What you said before attempted to give Bush a pass because of the timeline involved. We now have Bush adding on to the timeline and still disavowing that they were real WMD's. Even the news channel where you heard the "NEWS" had to admit they were not real WMD's. You are left alone drowning in a sea of missinformation, and a desperate attempt by a losing politician to grab some publicity. Swim to shore my friend.
Yes, but the thing is the inspectors were unaware of the now known status...Saddam lied...and I wouldn't say this was the only thing after 11 years of trying non-militarily and 16 resolutions after...
WRONG! according to Fox News you might as well wait for the "official word" first like your idol sanitarium
Again if you read David Kaye's statement, it clearly shows that they were aware of much of what was found, and expected others to be found as well.
but "these are not the WMD’s this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had and not the WMD’s for which this country went to war" agree or disagree?
Here is my final take on this...I won't further this with silliness or even non-silliness unless something dramatic or developmental happens First off, this was fun...I want to thank several posters who engaged with me on this in both silly and non-silly ways...(And if it wasn't fun, why do this?)Sometimes in politics we play sides too easily without realizing the big picture,...and the big picture is we are all Americans, and even if some posters aren't, we are all still fellow humans with ties to what is right and fair for each of us...I really care for my BBS family and wish everyone the best in there real lifes that are more meaningful than a political forum... I do want to say my point is highlighting and exhibiting attention to the story Foxnews ran because I believe it should deserve attention...It could really mean something substantial and my goal was basically to show what was reported, combined with the intel report as an important topic I felt personaly interested in... Honestly, from the get go, I have questions that are unanswered about this...Specifically: Are they really and truly possibly dangerous? Filled or unfilled? How many places are they at?, among others...I am not saying the story is too full of holes, but it is a story I deem as a real possible noteworthy topic that is worth examining...Who knows? there may be more to come out of this...
T.K.O.!!!!!!!!! ...ROXRAN doesn't get out of his corner in the 12th. And I wouldn't either. <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8MZeiBq3Irw"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8MZeiBq3Irw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
so you agree that these are not the wmds america went to war for, all the soldiers died for, and all money spent for.. fair enough
I don't want to go back on what I said, but it is unfair to not answer the one pending question in this aspect...These are WMD elements that have potential to be used for harm...This I believe. I have a post 9/11 mindset that affirms the reasoning of intervening militarily after 11 years, 16 resolutions of non compliance......because the whereabouts of these were made unavailable. Saddam did support terroristic endeavors...He actually DID terroristic endeavors to the tune of killing over tens of thousands of his own people barbarically, he unsubtantially invaded another country...He was an active and worrisome threat and still interested/capable of restarting a program with basis of WMD... Having a country established with a basis of democracy in the heartland region of the fanatical is a basis and strong factor of the war on terror...especially at the expense of a terroristic madman who ran Iraq....Iraq, Afghanistan...Success stories on disposing governmental entities which encourage terroristic deeds...That is what I believe these soldiers died for and I am very grateful...I had a cousin serve, and a family friend who came back, but they were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to make it happen... I honestly don't care about money spent to keep us secure in the war on terror... That is my answer to you. Please address further questions elsewhere...
what if there was a subsequent foxnews story quoting from administration defense officials that dismisses this? again why dont you annswer a simple yes or no about this comment from admin defense officials? "these are not the WMD’s this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had and not the WMD’s for which this country went to war" is this truth or lie?
I'm quite suprised no one has called you out on this post as of yet. This post is laughably wrong on so many levels. Bacterial and chemical weapons such as sarin were precisely the basis for U.S invasion. We weren't concerned about Saddam having nuclear capability because that is far easier to detect and take care of from afar. I think it's hilarious how you dislike the truth so you try to sweep the facts under the carpet.
Goody, fresh meat. Suffice it to say, the amount of times an administration official/war advocate, during the pre-war buildup, referred to deadly bioweapons (notice wnes did not mention this) and nuclear programs probably numbers in the tens of thousands, at a minimum see, e.g., one of many speeches loaded with lies by GWB: "Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud" That's just one example. Have you been living under a rock for the last 4 years? You are aware that the president's pre-war lies about Iraq and uranium and its nuclear weapons programs has been the focus of various indictments, etc, which has only been in the news about a million times.
Truth? Can you handle the truth? Did you cry a river when Washington turned a blind-eye to the Saddam regime's repeated use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers, by helping Iraq develop its chemical, biological weapons programs during the '80s? Did Colin Power hold a centrifuge tube or a petri dish when he attempted to convince UN members Saddam was actively seeking to develop nuclear weapons? Did or did not George W Bush utter mushroom cloud in his various speeches leading up to the Iraq War? Does the notorious 16-word statement in Bush's '03 SOTU speech have something to do yellowcake or agar plate?
This is silly. Isn't this find, whether part of old weapons, or new weapons, ONLY significant because it keeps WMD out of the hands of dangerous people? To me, this has NOTHING to do with political power, justifying the cause for the war, or boosting the president's approval ratings. This is significant because it takes these weapons away from those who would use them to take human life. Let's keep our eye on the damn ball.
Wrong. The "WMD's" found had no capacity to take human life, as stated by the Bush administration, and had no use to anybody other than as scrap metal. This is a fact. That is why this is a non-story which only lives on this BBS.
so the degraded pre-1991 bio and chem weapons are exactly the dreaded mushroom cloud producing WMD's we went to war for and not the nuclear weapons? I would like to see the UN presentation of Powell and Rice's speech with this new info..
