|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
jimhanson 
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
 |
Posted on: Jun. 12 2004,7:13 pm |
|
   |
This has been on some of the military Forums for about a week, but I hadn't heard of the Worldtribune, so didn't put much credibility in it (an internet search for the Worldtribune shows articles going back to 2000, their "mission statement" says they specialize in covering international affairs for Americans). According to their story, the U.N. has determined that Saddam moved WMD's to other countries before, during, and after the war--and that many of the WMD's have been scrapped by looters. Rocket engines have been showing up in salvage yards--engines with tags showing they had been fired, and engines from rockets not disclosed to the U.N. Also, fermenters (for making biological weapons OR medicines--but mounted on portable trailers--wink, wink) and centrifuges for nuclear production have also shown up. The U.N. confirms reports that WMD's were sent to Syria, the Bekkah Valley, and Jordan.
A watered-down version came out in the New York Times. Link http://www.nytimes.com/2004....AVISTA1
That led to the U.N. report--
Link http://www.un.org/Depts....435.pdf
Especially look at item #15, and scroll down to the end of the report to view satellite photos with 1 metre resolution
Worldtribune story link
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_1.html
Nothing from Dan Rather and the major networks, yet. Let's see, released on a Friday, during coverage of a major news event--you wouldn't suppose they were trying to downplay the story, would you?  (sarcasm)
One person commenting said:
| Quote | I can see all the excuses from liberal land coming already--
"They weren't active"
"They weren't pointed at us"
"The trailer-mounted fermenters and centrifuges COULD have been used for peaceful purposes"
"The inspectors should have been given more time"
"Saddam was disarming"
"It's all for oil"
"Yeah, but all those jobs they're adding aren't GOOD jobs (oops, that one was for job loss)
"we never said Bush lied" |
Sarin gas shells, mustard gas shells, thousands of gallons of Sarin "insecticide" (stored in underground bunkers with other ammo, protected by camoflage--the Iraqis have a fetish about keeping their ammo dumps free of bugs), Artillery shells filled with Sarin and labled "insecticide" (what a unique way to deliver "insecticide"--does Orkin know about this?) Mig-25s and 27s buried in the desert sand. "Nope, no Weapons of Mass Destruction Here!"
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
cpu_slave
Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 14 2004,10:47 am |
|
 |
The missiles engines found were from Al Samoud 2 missiles, the same missiles that were cited by the UN as being non-compliant to resolutions and that were in the process of being destroyed BEFORE the US even invaded in March 2003.
| Quote | | From UN Report "…that some of the materials may have been removed from Iraq by looters of sites and sold as scrap." |
DUH! Even during the invasion the Iraqis were looting anything and everything. Remember the museums and hospitals that were completely stripped of anything of value during the invasion? Or how about the looted electric companies where even the copper wire was stripped out and sold as scrap? Are you naïve enough to think that the looting Iraqis would have simply left any Iraqi military equipment untouched?
How about point 14- right above 15 that you point to as proof to aid your argument:
| Quote | | From UN Report "…In general, from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured a variety of dual-use biological and chemical items and materials, including chemicals, equipment and spare parts. To date, UNMOVIC has found no evidence that these were used for proscribed chemical or biological weapon purposes. Although some of the goods may have been acquired by Iraq outside the framework of mechanisms established under Security Council resolutions, most of them were later declared by Iraq to UNMOVIC in its semi-annual monitoring declarations." |
Wow- even the UN report itself says they have no evidence that there was a chemical or biological weapons program going back at least FOUR YEARS before we invaded. What you point to as proof of a program is missiles that were found and in the process of being destroyed before the US began the invasion. Believe it or not, not everyone has ADD and some of us actually remember what was going on prior to the invasion, and these missiles were news and being destroyed by Saddam in an effort to stave off an invasion by the US. Being the case, it is not suprising that parts of these missiles are turning up. Even so- they are finding the engines and not any sort of 'payload'...
As for you 'news source'
| Quote | | This newspaper exists because we believe the world's most influential nation is poorly served by U.S.media outlets |
Let me guess- more of that ‘liberal media bias’? Isn’t that the same reasons given by the likes of Rush and Ann to be in the ‘media’?
The ‘World Tribune’- run by the same guy that brings you the Washington Times- another right wing mouth piece. It’s pretty obvious to see their political skew once you see some of the other ‘headlines’ and ‘editorials’ – heck even the ‘letters to the editor’ sound like parrots from the right. Some of their ‘sources’ for news? Washington Times, Drudge Report, NewsMax.com- It's not hard to see what agenda their pushing...
Sorry Jim- there are no ‘WMD’ in Iraq- 18 months with not having found anything pretty much proves it- but I do enjoy attempts by people to sway the ignorant sheep. You might have better luck proving Saddam was a cross-dresser than proving the WMD argument.
| Quote | | Sarin gas shells, mustard gas shells, thousands of gallons of Sarin "insecticide" (stored in underground bunkers with other ammo, protected by camoflage--the Iraqis have a fetish about keeping their ammo dumps free of bugs), Artillery shells filled with Sarin and labled "insecticide" (what a unique way to deliver "insecticide"--does Orkin know about this?) Mig-25s and 27s buried in the desert sand. "Nope, no Weapons of Mass Destruction Here!" |
It's as simple as Got Proof?
--------------
An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.-James A. Michener
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.-Albert Einstein
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from wise men.- Marcus Cato
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 14 2004,2:29 pm |
|
|
| Quote | | The ‘World Tribune’- run by the same guy that brings you the Washington Times |
Oldest debating trick in the book--impugn the source. That's why, as I said, I didn't post the Worldtribribune site until it had further verification--and I DID include the liberal N.Y. Times site (same article, with a conspicuous difference--they removed Saddam's name), AND added the U.N. link. You don't like the Washington Times--but we are supposed to believe the Washington Post? WHY? Perhaps you would agree with me, the N.Y. Times and the U.N. are not to be believed?
| Quote | From UN Report "…that some of the materials may have been removed from Iraq by looters of sites and sold as scrap."
DUH! Even during the invasion the Iraqis were looting anything and everything. |
That's the whole point of the Times article, and the U.N. report--These are PROSCRIBED (forbidden) weapons, according to the UN resolutions. Points 13, & 14 say, in effect "yes, these are proscribed weapons (weapons that are forbidden by our resolution), obtained from "outside sources" (like the Russians and the French--who broke the U.N. embargo, and now have been shown to be part of the largest bribery scandal in the history of the world--the "Oil for food" program). But that's O.K.--Saddam told us about these illegal weapons, and we didn't do anything about them.
The thing that SHOULD be embarrassing to the U.N., and to the Russians and the French, is that these weapons existed at all. They weren't "old" weapons, they were modern ones--bought during the time that the UN itself was "enforcing" "trade sanctions" against Iraq--with two Security Council members breaking the sanctions. Remember, at the time, the UN, France, and Russia bleating "give sanctions time to work" (12 years?) --all the while they were subverting them.
It is interesting that indeed, these were found and sold by looters--NOT SADDAM--OR THE UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS.
| Quote | | Believe it or not, not everyone has ADD and some of us actually remember what was going on prior to the invasion, and these missiles were news and being destroyed by Saddam in an effort to stave off an invasion by the US |
See sections 7&8 of the U.N. report--section 7 says that officials in this yard alone had "7-12 missiles"--the UN says in both sections that other missiles may have gone to other areas. These are not the primitive "in-country" missiles that SAddam started destroying piecemeal--too late.
How absurd--N.Y. Times runs this article, the U.N. publishes the article. All the previous items? | Quote | | Sarin gas shells, FOUND mustard gas shells FOUND, thousands of gallons of Sarin "insecticide" (stored in underground bunkers with other ammo FOUND, protected by camoflage--the Iraqis have a fetish about keeping their ammo dumps free of bugs) , Artillery shells filled with Sarin and labled "insecticide" FOUND (what a unique way to deliver "insecticide"--does Orkin know about this? No need for crop sprayers any more--just pack "insecticide" in artillery shells and "fire for effect" on your fields) Mig-25s and 27s buried in the desert sand FOUND. "Nope, no Weapons of Mass Destruction Here!" |
What does it take to convince a liberal that Saddam is no Abraham Lincoln? That he doesn't mean us well? That he has the will, the capability, and the history to use WMDs? DOES HE HAVE TO THUMB HIS NOSE AT THE UN, SET HUNDREDS OF OIL WELLS ON FIRE, INVADE NEIGHBORING COUNTRIES, OR KILL THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE in order to convince liberals that he is not the ogre those mean old conservatives make him out to be? OH, WAIT, HE'S ALREADY DONE THOSE THINGS! Liberals have been wrong on nearly every aspect of this war--perhaps they just need "more proof".
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
cpu_slave
Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 14 2004,4:33 pm |
|
|
| Quote | | Oldest debating trick in the book--impugn the source. |
Come one now jim- if the source has a known political skew and a history of agenda pushing are we to simply overlook that and conclude if it is merely published it must therefore be true?
| Quote | | That's why, as I said, I didn't post the Worldtribribune site until it had further verification--and I DID include the liberal N.Y. Times site |
Then you come back and do the exact same thing- pointing out the slant of the NY Times! Now let’s take a step back here and look at the bigger picture, politics. We all know that since the WMD rhetoric used to sell the public on this war was overstated it has come back to bite this administration at a bad time, namely election season. That is why you see the right-slanted media over blowing any insignificant find in Iraq as the ‘smoking gun’ while the more left-slanted media at the same time tries to underplay any actual significance without hard proof. Either way- one rusty old bomb with sarin is a far cry from what the administration was stating at the start of this mess. Remember, the administration that told the world that Saddam was sitting on stockpiles of WMD and that we could get the proof by invading? Again, after 18 months we still can not produce one thing on Powells’ list to the UN so along comes this theory that if they found some parts in a scrap yard that Saddam must have did it, never mind that these ‘found’ parts are nothing new.
| Quote | | That's the whole point of the Times article, and the U.N. report--These are PROSCRIBED (forbidden) weapons, according to the UN resolutions. |
And we knew of these before the start of the war, remember? The missile went over the mileage range limit by a couple of hundred miles and therefore they were “forbidden”. This is still far short of proving that Iraq with it’s “weapons” was a direct threat to the US. Besides, these missiles were not pointed to as “WMD” before the invasion, so why the misdirect now? Oh that’s right, politics.
| Quote | | They weren't "old" weapons, they were modern ones--bought during the time that the UN itself was "enforcing" "trade sanctions" against Iraq— |
Yes, we all know Saddam violated UN resolutions and skirted sanctions, but this still falls short on the WMD meter. Israel violates resolutions daily and with the US in it’s corner nothing bad happens to them- but if they were sitting on a big oil reserve I think things may have been different…
| Quote | | See sections 7&8 of the U.N. report--section 7 says that officials in this yard alone had "7-12 missiles"--the UN says in both sections that other missiles may have gone to other areas. These are not the primitive "in-country" missiles that SAddam started destroying piecemeal--too late. |
Make up your mind- do you believe that the Samoud 2 missiles were primitive or modern? You can not have it both ways! Before the war I believe the number was somewhere around 25-30 Samoud 2 missiles, all dismantled prior to the US invasion. Not to hard to figure that the parts of them that are worth a few bucks would turn up somewhere…
| Quote | All the previous items?
| Quote | | Sarin gas shells, FOUND mustard gas shells FOUND, thousands of gallons of Sarin "insecticide" (stored in underground bunkers with other ammo FOUND, protected by camoflage--the Iraqis have a fetish about keeping their ammo dumps free of bugs) , Artillery shells filled with Sarin and labled "insecticide" FOUND (what a unique way to deliver "insecticide"--does Orkin know about this? No need for crop sprayers any more--just pack "insecticide" in artillery shells and "fire for effect" on your fields) Mig-25s and 27s buried in the desert sand FOUND. "Nope, no Weapons of Mass Destruction Here!" |
|
Please cite a source for all these ‘finds’ and how these items fit into the administrations WMD list. All I can find on the sarin is one 'suspected' shell but further tests were needed to conclusively identify, a far cry from the ‘thousands of gallons of sarin’ that you state as 'found'. As for the planes, Saddam's regime had about 300 combat aircraft, all of them survivors of the Gulf War. Most were aging Soviet-era MiGs, Sukhois and older French Mirage fighters. The best were the MiG-29 Fulcrums, one of the most advanced fighters produced in the Soviet era. Again, nothing new here.
| Quote | | What does it take to convince a liberal that Saddam is no Abraham Lincoln? |
Who the hell said he was Abe? When did simply being against this administration make me a liberal? I guess it’s the old ‘if your not behind this administration then you’re a dirty liberal hippy commie’ rhetoric that the neo-cons are so bent on believing. Not everything is black or white, left or right, republican or democrat, conservative or liberal despite what the left and the right would have you believe.
| Quote | | That he has the will, the capability, and the history to use WMDs? |
Holy jumpin' jesus jim- I can name several countries that fit this description: Germany, Russia, France, China, etc. Hell, even the US fits that description. Even so, is this all that is needed to invade? No proof, no evidence, just the history, will, and capability? Man, should I go back into hiding because I have a history of intelligence, have the will and am capable of using it? I guess by your neo-con logic that means I am an intimate threat and need to be dealt with before it’s too late… 
| Quote | | Liberals have been wrong on nearly every aspect of this war--perhaps they just need "more proof". |
No, this administration has been wrong on nearly every aspect of this war- and the sheep that swallowed all the BS are finally starting to ask the questions that needed to be asked, like:
Where is the WMD that, as the administration stated, was all over the place in Iraq?
Why are the people still fighting and US soliders still dying? Saddam is gone, most of his leadership captured so you cant blame it all on him.
Remember, it was this administration that sold you on the Iraq war, making you believe that after we walked into Iraq that the citizens would be throwing flowers and oil at us in thanks for ‘liberating’ them. Didn’t go as planned now did it? Still, I find it silly that conservatives are still holding onto hope that something, anything would be found to prove the WMD claims. Sorry, but something ‘suspected’ as sarin, a few old buried jets (that we knew he had prior to Gulf War I) and missile engines from systems scrapped before we invaded are a far cry from all the ‘evidence’ pointed to by this administration. Like the old lady from the classic Wendy’s commercial, Where’s the Beef?
Jim, you seem pretty partisan-blinded on this issue. Step back and ask yourself how you would feel if all the events happened but instead of bush it was gore in the oval office? Thought so…
--------------
An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.-James A. Michener
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.-Albert Einstein
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from wise men.- Marcus Cato
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 15 2004,11:17 am |
|
|
| Quote | Come one now jim- if the source has a known political skew and a history of agenda pushing are we to simply overlook that and conclude if it is merely published it must therefore be true?
|
Not only the Worldtribune (The Washington Times is biased but the Washington Post isn't?), but I also cited the N.Y. Times (one of the most liberal papers out there), and the U.N. report itself.
| Quote | | The missile went over the mileage range limit by a couple of hundred miles and therefore they were “forbidden |
Saddam said he had only the older missiles. HE LIED. He said he had only 50 of the old missiles, and "volunteered" to get rid of a few at a time. HE LIED. The missile in the photo was mis-identified by Saddam--HE LIED. The salvage yard says they can recall up to 12 missiles going through the yard--perhaps more--and this is just one salvage yard. The obvious conclusion--SADDAM LIED.
| Quote | | Yes, we all know Saddam violated UN resolutions and skirted sanctions, but this still falls short on the WMD meter. |
Violated UN sanctions? Hell, yes!--at least 12 of them! Skirted sanctions? Yes, with the complicity of Germany, France, and Russia--UN members, Security Council members, Friend of Saddam, and profiteers of the largest bribery scandal in the history of the world. Remember, these "friends" not only refused to support action against Saddam (and we can now see why), but actively worked against us.
| Quote | | Make up your mind- do you believe that the Samoud 2 missiles were primitive or modern? |
Read carefully--the missiles were newer than any he had acknowledged--deliberate deception. The gas shells were old--that's why the chemicals didn't mix--these were "proscribed" (forbidden)--and he said he had gotten rid of them--deliberate deception.
| Quote | | Please cite a source for all these ‘finds’ and how these items fit into the administrations WMD list. |
In the interest of brevity, will you acknowledge finding a Sarin gas shell, and mustard gas shells? I thought he said he got rid of all of these--he wasn't supposed to have them. Where did they come from? More looters raiding his secret stockpiles? There ARE a lot of drums of "insecticide" (whose base is SARIN). Yes, this COULD be one of those "dual-use" chemicals--but why put them in ammunition dumps, covered by camoflage? Why put it in artillery shells (but to be fair, the shells WERE labeled "insecticide"--enough to placate most liberals). What a unique way to spray crops--you could cover most of Freeborn County with a half-dozen firebases!) Those supersonic jet fighters (Mig-25--still one of the flat-out fastest fighters in existence, Mig-27--the one you can buy a ride on to nearly 100,000 feet higher than any of our current fighters--the Mig-29--acknowledged to be the equal of our F-16) buried in the desert--I'm sure a creative liberal mind can find a "dual-use" reason for them, too. ("Hiding weapons--uh, no, we were going to use them for "crop dusters" for "insecticide" after we kicked out the infidels")--WHERE'S "BAGHDAD BOB" WHEN YOU NEED HIM--even James Carville couldn't explain this fairy tale.
| Quote | | this administration has been wrong on nearly every aspect of this war |
Liberals forecast "thousands of US deaths"--"hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths", "a quagmire" (they like that word--from the people that brought you "quagmire" in Vietnam), "no link, no link" of Iraq as a sponsor or haven for terrorists, "Bush Lied" about WMDs.
| Quote | | Step back and ask yourself how you would feel if all the events happened but instead of bush it was gore in the oval office? |
Reminded of the quote: "God smiles upon fools and the United States of America" Maybe it WASN'T the Supreme Court (as liberals like to say) that intervened in Gore's Florida Fiasco--There MUST be a Divine Intervention--can you IMAGINE a President Gore, after his crazy rant last week? Too timid, then too vituperative--he must be "re-inventing" himself yet again!
The reality is that the war was won in a matter of days--as one wag put it--less time than it took Janet Reno to take Waco"--no quagmire here. Military casualties were few in comparison to the number of troops involved--about the same as the number of homicides in Michigan annually. Yes, there were civilian casualties--that is inevitable in war--but the U.S. went to great lengths to minimize them. I would guess that Saddam killed more people than the U.S. did. More evidence of Saddam's terror complicity comes forth every week. Any way you put it--the world is a better place without Saddam--the Middle East may see an example a country being ruled without a king or dictator, Libya has renounced its own WMD. I'd say it is worth it.
P.J. O'Rourke said it best--"I'm not against the WAR, I'm against the PEACE". Dennis Miller added "Go in there and tell them we are going to crank up the war again--no more nice guys--shoot at a U.S. soldier, and there will be hell to pay!"
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
cpu_slave
Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 15 2004,4:05 pm |
|
|
| Quote | | Not only the Worldtribune (The Washington Times is biased but the Washington Post isn't?), but I also cited the N.Y. Times (one of the most liberal papers out there), and the U.N. report itself. |
Jim- I think you are misunderstanding my statement about media bias- to put it bluntly –ALL MEDIA IS BIAS one way or the other. My linking the worldtribune.com site to the Washington Times and the rest of the right was to show which way this particular news source slanted. As for the UN report itself- I find no wording in it saying these missile engines are proof of Saddams WMD.
| Quote | | Saddam said he had only the older missiles… |
Before the invasion, Saddam was in the process of destroying the handful of missiles that violated the UN sanctions list. The UN never said that Saddam could not have any missiles or planes, it just limited the types to those that had no real range.
| Quote | | The salvage yard says they can recall up to 12 missiles going through the yard--perhaps more--and this is just one salvage yard. The obvious conclusion--SADDAM LIED. |
12? Less than half of what was destroyed prior to the invasion? Just how many salvage yards are there that specialize in recycling the types of metals contained in these missiles? Again, this is a conclusion drawn without any actual proof, only speculation and assumptions.
| Quote | | Violated UN sanctions? Hell, yes!--at least 12 of them! |
Again- Israel has violated how many? For how many years longer than Iraq?
| Quote | | the missiles were newer than any he had acknowledged |
What? He admitted to having them to the UN well before the invasion and even destroyed them before we went in.
| Quote | | The gas shells were old--that's why the chemicals didn't mix--these were "proscribed" (forbidden)--and he said he had gotten rid of them--deliberate deception. |
Just how many 'sarin shells' have we found over there? One? Which could have been filled with chemicals terrorists brought with them from other countries? I know a few gun show regulars who have more 'WMD' in their basements than that.
| Quote | | In the interest of brevity, will you acknowledge finding a Sarin gas shell, and mustard gas shells? |
One shell found with suspected sarin (still waiting for the tests to prove – been down this road before with the ‘smoking gun’ only to later find that the initial field tests were wrong-) and 10 shells which contain the decayed residue of mustard gas predating the first gulf war which were on a UN list from 2003, but the inspectors were pulled out before they could be destroyed. Now some of the same shells are turning up and this is supposedly some sort of ‘big find’? The smoking gun? Ok- you got me, yes they found some shells- so are these shells the ‘huge stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons’ that bush and the gang were pointing to as the need to rush in?
As for the jets, we knew he had them because he had them for over a decade and again, they were not on the UN sanctioned list. Realistically, they were probably buried out there so they would survive a US air attack and be used in a fight. Only problem was Saddams army really did not want to fight so there they sat until we 'found' them.
| Quote | | The reality is that the war was won in a matter of days--as one wag put it— less time than it took Janet Reno to take Waco"--no quagmire here. |
Days? Really? Then why have nearly as many soldiers died after the victory? We will see if we really ‘won’ when we see who the Iraqi people freely elect as their leader and the violence ended. Besides, if you want to compare this to Waco, then how many months did Reno stay there ‘nation building after the victory?’ How many soldiers died liberating ‘Waco’ and then in the subsequent months guarding it? How many billions of dollars were spent rebuilding Waco after we liberated it?
| Quote | | Any way you put it--the world is a better place without Saddam— |
I will agree with this, especially if we leave Iraq a better place then we found it. There are some who say that the people there can only be ruled by a dictator and that they are not ready for democracy- that’s why these people never really tried a revolution on their own (oh wait- the Kurds tried when they thought Bush Sr. was going to help- and without it they were slaughtered)
I guess time will only tell us if this whole episode was worth it as far as freeing a people. Only problem is that in order to achieve this goal we were lied to by this administration telling us that we needed to invade before Iraq attacked us with all those pesky WMD's.
--------------
An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.-James A. Michener
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.-Albert Einstein
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from wise men.- Marcus Cato
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 15 2004,6:58 pm |
|
|
| Quote | | My linking the worldtribune.com site to the Washington Times and the rest of the right was to show which way this particular news source slanted. |
Which is why I linked the liberal N.Y. Times and the original UN document.
| Quote | | Before the invasion, Saddam was in the process of destroying the handful of missiles that violated the UN sanctions list. |
Yep, a few at a time--and you say "handful of missiles that violated the un sanctions list". Obviously, he DIDN'T destroy those missiles, did he--they are being unearthed now. He DID produce missiles that violated the UN resolution--obviously, the UN resolution meant so little to the UN that they didn't bother to enforce their own resolution--and it meant so little to Saddam that he wasn't afraid of being caught with them by the toothless UN. It didn't mean anything to the complicent French, supplying the missiles to Saddam in violation of the UN embargo that they themselves signed off on.
So much for the UN--"resolve, talk, cheat, resolve again, talk, talk.....". The Husseins COUNTED on UN inaction, and the obstructionism of the French. In the words of Saddam's son to his bodyguard on the eve of the war--"This Bush, I think he means to come...". Words MEAN things to some people--unlike Mr. Clinton, who made empty threats--who considered a promise a "point to start negotiations", who could parse the meaning of IS.
| Quote | | Israel has violated how many?(UN sanctions) |
Do you really want to get into moral relativism here? This, from the same people that can't stand to have any other president compared to Clinton?
| Quote | | (Sarin-filled artillery shells) Which could have been filled with chemicals terrorists brought with them from other countries? |
It was inevitable that this would be accused of being a "plant". How is it, that it is plausible that terrorists would bring a nerve-gas shell into Iraq ](ever heard the saying "Like carrying coals to Newcastle"? Carrying coal to a place that is famous for mining coal?), but it considered implausible that Saddam buried and shipped out his WMDs before and during the war? | Quote | | but the inspectors were pulled out before they could be destroyed |
Saddam had 12 years to destroy the banned gas shells--BUT DIDN'T. Recall, the inspectors weren't "PULLED OUT"--Saddam KICKED THEM OUT.
| Quote | | the Kurds tried (to revolt) when they thought Bush Sr. was going to help- and without it they were slaughtered) |
True, and it is a shameful period in U.S. history--ranks right up there with the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, and Somalia as far as promising one thing, then reneging, cutting and running. It is that reason why the U.S. is considered an unreliable ally in the world--you can't depend on their actions. Reagan and Thatcher changed that in the 1980s--the world knew that when Thatcher gave fair warning to the Argentines in the Falklands that they were coming, and that when Reagan built up the military, stated that we would build and deploy SDI, and told Gorbachev "tear down this wall"--he meant what he said--not empty words. Subsequent politicians--administrations and legislators--are small in stature compared to them.
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
hoosier
Group: Members
Posts: 1476
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 16 2004,8:45 am |
|
|
CPU_Slave 1
Jim 0
--------------
The power of accurate obsvervation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.
George Bernard Shaw
The devil begins with froth on the lips of an angel entering into battle for a holy and just cause. Grigory Pomerants
We have crossed the boundary that lies between Republic and Empire. Garet Garrett
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
cpu_slave
Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 16 2004,11:09 am |
|
|
Sorry Jim- but when someone has to needlessly resort to bringing up Clinton in their debate it is obviously over. I am so tired of the ‘Clinton got a blow-job’ – ‘Clinton and Whitewater’ – ‘Clinton and the meaning of IS’ – because honestly this debate had nothing to do with him- It had to do with Saddam, Iraq, Bush, the current administration, the UN, and WMD.
Perhaps we need a Godwin’s Law pertaining to the frequent invoking of Clinton in debates not directly relating to him…
--------------
An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.-James A. Michener
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.-Albert Einstein
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from wise men.- Marcus Cato
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
jimhanson
Group: Moderator
Posts: 8491
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 16 2004,4:35 pm |
|
|
Not one rebuttal to the last post? What ABOUT the missiles? Moral Relativism? The implausibility of planted evidence, the libs refusal to believe that the WMDs might actually have been moved--as the cited news sources say? What about appearance of gas shells--items that Saddam says he destroyed--items that he wasn't supposed to have--items that show him to be a liar? What about the shameful record of U.S. foreign policy (I'm even agreeing with you there) and the horrible record of the U.S. as a dependable ally?
We can't even talk about Clinton, but it's OK to bash Reagan, Bush 41, or Bush 43 at will? Who came up with that one? Have you been on the Democratic Underground site again? Predictably, they don't allow criticism of their proposals on the site. Like him or loathe him, Clinton WAS president for 8 years--the policies and actions (or inactions) are still with us today--like the proverbial "elephant in the room", he is too big to be ignored.
What is this, like the Devil himself "NONE MAY DARE SAY HIS NAME?" Are we to refer to him, like the devil, by NUMBER--666--"the mark of the beast"--to avoid saying his name?
--------------
"If you want to anger a Conservative, tell him a lie. If you want to anger a LIBERAL, tell him the TRUTH!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
