"20 Lies About the War"

[DealMonkey]

ROTFL! Aaaah, stop it you guys. 😀

 

[LunarRay]

Seems as though we've not yet seen fit to provide the proof of the assertion that we were faced with an exigent circumstance back in March... for the invasion... so to be consistent with UN Charter Article 51... I'd like to see the proof now ... it's been a few months and we've been off on tangent after tangent.. I'm still stuck on the invasion and the legality thereof..

If we had not invaded Saddam and Al Qaeda would have continued their joint development of the android army of Bush-a-likes... disguised as yellow stuff.... where is it?? them, or what ever it is or was we were all afeard of ...

 

[JellyBaby]

that is true, just look at the group a big part of the administartion belongs to, new american century, should have been a big warning

Sadly it would seem our political leaders are up to their virgin knickers in secret dealings, think tanks, policy groups, etc. The people's voice is now only a memory. This same phenomonon happened under Clinton who was associated with various groups. Even the virtuous Hillary supported an American Communist party organization.

 

[AndrewR]

Let's address some of lies printed in this thread, not the ones alleged to have come from the Administration.

"Iraq was responsible for the 11 September attacks"

Find me any quote which says that any group other than AQ was "responsible" for the September 11th attacks.

"Iraq was trying to import aluminium tubes to develop nuclear weapons"

Goes to another discussion happening above. I have little faith in the IAEA since weren't they "monitoring" North Korea's compliance with the 1994 Agreed Framework and failed to see the uranium enrichment program which NK admitted to last year? Sure, they know everything, don't they? The fact that something has dual use does not eliminate the possibility that it is intended for something illegal or forbidden. Also, the fact that the UN approved something for importation means less than nothing since there were few actual controls or denials with the UN programs.

Lastly, please find me a gun or mortar which is made out of aluminum. Not the frame or pieces, the gun tube. I am immensely curious because I have never heard of such a thing -- everything I know of uses steel. I wasn't aware that aluminum could handle the instantaneous pressures of a conventional weapon. I also remember reading that these tubes were not a match to current Iraqi rockets and were also of too high a quality for rockets as well.

"7 Saddam Hussein had the wherewithal to develop smallpox

This allegation was made by the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in his address to the UN Security Council in February. The following month the UN said there was nothing to support it."

So, before the war and before full access to Iraq and before exhaustive studies and interviews of Iraqi scientists, the UN declared their disagreement. Therefore, the UN is correct. Ah, I see now.

"10 Iraq was obstructing the inspectors"

Anyone who doubts that statement is bordering on insane.

"13 War would be easy"

The Coalition conquered a country with a handful of divisions in a few weeks. That's not easy? Easy does not mean bloodless or instantaneous but far be it from journalists to understand anything before writing.

"The fall of Iraq's southernmost city and only port was announced several times before Anglo-American forces gained full control"

The fall of a strongpoint or a city does not mean that it is in full control by the conquering forces. Furthermore, there is something called the "fog of war" which makes earlier pronouncements sometimes inaccurate or premature. God forbid someone said something about an ongoing battle that turned out to be inaccurate! That NEVER happens.

"Local medical staff had tried to return her to the Americans after Iraqi forces pulled out of the hospital, but the doctors had to turn back when US troops opened fire on them. The special forces encountered no resistance, but made sure the whole episode was filmed."

Here are some great lies. Nothing has ever substantiated the BBC claims that I have seen regarding the alleged attempt to return Lynch to US hands. Please show me otherwise. As far as the operation to rescue her, of course they conducted it with the full intent on meeting resistance because to do otherwise would be stupid. Military operations are often filmed by combat camera personnel for a variety of reasons -- this one was no different.

You forgot to mention that the US forces were firing blanks. Oh, wait, that allegation turned out to be completely unfounded and a ridiculous lie on the part of those seeking to discredit the Administration. Unlike much of what's written above.

"18 Interrogation of scientists would yield the location of WMD"

They've found a nuclear component so far from an Iraqi scientist and reams of documents from others.

"Instead Britain co-sponsored a Security Council resolution that gave the US and UK control over Iraq's oil revenues. There is no UN-administered trust fund."

Ah, yes, the UN-administered no-accountability trust fund which refuses to fully disclose its activities under the Oil for Food program or which lists the items with exceptionally vague and sometimes misleading subjects without ever having an independent audit to determine that everything was being conducted properly. Surely no corruption there.

"Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline."

Glad they know their geography, but nowhere is it stated that they would fly the UAVs to the States for use.

 

[Bowfinger]

I'll probably regret this, but I hate to leave ignorance unanswered. Brevity isn't my strong suit, but I'll try.

Originally posted by: AndrewR
Let's address some of lies printed in this thread, not the ones alleged to have come from the Administration.

"Iraq was responsible for the 11 September attacks"

Find me any quote which says that any group other than AQ was "responsible" for the September 11th attacks.

Bush and his minions constantly combined references to 9/11 and al Qaeda with references to Iraq, trying to create the impression they were somehow linked. This has been documented dozens of times in dozens of articles and commentaries.

"Iraq was trying to import aluminium tubes to develop nuclear weapons"

Goes to another discussion happening above. I have little faith in the IAEA since weren't they "monitoring" North Korea's compliance with the 1994 Agreed Framework and failed to see the uranium enrichment program which NK admitted to last year? Sure, they know everything, don't they? The fact that something has dual use does not eliminate the possibility that it is intended for something illegal or forbidden. Also, the fact that the UN approved something for importation means less than nothing since there were few actual controls or denials with the UN programs.

Lastly, please find me a gun or mortar which is made out of aluminum. Not the frame or pieces, the gun tube. I am immensely curious because I have never heard of such a thing -- everything I know of uses steel. I wasn't aware that aluminum could handle the instantaneous pressures of a conventional weapon. I also remember reading that these tubes were not a match to current Iraqi rockets and were also of too high a quality for rockets as well.

First, the tubes weren't dual-use. No one outside the Bush administration believed they were suitable for uranium enrichment. Second, it is extremely arrogant of you to decide that your opinion is somehow more valid than all of the people with expertise in this area. Third, you need to work on your reading comprehension. No one has suggested these tubes were for the barrel of a weapon. They were for rocket bodies. Rockets fly in the air, so they need to be light, so they are often made of aluminum. Iraq was trying to duplicate a NATO design.

This was all clearly explained had you bothered to read any of the articles instead of blindly jumping in with both feet . . . in your mouth.

"7 Saddam Hussein had the wherewithal to develop smallpox

This allegation was made by the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in his address to the UN Security Council in February. The following month the UN said there was nothing to support it."

So, before the war and before full access to Iraq and before exhaustive studies and interviews of Iraqi scientists, the UN declared their disagreement. Therefore, the UN is correct. Ah, I see now.

So it's OK for Powell to make completely unsupported claims before the war, when they have no evidence, but it's not OK for the world's best experts to point out that he had no evidence? Right.

"10 Iraq was obstructing the inspectors"

Anyone who doubts that statement is bordering on insane.

I won't take the time to dig out the quotes -- they're floating around here if you're open to learning something -- but Blix stated that they were getting reasonable, though not perfect, cooperation, and that they had NOT been blocked from inspecting any sites. If I remember right, he gave Iraq a 'B'.

"13 War would be easy"

The Coalition conquered a country with a handful of divisions in a few weeks. That's not easy? Easy does not mean bloodless or instantaneous but far be it from journalists to understand anything before writing. [ deleted for space ]

It's not over yet, nor is there any exit in sight.

"18 Interrogation of scientists would yield the location of WMD"

They've found a nuclear component so far from an Iraqi scientist and reams of documents from others.

So far as I know, that's the single -- albeit trivial -- exception to date, They still don't have a clue where all these "thousands of liters", etc., are.

"Instead Britain co-sponsored a Security Council resolution that gave the US and UK control over Iraq's oil revenues. There is no UN-administered trust fund."

Ah, yes, the UN-administered no-accountability trust fund which refuses to fully disclose its activities under the Oil for Food program or which lists the items with exceptionally vague and sometimes misleading subjects without ever having an independent audit to determine that everything was being conducted properly. Surely no corruption there.

Sorry, haven't followed this one. Anyone else?

"Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline."

Glad they know their geography, but nowhere is it stated that they would fly the UAVs to the States for use.

You are mistaken. Bush himself said they would smuggle UAVs into the U.S., using them to deliver WMDs. Again, this is documented if care to open your mind a bit.

 

[charrison]

First, the tubes weren't dual-use. No one outside the Bush administration believed they were suitable for uranium enrichment.

This is false and the link has been posted multiple times. The UN NUclear inspector did admit the tubes could be modified for enrichment of uranium. And the tubes, no matter what they were used for, were still banned items.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison

First, the tubes weren't dual-use. No one outside the Bush administration believed they were suitable for uranium enrichment.

This is false and the link has been posted multiple times. The UN NUclear inspector did admit the tubes could be modified for enrichment of uranium. And the tubes, no matter what they were used for, were still banned items.

Nope. There's a difference between saying something is possible, and saying something is suitable. That's like saying that, since it is possible to eat broth with a fork, a fork is suitable for eating broth. Not the same. Yes, since the tubes were made of aluminum, they could have been reworked into centrifuge components ... by melting them down, perhaps. They were nowhere close to being usable in their delivered form.

 

[NesuD]

3 Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa for a "reconstituted" nuclear weapons programme

Sorry fool that particular tidbit was never used to make a case for war. The info appeared once and only once ever in the sotu speech The US congress had voted to support a war in Iraq 3 months before that was ever spoken.

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: NesuD

3 Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa for a "reconstituted" nuclear weapons programme

Sorry fool that particular tidbit was never used to make a case for war. The info appeared once and only once ever in the sotu speech The US congress had voted to support a war in Iraq 3 months before that was ever spoken.

If that tidbit was never used to make a case for war, then why was it used in the SOTU? For filler?

Also, it was still a lie the President made about Iraq, regardless of the time it was made.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Excelent job Bow -

When out of the window there arose such a clatter
I thought that my bladder surely would splatter

I ran to the window and drew back the sash
pushed up the glass and up-chucked my hash.

When what to my wondering eyes should appear
but a wave of cruise missles going right up the rear
and a sky full of bombs
that would fill us with fear.

Shock and awe, shock and awe, through the city all night
and I knew in the morning we'd be in for a fight.

O.K. - theres my contribution, someone else take it from here.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: NesuD

3 Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa for a "reconstituted" nuclear weapons programme

Sorry fool that particular tidbit was never used to make a case for war. The info appeared once and only once ever in the sotu speech The US congress had voted to support a war in Iraq 3 months before that was ever spoken.

I suggest you get your facts straight before you start calling people names.

This "little tidbit" was first floated last September, and was a key piece of the whole lie about Iraq's nuclear program. In particular, the specific claim of Iraq buying uranium from Africa was used to con Congress into giving Bush the authority to invade Iraq. Several Congressmen have publicly said they would NOT have voted for this if they'd known the Niger document was forged.

Would you care to apologize to Czar now?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Yellow Cake

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger Several Congressmen have publicly said they would NOT have voted for this if they'd known the Niger document was forged.

Would you care to apologize to Czar now?

That is such BS, they are only saying that now because it suits their attempt to back out of their support for the war. THAT is why this issue has become so overblown. They found their "out".

CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Several Congressmen have publicly said they would NOT have voted for this if they'd known the Niger document was forged.

Would you care to apologize to Czar now?

That is such BS, they are only saying that now because it suits their attempt to back out of their support for the war. THAT is why this issue has become so overblown. They found their "out".

Maybe, but that's not what we're discussing. NesuD claimed the Niger claim didn't come out until January. I pointed out that it surfaced months before. I added the well-documented fact that several Congressman said knowing it was a forgery would have changed their vote. Since this vote was in October, it confirms that the Niger lie was pushed out before the SOTU.

 

[J Heartless Slick]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Condi said the it was the only possible use. That makes it a lie by your own reasoning. I don't know why I'm even bothering though, go ahead and keep defending them.

Her statement was wrong - yes. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have been though.

CkG

Bill Clinton would be so proud of you. Look at how you twist and turn and nitpick the precise definitions of one or two words, thus evading the plain and simple intention of the statement. You can define 'is' with the best of them.

Here's to you. :beer:

Man, I was hoping the Bush supporters would stay on topic all the way through this thread without trying to shift the focus away from Bush by bring up Clinton. Nope not this time.

 

[Bowfinger]

So many threads. Here's another bump for etech.