Lt_Ripley Posted October 31, 2007 #51 Share Posted October 31, 2007 You mean about the WMD that the UN, Clinton, and some dem been warning about us even before Bush ran for office? and your skipping right over the fact that even they came to the conclusion there wasn't any. stop cherry picking. Both Rice and Powell in 2001 stated Saddam DID NOT have WMD'S and that he was contained. need the video link again of both of them ? it's old news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted October 31, 2007 #52 Share Posted October 31, 2007 (edited) and your skipping right over the fact that even they came to the conclusion there wasn't any. stop cherry picking. Both Rice and Powell in 2001 stated Saddam DID NOT have WMD'S and that he was contained. need the video link again of both of them ? it's old news. Oh really? Then how come no one OFFICIALLY declared that Saddam does not have any WMD? How come no one showed verifiable documents that Saddam does not have WMD? Why did congress vote for military action since Powell and Rice said there is no WMD? Why didn't Hans Blix of the UN simply declare there is no WMD? Where were all your facts before we took action? Well??????????? Edited November 1, 2007 by AROCES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmpressStarXVII Posted October 31, 2007 #53 Share Posted October 31, 2007 You are touch for you think even if the Iraqis HATES US, they still are showing good will. Well, I for one never see the Iraqis as hating us and not surprise to see them help a friend. They been friends with us and your propaganda of they hate us is surely getting exposed as it is a false PROPAGANDA for poltical motive. It's going to be hard to try and decipher what exactly you just said, but I'm going to give it a go. Show me where I said that even though the Iraqi's hate us, they have good will towards their enemy. Paranoid much? Every time I read your posts you sound more and more like the thing you despise. A paranoid conspiracy theorist liberal. Do some soul searching, and accept who you are, stop trying to pull off this uber-conservative act because it isn't working anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted October 31, 2007 #54 Share Posted October 31, 2007 It's going to be hard to try and decipher what exactly you just said, but I'm going to give it a go. Show me where I said that even though the Iraqi's hate us, they have good will towards their enemy. Paranoid much? Every time I read your posts you sound more and more like the thing you despise. A paranoid conspiracy theorist liberal. Do some soul searching, and accept who you are, stop trying to pull off this uber-conservative act because it isn't working anymore. Alright, if you don't think the Iraqis hate us then disregard my comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt_Ripley Posted October 31, 2007 #55 Share Posted October 31, 2007 (edited) Oh really? Then how come no one OFFICIALLY declared that Saddam does not have any WMD? How come no one showed verifiable documents that Saddam does not have WMD? Why did congress voted for military action since Powell and Rice said there is no WMD? Why didn't Hans Blix of the UN simply declare there is no WMD? Where were all your facts before we took action? Well??????????? you haven't been paying attention have you ? there were/are reports out there. Bush was given reports and IGNORED THEM or decided to lie anyway. -- thoes aluminium tubes being one of the most memorable. Hans Blix DID declare there was no wmd's !!!!! after bush invaded. Why after ? well my unimformed reader Blix was about to file the final report stating they could find no evidence of wmd ----- that made a war itchy Bush , who had been putting pressure on the UN to invade which they wouldn't ( they were smart they wanted all the facts) , call for the early removal of inspecters so he could invade before the report came out. If the Blix report came out before hand then Bush would not have been able to illegally invade. and yes pre emptive war is illegal both against our constitution and international treaty. Anyone who says other wise has no clue. want documents ? here is a start - there are links to the final report. Blix insists there was no firm weapons evidence <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1471932,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1471932,00.html</a> Blix sceptical on Iraqi WMD claim Iraq probably destroyed its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the early 1990s, the former United Nations chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has said. Speaking to the BBC's World Service, Mr Blix said he was more certain than ever that there was no WMD in Iraq. Mr Blix said the capture of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was important, as he may reveal at what stage he might have destroyed them. The US and UK used concerns over WMD to justify the March invasion of Iraq. Mr Blix and a team of UN weapons inspectors spent more than three months searching for WMD in Iraq in the build-up to the war without finding anything they deemed significant. 'No weapons' Speaking to the BBC's Newshour programme, Mr Blix said he hoped Saddam Hussein would now reveal the truth about his chemical, biological and nuclear programmes. "I doubt that he will reveal any WMD, because I think both we UN inspectors and the American inspectors have been looking around and come to the conclusion that there aren't any," Mr Blix said. "He might be able to reveal when they were done away with. I am inclined to think it was early in 1991 or 1992." <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3323633.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3323633.stm</a> Context of 'March 12, 2007: Former Chief UN Weapons Inspector Says British Government Embellished Intelligence on Iraq' This is a scalable context timeline. It contains events related to the event March 12, 2007: Former Chief UN Weapons Inspector Says British Government Embellished Intelligence on Iraq. You can narrow or broaden the context of this timeline by adjusting the zoom level. The lower the scale, the more relevant the items on average will be, while the higher the scale, the less relevant the items, on average, will be. <a href="http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq_1104" target="_blank">http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...on_of_iraq_1104</a> GOP/Media Rewrite Iraq War History If Saddam “had opened up his country to I.A.E.A. inspectors, and they’d come in and they’d found that there were no weapons of mass destruction,” the war might have been averted, the former Massachusetts governor said. But the reality is that Hussein did open up his country through the fall and winter of 2002-03, giving Hans Blix and his U.N. inspection team free rein to check out suspected WMD sites. It was President Bush who forced the U.N. inspectors out in March 2003 so his invasion could proceed. <a href="http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/060807.html" target="_blank">http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/060807.html</a> happy reading. Edited October 31, 2007 by Lt_Ripley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladDraculea Posted October 31, 2007 #56 Share Posted October 31, 2007 sorry for my ignorance but... what's WMD? thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmpressStarXVII Posted October 31, 2007 #57 Share Posted October 31, 2007 sorry for my ignorance but... what's WMD? thanks weapons of mass destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted October 31, 2007 #58 Share Posted October 31, 2007 you haven't been paying attention have you ? there were/are reports out there. Bush was given reports and IGNORED THEM or decided to lie anyway. -- thoes aluminium tubes being one of the most memorable. Hans Blix DID declare there was no wmd's !!!!! after bush invaded. Why after ? well my unimformed reader Blix was about to file the final report stating they could find no evidence of wmd ----- that made a war itchy Bush , who had been putting pressure on the UN to invade which they wouldn't ( they were smart they wanted all the facts) , call for the early removal of inspecters so he could invade before the report came out. If the Blix report came out before hand then Bush would not have been able to illegally invade. 2 Years and before that, many many years of weapons inspections. And then when we are about to enter, hold it, I have the proof soon!(gimme a break! ) Quite clear Blix was stalling for his boss is deep into Saddams pocket. and yes pre emptive war is illegal both against our constitution and international treaty. Anyone who says other wise has no clue. Preemptive my foot, all the chances for diplomacy was explored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted October 31, 2007 #59 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Nice try Ripley, but time and time again you and many others make excellent posts such as yours and they somehow get passed over and or flat out ignored by the likes of, well we all know who they are. Don't give up though, you never know, one day they might see the truth for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted October 31, 2007 #60 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Nice try Ripley, but time and time again you and many others make excellent posts such as yours and they somehow get passed over and or flat out ignored by the likes of, well we all know who they are. Don't give up though, you never know, one day they might see the truth for what it is. You mean like if fairy tales comes true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjadude Posted October 31, 2007 #61 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Wow! What a sad life some of you lead. These people are in a country where up until May of 2003, their daughters could be taken out of their own house to be sexual toys for Saddam's sons, where there was NO chance to speak out against the regime. THEY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO SEND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE U.S. That $1,000 symbolizes their ability to do something they were not allowed to do before! The $1,000 is being sent by individuals, who are finally being allowed to act as individuals. Yes it's wonderful if small. And those dire conditions exist all over the planet. Are you advocating invasion of all those countries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjadude Posted October 31, 2007 #62 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Oh really? Then how come no one OFFICIALLY declared that Saddam does not have any WMD? How come no one showed verifiable documents that Saddam does not have WMD? Why did congress voted for military action since Powell and Rice said there is no WMD? Why didn't Hans Blix of the UN simply declare there is no WMD? Where were all your facts before we took action? Well??????????? Your head must be swarming. How OFFICAL due Rice and Powell have to be? Do you want an audience with God? Congress did not declare war. Blix did say that there were no WMD's. What kind of DECLARATION would you accept? A burning bush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjadude Posted October 31, 2007 #63 Share Posted October 31, 2007 2 Years and before that, many many years of weapons inspections. And then when we are about to enter, hold it, I have the proof soon!(gimme a break! ) Quite clear Blix was stalling for his boss is deep into Saddams pocket. Preemptive my foot, all the chances for diplomacy was explored. No. all along, no WMD's found. Nothing to report. You can't prove the that a nothing exists. ALL chances for diplomacy? Not even in your wildest neocon dreams.... There was in fact almost no diplomacy because Bush would not talk to them as he made quite publically clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xCrimsonx Posted November 1, 2007 #64 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Awsome topic for a post IamsSon! This is a touchy subject, although someone mentioned, Q"Such a sad state to see someone so heartless." Q With respect to all, how the bloody hell can one not be a little peeved at such a story. Yep, all is good and well, $1000 bucks for the Fire victims well done! Old man Bush is still sending our loved ones across the seas, here in Oz our politicians sit around snickering like little babies in their $1000 suits. Good on them, but this is and never will be the start to making up for EVERYTHING they started and hopefully were going to finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmpressStarXVII Posted November 1, 2007 #65 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Q"Such a sad state to see someone so heartless." Q That was sarcasm... Good on them, but this is and never will be the start to making up for EVERYTHING they started and hopefully were going to finish. Who consists of 'they' and what did 'they' do? Surly you are not suggesting Iraq attacked us? The only 'they' I can assume you are speaking about is Sadaam Hussein and the WMD controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xCrimsonx Posted November 1, 2007 #66 Share Posted November 1, 2007 (edited) That was sarcasm... Who consists of 'they' and what did 'they' do? Surly you are not suggesting Iraq attacked us? The only 'they' I can assume you are speaking about is Sadaam Hussein and the WMD controversy. Sorry bout that, cheeky be my second nature, makes up for my crappy temper. lol Yes and correct! Twas the start to It all I say. When the %%%% hit the fan, that be where It started. Edited November 1, 2007 by Atanerpmav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted November 1, 2007 #67 Share Posted November 1, 2007 (edited) Your head must be swarming. How OFFICAL due Rice and Powell have to be? Do you want an audience with God? Sworn, written and verifiable testimony. Not from an interview and them making speculations. Congress did not declare war. They authorized the use of Military force. Use the Military then for what, a dance festival? Blix did say that there were no WMD's. What kind of DECLARATION would you accept? A burning bush? An OFFICIAL declaration from UN that Iraq is not a threat anymore, therefore the immediate withdrawal of resolutions. It could have prevented the war, if Hans Blix was so sure Iraq had no WMD. You folks should be wondering instead why he didn't do that, instead of Bush lied! Bush lied! bush lied! Edited November 1, 2007 by AROCES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted November 1, 2007 #68 Share Posted November 1, 2007 No. all along, no WMD's found. Nothing to report. You can't prove the that a nothing exists. Isn't it nice that we all can say that now confidently, since we went it and verifeid it? ALL chances for diplomacy? Not even in your wildest neocon dreams.... There was in fact almost no diplomacy because Bush would not talk to them as he made quite publically clear. 2 years was given for all avenues to be explored and all those who are saying now there was no WMD to come out and show in a vrifiable way that there is indeed no WMD. Where were all you folks then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosdarksoulz Posted November 1, 2007 #69 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Saddam had no wmd yet that was an excuse for bush and his pets to invade iraq. news flash, he's gone and he aint comming back! what excuse are you using now? iraq hates the us? get a bloody life! us has/had wmd and no one said jack! tell you what, since you see bush as a hero/savior go and disarm north korea... they openly show their hate for america and their desire to destroy america so why dont bush do something? i'l tell you why, north korea has the 4th largest army in the world, and the us knows it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted November 1, 2007 #70 Share Posted November 1, 2007 (edited) Saddam had no wmd yet that was an excuse for bush and his pets to invade iraq. news flash, he's gone and he aint comming back! what excuse are you using now? iraq hates the us? get a bloody life! us has/had wmd and no one said jack! tell you what, since you see bush as a hero/savior go and disarm north korea... they openly show their hate for america and their desire to destroy america so why dont bush do something? i'l tell you why, north korea has the 4th largest army in the world, and the us knows it...Saddam had no WMD, we can all say that now. VERIFIED! We are disarming N Korea and diplomacy is working this time. See how it works when you have teeth negotiating with Tyrants of the World? The communist N Korea hates America, SO? Edited November 1, 2007 by AROCES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathory Posted November 1, 2007 #71 Share Posted November 1, 2007 didn't the Kay report establish that Saddam had all the processes in place to begin full scale production of chemical weapons the moment sanctions were lifted? Blix on the other hand, only said there were no WMDs long after the fact, prior to that he was talking in lots of if, buts and maybes, and Saddam wasn't playing ball either. Most damning of the weapon's inspectors processes, were the number of banned munitions turning up in INSPECTED sites, Blix and co did a sh** job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosdarksoulz Posted November 1, 2007 #72 Share Posted November 1, 2007 continued... it wont be as easy to take over as iraq was. the only super powers to rival that of the us army are, the republic of china, india, north korea and russia, possibly south korea too... i guarantee you, that the us wont go to war with any of these country/nation (if it does) on its own... i dont despise america, i despise its leader/war criminal, bush and his supporters... p.s i have the utmost respect for the us citizens who acknowledge bush for the **** he is and refuse to support him. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaosdarksoulz Posted November 1, 2007 #73 Share Posted November 1, 2007 (edited) Two wrongs dont make a right, the us tries to convey the image that they the good guys yet, what they do is no different from the so called bad guys. For the sake of argument, lets say terrorists masterminded 9/11, does that mean you mastermind the invasion of a country, bomb the hell of it and take all its oil in response? Many innocents died in 9/11 (may they all rest in peace) but even till this moment... more innocents are dying in iraq. iraq was messed up, agreed, but its no better now... Edited November 1, 2007 by jaks.ko.ex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted November 1, 2007 #74 Share Posted November 1, 2007 An OFFICIAL declaration from UN that Iraq is not a threat anymore, therefore the immediate withdrawal of resolutions. It could have prevented the war, if Hans Blix was so sure Iraq had no WMD. You folks should be wondering instead why he didn't do that, instead of Bush lied! Bush lied! bush lied! Hans Blix wasn't sure. After several delays with the Iraqi government, inspection was still ongoing. The tone of his last report to the UN was anything but conclusive. It's worth a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AROCES Posted November 1, 2007 #75 Share Posted November 1, 2007 Hans Blix wasn't sure. After several delays with the Iraqi government, inspection was still ongoing. The tone of his last report to the UN was anything but conclusive. It's worth a read. Correction! Hans blix wasn't sure after SEVERAL YEARS with the Saddam regime and inspection was still ongoing. Tone of his voice does not matter, he failed and that is that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now