Buried in Iraq

[Cal]

Contains photographs, please visit link.
http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/oct2005/a101705wm2.html

 

[Liberty Belle]

Wow!! Thanks for posting this Cal. It boosted my morale too. Now I know disagreeable will have a fit when he/she/it reads this, but those Weapons sure look like they are capable of Mass Destruction to me. But then, what do I know about WMDs? :?

 

[Disagreeable]

Why hasn't President Bush brought these WMDs to the attention of the American people?

 

[Disagreeable]

but those Weapons sure look like they are capable of Mass Destruction to me. But then, what do I know about WMDs? :?

And Doctor Bill Frist said Terri Schiavo looked fine to him, too. Of course, further examination (an autopsy) showed he was wrong.

 

[Liberty Belle]

dis - did you miss this?
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5124

 

[Cal]

Why hasn't President Bush brought these WMDs to the attention of the American people?

If I can find it, I'm sure the media should be able to find it as well.

 

[Disagreeable]

Why hasn't President Bush brought these WMDs to the attention of the American people?

If I can find it, I'm sure the media should be able to find it as well.

That's weak, Cal, weak. You know as well as I do that if Bush had proof that his original claim for the Iraqi war was valid, he'd call the press in and show them. He hasn't. In fact, Condi Rice was on a talk show Sunday saying the reason for this war was not 9-11, it was to build a "new" Middle East. So you keep spinning, the Bush bunch is. The problem is that most folks aren't buying anymore.

 

[mp.freelance]

dis - did you miss this?
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5124

Disagreeable is just incapable of responding. Take it as a compliment! Usually, when backed into a corner, Disagreeable will just say the equivalent of: "Yeah, well, we didn't find WMD, so Bush misled the country into war. The blood is on your hands." This is its standard response to everything, so by actually getting it to shut up, it is a sign you proved your point.

 

[Cal]

Why hasn't President Bush brought these WMDs to the attention of the American people?

If I can find it, I'm sure the media should be able to find it as well.

That's weak, Cal, weak. You know as well as I do that if Bush had proof that his original claim for the Iraqi war was valid, he'd call the press in and show them. He hasn't. In fact, Condi Rice was on a talk show Sunday saying the reason for this war was not 9-11, it was to build a "new" Middle East. So you keep spinning, the Bush bunch is. The problem is that most folks aren't buying anymore.

In fact, Condi Rice was on a talk show Sunday saying the reason for this war was not 9-11, it was to build a "new" Middle East

That actually seems on par with what I just posted from links to statements made pre-war. I wonder, as well, with the ease that insurgents have came into Iraq and brought explosive materials and chemicals with them, why is it such a stretch for some to believe that any of the materials that intelligence said existed, weren't just as easily taken out of the country pre-invasion. If you recall, Hussein was not even remotely cooperative with weapons inspectors, sealing his own demise. Do I have to dig up old links to prove that as well?

 

[Disagreeable]

If I can find it, I'm sure the media should be able to find it as well.

That's weak, Cal, weak. You know as well as I do that if Bush had proof that his original claim for the Iraqi war was valid, he'd call the press in and show them. He hasn't. In fact, Condi Rice was on a talk show Sunday saying the reason for this war was not 9-11, it was to build a "new" Middle East. So you keep spinning, the Bush bunch is. The problem is that most folks aren't buying anymore.

In fact, Condi Rice was on a talk show Sunday saying the reason for this war was not 9-11, it was to build a "new" Middle East

That actually seems on par with what I just posted from links to statements made pre-war.

Are you saying that Bush lied about Saddam having WMDs?

I wonder, as well, with the ease that insurgents have came into Iraq and brought explosive materials and chemicals with them, why is it such a stretch for some to believe that any of the materials that intelligence said existed, weren't just as easily taken out of the country pre-invasion. If you recall, Hussein was not even remotely cooperative with weapons inspectors, sealing his own demise. Do I have to dig up old links to prove that as well?

Get real, Cal. The insurgents didn't have to bring explosives, chemicals and guns into the country when Saddam fell. There were tons of munitions dumps around, unguarded, because the Bush Bunch didn't send enough troops to guard or destroy them. Plus Rumsfeld ordered the Iraqi Army and Police de-activated. So they took their weapons home with them. Today they're getting better equipment to fight Americans from across borders and we still can't stop them because there are not enough troops and the police and army are infiltrated with insurgents!

You can continue to believe whatever you want but these crackpot theories are only that. Whenever there are any facts showing that Saddam actually had WMDs that posed a threat to the US, the Bush Bunch will be on camera with them immediately.

There were UN weapons inspectors in Iraq doing their job. Bush ordered them to leave the country so he could attack. I've asked this question seveal times and no one has responded: "Why not wait a couple of weeks for the UN inspectors to do their job?" I believe it was because Bush wanted to attack Saddam and used 9-11 as an excuse. Why do you think he told the UN weapons inspectors to get out?

 

[Liberty Belle]

dis - I hate to bring this up again, but we had been waiting for YEARS for the corrupt and inept UN to "do their job" and, as usual, they weren't doing anything.

Should we have waited until we were attacked again or until Saddam had time to develop the nuclear weapons we know he was investigating?

I refer you to what some of the politicians from YOUR side of the political spectrum had to say about Saddam developing nuclear weapons. We should have just left him alone to get the big one built?

Read this and then tell us, were these guys lying?

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons. U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002