Ex-CIA agent: US invents its own enemies

[Jhhnn]

So, using HANS BLIX'S UN REPORT, we see he was finding, and destroying, WMDs in Iraq shortly before the invasion.

Negative. All WMD's actually destroyed (a few shells, item 119 of the report) were known to have existed prior to the Inspectors leaving in 1997. Because they were known to exist, slated for disposal under UN supervision, the Iraqis kept them for disposal at a future date, like when the inspectors returned. The rest of the stuff listed in Blix' report, which you linked, were not WMD's, nor did Blix claim they were at any time. Shells filled with water & HE are not WMD's, nor are minor misc components listed in his report. He found no WMD's not already declared by the Iraqis, no matter how desperately you want to say that he did. Follow up by US forces after the invasion confirmed his findings.

 

[bwanaaa]

I think our pro-active foreign policy is rooted in Pearl Harbor. While the world tried to appease Hitler, played pacifist, and used their diplomacy-we had our asses royally reamed. Is it any surprise then that since that day we visit back onto aggressors a revenge that is 10 fold worse.

I agree, perhaps our presence in other lands to spread 'democracy' is not too different than the crusaders who fought to spread christianity. Islam was just a response to the Crusaders. And unfortunately their ideology hasnt moved forward since then. But how would you prevent another Pearl Harbor?

I think the answer lies in the solution that saved our asses in WW2. Our ability to crack enigma as well as the numerous other encryption schemes gave us the ability to fight smarter. So that's where I think our strategy should focus.

Stage 1) data gathering-- Face recognition of everything walking in the middle east, afghanistan, irag, iran, etc. Every communication is logged. Every cell phone gps tracked, Every bus ticket, rail ticket, airline ticket, customs stamp is logged. All adverse events - sniper shots, IEDs, etc.

Stage 2) data analysis--Real time data mining creating linked lists of known terrorists with acquaintances, locations. Rule generation of behavior patterns of these actors-geolocation frequencies, routes, habits. Correlation of adverse events with relevant cell phone activity, terrorist locations, communication bursts.

Stage 3) intervention against high risk precursor marker events.

We live in an era where there will not be a gradual buildup of atrocities-in W2 we saw the Japanese abuse the Chinese, the Nazis abused their strength with resource grabs. Today, the next event will be more abrupt and more atrocious.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Ignorant troll ranting snipped in interests of saving electrons

You ignored the questions yet again.

1. Explain why Blix himself said there are no WMD
2. Explain why the entire Bush admin all state there are no WMD
3. Answer yes or no that you think Obama was born in the US

Come on,all you are intellectually capable of is to keep calling me a coward? Really? Even the other trolls here on P&N can do more than that, you are just pathetic.

This is you:

cybrtroll: dudes, person X is an arms dealer! Hans Blix says so!1111!!!!
rest of world: Um, no.
cybrtroll: really, Blix said that person X was found with a box of ammo dating to WWI that is so corroded that it doesn't work, and cannot be used. He is so an arms dealer !!111!!1!oneoneone!!11!!
rest of world: /facepalm
cybrtroll: COWARDS COWARDS COWARDS
cybrtroll: waaaaaahhhh!!!!!!!
rest of world: dude, you are an ignorant troll
rest of world: /double facepalm
cybrtroll: waaaahhhhhh!!!!1111!!!! COWARD COWARD COWARD

I think that pretty much sums up your trolling. Enjoy

 

[cybrsage]

You ignored the questions yet again.

1. Explain why Blix himself said there are no WMD

I answered this one a few times already, you just are too cowardly to accept it.

You will have to ask Hans for that answer. I know it is scary, but grab some bravery and do it yourself. Hans said there were WMDs in his official report to the UN. If you want to know why he later lies in his book, ask the guy who lies in his book.

It is less scary to tell me I have to tell you why Hans Blix lied in his book, but if you gain some courage and write Hans himself, you will get your answer.

2. Explain why the entire Bush admin all state there are no WMD

Irrelevant. Bush was neither on the UNMOVIC team nor a writer of Hans' book. Each time you bring him up it is simply to hide your fear of actually writing Hans and asking him why he lied.

3. Answer yes or no that you think Obama was born in the US

Irrelevant. If you want a thread on this topic, make one. You are simply trying to change the subject to hide your cowardace. At least try to stay on the subject you are discussing. It is cowardly to run away from it like this.

Come on,all you are intellectually capable of is to keep calling me a coward?

If you walk like a coward, talk like a coward, and act like a coward...people won't call you a brave man.

 

[cybrsage]

Negative. All WMD's actually destroyed (a few shells, item 119 of the report) were known to have existed prior to the Inspectors leaving in 1997. Because they were known to exist, slated for disposal under UN supervision, the Iraqis kept them for disposal at a future date, like when the inspectors returned. The rest of the stuff listed in Blix' report, which you linked, were not WMD's, nor did Blix claim they were at any time. Shells filled with water & HE are not WMD's, nor are minor misc components listed in his report. He found no WMD's not already declared by the Iraqis, no matter how desperately you want to say that he did. Follow up by US forces after the invasion confirmed his findings.

Untrue, line 88:

88. The discovery by UNMOVIC of twelve 122 mm chemical warheads and rocket
motors in mid-January 2003 at the Ukhaidar ammunitions depot led to an Iraqi
declaration regarding four additional warheads at Al Taji a few days later.

12 chemical warheads and rocket motors were discovered in January 2003...and when they were Iraq said "crap, we better tell them about the others we hid" and disclosed 4 more of them a few days later.

Chemical warheads, even if empty or filled with water, still constitute WMDs, as their purpose is to disburse WMDs.

 

[Whiskey16]

Oohh...an extremely poor display of historical knowledge:

I think our pro-active foreign policy is rooted in Pearl Harbor. While the world tried to appease Hitler, played pacifist, and used their diplomacy-we had our asses royally reamed.

At that time while you sat on your asses with some of your own politicians supporting German aggression and thereby hampering opposing efforts to be more active for the European theatre, much of the world was already at war....

Is it any surprise then that since that day we visit back onto aggressors a revenge that is 10 fold worse.

Worse? For whom? Extreme US military aggression and massacres upon US aboriginals or US imperial warfare where 100,000's of civilians in the Philippines faced your slaughter? You already had a sordid history.

Dude, the USA was certainly "pro-active upon the world stage, decades before you got head-butted at Pearl Harbor.

I think the answer lies in the solution that saved our asses in WW2. Our ability to crack enigma as well as the numerous other encryption schemes gave us the ability to fight smarter.

That specific was of the British. Plus, you may thank the Royal Canadian Navy and the merchants for supplying Britain while your state was so incompetent as to retain the delusion of peace and retain shoreline lighting to ultimately aid confident in-shore u-boats to pluck of silhouette supply ships as they passed along the eastern US seaboard.

....tired, and rushed. Sorry for the a-typically inadequate post, though this little lad likely cannot handle much more in depth lectures.

 

[PingviN]

Chemical warheads, even if empty or filled with water, still constitute WMDs, as their purpose is to disburse WMDs.

That's why the UN said "go for it" when US/UK argued that Resolution 1441 was violated? Oh, that's right, they didn't.

The report states they found no significant quantities nor any active warheads. The Iraqi were cooperating with the UN and Hans Blix states they were mere months away from completing the disarmament process. The war in Iraq was started on false premises by a warmongering Bush administration.

Get it into your thick skull that there were no WMDs to go to war over, which everyone but you seems to have come to realize over the years.

 

[Jhhnn]

Untrue, line 88:



12 chemical warheads and rocket motors were discovered in January 2003...and when they were Iraq said "crap, we better tell them about the others we hid" and disclosed 4 more of them a few days later.

Chemical warheads, even if empty or filled with water, still constitute WMDs, as their purpose is to disburse WMDs.

Lameness & obfuscation. Blix never claimed such to be WMD's, nor did the people he reported to, either. The fact that they did not contain chemical warfare agents meant that they were *not* WMD's. The terms of Iraq's agreement with the UN did not define such things as WMD's, at all, no matter how hard you try to claim that it did. It's like claiming that an empty glass is a drink, an empty plate is a meal, or an empty tub is a bath. It's fantasy. By your non-reasoning, a truck that could transport WMD's is a WMD, as is a rocket launcher or howitzer, airplane or helicopter.

All of which is intended merely to hide the truth, anyway- that the vast stockpile of WMD's alleged to be held by the Iraqis was a propaganda construct, based on demands to prove a negative.

Prior to the invasion, the Iraqis possessed tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of conventional rockets & artillery shells in depots throughout the country. In all of that, absolutely zero undeclared WMD's were found by Blix or US forces after the invasion. Zero, zip, nada, nothing, zilch.

What it amounts to is that the Bush Admin did indeed create their own enemy out of their imaginations, complete with scary non-weapons and scary non- programs of nuclear weapons.

It also reveals your utter dishonesty.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/10/nato-dismal-future-pentagon-chief

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

WAAHH WAAHH WAHHH COWARD COWARD COWARD

Wow, you continue to show you limited use of the English language. Really, is coward the only word you know how to use?

Lets see, evidence that Blix said there were no WMD in Iraq...this is going to be hard I bet....(10sec typing in google)...oh look at all of these articles with real quotes of real people!

Link

In my briefing to the security council on 14 February, I referred to WMD and said: "So far, UNMOVIC has found no such weapons …"; but also noted: "many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for … One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist. However, that possibility is also not excluded."

On the record, clear cut..Blix's report says no WMD. Shocking that you are wrong cybrtroll, bet you never would have guessed that huh? He says there are rumors that there are WMD, but they cannot find any evidence.

Link

Findings from the official ISG report:

"The ISG has not found evidence that Saddam possessed WMD stocks in 2003, but [there is] the possibility that some weapons existed in Iraq, although not of a militarily significant capability."

No WMD found either. Still believing that all these people and official records are all wrong? LOL troll. Still need more? How about this?

Link

The United Nations team of international weapons experts in Iraq have confirmed that there is "no evidence" whatsoever to support the American and British claims that the Iraqi regime was hiding or planning to build weapons of mass destruction. The official UN weapons inspectors (UNMOVIC) were responsible for verifying the disarmament process in Iraq but were forced to leave when the US and UK started the war.

Again, official UN report shows no WMD. 10sec on google comes up with 100's or links to the reports, articles abou the report, and interviews with Bush Admin officials that say they were wrong, and no WMD found.

So are you really that freaking stupid and ignorant? OR do you want to just admit you are wrong, and move on?

Oh, and you still refuse to answer (after avoiding and misdirecting) about Obama being born in the US...come on you know you are a birther, go ahead and say it. We can add that to your troll tag.

Let me guess, the next reply will still have no facts or argument to prove your case, but will call me a coward at least 5 times.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Wow, you continue to show you limited use of the English language. Really, is coward the only word you know how to use?

Lets see, evidence that Blix said there were no WMD in Iraq...this is going to be hard I bet....(10sec typing in google)...oh look at all of these articles with real quotes of real people!

Link



On the record, clear cut..Blix's report says no WMD. Shocking that you are wrong cybrtroll, bet you never would have guessed that huh? He says there are rumors that there are WMD, but they cannot find any evidence.

Link

Findings from the official ISG report:



No WMD found either. Still believing that all these people and official records are all wrong? LOL troll. Still need more? How about this?

Link



Again, official UN report shows no WMD. 10sec on google comes up with 100's or links to the reports, articles abou the report, and interviews with Bush Admin officials that say they were wrong, and no WMD found.

So are you really that freaking stupid and ignorant? OR do you want to just admit you are wrong, and move on?

Oh, and you still refuse to answer (after avoiding and misdirecting) about Obama being born in the US...come on you know you are a birther, go ahead and say it. We can add that to your troll tag.

Let me guess, the next reply will still have no facts or argument to prove your case, but will call me a coward at least 5 times.

weither sadam had weapons of mass destruction or not its not the question.

He was murdering thousands of people because their muslim believes differ of those from the Rest of the arab world. He was committing genocide.

 

[Joepublic2]

Who's to say that this ex-CIA agent isn't simply spreading more disinformation? I agree with what he's saying, and our cessation of playing world police is about the only thing I agree with Paul with politically, but at this point I think the only interests the CIA is looking out for is the CIA's; they're a pretty much unaccountable organization.

weither sadam had weapons of mass destruction or not its not the question.

He was murdering thousands of people because their muslim believes differ of those from the Rest of the arab world. He was committing genocide.

While that is definitely terrible, it's the US's problem how? And yes, I'm aware that we basically installed him, but if we just wanted to nullify him and the ba'athist party surely there would have been easier ways to do it? And our "nation building" (what a stupid expression btw, the only thing a military does well is to destroy) exercise hasn't exactly stopped the genocide, has it?

 

[bwanaaa]

That specific was of the British. Plus, you may thank the Royal Canadian Navy and the merchants for supplying Britain while your state was so incompetent as to retain the delusion of peace and retain shoreline lighting to ultimately aid confident in-shore u-boats to pluck of silhouette supply ships as they passed along the eastern US seaboard.

Actually, US cryptanalysts were the only ones successful at cracking the Japanese encryption schemes, RED and then PURPLE. Both the British and the Nazis were confounded and could not crack those codes. Intercepts from MAGIC during WW2 ranged from 70 to 130 daily and these were deciphered and passed on the the Sec State and the White House twice daily.

In fact, Nazi High command had instructed Japan to attack Britain in Asia in hope of engaging the US in the war. These instructions were intercepted by the SIS (Signal Intelligence Service).By acting on these intercepts and enhancing US stature in Asia, we thwarted Japan's plans.

BTW, It was Chamberlain who was sucking Hitler's dick because he thought that engaging the Nazis was a lose-lose proposition. But once Britain woke up to the facts of war, they employed 30,000 in the task of cryptanalysis (Bletcheley park)

Appeasing the Nazis did not work out well for them. Likewise, appeasing terrorists or the states who sponsor them (Iran) will not work out well for us. Only by having better information can we anticipate and prevent major attacks.

 

[PingviN]

weither sadam had weapons of mass destruction or not its not the question.

He was murdering thousands of people because their muslim believes differ of those from the Rest of the arab world. He was committing genocide.

The existence of WMDs _is_ the question here, the US/UK went to war over supposed WMDs (that did not exist), not because he was a ruthless dictator.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Who's to say that this ex-CIA agent isn't simply spreading more disinformation? I agree with what he's saying, and our cessation of playing world police is about the only thing I agree with Paul with politically, but at this point I think the only interests the CIA is looking out for is the CIA's; they're a pretty much unaccountable organization.



While that is definitely terrible, it's the US's problem how? And yes, I'm aware that we basically installed him, but if we just wanted to nullify him and the ba'athist party surely there would have been easier ways to do it? And our "nation building" (what a stupid expression btw, the only thing a military does well is to destroy) exercise hasn't exactly stopped the genocide, has it?

Exactly! Its not a US problem and US soldiers should not die in a country thousands of miles away trying to sort other peoples problems out.

But someone had to be punched in the face for 9/11. But now if people say Saddams and most of the stuff is fabricated don't that mean some of 9/11 was fabricated to win the majority of the countries support? After all the US with such patriotic believes is a easy target for politicians who manage to use or twist that in their favor. The security agencies of most countries have been hiring extremist groups to do some of their dirty laundry and if you look at the other wars in other countries theres always the attack on something from the US all be it the ship or the 9/11 attacks

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

The existence of WMDs _is_ the question here, the US/UK went to war over supposed WMDs (that did not exist), not because he was a ruthless dictator.

Yet you entered Somalia for that same reason and not for weapons. Was the weapons really the issue or did some one have to get a beating after 9/11?

 

[PingviN]

Yet you entered Somalia for that same reason and not for weapons. Was the weapons really the issue or did some one have to get a beating after 9/11?

We? Sweden is not a part of the US. The UN entered Somalia to assist with humanitarian efforts, they were limited to self defense. The US didn't go to Somalia because of WMDs, they did so because the Somalian population was in deep shit.

The reason for war with Iraq was because of Saddam's [non-existing] WMDs. You don't go to war over WMDs and then claim you did so because Saddam was an ass.

I don't think anyone disagrees with the fact that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein, but the dictatorship was not the reason the US/UK went to war with Iraq.

 

[cybrsage]

Lameness & obfuscation. Blix never claimed such to be WMD's, nor did the people he reported to, either. The fact that they did not contain chemical warfare agents meant that they were *not* WMD's.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

According to you, a nuclear warhead, minus the detonating electronics, is not a WMD.

Wow, no wonder no one takes you serious!


I can see we will get nowhere. You can continue to say the WMD report by Hans Blix does not report on WMDs and therefor your fragile world view can remain intact. I will stop attempting to get you to join reality.

 

[cybrsage]

Wow, you continue to show you limited use of the English language. Really, is coward the only word you know how to use?

When it describes you perfectly, why use others words. If you are so bothered about being a coward, then you need to work on obtaining some bravery. Write Hans Blix and ask him to explain why he lied.

...lots of stuff which pretends the WMDs listed in the UN report are not WMDs...

The UN Report lists WMDs. You pretend they are not, even though they had to be reported by Iraq as WMDs and disposed of as WMDs.

Just like with Jhhnn, I can see we will get nowhere. You can continue to act the coward and say "Hans Blix lied but I want you to tell me why since I am a coward and will not astk Hans himself since that removes my anonymity...and being anonymous is the only way I can act brave."

No sense in continuing. I doubt you will ever get the courage to write Hans himself for the answers to your questions.

 

[Craig234]

Actually, US cryptanalysts were the only ones successful at cracking the Japanese encryption schemes, RED and then PURPLE. Both the British and the Nazis were confounded and could not crack those codes. Intercepts from MAGIC during WW2 ranged from 70 to 130 daily and these were deciphered and passed on the the Sec State and the White House twice daily.

In fact, Nazi High command had instructed Japan to attack Britain in Asia in hope of engaging the US in the war. These instructions were intercepted by the SIS (Signal Intelligence Service).By acting on these intercepts and enhancing US stature in Asia, we thwarted Japan's plans.

BTW, It was Chamberlain who was sucking Hitler's dick because he thought that engaging the Nazis was a lose-lose proposition. But once Britain woke up to the facts of war, they employed 30,000 in the task of cryptanalysis (Bletcheley park)

Appeasing the Nazis did not work out well for them. Likewise, appeasing terrorists or the states who sponsor them (Iran) will not work out well for us. Only by having better information can we anticipate and prevent major attacks.

Your history is right but the lesson you get is wrong, peace is not 'appeasment' and Iran is not Nazi Germany.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

We? Sweden is not a part of the US. The UN entered Somalia to assist with humanitarian efforts, they were limited to self defense. The US didn't go to Somalia because of WMDs, they did so because the Somalian population was in deep shit.

The reason for war with Iraq was because of Saddam's [non-existing] WMDs. You don't go to war over WMDs and then claim you did so because Saddam was an ass.

I don't think anyone disagrees with the fact that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein, but the dictatorship was not the reason the US/UK went to war with Iraq.

Eek apologies didn't see you were from Sweden as one is so use to see some place in the USA.

That's what I meant they went there for humanitarian efforts. There were no WMD's because it has been shipped to Syria in 2008. Saddam wanted to
1) to embarrass the United States and
(2) to make it possible to retrieve the WMD and easily resume his weapons program once the UN gave the all clear pronouncement.

There was tons of trucks moving out of Iraq to Syria. Unfortunately Saddam didn't live to go and retrieve them.
Also Iraqis under the command of Uday Hussein, one of Saddam Hussein's sons, supported the al-Qaida elements in the country with training and providing safe harbor.

But on the lighter side I just love this pic

 

[Jhhnn]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

According to you, a nuclear warhead, minus the detonating electronics, is not a WMD.

Wow, no wonder no one takes you serious!


I can see we will get nowhere. You can continue to say the WMD report by Hans Blix does not report on WMDs and therefor your fragile world view can remain intact. I will stop attempting to get you to join reality.

Heh. You're really quite desperate. A chemical weapon lacking chemicals is not a WMD, and a nuclear bomb lacking fissionable materials wouldn't be a nuclear bomb, either. Neither would create the desired effect.

You've staked out an indefensible position wrt Blix & his findings, and will now attempt to defend it in the usual manner of all trolls. He found nothing that hadn't been declared previously, and neither did anybody else after the invasion.

The WMD allegation, and that of a "reconstituted nuclear program" were merely propaganda constructs on the part of the Bush Admin, created to enable the invasion of Iraq. And they worked, sad to say, although the ultimate results obviously aren't as intended. When the dust finally settles in Iraq, it's highly unlikely that the govt will be any more friendly than the Baathists, or necessarily any more democratic. In many respects, they've already gone retrograde, leaning more on the sectarian divisions and primitive folkways that people will often go to when attacked.

It speaks vividly of the utter incompetence of the American Right in foreign affairs, not to mention that our current economic situation speaks to it, as well. But the Believers still Believe, despite it all, and are more than willing to vilify somebody, anybody that their leadership sics 'em on... and to resort to revisionist history & Denial as coping mechanisms.

If you need to resort to fantasy to enrich your life, just believe in Bigfoot, OK? At least nobody gets killed, and it's free...

 

[kylebisme]

There were no WMD's because it has been shipped to Syria in 2008.

I've seen some claims that WMDs were shipped out of Iraq to various locations just prior to the 2003 invasion, but nothing to substantiate such assertions, nor anyone before you claiming such a thing happened in 2008. Everything else I've seen on the matter suggests that aside from a few old scraps in forgotten stockpiles, Saddam destroyed his WMDs long before the invasion. Even the government officials I've seen comment on the matter suggest the same, including Bush himself. So, where are you getting your claim to the contrary from?

 

[kylebisme]

And they worked, sad to say, although the ultimate results obviously aren't as intended.

There's been plenty of rich people getting richer off the conflict, which seems to me is the actual intended results of most invasions.

 

[Jhhnn]

Eek apologies didn't see you were from Sweden as one is so use to see some place in the USA.

That's what I meant they went there for humanitarian efforts. There were no WMD's because it has been shipped to Syria in 2008. Saddam wanted to
1) to embarrass the United States and
(2) to make it possible to retrieve the WMD and easily resume his weapons program once the UN gave the all clear pronouncement.

There was tons of trucks moving out of Iraq to Syria. Unfortunately Saddam didn't live to go and retrieve them.
Also Iraqis under the command of Uday Hussein, one of Saddam Hussein's sons, supported the al-Qaida elements in the country with training and providing safe harbor.

But on the lighter side I just love this pic

Promulgating the Michael Ledeen fantasy, I see. There's not a shred of proof that such a thing ever happened, nor any reason it would have. Why would a dictator ship off his most potent weapons on the eve of an invasion by hostile forces? If he lost, he'd end up dead either way, and if he won, he'd still be alive, regardless of the weaponry used to do that. It's not like Saddam Hussein would have blinked at the use of chemical weapons.