|
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
Check out the mass graves at:
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/ You guys are a riot. "OK. So we lied about Iraq having WMD. Don't you stupid arses realize that we lied to you for your own good? Since we should all be happy that Saddam is out of power, we should all be happy about the lie that was used to generate public support for the expedition. Saddam did this long list of terrible things! I mean, really......his own people couldn't trust him!" He was a *******. No doubt. You guys should have said all along "Let's go to Iraq to oust a *******," not spin a cover story that it was "never about WMD" only after the weapons are nowhere to be found. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been
for years. WMD was the best angle to try to sell it to the UN - personally I disagreed even then - just in case it turned out like this. If you tell me there's an asshole Arab with a gun, that needs killing - that's good enough for me. -W "Gould 0738" wrote in message news:20031230102807.19126.00001768@mb- He was a *******. No doubt. You guys should have said all along "Let's go to Iraq to oust a *******," not spin a cover story that it was "never about WMD" only after the weapons are nowhere to be found. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
"Clams Canino" wrote in message news:i3hIb.172656$8y1.519584@attbi_s52... BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been for years. You mean...the Democrats were saying things like this: "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by (FORMER) Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "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 . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 "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" Rep. - Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been
for years. The chemical and biological weapons had known, predictable shelf lives. When both parties were concerned about WMD in the late 80's, most of the weapons we sold Iraq and those we knew they had developed in the early 1980's were still potentially active. Scott Ritter has made an excellent case that unless SH made new weapons that we didn't know about, by the time GWB began thumping the WMD drum we knew darn well the old weapons were no longer effective. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
NOYB wrote:
"Clams Canino" wrote in message news:i3hIb.172656$8y1.519584@attbi_s52... BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been for years. You mean...the Democrats were saying things like this: It doesn't matter what they were saying. What matters is, when push came to shove, Dubya DumFoch invaded on lies, misconceptions, bad staff work and bad intelligence. While my little world doesn't compare to that of the chief of state, I sometimes put together multi-million dollar marketing programs. I sure as hell do not commit client dollars without have solid research and real facts at hand, and I'm bright enough to know the difference between good research and war-mongering bullship. Bush lied, he's too stupid to be president, and he's sending us down the drain. You make like that future for this country, but I don't. -- Email sent to is never read. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
You mean...the Democrats were saying things like this:
When the government lies to the people, it doesn't matter which party is moving its lips at any given moment. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
... BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been for years. The chemical and biological weapons had known, predictable shelf lives. When both parties were concerned about WMD in the late 80's, most of the weapons we sold Iraq and those we knew they had developed in the early 1980's were still potentially active. Scott Ritter has made an excellent case that unless SH made new weapons that we didn't know about, by the time GWB began thumping the WMD drum we knew darn well the old weapons were no longer effective. I fear that because Ritter's name was in the news during the same year the U.N. was involved in inspections, the Borg will never consider him credible, especially since they are more knowledgable on these issues than Ritter. This is why the government asked people like JohnH, NOYB and Bill to handle the inspections. Unfortunately, they had other committments. :-) |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been for years. The chemical and biological weapons had known, predictable shelf lives. When both parties were concerned about WMD in the late 80's, most of the weapons we sold Iraq and those we knew they had developed in the early 1980's were still potentially active. Scott Ritter has made an excellent case that unless SH made new weapons that we didn't know about, by the time GWB began thumping the WMD drum we knew darn well the old weapons were no longer effective. I fear that because Ritter's name was in the news during the same year the U.N. was involved in inspections, the Borg will never consider him credible, especially since they are more knowledgable on these issues than Ritter. This is why the government asked people like JohnH, NOYB and Bill to handle the inspections. Unfortunately, they had other committments. :-) Ah, yes, the troika of turgid trash. -- Email sent to is never read. |
OT--Uh-oh. What if the anti-war liberals were wrong?
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Clams Canino" wrote in message news:i3hIb.172656$8y1.519584@attbi_s52... BOTH parties were totally convinced about Saddams links to WMD, and had been for years. You mean...the Democrats were saying things like this: It doesn't matter what they were saying. What matters is, when push came to shove, Dubya DumFoch invaded on lies, misconceptions, bad staff work and bad intelligence. Too bad Gore, Hillary, and Kerry can't take advantage of that, eh? "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com