Page 9 of 44 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 436

Thread: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

  1. #81
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    No, we were told there were STOCKPILES of WMDs, none of those STOCKPILES were found.

    I don't think Bush lied to get us into Iraq, but I do think he made his decisions based on weak analysis and information.
    You weren't really intending to dig this all up again were you? It's deja vu all over again.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  2. #82
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    That’s rather the rub, isn’t it? You (and most democrats really) prefer to wait until a threat has reached a level that we can no longer do anything about before you finally want to get involved. Let the threat grow and grow, then, maybe we’ll get involved.
    My neighbor is an asshole. He might one day lose it. I could just go shoot him, but I would hold up well in court arguing that he migth one day go too far. You and Bush and his supporters tend to put the world in such clear terms, either we kill him now, or we die. Of course, as CATO pointed out. If Saddam was that kind of threat, why weren't we dead already?

    You have to make judgements concerning the level of threat. No reasonable person suggested that Saddam was capable of posing a serious threat to the US. heck, the ease with which he fell attests to this. Even that incredible defense he put up in the first Gulf war showed clearly he could be taken any time we wanted, hence not the kind of threat that warranted invasion the cost we paid, and continue to pay.


    Sure it is. PS. I truly find “mere dangerous” to be laughable. You take care of threats when they are evident. You don’t keep passing the buck as both Bush1 and Clinton did. When that happens, the danger levels have increased to a point where they can not really be managed any longer. Saddam has acknowledged that he still had the scientists available and had every intention of restarting his WMD program once Bush left him alone. If the threat had not been taken care of while still “mere dangerous” he would have eventually gotten to a point where he was “semi- dangerous or even higher (we can call that plain dangerous if you like). In other words, the threat was never going to be eliminated, as you like to claim.
    The rub is in taking car eof. As Saddam was bottled up and incapable of even defending hims self, what you miss is that he was dealt with. And the trheat to us is still not eliminated. In fact, it is worse today. Saddam was a no body, but a no body who helped keep Iran in check. Today, we have give aid to our enemies and helped iran to be stronger in the region (that's why they helped us go into Iran). You might want to investigate the first time Chalibi betraryed us.




    Ah, I always love the people that know what is on everyone’s minds. I had many discussions with co-workers and friend (republicans and democrats) and almost all thought that Saddam acting in that manner meant that he almost certainly had something. I’ve even had some fairly recent conversations with people, and they always agree on that point. So, I see the exact opposite of you. For you to announce that the images on TV of weapons inspectors being turned away and delayed didn’t have any affect on peoples perceptions just seems like a very silly argument.
    I don't claim to know what is on everyones mind. No where did I make that claim. Strawman much? And no, if one stoppe dand thought for but a few moments, you would realize we saw most of his weapons destroryed. It was possible and believed that he had some left over wmds, but not that he had stockpiles or that he was gorwnig with active programs. No evidence supported the growing claim, that is, unless . . . of course . . .you used intel inappropriately. Without Curveball, Chalabi, or Libi, the case can't be made at all.


    If only we based our security on the thoughts of UN weapons inspectors who only get a part of the picture then you might have a great point. Still, I don’t see how it was a “leap” to war. The ceasefire agreement had been in violation for a long time (going back to Clinton). Numerous resolutions later an invasion finally occurred.
    Instead of Curveball, Chalibi and Libi? Again, the point is they were on the ground, slowly making progress by their judgment. If we were interested in the inspections and the process, we would have waited. We weren't.

    Sure you can. Saddam failed to follow through with his obligations, the UN passed a resolution that serious consequences would follow if he didn't follow through. He didn't follow-through and serious consequences followed. I don't care what some other countries thought was meant by serious consequences. You can't get much more serious then what happened. Bush even went the additional step of getting authorization for the war from congress.
    No, the UN did not say what those consequence would be or that they would be merited out by the US. And did you notice congress did not declare war? Cowards though they be, the fact is they did not declare war, and some even argued that he had to it within the UN. But, let's not let facts slow us down.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #83
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    There were meetings between Saddam and those affiliated with al-queda. However, it was discovered that Saddam did not trust al-queda for various reasons. Nonetheless, Saddam was actively seeking to increase his ability to use "terrorist-like activities" for political reasons, to increase his asymmetric warfare abilities, etc.
    During the cold war, we met with the Russians as well. Does that mean we were in league with them? We meet with the Talabn now, meet with inusrgants in Iraq, and always meet with our enemies in some capacity. Do these meetings equal us working with them? And what he wanted does not equal what he was able to do.

    Bush stated there was no link between al-queda and Saddam to the public. There was worry previously that there WAS a connection due to meetings mentioned before and his harboring of known terrorists.

    Did the administration use propaganda to gain support for the war? Yes, like what is done by every leader in American history during wartime.
    He did. True. But as otherrs pointed out, that was when asked directly, and after he had so completely anchored the connection in the public mind. I ran into some yesterday who still believes Saddam was behind 9/11 and that Bush told him he was. True, there are likely few of those left, but misinformation dies a slow, hard death.

    Also, it isn't just Bush. Read Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others. The adminsitration did a good job of having members of the administration pushing the message.

    Welcome to politics.

    I assume you aren't dumb enough to believe what a car-sales man tells you at face value. Why are you so credulous to what politicians tell you?
    At one level I agree with you. And frankly, if it were just politics, involving run of the mill lying, as they all do this, I wouldn't bat an eye. I accept as too many of us do that politicians lie. Lies that send us to war are far too serious for me to dismiss this war. If you're going to ask those I love to go into harms way, I don't ask, I demand that you tell the truth. If you can't tell the truth, you don't deserve the right to send young men and women to war. And I don't care who did it in the past.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #84
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,491
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Boo:

    Saddam had 12-years and 16 UN resolutions.
    He had and used WMD.
    He threw out the Inspecteurs de la UN for years.
    Hans Blix stated he was not cooperating and said they had lied about weaponized WMD.
    Clinton and the Dems gave warning about war; in fact Clinton sent Cohen out to sell the possibility and gave us a memorable presentation of Anthrax... and Saddam.
    After 911, Saddam was given a last chance. All our allies agreed... even the UN agreed he had WMD.
    David Kay said we were lucky... because the chance of a terrorist hooking up with WMD was real due to the decay in Iraq.
    We discovered a Nuke Black Market from this exercise.
    Libya's out of the business.
    AND at the same time... we realized the Iranians had an 18-year nuke program. Intel failures in closed societies works both ways.
    That's not a complete list, but more than enough.

    Hell, Hillary told Code Pink she had knowledge only a first lady (and other insiders) could get about Saddam. There was no lying. Colin Powell isn't totally stupid... they connected the dots that went back more than a decade.

    Given the facts, Bush did the right thing, and got the votes to do it.

    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 10-27-10 at 06:25 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  5. #85
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Boo:

    Saddam had 12-years and 16 UN resolutions.
    He had and used WMD.
    He threw out the Inspecteurs de la UN for years.
    Hans Blix stated he was not cooperating and said they had lied about weaponized WMD.
    Clinton and the Dems gave warning about war; in fact Clinton sent Cohen out to sell the possibility and gave us a memorable presentation of Anthrax... and Saddam.
    After 911, Saddam was given a last chance. All our allies agreed... even the UN agreed he had WMD.
    David Kay said we were lucky... because the chance of a terrorist hooking up with WMD was real due to the decay in Iraq.
    We discovered a Nuke Black Market from this exercise.
    Libya's out of the business.
    AND at the same time... we realized the Iranians had an 18-year nuke program. Intel failures in closed societies works both ways.
    That's not a complete list, but more than enough.

    Hell, Hillary told Code Pink she had knowledge only a first lady (and other insiders) could get about Saddam. There was no lying. Colin Powell isn't totally stupid... they connected the dots that went back more than a decade.

    Given the facts, Bush did the right thing, and got the votes to do it.

    .
    How can anyone believe Bush did the right thing? Taking Saddam out was not worth the trillion dollars and thousands of lives. It was the biggest mistake in history.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/...assive-mistake
    Last edited by USA_1; 10-27-10 at 07:27 PM.
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  6. #86
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    My neighbor is an asshole. He might one day lose it. I could just go shoot him, but I would hold up well in court arguing that he migth one day go too far. You and Bush and his supporters tend to put the world in such clear terms, either we kill him now, or we die. Of course, as CATO pointed out. If Saddam was that kind of threat, why weren't we dead already?
    I'm not going to go through the whole thing, but that's not quite the same. It would be more similar to your neighbor being arrested 12 years ago for shooting and poisoning a bunch of his neighbors. After serving a bit in prison, he recieves probation. The stipulations of that probation was that he not be allowed to own any guns and if the police come by with a warrant he must allow them in to search his house. A bunch of different police departments over the course of many years do an investigation and most arrive at the same conclusions - your neighbor has purchased guns in violation of his probation. They attempt to serve warrants to search his house, but he refuses to let them in - or if he does let them in it's only after a few hours of delay. Finally they arrrest your neighbor. They then search his home, but only found old guns just lying around. Some are not serviceable some are not. In the meantime all the liberals are claiming that all of the police departments lied and people died or some such silly slogan.
    Last edited by buck; 10-27-10 at 08:31 PM.

  7. #87
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,491
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by USA-1 View Post
    How can anyone believe Bush did the right thing? Taking Saddam out was not worth the trillion dollars and thousands of lives. It was the biggest mistake in history.

    The Iraq war: still a massive mistake - CSMonitor.com
    That trillion will turn out to be a bargain in the big picture, far better than any trillion Obama spent. We should have crushed him once he started playing games after losing Gulf War 1... but by then the UN was in the process of proving they are corrupted to the core.

    The soldiers volunteered, God Bless them, and the great majority believed in their mission.

    .
    Last edited by zimmer; 10-27-10 at 08:39 PM.
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  8. #88
    Steve
    tryreading's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Last Seen
    02-26-13 @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    4,809

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by bicycleman View Post
    Glad to see you are an equal opportunity labeler because there were Democrats who voted for that war.




    Satellite photos.



    Tell me. Did we attack Syria? If not, why didn't we? I'm not privy to CIA briefings. Maybe you are and will enlighten your readers.
    1) Yeah, equal opportunity, the fools in the White House and the Democrat and Republican fools in Congress who voted yea in order not to look weak. All those fools and short-sighted 'leaders.'

    2) Satelitte photos are a part of intelligence. Another part would be knowledge of the contents of the trucks. We don't know what was in them.

    3) We have attack plans, and other types of war plans for many different countries. They don't mean anything.
    Do not write in this space!

  9. #89
    Guru
    USA_1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    BANNED
    Last Seen
    04-16-11 @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,142

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    That trillion will turn out to be a bargain in the big picture, far better than any trillion Obama spent. We should have crushed him once he started playing games after losing Gulf War 1... but by then the UN was in the process of proving they are corrupted to the core.

    The soldiers volunteered, God Bless them, and the great majority believed in their mission.

    .
    That trillion was flushed down the toilet. The US will have gained absolutely nothing.
    "This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."" GWB

  10. #90
    Steve
    tryreading's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Last Seen
    02-26-13 @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    4,809

    Re: Wikileaks show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq-With Surprising Results

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Boo:

    Saddam had 12-years and 16 UN resolutions.
    He had and used WMD.
    He threw out the Inspecteurs de la UN for years.
    Hans Blix stated he was not cooperating and said they had lied about weaponized WMD.
    Clinton and the Dems gave warning about war; in fact Clinton sent Cohen out to sell the possibility and gave us a memorable presentation of Anthrax... and Saddam.
    After 911, Saddam was given a last chance. All our allies agreed... even the UN agreed he had WMD.
    David Kay said we were lucky... because the chance of a terrorist hooking up with WMD was real due to the decay in Iraq.
    We discovered a Nuke Black Market from this exercise.
    Libya's out of the business.
    AND at the same time... we realized the Iranians had an 18-year nuke program. Intel failures in closed societies works both ways.
    That's not a complete list, but more than enough.

    Hell, Hillary told Code Pink she had knowledge only a first lady (and other insiders) could get about Saddam. There was no lying. Colin Powell isn't totally stupid... they connected the dots that went back more than a decade.

    Given the facts, Bush did the right thing, and got the votes to do it.

    .
    UN reolutions? Seems the guys who despise the UN the most think it was a good idea we went to war to enforce their resolutions.

    He had used WMD, you are right. In the early 1980s, while we were his ally during the Iraq-Iran war, he used them on the Iranians and on his own people. We continued to back him anyway. At that time, we turned a blind eye.

    Clinton warned about war, but did not invade. Bush should not have attacked either. He should have asked his father why he didn't invade Baghdad in 1991. There were very good reasons, and W. Bush could have learned from them.
    Do not write in this space!

Page 9 of 44 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •