So if they are guilty in the eyes of the, law then Bush and his cabinet are also

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

jkennedy said:
No they didn't. However, even if they had, you are, again, revising history. Iraq never had nukes. Bush said they did. Bush should be in prison, as should Cheney.

So the Israelis bombed thin air? There was no reactor? Funny joke.

The point was there was no way to know if Iraq had restarted it's nuclear weapons program, and with Saddam's support of various terrorist groups nobody wanted the proof to be a nuclear explosion in DC or Tel Aviv.

Or, you know, a chemical weapons attack.

But hey--- Saddam's the good guy :lamo

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

matchlight said:
Do you favor promoting Muslim jihadist propaganda against the United States? Are you naive enough to take these bastards' word for what supposedly was done to them at face value, or is there some other reason you are holding out the crying towel for them? Just wondering. Moazzam Begg, one of the persons you mention, is a leading figure in that propaganda effort--a G--damned jihadist liar who should have had his greasy neck stretched on a gallows years ago.

The blind regressives at their best, no think , hate, unresonable and just simply wrong as usual.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
jbander said:

Jesus ****. Either they had WMDs or they didn't. Reagan can't have given them WMDs if there were no WMDs, now could he?[

/QUOTESome more higher level no think, I told you what happened. and don't give a crap what you think about it. take it or leave it, regressives won't let facts get in the way of their opinions. So your saying that Bush the Baby killer and Cheney lied when they said there was no weapons of mass destruction as they said to get us into the war, you full of baloney.

Click to expand...

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
So the Israelis bombed thin air? There was no reactor? Funny joke.

The point was there was no way to know if Iraq had restarted it's nuclear weapons program, and with Saddam's support of various terrorist groups nobody wanted the proof to be a nuclear explosion in DC or Tel Aviv.

Or, you know, a chemical weapons attack.

But hey--- Saddam's the good guy :lamo

Of course they knew their was no weapons of mass destruction , or they were building no nuclear weapon and there was no terrorist in Iraq nor did he support any. He had the information simply read post 44 , that is how it happened. Only the ding dong people that are regressives are still holding onto the crap you're suggesting.

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
Of course they knew their was no weapons of mass destruction , or they were building no nuclear weapon and there was no terrorist in Iraq nor did he support any. He had the information simply read post 44 , that is how it happened. Only the ding dong people that are regressives are still holding onto the crap you're suggesting.

Are you serious?

Because that's flat out idiotic.

Osiraq - Iraq Special Weapons Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Terrorism Havens: Iraq - Council on Foreign Relations

Saddam's Terror Links - WSJ

"There were no terrorists in Iraq nor did he support any"

Uh, yes, he did. As far back as the Iran-Iraq War.

Only "useful idiots" as Lenin aptly put it deny that

matchlight · Apr 24, 2016

jkennedy said:
Bush and Cheney are convicted war criminals because they tortured people.

I will give your assertion all the weight it deserves. You haven't presented any evidence whatever that either of those men tortured anyone.

We have since promised to stop, but we will have to see if that happens.

We will have to see if you can show there ever was any torture--if not, there is nothing to stop.

When we wonder why countries from the middle east hate us

I don't care a damn whether some people in those countries--over even many of the--hate the U.S. It's natural that they would, because many of them support shari'ah, which is fundamentally incompatible with our democratic values and commitment to individual liberties,

The goal of this country's foreign policy is not--or at least never should be--to make the people of any nation in the Middle East like us. The goal should be cultivate in them a healthy respect for what the U.S. will do to their countries if they harm Americans or otherwise threaten our interests.

look, in part, to our torturing of them.

That is a hoary old staple of anti-American propaganda that sounds like something the Soviet Communists might have cooked up. It's no coincidence that it helps jihadists by counseling that the U.S. should treat them with kid gloves. Leftists are the jihadists' fifth column in the West. The collaboration is natural, because leftists loathe this country and wish it ill just like Muslim jihadists do.

So go ahead and claim you know where I get my information, and tell us all how you don't believe that information, and revise all the history you like.

I doubt you have much information on this subject, wherever you may have picked it up. Why should I or anyone else believe a lot of cheap slanders against the U.S. that you can't support with evidence? Judging by what you have written, you are the one who is trying to distort the history of this country's dealings with Islamist savages.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
Are you serious?

Because that's flat out idiotic.

Osiraq - Iraq Special Weapons Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Terrorism Havens: Iraq - Council on Foreign Relations

Saddam's Terror Links - WSJ

"There were no terrorists in Iraq nor did he support any"

Uh, yes, he did. As far back as the Iran-Iraq War.

Only "useful idiots" as Lenin aptly put it deny that

all garbage, the weapons of mass destruction is already admitted by bush and Cheney as crap, why because it is so dam easy to find out that it is crap. There hadn't been working on a bomb in forever and why would he support Islamic terrorists, they hated him with a passion, he was a moderate and as un Muslim as they come in all those countries over there.
And it doesn't matter whatever you can find , they knew before they attacked that they would do two things, make a fortune off the war, which they did. Bush and Cheney made a fortune out of the war and they knew dam well there wasn't any WMD , any terrorists and any atom bomb. The only hard support they had was curveball which they latched onto like he was gold, he said everything they wanted to hear and you do know that he turned out to be not a insider like Bush and the war criminals said but a chronic liar whose friends even said they would have told these supper Americans if they would have just asked. ask. He was a TAXI driver not a insider. If you can do anything to turn around this fact go right ahead but I know you can't , The president took us for idiots. and murdered 5000 American heros. Live with it, it's their epitaph.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
Are you serious?

Because that's flat out idiotic.

Osiraq - Iraq Special Weapons Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Terrorism Havens: Iraq - Council on Foreign Relations

Saddam's Terror Links - WSJ

"There were no terrorists in Iraq nor did he support any"

Uh, yes, he did. As far back as the Iran-Iraq War.

Only "useful idiots" as Lenin aptly put it deny that

Your sights are crap a couple of crazy sights and something about Isreal attack on the nuclear power plant in Iraq , which has absolutely nothing to do with the war. or what was going on right before the war. What was it anyway, 20 years before we attacked Iraq over Bushes lies.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

First if you don't know how to read with your pro war comedy act don't even try to read this" Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations were made by the U.S. Government officials who claimed that a highly secretive relationship existed between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamist militant organization Al-Qaeda from 1992 to 2003, specifically through a series of meetings reportedly involving the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS).[1] In the lead up to the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush alleged that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and militant group al-Qaeda might conspire to launch terrorist attacks on the United States,[2] basing the administration's rationale for war, in part, on this allegation and others. The consensus of intelligence experts has been that these contacts never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission and by declassified Defense Department reports[3] as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.[4] Critics of the Bush Administration have said Bush was intentionally building a case for war with Iraq without regard to factual evidence. On April 29, 2007, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet said on 60 Minutes, "We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period" The president and his cabinet are the murderers of 5000 American heros' and will get their day. They are all war criminals and they Murderd our service men to make a fortune , and they did, millions apon millions.

Sherman123 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia...At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. Their slime all of them Talk to these guys "The court heard how Abbas Abid, a 48-year-old engineer from Fallujah in Iraq had his fingernails removed by pliers; Ali Shalal was attached with bare electrical wires and electrocuted and hung from a wall; Moazzam Begg was beaten, hooded and put in solitary confinement, Jameelah was stripped and humiliated, and was used as a human shield whilst being transported by helicopter. The witnesses also detailed how they have residual injuries till today." Do you support slime, just wondering??????

It was a mock tribunal. Not a court of law.

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
all garbage, the weapons of mass destruction is already admitted by bush and Cheney as crap, why because it is so dam easy to find out that it is crap. There hadn't been working on a bomb in forever and why would he support Islamic terrorists, they hated him with a passion, he was a moderate and as un Muslim as they come in all those countries over there.
And it doesn't matter whatever you can find , they knew before they attacked that they would do two things, make a fortune off the war, which they did. Bush and Cheney made a fortune out of the war and they knew dam well there wasn't any WMD , any terrorists and any atom bomb. The only hard support they had was curveball which they latched onto like he was gold, he said everything they wanted to hear and you do know that he turned out to be not a insider like Bush and the war criminals said but a chronic liar whose friends even said they would have told these supper Americans if they would have just asked. ask. He was a TAXI driver not a insider. If you can do anything to turn around this fact go right ahead but I know you can't , The president took us for idiots. and murdered 5000 American heros. Live with it, it's their epitaph.

jbander said:
Your sights are crap a couple of crazy sights and something about Isreal attack on the nuclear power plant in Iraq , which has absolutely nothing to do with the war. or what was going on right before the war. What was it anyway, 20 years before we attacked Iraq over Bushes lies.

You really don't seem to understand this, so I'll spell it out in simple words for you: Either Reagan gave Iraq WMDs, as you've claimed, and Iraq had them; or he didn't, and they didn't have them. You don't get it both ways. It simply doesn't work that way.

By "crazy" sites, you mean your got scared cause they challenged your worldview where USA= bad, Saddam=good. Too bad.

Saddam was an opportunists. Terrorists are also opportunistic by nature. Look at how Gaddafi, who was very big on pan Islamicism, supplied the IRA.

Not to mention all the ex Mukhabaret guys in ISIS

Your "no terrorists" in Iraq is a flat out bad joke. Not to mention you've apparently never heard of grammar or spelling.

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
First if you don't know how to read with your pro war comedy act don't even try to read this" Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations were made by the U.S. Government officials who claimed that a highly secretive relationship existed between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the radical Islamist militant organization Al-Qaeda from 1992 to 2003, specifically through a series of meetings reportedly involving the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS).[1] In the lead up to the Iraq War, U.S. President George W. Bush alleged that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and militant group al-Qaeda might conspire to launch terrorist attacks on the United States,[2] basing the administration's rationale for war, in part, on this allegation and others. The consensus of intelligence experts has been that these contacts never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission and by declassified Defense Department reports[3] as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.[4] Critics of the Bush Administration have said Bush was intentionally building a case for war with Iraq without regard to factual evidence. On April 29, 2007, former Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet said on 60 Minutes, "We could never verify that there was any Iraqi authority, direction and control, complicity with al-Qaeda for 9/11 or any operational act against America, period" The president and his cabinet are the murderers of 5000 American heros' and will get their day. They are all war criminals and they Murderd our service men to make a fortune , and they did, millions apon millions.

Congratulations you know how to use copy and paste. Not very well, obviously.

If you notice, I never said Saddam supported AQ--- I said he supported terrorists.

There's more then one group of terrorists out there. Shocking, I know.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Sherman123 said:
It was a mock tribunal. Not a court of law.

Bat **** , those scum bags are all yours you own them. just like the head of your party Trump and Cruz . You own them also. I have no problem believing you can make your weak Mind OK torture by calling it something else. Or OK a war that murdered 5000 American hero's and live with the fact that BUSH and Cheney made millions off the war. You belong with them. And there is no Mock Tribunal, it's a Tribunal and the definition says a tribunal mean court. You can't lie or distort this fact. Your hero's are slime.

Sherman123 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
Bat **** , those scum bags are all yours you own them. just like the head of your party Trump and Cruz . You own them also. I have no problem believing you can make your weak Mind OK torture by calling it something else. Or OK a war that murdered 5000 American hero's and live with the fact that BUSH and Cheney made millions off the war. You belong with them. And there is no Mock Tribunal, it's a Tribunal and the definition says a tribunal mean court. You can't lie or distort this fact. Your hero's are slime.

So you have nothing in response. The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCT) you are referring to is an NGO not a Malaysian Court of Law. It would be the same if you and I got together to create a tribunal.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
You really don't seem to understand this, so I'll spell it out in simple words for you: Either Reagan gave Iraq WMDs, as you've claimed, and Iraq had them; or he didn't, and they didn't have them. You don't get it both ways. It simply doesn't work that way.

By "crazy" sites, you mean your got scared cause they challenged your worldview where USA= bad, Saddam=good. Too bad.

Saddam was an opportunists. Terrorists are also opportunistic by nature. Look at how Gaddafi, who was very big on pan Islamicism, supplied the IRA.

Not to mention all the ex Mukhabaret guys in ISIS

Your "no terrorists" in Iraq is a flat out bad joke. Not to mention you've apparently never heard of grammar or spelling.

What a weak mind I can give you dozens of scenarios that Reagan gave WMD to Iraq and they diddn't have them anymore or they did have them and told us where they all were. You think you can LIe and deceive your way out of this , you can't Bush and cheney both said there wasn't any WMD to go to war over. We had looked at 100% of the listed place that Sadam gave to the united nations inspectors and and probably 99% of the place where we guessed they could be hiding them. " March 18, 2003 - Inspectors withdraw from Iraq.
March 20, 2003 - (local time) U.S. and coalition forces begin military action against Iraq.
October 2, 2003 - David Kay, who heads the U.S. search, reports to intelligence committees for both the House and Senate that the Iraq Survey Group has found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Kay says he will need six to nine months to conclude his work.
January 28, 2004 - After retiring earlier in the month, David Kay tells the Senate Armed Services Committee that there should be an independent investigation into the flawed intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons capability.
February 6, 2004 - President George W. Bush names a seven-member commission to investigate the nation's intelligence operations, specifically to study the information about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction.
October 6, 2004 - The final Iraq Survey Group report is released. The report concludes that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction.
December 2005 - U.S. inspectors end their search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
March 31, 2005 - The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction reports that the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in its assessments of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities before the U.S. invasion.
June 29, 2007 - The U.N. Security Council adopts resolution 1762, terminating the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission's (UNMOVIC) mandate." a total complete lie by Bush and his cabinet knowing from literally all concerned that they had none of the big three. Bomb, terrorist, WMD

TurtleDude · Apr 24, 2016

RetiredUSN said:
What countries are saying Bush is a war criminal? Please name them if you are using them to prop your argument.

where is any citation to this OP blather? its more hate Bush nonsense apparently with no support

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

Sherman123 said:
So you have nothing in response. The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCT) you are referring to is an NGO not a Malaysian Court of Law. It would be the same if you and I got together to create a tribunal.

And whatever it would be called it would be respected by the level of people who judged and worked the tribunal , the facts that were presented and by how well a case would be made against your slime heros. The people involved are highly respected, the case was easy ,we tortured people and all your slugs admitted it. Like I said you own them and deserve them . when a political party digresses to the scum level , I should just assume that this liars war is ok as far as your concerned and that you believe torture is ok.

jbander · Apr 24, 2016

This war and the idiots that started it can be summed up real easily , Simply Google curve ball. You will find how stupid stupid can get.

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
What a weak mind I can give you dozens of scenarios that Reagan gave WMD to Iraq and they diddn't have them anymore or they did have them and told us where they all were. You think you can LIe and deceive your way out of this , you can't Bush and cheney both said there wasn't any WMD to go to war over. We had looked at 100% of the listed place that Sadam gave to the united nations inspectors and and probably 99% of the place where we guessed they could be hiding them. " March 18, 2003 - Inspectors withdraw from Iraq.
March 20, 2003 - (local time) U.S. and coalition forces begin military action against Iraq.
October 2, 2003 - David Kay, who heads the U.S. search, reports to intelligence committees for both the House and Senate that the Iraq Survey Group has found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Kay says he will need six to nine months to conclude his work.
January 28, 2004 - After retiring earlier in the month, David Kay tells the Senate Armed Services Committee that there should be an independent investigation into the flawed intelligence about Saddam Hussein's weapons capability.
February 6, 2004 - President George W. Bush names a seven-member commission to investigate the nation's intelligence operations, specifically to study the information about Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction.
October 6, 2004 - The final Iraq Survey Group report is released. The report concludes that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction.
December 2005 - U.S. inspectors end their search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
March 31, 2005 - The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction reports that the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in its assessments of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities before the U.S. invasion.
June 29, 2007 - The U.N. Security Council adopts resolution 1762, terminating the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission's (UNMOVIC) mandate." a total complete lie by Bush and his cabinet knowing from literally all concerned that they had none of the big three. Bomb, terrorist, WMD

"What a weak mind" :lamo

You truly don't get the irony in that statement, do you.

The funny joke is that you provide no links, though you've clearly copy pasted from somewhere and just expect everyone to bow down at your intellect. Uh no.

Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds in the aftermath of Desert Storm---that was just over ten years earlier. He had also used them against Iranian troops in the Iran-Iraq War.

Chemical weapons are weapons of mass destruction.

Eric7216 · Apr 24, 2016

jbander said:
Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and their legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo were tried in absentia in Malaysia...At the end of the week-long hearing, the five-panel tribunal unanimously delivered guilty verdicts against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their key legal advisors who were all convicted as war criminals for torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. Their slime all of them Talk to these guys "The court heard how Abbas Abid, a 48-year-old engineer from Fallujah in Iraq had his fingernails removed by pliers; Ali Shalal was attached with bare electrical wires and electrocuted and hung from a wall; Moazzam Begg was beaten, hooded and put in solitary confinement, Jameelah was stripped and humiliated, and was used as a human shield whilst being transported by helicopter. The witnesses also detailed how they have residual injuries till today." Do you support slime, just wondering??????

Did you just do a bait and switch? I can understand that pulling out fingernails is torture. Anything that causes physical trauma like broken bones, bleeding, bruising, etc. is torture. I am not aware of any direct link between Bush and those torture events. I have a hard time understanding that waterboarding (basically scaring someone) is torture and calling it torture does not make it torture. It is very hard to believe that training techniques used on our own troops would be torture. But, hey, if we want to make it torture let's do so and not allow it from this point forwarded. You can't be guilty of a crime that wasn't a crime at the time you committed it.

If it were me, I would rather be waterboarded than have some drone drop a bomb on me, killing me, while I am at home drinking tea. That seems like a war crime.

Tigerace117 · Apr 24, 2016

Eric7216 said:
Did you just do a bait and switch? I can understand that pulling out fingernails is torture. Anything that causes physical trauma like broken bones, bleeding, bruising, etc. is torture. I am not aware of any direct link between Bush and those torture events. I have a hard time understanding that waterboarding (basically scaring someone) is torture and calling it torture does not make it torture. It is very hard to believe that training techniques used on our own troops would be torture. But, hey, if we want to make it torture let's do so and not allow it from this point forwarded. You can't be guilty of a crime that wasn't a crime at the time you committed it.

If it were me, I would rather be waterboarded than have some drone drop a bomb on me, killing me, while I am at home drinking tea. That seems like a war crime.

This guy is obsessed with the concept that Bush is a war criminal. To the point of totally exonerating Saddam of his actions. Don't expect logic

Sherman123 · Apr 25, 2016

jbander said:
and whatever it would be called it would be respected by the level of people who judged and worked the tribunal , the facts that were presented and by how well a case would be made against your slime heros. The people involved are highly respected, the case was easy ,we tortured people and all your slugs admitted it. Like i said you own them and deserve them . When a political party digresses to the scum level , i should just assume that this liars war is ok as far as your concerned and that you believe torture is ok.

you will never depose us from our throne of skulls

jbander · Apr 25, 2016

Tigerace117 said:
"What a weak mind" :lamo

You truly don't get the irony in that statement, do you.

The funny joke is that you provide no links, though you've clearly copy pasted from somewhere and just expect everyone to bow down at your intellect. Uh no.

Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds in the aftermath of Desert Storm---that was just over ten years earlier. He had also used them against Iranian troops in the Iran-Iraq War.

Chemical weapons are weapons of mass destruction.

Yup Sadam used WMD on the Kurds that Reagan gave him, another Reason why he is the worst president in history but it has nothing to do with the fact that they gave them all up to the inspector and didn't have them as Bush the Baby killer said. Sadam used the chemical weapons on the Kurds in 1988, it was not after Desert Storm as you say, Desert storm started the beginning of 92 4 years after the Kurd Gassing. Bushes liars war started in march 2003 and had nothing to do with the Kurds 15 years earlier . Bush Murdered 5000 American Hero's.

jbander · Apr 25, 2016

Eric7216 said:
Did you just do a bait and switch? I can understand that pulling out fingernails is torture. Anything that causes physical trauma like broken bones, bleeding, bruising, etc. is torture. I am not aware of any direct link between Bush and those torture events. I have a hard time understanding that waterboarding (basically scaring someone) is torture and calling it torture does not make it torture. It is very hard to believe that training techniques used on our own troops would be torture. But, hey, if we want to make it torture let's do so and not allow it from this point forwarded. You can't be guilty of a crime that wasn't a crime at the time you committed it.

If it were me, I would rather be waterboarded than have some drone drop a bomb on me, killing me, while I am at home drinking tea. That seems like a war crime.

Ya the party line, not a clue knowing nothing about it and waterboarding as per the party line is not Torture, even if we have signed treaties saying that it is torture, and that we Are part of the Geneva convention. Every Court up to and including the supreme court has said that these detainees that we have In Cuba and many other torture capitals in the world. Are protected and can't be tortured and defined water boarding as torture , The country has the courts have the world has said that Waterboarding is torture. Doesn't end there anyway we had them tortured to death in other places that we took them to. every type of torture was done by our CIA in these torture capitals. Every type. Your so pitiful and your party is pitiful.
My favorite is one of the conservative talk show hosts out east said that it wasn't torture and let some seals waterboard him, he lasted seconds and told everyone that he was wrong and that it was torture without a doubt., Seals have it done to them in training and say straight out that it is torture.

Tigerace117 · Apr 25, 2016

jbander said:
Yup Sadam used WMD on the Kurds that Reagan gave him, another Reason why he is the worst president in history but it has nothing to do with the fact that they gave them all up to the inspector and didn't have them as Bush the Baby killer said. Sadam used the chemical weapons on the Kurds in 1988, it was not after Desert Storm as you say, Desert storm started the beginning of 92 4 years after the Kurd Gassing. Bushes liars war started in march 2003 and had nothing to do with the Kurds 15 years earlier . Bush Murdered 5000 American Hero's.

Ah, but there's no WMDs, remember?

Desert Storm was 1990-1991: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq

So if they are guilty in the eyes of the, law then Bush and his cabinet are also

warrior of the wetlands