CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Please quit twisting the statement about the "imminent threat". Please go back and look what was said about the "imminent threat". Something about ...before they became an imminent threat
CkG
Since we knew that they had chemical weapons and were prepared to use them within 45 minutes of notice?
Wow, was reading this article over at Time.com and some of these quotes just seem SO confident. Looking back now, those who said them must feel like the biggest chumps ever.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Please quit twisting the statement about the "imminent threat". Please go back and look what was said about the "imminent threat". Something about ...before they became an imminent threat
CkG
Since we knew that they had chemical weapons and were prepared to use them within 45 minutes of notice?
did you find the "imminent threat" quote yet?
Edit- Here - read this - it might just shed some light on the "imminent threat" accusation.
CkG
Miramonti
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2000
- 28,653
- 100
- 106
I think some chemical weapons will be found in some capacity, either in iraq or evidence of it deposed in syria etc., but thats not the issue imo.
The administration claimed iraq not only had wmd's but an active wmd program, including having restarted its nuclear program. Beyond that they took an urgent and unilateral position to go to war, without the blessing and support of the UN/international community. They scorned europe for not supporting them and they basically bought troups from small countries with promises of aid packages, and weakly claimed it was a coalition of the willing.
Even aside from whether or not any weapons will be found in iraq, this president has completely disgraced the country.
The administration claimed iraq not only had wmd's but an active wmd program, including having restarted its nuclear program. Beyond that they took an urgent and unilateral position to go to war, without the blessing and support of the UN/international community. They scorned europe for not supporting them and they basically bought troups from small countries with promises of aid packages, and weakly claimed it was a coalition of the willing.
Even aside from whether or not any weapons will be found in iraq, this president has completely disgraced the country.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
I love the logic that says Saddam hid his weapons since he knew we were coming. Like the cops are going to hassle you for your stash.
People with lots of guns and tanks were going to try to kill him no matter what. If someone was trying to kill you, rest assured you would not try to bury the only weapons you KNOW might save you. You will use every means to defend yourself, if you have to burn the Earth to do so. If you do not, you dont have them.
And has been pointed out-
We were told that we knew what and where they were. Nothing. Nothing at all.
Even if they eventually find something, Bush never knew what he claimed and used to promote the fear that made this war possible. To americans Saddam was about as threatening dead gnats.
People with lots of guns and tanks were going to try to kill him no matter what. If someone was trying to kill you, rest assured you would not try to bury the only weapons you KNOW might save you. You will use every means to defend yourself, if you have to burn the Earth to do so. If you do not, you dont have them.
And has been pointed out-
We were told that we knew what and where they were. Nothing. Nothing at all.
Even if they eventually find something, Bush never knew what he claimed and used to promote the fear that made this war possible. To americans Saddam was about as threatening dead gnats.
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Shhhhh... Using logic around here is against the rules.
:beer: for you anyway
CkG
HA HA HA.
Logic is cause for banning round' here..
How does the fact that the weapons can harm us, make it easier to find? If it's on a platform or not, there are PLENTY of spaces to hide WMD, chemicals and what not..
I still can't get this out of my head... Why did they chemical weapons suits? They knew that we wouldn't use them.
He had ample time to hide them, ANYWHERE in the country.
That wasn't the argument. The argument was that they were an imminent threat. If he has them so well hidden, they aren't much of an imminent threat to anyone.
We've also had spy planes and satellites watching him for 5 years. We've had turncoats, defectors, and informants giving us info. We've had 5 months and the best inspectors in the world searching the country and all we've found are barrels which had already been accounted for. Christ if you count a can of RAID, I have more Weapons of Mass Destruction in my pantry than we've found in Iraq so far.
FACT this war was sold to us on the basis of Iraq possessing stockpiles of WMD's. It was sold to us on the basis that they were an imminent threat. It was sold to us on the basis that we couldn't let WMD's be used in a terrah attack, so we had to invade a country or we would face imminent danger. So far all of it has been bullshit and all we're left with a bill for a few hundred billion dollars and a few hundred dead soldiers.
Now I don't care what political party you belong to, what political dogma you prescribe to, but this is a major fvck up. Intelligence has so far been horrendous, the administration has so far shown that they weren?t prepared for what was going to happen after major fighting had stopped and because of that our soldiers are dying.
Questions need to be asked, and if good answers aren't given then people should lose their job. Whether that's people at the intelligence agencies, the Pentagon, or the White House, I don't care.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
candy coat the misinformation? Seems SViscusi overlooked my link earlier - re: imminent threat
CkG
Krauthammer is a warmongering POS. Furthermore, he's using the same slight of hand has other Bush-league liars.
Hmm
Two senior policymakers, who supported the war, said in unauthorized interviews that the administration greatly overstated Iraq's near-term nuclear potential.
"I never cared about the 'imminent threat,' " said one of the policymakers, with directly relevant responsibilities. "The threat was there in [Hussein's] presence in office. To me, just knowing what it takes to have a nuclear weapons program, he needed a lot of equipment. You can stare at the yellowcake [uranium ore] all you want. You need to convert it to gas and enrich it. That does not constitute an imminent threat, and the people who were saying that, I think, did not fully appreciate the difficulties and effort involved in producing the nuclear material and the physics package."
PDF of Bush administration poo
National Review argument claiming Bush never said "imminent"
So let's see if the tally is right . . .
America (well the dumb 69% or so) believe Saddam was connected with 9/11 . . . yet the Bush administration says they've never said such a thing.
Now Bush Leaguers are claiming the threat from Iraq was never imminent just a problem of uncertain magnitude (where's the WMD) and uncertain time horizon (if ever).
So Saddam isn't associated with 9/11 and he did not have WMD perched to strike the US or its allies and he did not have a distribution plan for Al Qaeda (well not to our knowledge). So we invaded Saddam b/c he's a bad man and America wants to invest $250B to build a modern Iraq. Funny thing is . . . I don't remember Bush giving that speech in fall 2002 or winter 2003 . . . do you?
Hmm
Two senior policymakers, who supported the war, said in unauthorized interviews that the administration greatly overstated Iraq's near-term nuclear potential.
"I never cared about the 'imminent threat,' " said one of the policymakers, with directly relevant responsibilities. "The threat was there in [Hussein's] presence in office. To me, just knowing what it takes to have a nuclear weapons program, he needed a lot of equipment. You can stare at the yellowcake [uranium ore] all you want. You need to convert it to gas and enrich it. That does not constitute an imminent threat, and the people who were saying that, I think, did not fully appreciate the difficulties and effort involved in producing the nuclear material and the physics package."
PDF of Bush administration poo
National Review argument claiming Bush never said "imminent"
So let's see if the tally is right . . .
America (well the dumb 69% or so) believe Saddam was connected with 9/11 . . . yet the Bush administration says they've never said such a thing.
Now Bush Leaguers are claiming the threat from Iraq was never imminent just a problem of uncertain magnitude (where's the WMD) and uncertain time horizon (if ever).
So Saddam isn't associated with 9/11 and he did not have WMD perched to strike the US or its allies and he did not have a distribution plan for Al Qaeda (well not to our knowledge). So we invaded Saddam b/c he's a bad man and America wants to invest $250B to build a modern Iraq. Funny thing is . . . I don't remember Bush giving that speech in fall 2002 or winter 2003 . . . do you?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
So where again did Bush say Iraq was an "imminent threat"? Yeah - that's right.
Again - please make sure you know the truth before you post.
CkG
CkG - you're arguing over semantics when it is the entire case for war that is at issue.
Remember, we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
Remember, we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
candy coat the misinformation? Seems SViscusi overlooked my link earlier - re: imminent threat
CkG
I didn't overlook it, I also didn't overlook the British claim that Iraq could deploy chemical and biological weapons in 45 minutes never being corrected by the administration. Doesn't that sound imminent?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Maybe - but the truth of the matter is that people here are misrepresenting what Bush said. The Truth is that he never said Iraq was an "imminent threat" - but people and the press ran wild with it. I'm sorry if you people felt duped - but it wasn't what he said.
CkG
Do you honestly believe the Bush administration did not sell the Bush War 2003 as an urgent intervention.
Embassy press release
I've re-read the SEP 2002 and OCT 2002 speeches. The Bushies can make an argument the word "imminent" was not mentioned by Bush.
Imminent could mean months
Unavoidable could mean . . . um . . . give me a minute . . . I'm sure there's some way to spin that one, too.
Embassy press release
I've re-read the SEP 2002 and OCT 2002 speeches. The Bushies can make an argument the word "imminent" was not mentioned by Bush.
I guess this is truthful as well since he used "or"
Unlike the menagerie of lies and misinformation used to sell war this war to America . . . it's much easier to use the truth to fry the Bushies. Let them exsanguinate using the true record of Bush deceit.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: SViscusi
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
candy coat the misinformation? Seems SViscusi overlooked my link earlier - re: imminent threat
CkG
I didn't overlook it, I also didn't overlook the British claim that Iraq could deploy chemical and biological weapons in 45 minutes never being corrected by the administration. Doesn't that sound imminent?
Oh, so you purposely spread misinformation? The Brits intelligence made that statement yes. Sure 45min deployment would be a threat. But what you fail to understand is that people took a phrase and twisted it - and now are claiming that Bush said something he did not.
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?
If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option." - Bush SOTU
CkG
When you say the truth of the matter what you mean is that you have taken a really important topic and teased out some irrelevant tiny and insignificant part of it and created a gigantic noise around it to which you pretend there is meaning. You are probably the most empty headed, idiotic, superficial sophist I have ever had the pleasure of being insulted by. You are, as we say today, completely out to lunch. You are like a fly that buzzes on a window pain. You have the gift of drivel.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter