Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/3/2004 4:56:11 PM EST
I've even seen hints of it on this site... "bush lied to us, there were no weapons of mass destuction blah blah blah"

Did the fact that two chemical booby traps not make the news? Did the fact that the Poles found 70 or so chemical artillery warheads not make it past foxnews.com? Even forgeting all that, what about the prohibited long range missles that where fired on Kuwait during OIF?

The sheep make me sick, telling lies over and over again

Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:02:44 PM EST
there was also the 3 truck loads of chemical nerve agent found in syria that was about to be used to kille 70,000+ Jordanians, as well as the 400+ Iraqi nuclear scientists working in a hollowed out mountain in Libya, who were getting support from N. Korea and Uranium from Niger. Also, Iraqi is a big desert, we could still stumble upon a buried cache somewhere. Oh yeah and I remember right before the Iraq war started there were three cargo ships sailing in circles in the Indian ocean after departing from Iraq. I never heard an update on that last story though.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:05:29 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 5:06:36 PM EST by Greenhorn]
I'm sick of the WMD crap, but for a much deeper reason.

IT DOESN'T MATTER! We would have been MORE than justified fighting Saddam's murderous regime if he had NEVER had any C/B/N weapons!
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:09:46 PM EST
I agree with that also greenhorn
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:15:47 PM EST
The dummycunts have to hang on to their myths...
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:16:24 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:17:47 PM EST
Do any of you have links to stories that I could print out. I've got a professor that goes on and on and on and on about WMDs.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:25:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 5:25:32 PM EST by Greenhorn]
Of course, that isn't to say I don't totally agree with your setiments.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 5:43:20 PM EST
Connect the dots, dude. The WMD's are hidden in bottles of ketchup in Cambodia.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:13:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By painrx:
Do any of you have links to stories that I could print out. I've got a professor that goes on and on and on and on about WMDs.



Poles find 17 Sarin Warheads before terrorists can purchase them

two different incedents

I'd like to see more myself
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:17:15 PM EST
There were also two tons of enriched uranium found. BBC even covered it. Why wasn't that big news?????
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:25:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 6:26:04 PM EST by Aimless]
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:31:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By Currahee:

Originally Posted By painrx:
Do any of you have links to stories that I could print out. I've got a professor that goes on and on and on and on about WMDs.



Poles find 17 Sarin Warheads before terrorists can purchase them

two different incedents

I'd like to see more myself



Thanks for the links... there are 3000 liberals on campus who need to see it.

- BG
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:33:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By painrx:
Do any of you have links to stories that I could print out. I've got a professor that goes on and on and on and on about WMDs.




Essentially both President Bush and Condi Rice have stated that they didn't find the WMD they expected to. (I don't have the sites, but I've seen the clips from interviews or press conferences or whatever it was). So technically, your professor is right. Quite strong claims were made (watch Powell's presentation to the U.N.) - and pretty much none of those strong claims were substantiated (and a few rockets with gas, or one particular lab doesn't even begin to come close to what was expected).

It WAS a mistake - but it was a mistake that EVERYONE believed, so it's not a big deal. Bush was given briefings about what people belived, and he made choices based on that. It's ridiculous to hold HIM accountable for intelligence failures by other people.

So it's kind of a non-issue. If your professor starts up again, try countering with "yeah so what - the bush adminstration has admitted it was a mistake. What's your point??"

Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:47:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 6:48:59 PM EST by damong]
what I'd like to know is why we haven't attacked North Korea - They are communists, they state publicly that they have nuclear weapons, people from DOE have visited No. Korea and have said they are reprocessing spent fuel to make weapons grade uranium, they have ICBM's and have tested them, and they kicked out inspectors more than a 2 years ago... whats up with that? is it because there isn't anything in North Korea worth fighting over? (North Korea is a wasteland really).

I'd say North Korea is WAY more of a threat than Iraq was.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:49:53 PM EST
Tag
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 6:52:10 PM EST

Originally Posted By damong:
what I'd like to know is why we haven't attacked North Korea - They are communists, they state publicly that they have nuclear weapons, people from DOE have visited No. Korea and have said they are reprocessing spent fuel to make weapons grade uranium, they have ICBM's and have tested them, and they kicked out inspectors more than a 2 years ago... whats up with that? is it because there isn't anything in North Korea worth fighting over? (North Korea is a wasteland really).

I'd say North Korea is WAY more of a threat than Iraq was.




Iran FIRST, then North Korea !!


Let's go already !!
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 8:30:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 8:31:09 PM EST by copenhagen]
We havnt attacked North Korea yet maybe because Bush doesnt want a few of our citys on the West Coast leveled by North Korean ICBM's.
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 8:31:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By copenhagen:
We havnt attacked North Korea yet maybe becasue Bush doesnt want a few of our citys on the West Coast leveled by North Korean ICBM's.




You're kidding, right?

They don't have that capability now. But, if we wait a few years and do nothing, then they will!
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 8:31:59 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/3/2004 9:45:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/3/2004 9:45:59 PM EST by Tango7]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
Essentially both President Bush and Condi Rice have stated that they didn't find the WMD they expected to. (I don't have the sites, but I've seen the clips from interviews or press conferences or whatever it was).



They have stated that they didn't find the stockpiles that they expected to.


So technically, your professor is right.


Well, yes and no.

According to the change in terminology a few years ago, CBRN weaponry was morphed into WMD, courtesy of a "modernizing" FedGov, and this invented term incorporated conventional explosives utilized by the "correct" bad guys under the "correct" set of circumstances.

A "weapon of mass destruction" was stated as being a device that was intended to kill maim, or disable multiple victims, either though conventional or unconventional means. While intended (IMHO) to include weapons capable of killing, maiming, or disabling hundreds or thousands of victims, technically the bomb vests in Swordfish would qualify, because they had been augmented with projectiles... using the WMD criterion, if they were "just" explosive laden vests, they might or might not be WMD's.[%]It's stupid semantics, but this way Uncle has a shitbox to sweep everything into, as well as a way to magnify charges against domestic troublemakers.

So the presence of a single binary-compound nerve agent warhead (OK, I know there have actually been several) technically qualifies as the presence of WMD, and a legitimate threat. Of course, the news media will downplay such finds... after all, anything less than 10,000 fully loaded multiple Chem/Bio delivery system warheads doesn't count, right?


Quite strong claims were made (watch Powell's presentation to the U.N.) - and pretty much none of those strong claims were substantiated (and a few rockets with gas, or one particular lab doesn't even begin to come close to what was expected).


Remind your professor to polish his Kerry/Edwards button... then provide him with some of the voting records and supporting testimony / discussion for the 1998 "reauthorization of hostilities with Iraq" resolution. (No, that's not the real name, but it's pretty much the content). As DK cites below:


It WAS a mistake - but it was a mistake that EVERYONE believed, so it's not a big deal. Bush was given briefings about what people belived, and he made choices based on that. It's ridiculous to hold HIM accountable for intelligence failures by other people.


It also was based on actual AARs from victims/witnesses from Hussein's use of chem agents WMD's against Iranian military and civilian targets during the Iran-Iraq war, and against his own citizens during the Kurdish uprising in the 1990's.


So it's kind of a non-issue. If your professor starts up again, try countering with "yeah so what - the bush adminstration has admitted it was a mistake. What's your point??"


Just ask him if the dead Kurds were an RNC fabrication, or maybe the blister agent Iranians were secret Halliburton shills, hmm?
Top Top