Evidence that Iraq has massed 250000 troups on Saudi border

[Moonbeam]

Digobick, I will take your advise.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: smp

Originally posted by: CPA
haha, Moonie, I didn't read the whole thing, but I didn't have to. Once I saw it was a Democrat challenging Bush's team's intelligence reports, I knew I could quickly dismiss the article as an attempt by the Dems of chipping away at Bush's popularity approval. And yes, that's all it is. November elections are coming up, the Dems are scared and have not been able to crack Bush's poll numbers, especially the approval for the way he is handling the war on terrorism and, for the most part, his approach on Iraq. Just another attempt of the Dems at playing politics.

Many pepole don't vote because they don't see a difference between 'dems' and 'reps' ... I concur. This isn't about who is in power, this is about propaganda. The mud slinging between the two parties is a good smoke screen, people actually believe that they "have a choice".

edit: of course you didn't have to read the whole thing .. you think that if you read it you might fall prey to dem propaganda or something? I love the blind eye people turn to any information which does not support their ignorant sense of reality and security.

I am not turning a blind eye. Moreso, I question the timing of this article.

 

[JellyBaby]

CPA, it is entirely possible, without your knowledge, that you have been conditioned to view politicial reality as a fight between two sides, democrat and republican. Constrained by this viewpoint you're not always allowing fact and reason to determine your judgement; you're viewing events through someone else's scope. I know. It happened to me.

You feel this is democrat propoganda attempting to influence the upcoming elections. How can this be when the source is the CSM, largely a conservative republican bastion? You question the timing of the article. When invading a foreign nation seems imminent, is that not the most appropriate time for any and all viewpoints?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: CPA
haha, Moonie, I didn't read the whole thing, but I didn't have to. Once I saw it was a Democrat challenging Bush's team's intelligence reports, I knew I could quickly dismiss the article as an attempt by the Dems of chipping away at Bush's popularity approval. And yes, that's all it is. November elections are coming up, the Dems are scared and have not been able to crack Bush's poll numbers, especially the approval for the way he is handling the war on terrorism and, for the most part, his approach on Iraq. Just another attempt of the Dems at playing politics.

That's a great attitude, dismiss criticism because of the source, regardless if it's based on fact or not.

 

[tcsenter]

Contrary to Bush?s claim, however, the 1998 IAEA report did not say that Iraq was six months away from developing nuclear capability, NBC News? Robert Windrem reported Saturday.

Exactly, and neither did Bush say that Iraq was CURRENTLY six months away from developing nuclear capability.

The report mentioned that intelligence information before the Gulf War predicted that Hussein would have nuclear capability within a few years. When weapons inspectors first went into Iraq, they discovered that Hussein was six months from obtaining nuclear capability, not a few years as intelligence reports predicted. Bush recounted this factual information to counter Ridder's assertion that Hussein is years from rebuilding the nuclear program to the state it was in before the Gulf War.

As usual, Bush wasn't wrong, his statements were misrepresented.

 

[rickn]

[conspiracy on]

All of the Iraqi military equipment was russian made, so their satellites didn't see it [/conspriracy off]

 

[tcsenter]

To clarify: Bush was in effect saying in response to those who claim Iraq is years from rebuilding its nuclear weapons program 'Yeah, we've heard that before, and those reports were dead wrong, as the 1998 IAEA report shows.' (paraphrasing)

Bush was using this as an example, he did NOT state that the IAEA reported Iraq was CURRENTLY six months from nuclear capability or in 1998.

 

[JellyBaby]

The quote was:

Bush said U.N. weapons inspectors, before they were denied access to Iraq, concluded that Saddam was "six months away from developing a weapon."

Weapons inspectors assessed, confiscated and/or destroyed Iraq's aresenal per U.N. decree. How can we know what Iraq has now since there is no inspection process? I really want to hear Bush's speech this week.

 

[rubix]

maybe some of you aren't aware, but there was an agreement between bush sr. and saddam in the original gulf war. the agreement was that bush would not kill saddam and end his regime if saddam did not use chemical/biological weapons. this is why we stopped after kicking their asses out of kuwait.

now things are different. if we are going to purposefully kill saddam he has nothing to lose and is way more likely to use his chemical/biological weapons. i just read today that the us government said if he uses them we will "annihilate" saddam. also israel has stated if saddam attacks them with it then they will nuke iraq. these are hardly agreements like in the gulf war. so don't pretend saddam and his weapons aren't a threat. he can and might use them this time and we should kill him now because waiting only means things get worse (more weapons, maybe nukes). waiting does absolutely NOTHING. and the us didn't become the strongest nation by sitting on it's ass. it became it by taking risks and doing what others are too scared to do. this is the same way it works for companies. you have to take to the big risks for the big gains.

 

[tcsenter]

maybe some of you aren't aware, but there was an agreement between bush sr. and saddam in the original gulf war. the agreement was that bush would not kill saddam and end his regime if saddam did not use chemical/biological weapons. this is why we stopped after kicking their asses out of kuwait.

Huh! And I thought the reason we stopped after kicking their asses out of Kuwait was because that was the STATED PURPOSE of the Gulf War - to eject Iraq from Kuwait and severely diminish Iraq's military capability. To hear the UN tell it, killing Saddam or deposing him was NEVER among the UN's objectives.

Silly me.