Well, the responses here sum it up for hopeless Left.
We found components of a NUCLEAR program. We found documents on how to conceal items from the UN inspectors.
....yet, some here are STILL defending Saddam. It's ridiculous. This is irrefutable proof Saddam was able to restart his nuclear program at any time...and also proof he was decieving the UN. I SAY AGAIN: We have proof he was deceiving the UN...and now we have folks saying that Iraq was disarmed ACCORDING TO the UN?
Sometimes I wonder: If a nuclear missile slammed into Los Angeles and we were somehow able to read "With Love from North Korea" on the side before impact, would the liberals suggest that Bush had it painted on there?
Oh, and BTW: Blix NEVER claimed Iraq was disarmed. Never.
Eaaaaaaaaaaaadnt! ( buzzer sound ). Wrong. Didn't you read the CNN article I linked to? More expert men than you say it wasn't evidence of a program or a smoking gun.
Why would it have to be from 2001? If it's not allowed and they didn't declare it then it is streng verboten.
All this "justify a war" talk is garbage because there's no justifying it to those who has already made up their mind not to think it was just.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
Why would it have to be from 2001? If it's not allowed and they didn't declare it then it is streng verboten.
All this "justify a war" talk is garbage because there's no justifying it to those who has already made up their mind not to think it was just.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
Well you can go right on patting yourselves on the back if you want. The rest of the world is saying this isn't the smoking gun proof you think it is. I'm glad you guys aren't calling the shots.
If you were right about this there wouldn't still be articles like this :
Also your'e right about one thing. A lot of us know about Saddam and his ways. We also know this isn't the only place in the world where this sort of thing happens. Yes, we made up our minds a long time ago that this war wasn't as advertised.
Hmmm? Gosh maybe we should have gone after China when they gunned down those student protesters? Of course we just stood by while South Africa did unspeakable things to their own people. Gosh maybe in the future we should just attack everybody that is unjust to their own?
groverat, nobody here is saying that Saddam was a nice man. However the only reason this war got off the ground was for reasons that haven't been revealed to the american people. They covered them in a nice fluffy frosting of WOMD and Threat to the U.S.
WOMD and threat still hasn't been proven. Even if these parts and drawings could have eventually led to something they didn't. There was no big nuclear arsenal. No WOMD. No threat.
The fact that they weren't supposed to have them isn't the point here. What we're talking about is : Did Iraq have ( already fabricated ) WOMD and in some way were they a threat?
I wonder how many backyards in the world you could dig up and find interesting things?
I'm sorry but the idea that this find justifies everything is really grasping at straws. That argument holds water like a sieve.
Remember that Israel is by no means defenseless; it has its own nukes.
As I stated in another thread, there is no proof. They are a signee of the NPT and have never tested warheads nor ballistics capable of nuclear delivery. They haven't even made political moves to obtain such devices.
As I stated in another thread, there is no proof. They are a signee of the NPT and have never tested warheads nor ballistics capable of nuclear delivery. They haven't even made political moves to obtain such devices.
This is irrefutable proof Saddam was able to restart his nuclear program at any time
Saddam had an internet connection therefore it was possible for him to research weapons of mass destrution at any time. Is that justification for attacking?
The point remains that none of this evidence proves that he actually did restart his program. Answer this question directly SDW: How does the ability to restart the program constitute ACTIVELY PURSUING one?.
You are reaching as usual and are as looney as ever.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
If that was the reason from the start and we went around to every other corrupt dictatorship and did the same thing to free those people, fine.
It still all boils down to this:
Bush asks UN for permission thereby accepting the power of the UN.
UN says no.
Bush doesn't like answer. Bush sends invasion force anyway.
Whether or not the war was just or did any good is irrelevant. Deceiving the American people as to the REASON for the war (which has changed around 6,000 times) is the issue here.
Yes, the war will hopefully end up helping the Iraqi people. That's good. I don't deny that. I do, however, take issue with my president lying to me on a daily basis.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
It's more about how to justify not going to war in other scenarios now. If it's not the oil, why haven't we invaded the Congo where over three million people have been killed in the past 5 years?
It's more about how to justify not going to war in other scenarios now. If it's not the oil, why haven't we invaded the Congo where over three million people have been killed in the past 5 years?
because Israel doesn't care about Congo
but it is the oil and reconstruction contracts, too
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
This is basically what an Iraqi friend of mine was saying last night. Her family finally got a call from some of their relatives thanks to the red cross, and they were pretty damn unhappy about what the US has been doing there. And these folks are assirians, one of the most persecuted groups in the country. Why do you think her family came here?
Give up. It's over. Iraq concealed nuclear weapons program materials. Active or not, they had it. There is NO argument here. You might as well concede because you are going to get killed on this one.
I see the White House has admitted the intel on the Niger purchase was incorrect. Ok, then. It was incorrect. I have some questions: 1) Why was it incorrect? 2) Who gathered it? 3) Did Bush personally know it was incorrect (or seriously suspected it) when he used it?
Unless #3 is a "yes", this doesn't mean anything politically. In fact, the White House has done exactly what Bush did during the campaign with his DUI. They admitted it, and thereby took the story away.
Look, all partisanship and ideology aside for a second here: The House and Senate are controlled by Republicans and will be until at least next Novemeber. There isn't going to be a witch hunt or Watergate-style investigation/scandal. It's just not going to be politcal reality...even if Bush did lie.
jimmac and company: You can keep running around giggling "Bush is so screwed! Out the door in 2004!" all you want. If it makes you feel better, then go ahead and keep doing it. The political reality is that Aries1B is correct: The Dems have set themelves up yet AGAIN (which even I am starting to find unbelieveable). If significant WMD are found, The Bush administration is going to plaster it everywhere on this free earth. They might even rent billboards! The political reality is that George W. Bush is more than likely to win re-election in a landslide. They set themselves up for the tax cut. They set themselves up for medicare. They set themselves up for the war.
Enjoy your time until the election, though, because when he wins again I'm not going to be a very good winner.
I see the White House has admitted the intel on the Niger purchase was incorrect. Ok, then. It was incorrect. I have some questions: 1) Why was it incorrect? 2) Who gathered it? 3) Did Bush personally know it was incorrect (or seriously suspected it) when he used it?
Unless #3 is a "yes", this doesn't mean anything politically. In fact, the White House has done exactly what Bush did during the campaign with his DUI. They admitted it, and thereby took the story away.
Look, all partisanship and ideology aside for a second here: The House and Senate are controlled by Republicans and will be until at least next Novemeber. There isn't going to be a witch hunt or Watergate-style investigation/scandal. It's just not going to be politcal reality...even if Bush did lie.
jimmac and company: You can keep running around giggling "Bush is so screwed! Out the door in 2004!" all you want. If it makes you feel better, then go ahead and keep doing it. The political reality is that Aries1B is correct: The Dems have set themelves up yet AGAIN (which even I am starting to find unbelieveable). If significant WMD are found, The Bush administration is going to plaster it everywhere on this free earth. Tthey might even rent billboards to tell how wrong the the Dems were. The political reality is that George W. Bush is more than likely to win re-election in a landslide. Enjoy your time until then, though, because when he wins again I'm not going to be a very nice winner.
A scene from the future : SDW is being taken away in a jacket mumbling " There were WOMD in Iraq.....All 50 states.........it's all Katie Courics's fault! "
Come on SDW! I suppose if Bush fries over this it'll be someone elses fault?
The fact of the matter is right now unless Bush and company can come up with a very good ( and plausible ) explanation this is a very major rock in his road.
Comments
Originally posted by SDW2001
Well, the responses here sum it up for hopeless Left.
We found components of a NUCLEAR program. We found documents on how to conceal items from the UN inspectors.
....yet, some here are STILL defending Saddam. It's ridiculous. This is irrefutable proof Saddam was able to restart his nuclear program at any time...and also proof he was decieving the UN. I SAY AGAIN: We have proof he was deceiving the UN...and now we have folks saying that Iraq was disarmed ACCORDING TO the UN?
Sometimes I wonder: If a nuclear missile slammed into Los Angeles and we were somehow able to read "With Love from North Korea" on the side before impact, would the liberals suggest that Bush had it painted on there?
Oh, and BTW: Blix NEVER claimed Iraq was disarmed. Never.
Eaaaaaaaaaaaadnt! ( buzzer sound ). Wrong. Didn't you read the CNN article I linked to? More expert men than you say it wasn't evidence of a program or a smoking gun.
Still in check.
Nuclear components not allowed.
Documents found on how to hide things from Un inspectors
Documents=undeniable proof.
It's that simple. There isn't even an argument here. "Smoking gun". Jesus.
All this "justify a war" talk is garbage because there's no justifying it to those who has already made up their mind not to think it was just.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
Originally posted by groverat
Why would it have to be from 2001? If it's not allowed and they didn't declare it then it is streng verboten.
All this "justify a war" talk is garbage because there's no justifying it to those who has already made up their mind not to think it was just.
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
Well you can go right on patting yourselves on the back if you want. The rest of the world is saying this isn't the smoking gun proof you think it is. I'm glad you guys aren't calling the shots.
If you were right about this there wouldn't still be articles like this :
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...0.html?cnn=yes
Also your'e right about one thing. A lot of us know about Saddam and his ways. We also know this isn't the only place in the world where this sort of thing happens. Yes, we made up our minds a long time ago that this war wasn't as advertised.
Hmmm? Gosh maybe we should have gone after China when they gunned down those student protesters? Of course we just stood by while South Africa did unspeakable things to their own people. Gosh maybe in the future we should just attack everybody that is unjust to their own?
groverat, nobody here is saying that Saddam was a nice man. However the only reason this war got off the ground was for reasons that haven't been revealed to the american people. They covered them in a nice fluffy frosting of WOMD and Threat to the U.S.
WOMD and threat still hasn't been proven. Even if these parts and drawings could have eventually led to something they didn't. There was no big nuclear arsenal. No WOMD. No threat.
The fact that they weren't supposed to have them isn't the point here. What we're talking about is : Did Iraq have ( already fabricated ) WOMD and in some way were they a threat?
I wonder how many backyards in the world you could dig up and find interesting things?
I'm sorry but the idea that this find justifies everything is really grasping at straws. That argument holds water like a sieve.
Remember that Israel is by no means defenseless; it has its own nukes.
As I stated in another thread, there is no proof. They are a signee of the NPT and have never tested warheads nor ballistics capable of nuclear delivery. They haven't even made political moves to obtain such devices.
Originally posted by LiquidR
originally posted by fred_lj
As I stated in another thread, there is no proof. They are a signee of the NPT and have never tested warheads nor ballistics capable of nuclear delivery. They haven't even made political moves to obtain such devices.
Wrong.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/index.html
Originally posted by SDW2001
This is irrefutable proof Saddam was able to restart his nuclear program at any time
Saddam had an internet connection therefore it was possible for him to research weapons of mass destrution at any time. Is that justification for attacking?
The point remains that none of this evidence proves that he actually did restart his program. Answer this question directly SDW: How does the ability to restart the program constitute ACTIVELY PURSUING one?.
You are reaching as usual and are as looney as ever.
Originally posted by groverat
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
If that was the reason from the start and we went around to every other corrupt dictatorship and did the same thing to free those people, fine.
It still all boils down to this:
Bush asks UN for permission thereby accepting the power of the UN.
UN says no.
Bush doesn't like answer. Bush sends invasion force anyway.
Whether or not the war was just or did any good is irrelevant. Deceiving the American people as to the REASON for the war (which has changed around 6,000 times) is the issue here.
Yes, the war will hopefully end up helping the Iraqi people. That's good. I don't deny that. I do, however, take issue with my president lying to me on a daily basis.
Originally posted by groverat
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
It's more about how to justify not going to war in other scenarios now. If it's not the oil, why haven't we invaded the Congo where over three million people have been killed in the past 5 years?
Originally posted by bunge
It's more about how to justify not going to war in other scenarios now. If it's not the oil, why haven't we invaded the Congo where over three million people have been killed in the past 5 years?
because Israel doesn't care about Congo
but it is the oil and reconstruction contracts, too
Originally posted by groverat
If the stories of thousands of people being disappeared, mass graves all from Hussein isn't enough to justify the war that successfully got rid of him then there is no convincing you.
Of course, most say this situation is worse now:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/...International/
This is basically what an Iraqi friend of mine was saying last night. Her family finally got a call from some of their relatives thanks to the red cross, and they were pretty damn unhappy about what the US has been doing there. And these folks are assirians, one of the most persecuted groups in the country. Why do you think her family came here?
Originally posted by Scott
I heard the fluffy puppies are hurting too.
About the poor ikkle Iwaqi puppies.
The human beings can go and hang themselves, of course. The important thing is that AMERICA WON THE WAR! Way-hay!
Originally posted by Scott
I heard the fluffy puppies are hurting too.
Just because groverat is no longer a moderator doesn't mean you can make fun of him because he supports a 'humanitarian' war.
Originally posted by bunge
Just because groverat is no longer a moderator doesn't mean you can make fun of him because he supports a 'humanitarian' war.
Originally posted by SDW2001
Give up. It's over. Iraq concealed nuclear weapons program materials. Active or not, they had it. There is NO argument here. You might as well concede because you are going to get killed on this one.
You will be assimilated or you will be destroyed!
Originally posted by Aries 1B
No no no!
There were no WMDs! Keep on message/mantra! Say it loud, say it proud! Energize the base! Grab the attention! Foam at the mouth!
Then, just before the election, when the WMDs are finally and loudly found....
Landslide! Term 2!
Perfect!
The Democrats are walking into such an ambush....
Aries 1B
The more you believe that the greater your disappointing next election.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...otu/index.html
Originally posted by jimmac
I wonder how SDW is doing with his morning coffee and the news this morning?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...otu/index.html
I see the White House has admitted the intel on the Niger purchase was incorrect. Ok, then. It was incorrect. I have some questions: 1) Why was it incorrect? 2) Who gathered it? 3) Did Bush personally know it was incorrect (or seriously suspected it) when he used it?
Unless #3 is a "yes", this doesn't mean anything politically. In fact, the White House has done exactly what Bush did during the campaign with his DUI. They admitted it, and thereby took the story away.
Look, all partisanship and ideology aside for a second here: The House and Senate are controlled by Republicans and will be until at least next Novemeber. There isn't going to be a witch hunt or Watergate-style investigation/scandal. It's just not going to be politcal reality...even if Bush did lie.
jimmac and company: You can keep running around giggling "Bush is so screwed! Out the door in 2004!" all you want. If it makes you feel better, then go ahead and keep doing it. The political reality is that Aries1B is correct: The Dems have set themelves up yet AGAIN (which even I am starting to find unbelieveable). If significant WMD are found, The Bush administration is going to plaster it everywhere on this free earth. They might even rent billboards! The political reality is that George W. Bush is more than likely to win re-election in a landslide. They set themselves up for the tax cut. They set themselves up for medicare. They set themselves up for the war.
Enjoy your time until the election, though, because when he wins again I'm not going to be a very good winner.
Originally posted by SDW2001
I see the White House has admitted the intel on the Niger purchase was incorrect. Ok, then. It was incorrect. I have some questions: 1) Why was it incorrect? 2) Who gathered it? 3) Did Bush personally know it was incorrect (or seriously suspected it) when he used it?
Unless #3 is a "yes", this doesn't mean anything politically. In fact, the White House has done exactly what Bush did during the campaign with his DUI. They admitted it, and thereby took the story away.
Look, all partisanship and ideology aside for a second here: The House and Senate are controlled by Republicans and will be until at least next Novemeber. There isn't going to be a witch hunt or Watergate-style investigation/scandal. It's just not going to be politcal reality...even if Bush did lie.
jimmac and company: You can keep running around giggling "Bush is so screwed! Out the door in 2004!" all you want. If it makes you feel better, then go ahead and keep doing it. The political reality is that Aries1B is correct: The Dems have set themelves up yet AGAIN (which even I am starting to find unbelieveable). If significant WMD are found, The Bush administration is going to plaster it everywhere on this free earth. Tthey might even rent billboards to tell how wrong the the Dems were. The political reality is that George W. Bush is more than likely to win re-election in a landslide. Enjoy your time until then, though, because when he wins again I'm not going to be a very nice winner.
A scene from the future : SDW is being taken away in a jacket mumbling " There were WOMD in Iraq.....All 50 states.........it's all Katie Courics's fault! "
Come on SDW! I suppose if Bush fries over this it'll be someone elses fault?
The fact of the matter is right now unless Bush and company can come up with a very good ( and plausible ) explanation this is a very major rock in his road.
Cheers ( as they say )!
Still in check.