have any idea how many thousands he killed.

Didn't you read what happened in the subway in Japan using Sarin? Luckily the terrorists who used it didn't study it well enough to kill MORE than they did, but it still killed a lot.

If Saddam were to hand over just ONE of these shells to a terrorist who could slip it into the United States, then downtown New York could have easily been turned into a death zone. We can only hope that terrorists have not latched onto any of these YET.

Now, why did Saddam not use them? Because we went into Iraq with a strategic battle assuming that he would use chemicals if he had them. Our battle plan takes these things into consideration and we immediately eliminated all threats for being able to transport or launch any of these weapons. I'm sure they would have been used, in fact, there are questions now concerning whether or not soldiers might have been exposed to Sarin during Desert Storm.

Our military knows how to go in and control these situations--I doubt that you have ANY IDEA how well they are trained to keep the enemy from using chemicals when we enter a threater of war.

The lack of understanding of war and strategy really surprises me.

Besides, these weapons could be delivered to his neighboring countries including Israel. Terrorism was only ONE of the reasons that we took out Saddam. The other reason was that he was becoming a real and present threat to his neighbors including Israel.

Would you have rather have put the burdeon on Israel and turned the whole middle east into a nuclear war zone, just because Syria and the other Arab countries would stick with Iraq to destroy Israel forcing them to use nukes?

 

Amen! webdog!

How easily people forget that Saddam AGREED to follow ALL of the UN sanctions, including building or just storing chemicals. Then he would turn around and kick the inspectors out. Even if he didn't have chemicals, just kicking out the inspectors and ignoring the agreement he made with the original coalition was enough for a full fledged invasion.

Why can't people get this through their heads and understand that finding chemicals wasn't necessary for the US military to take the guy out of power.

The bottom line is, intelligence was NOT WRONG and we have now found WMDs. It doesn't MATTER whether or not they were there before--Saddam had promised us he had none. They were found, the intelligence community is vindicated. PERIOD. END OF ARGUMENT.

Now, Poncho, you can go ahead and plan the rest of the world's take-over by the big boys.:thumbs:

 

Dave, if they had it their way, they would have never been found--Saddam would still be in power and one would show up in downtown Manhattan, or they would be fired at Israel.

Thanks to those who have risked or given their lives to give the Iraqi's freedom, these 500 WMD's will not find their way to Saddam's enemies.

 

Dave, if they had it their way, they would have never been found--Saddam would still be in power and one would show up in downtown Manhattan, or they would be fired at Israel.

Thanks to those who have risked or given their lives to give the Iraqi's freedom, these 500 WMD's will not find their way to Saddam's enemies.

 

Why is it all you neolibs think our history with the Hussein regime only goes back 12 years? We're the ones that put him in power (in the late 50's), we're the ones that helped him get all those WMDs, we're the ones that willingly overlooked his atrocities for decades because he was "our guy". And why is it that all you neolibs can't have a debate unless it's framed in the phoney left vs right paradigm. The same violent covert interventionist policy has been carried out by democrat and republican administrations starting in 1953.

You sound like a parrot Dave don't you have anything original to say?

 

As much as it hurts :laugh:. I'm having to agree with Poncho here. Saddam was the lesser of two evils when the Shah was kicked out of Iran. When the millions (and I mean millions) of Iranians started crossing the boarders into Iraq somebody had to help them stop it. Where do you think this Sarin came from?

It was given to him to use to stop the overrunning of his country. I don't know for sure, but my guess, these shells originated right here in good ole Arkansas.

They WERE used against the Iranians and did stop the onrush, but then Saddam began to use them against his own people. This is where the split began.

By the way, don't forget that it was Israel that actually set Saddam's nuclear program back by tens of years with their sneak attack on Osrisk. THe attack was so well planned that the pilots asked the Jordanian air-traffic controllers (in Arabic) to cross the country, claiming they were an airliner, while it was actually a close formation of F-16's. They were given clearance to cross Jordanian airspace. Those sneaky Israeli's..........

 

Oh here we go again Phillip the great patriot, always so willing to send our children into harms way for a farse. What is wrong with you people anyways? These neocon's own words convict them of their deceptions on our troops as well as the rest us.

How you can sit there and keep lying to yourselves when the truth is so plainly seen if you just read their documents. We aren't there to free any Iraqis, our children, family members and friends aren't risking and giving their lives to rid the world of monsters or wmds. They are there dying trying to destabilze and balkanize Israel's enemies. If they are dying for any flags at all it's the ones with a single six point star and skull and bones not the stars and stripes.


Look I don't mean to get so uppity Phillip but when the lives of my countrymen my family and my friends are on the line because of a bunch of Malthusian owl worshiping liars it makes my blood boil.

 

BTW, don't forget it was we who first radicalized the Iranians by overthrowing their democratically elected government and installing the Shah's puppet regime. By a false flag terror campaign no less! All because the Iranians had the gall to nationalize their own public assets. Our "saintly" government is famous the world over for it's use of false flag terror campaigns.

 

You sound like a conspiracy theorist. Oh, but that isn't original either, is it? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Was that a random attack, or did you have a point?

 

Whoo Hoo what a comeback! Care to debate any of the points I've made on our history in the middle east are you just going to sit there on your perch and keep chomping on you're wise crackers Poly?

 

Dave, I would be very careful here. We have a lot of dirt in the middle east and I have no doubt that poncho can quote every bit of it. just thought I might warn ya.........

 

The British have even more dirt over there than we do. The Brits and the U.S. have been shooting, bombing, gassing and looting Iraq and Iraqi's for almost a hundred years now and they still haven't given up. They didn't want us there in 1920 and they don't want us there today.

I wouldn't be surprised if we found a few poison gas bombs Churchill left over there packed away in some corner of Baghdad.

 

You sound like someone who hates America with a passion. I guess that's why you don't list the US as where you live, but "North America". Does your last name happen to be Fonda?

 

Well, I guess I just felt that I should be able to express agreement with someone's post without getting a jibe like that. I felt it was totally uncalled for as I had not even really entered the argument or disputed any specific posting of the one leveling the attack.

 

You are correct.

Poncho is our very own conspiricy theorist-in-chief. There are none better ...or more persistent.

 

BINGO! The Israeli government saw Iraq as a threat to Israel. Iraq was a threat to Israel, not to the United States. The United States is doing Israel's bidding. Thus, about 2500 United States military personnel have died in Iraq, not 2500 Israeli military personnel - even though Israel is far and away the biggest beneficiary of the removal of Saddam Hussein from power.

 

I suppose I probably do to people that care more about defending their party and politicians than their country's sovereignty, constitution and bill of rights.

Then you'd be guessing wrong. I list it as North America because that's what we are now, North Americans since the Clinton and Bush globalist regimes made us part of the North American Union.

Care to venture a guess as to why my avatar is a panopticon?

Nope does your last name happen to be Mussolini?

Starting to catch on now Ken?

There are more reasons than that though. The transnationals wanted to privatize Iraq's public assets, which they've done by breaking international law. And Saddam wanted to increase oil production to pay off the debts from the war with Iran, that would drop the price. Big oil couldn't have that now could they? He was a threat to their bottom line.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment Carpro. :smilewinkgrin: