Hussein Was Right & Bush Was Wrong

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: yllus

What did Iraq do to Kuwait that is identical to what was done to Iraq? From this, I assume you apparently feel that Iraq was justified in its invasion and that the West should have done nothing?

Either you missed the point, or you just refuse to see facts when they are presented. The point is that Iraq was NOT justified in it's invasion of Kuwait in 1991, just as the U.S. was NOT justified in it's invasion of Iraq in 2003. Jesus Tap-dancing Christ man...open your eyes instead of twisting other people's words.

:thumbsup:

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: yllus

What did Iraq do to Kuwait that is identical to what was done to Iraq? From this, I assume you apparently feel that Iraq was justified in its invasion and that the West should have done nothing?

Either you missed the point, or you just refuse to see facts when they are presented. The point is that Iraq was NOT justified in it's invasion of Kuwait in 1991, just as the U.S. was NOT justified in it's invasion of Iraq in 2003.

I've looked through this thread, and the facts to be found in it are few and far between. Let's take a moment to look at the most popular reasons for the rationale for war in Iraq.

- Iraq's non-compliance with UN resolutions. Warnings had not deterred Iraq from overtly hostile actions that threatened the United States and its interests.
- Iraq's history of using WMD demonstrated the likelihood that it would use them in the future.
- The possiblity of the synergy created when hostile states and non-state agents conspire could not be ignored.
- Iraq's aggression externally in the Middle East, and internally using Stalinist methods.

All causes for alarm, and with which more than one president agreed with. This, in contrast with Saddam Hussein's 1990 aims to overrun the Kuwaiti state and with such a measure become the hegemon of the Middle East. Your judgement call on whether or not the U.S. was justified in 2003 simply doesn't hold up.

Jesus Tap-dancing Christ man...open your eyes instead of twisting other people's words.

How about people start talking facts so I don't have a reason to continuously call them to account? Let's just use the one version of history that went down in the facts, instead of op-ed pieces of what history sort of resembles.

 

[tooltime]

i'm glad hussein is gone. the man was byond twisted, sick and had to go

 

[dbuttcheek69]

why do you stupid America haters have to bitch about everything. You just gobble up what the media feeds you.

why dont you do us all a favor and move to Canada.

 

[dbuttcheek69]

for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

 

[Pohemi]

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

So I suppose Hussein just conveniently snuck everything out right under the noses of all the U.N. inspectors that had been in Iraq searching for them during the time leading up to our invasion? Sure...

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
why do you stupid America haters have to bitch about everything. You just gobble up what the media feeds you.

why dont you do us all a favor and move to Canada.

What the media feeds us is not that Bush and his administration went to war in Iraq based on a bunch of lies and half-truths. If it were up to the media (which is largely controlled by corporations including but not limited to defense contractors) we'd all be as stupid as you are for ignoring the facts: Even though Saddam Hussein was not a nice boy who played well with others, the matter still remains that the Bush administration lied to get the public to back our going to war.
As far as moving to Canada...it's funny you should mention that...I'm actually in the works of it with lawyers who specialize in just that :thumbsup:

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

^^^ Someone who didn't bother to read any of the previous posts in this thread which completely invalidate this theory.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

So I suppose Hussein just conveniently snuck everything out right under the noses of all the U.N. inspectors that had been in Iraq searching for them during the time leading up to our invasion? Sure...

As opposed to your bulletproof theory, where Saddam Hussein's regime had destroyed all its WMD (apparently sometime between 1998 and 2003) yet failed to even attempt to document or invite observers to that process. That's even less of a logical conclusion than the quiet spiriting of WMD out of the country.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
why do you stupid America haters have to bitch about everything. You just gobble up what the media feeds you.

why dont you do us all a favor and move to Canada.

Waaaaah

 

[Pohemi]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

So I suppose Hussein just conveniently snuck everything out right under the noses of all the U.N. inspectors that had been in Iraq searching for them during the time leading up to our invasion? Sure...

As opposed to your bulletproof theory, where Saddam Hussein's regime had destroyed all its WMD (apparently sometime between 1998 and 2003) yet failed to even attempt to document or invite observers to that process. That's even less of a logical conclusion than the quiet spiriting of WMD out of the country.

As opposed to the idea that he either destroyed them or passed them off in secret sometime earlier due to the fact that he didn't want his neighbors knowing he was disarming? That sounds like the most logical theory to me...not that he suddenly got rid of them all less than a year before we invaded. He knew he couldn't hide them from the U.N. forever, but he also didn't want to appear to be a sitting duck either.

 

[BBond]

One more time for those who continue to ignore the facts. Even the U.S. government is admitting there was NO WMD and NO WMD WAS MOVED OUT OF IRAQ.

U.S. found no evidence WMD moved from Iraq

The Duelfer report concluded that Iraq had no stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons and its nuclear program had decayed before last year's U.S.-led invasion, in findings contrary to prewar assertions of the Bush administration.

Iraq WMD search ended

As the hunt for weapons of mass destruction dragged on unsuccessfully in Iraq, top Bush administration officials speculated publicly that the banned armaments may have been smuggled out of the country before the war started.

advertisement
Whether Saddam Hussein moved the WMD ? deadly chemical, biological or radiological arms ? is one of the unresolved issues that the final U.S. intelligence report on Iraq?s programs is expected to address next month.

But intelligence and congressional officials say they have not seen any information ? never ?a piece,? said one ? indicating that WMD or significant amounts of components and equipment were transferred from Iraq to neighboring Syria, Jordan or elsewhere.

It was all a lie. Stop trying to make it the truth. Stop believing the lie. It's over. You've all been had and we told you so.

Just admit it. Don't keep making the same ridiculous allegations even after the U.S. government, the Bush administration, the liars themselves have given up on their search and admitted there is NO EVIDENCE WMD WAS MOVED OUT OF IRAQ.

 

[His Lord Uberdude]

Bbond, can you stop?

 

[raildogg]

There is wrong, there is right. There is evil, there is good.

America is right, they are wrong.

 

[Pohemi]

Originally posted by: raildogg
There is wrong, there is right. There is evil, there is good.

America is right, they are wrong.

Yeah that's the problem...too many people see the world as just as black and white as you retards.

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: raildogg
There is wrong, there is right. There is evil, there is good.

America is right, they are wrong.

Yeah that's the problem...too many people see the world as just as black and white as you retards.

thats the way I see it. America is right, the evil terrorist scum are wrong. and nice name calling, Mr. Leftist, who proclaims "I am more tolerant than you". In fact you guys are the most intolerant people

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: raildogg
There is wrong, there is right. There is evil, there is good.

America is right, they are wrong.

Ah...moral absolutism.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: dbuttcheek69
for several months the pentagon was preparing to invade Iraq and discover its WMD, so just like a drug dealer does when hes about to get arrested by the cops, he got rid of them before we invaded. in fact their probably all over the middle east right now just waiting to be used...

So I suppose Hussein just conveniently snuck everything out right under the noses of all the U.N. inspectors that had been in Iraq searching for them during the time leading up to our invasion? Sure...

As opposed to your bulletproof theory, where Saddam Hussein's regime had destroyed all its WMD (apparently sometime between 1998 and 2003) yet failed to even attempt to document or invite observers to that process. That's even less of a logical conclusion than the quiet spiriting of WMD out of the country.

As opposed to the idea that he either destroyed them or passed them off in secret sometime earlier due to the fact that he didn't want his neighbors knowing he was disarming? That sounds like the most logical theory to me...not that he suddenly got rid of them all less than a year before we invaded. He knew he couldn't hide them from the U.N. forever, but he also didn't want to appear to be a sitting duck either.

Utterly terrible reasoning. Did the UN resolutions require Hussein's regime to defend itself with knives and forks alone? There were specific guidelines as to what was to not exist in Iraq, and what was allowed. Forgive me if I and others believe that Hussein didn't require a couple thousand pounds of chemical weapons to keep his border secure.

 

[wchou]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
Isn't that the truth. Sad to know our President is lower than Saddam Hussein.

 

[wchou]

Either bush is a lunatic or someone is pulling the strings behind his back.

 

[Pohemi]

Originally posted by: raildogg

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: raildogg
There is wrong, there is right. There is evil, there is good.

America is right, they are wrong.

Yeah that's the problem...too many people see the world as just as black and white as you retards.

thats the way I see it. America is right, the evil terrorist scum are wrong. and nice name calling, Mr. Leftist, who proclaims "I am more tolerant than you". In fact you guys are the most intolerant people

OK...first of all, you show me my post where I said I was more tolerant than anyone else. And then you explain to me why I am "leftist" just because I have enough common sense to realize what kind of political games are being played with the war in Iraq. I never said I was opposed to Saddam being removed from power, as there are plenty of good reasons he should have been. What I don't agree with is how "right wing nut jobs" like yourself can sit and totally deny that Bush and our government has gone to war based on lies or false information or however you care to refer to it.

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Pohemi420
As opposed to the idea that he either destroyed them or passed them off in secret sometime earlier due to the fact that he didn't want his neighbors knowing he was disarming? That sounds like the most logical theory to me...not that he suddenly got rid of them all less than a year before we invaded. He knew he couldn't hide them from the U.N. forever, but he also didn't want to appear to be a sitting duck either.

Utterly terrible reasoning. Did the UN resolutions require Hussein's regime to defend itself with knives and forks alone? There were specific guidelines as to what was to not exist in Iraq, and what was allowed. Forgive me if I and others believe that Hussein didn't require a couple thousand pounds of chemical weapons to keep his border secure.

Don't be rediculous. I never said that Saddam had no weapons at all. What I said (in answer to a previous question) was that he didn't simply slip his WMD's out of the country at the last second. After DS, Iraq's capability to produce nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons was significantly lower. Whatever WMD's he may have had were hidden or gotten rid of due to the mandated U.N. inspections teams. He did not publicly announce his disarmament because Iraq would be apparently more susceptible to attack from bordering nations.
You post out your a$$ talking about logic when it's obvious you don't know the true meaning of the word. I'm done arguing about this with you; I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Good day.
:beer:

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: yllus
Utterly terrible reasoning. Did the UN resolutions require Hussein's regime to defend itself with knives and forks alone? There were specific guidelines as to what was to not exist in Iraq, and what was allowed. Forgive me if I and others believe that Hussein didn't require a couple thousand pounds of chemical weapons to keep his border secure.

Don't be rediculous. I never said that Saddam had no weapons at all. What I said (in answer to a previous question) was that he didn't simply slip his WMD's out of the country at the last second. After DS, Iraq's capability to produce nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons was significantly lower. Whatever WMD's he may have had were hidden or gotten rid of due to the mandated U.N. inspections teams. He did not publicly announce his disarmament because Iraq would be apparently more susceptible to attack from bordering nations.
You post out your a$$ talking about logic when it's obvious you don't know the true meaning of the word. I'm done arguing about this with you; I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Good day.
:beer:

How predictable. When faced with facts, you ran. *golf clap*

You said, "Hussein just conveniently snuck everything out right under the noses of all the U.N. inspectors..." "Everything" = the armanents Iraq was banned from acquiring via UN sanctions. True, or false?

There were clearly defined guidelines and specific exceptions made to allow Iraq to maintain defensive capabilities. Among those being SAM weaponry, the largest standing army in the Middle East, tanks, anti-tank weaponry, etc. True, or false?

On multiple occasions, Iraq was judged to be in breach of the set guidelines. Missiles. Biological weapons. General noncooperation. True, or false?

If your head is so far stuck your 'a$$' that you can't recognize that your theory of "he needed VX for self defense!" is flawed, then maybe you shouldn't be stepping foot onto a battlefield where wits are concerned to begin with. Later kid!

 

[Pohemi]

Are we speaking the same language here?? Apparently you really don't understand what I'm saying because you keep trying to twist my words...

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Pohemi420
Are we speaking the same language here?? Apparently you really don't understand what I'm saying because you keep trying to twist my words...

Ok, let's revisit:

Originally posted by: Pohemi420
As opposed to the idea that he either destroyed them or passed them off in secret sometime earlier due to the fact that he didn't want his neighbors knowing he was disarming? That sounds like the most logical theory to me...not that he suddenly got rid of them all less than a year before we invaded. He knew he couldn't hide them from the U.N. forever, but he also didn't want to appear to be a sitting duck either.

In your opinion, what of this "everything" you say Saddam destroyed/transferred in utter secret was essential to the security of his nation? And please - twisting your words did not occur, and would anyways be utterly unnecessary.

 

[Gaard]

Speaking of 'running'...

Originally posted by: Pohemi420

Originally posted by: raildogg
and nice name calling, Mr. Leftist, who proclaims "I am more tolerant than you". In fact you guys are the most intolerant people

OK...first of all, you show me my post where I said I was more tolerant than anyone else. And then you explain to me why I am "leftist" just because I have enough common sense to realize what kind of political games are being played with the war in Iraq. I never said I was opposed to Saddam being removed from power, as there are plenty of good reasons he should have been.

*cups hand to ear listening for raildogg's response*

- of course, if raildogg holds true to form, he won't be responding to this

 

[Bearcat14]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
None of the documentation either way changes the truth one whit. No nuclear program, no wmd's, no links to al qaeda worthy of the term- zero, zip, nada, nothing. Just a very expensive and fruitless war dragged in on the coattails of a lot of fearmongering and misdirection over 9/11, justified and sold on the basis of a great deal of supposition and cherry-picking of intelligence, much of it supplied by Iranian sponsored exile groups...

Whatever Blix believed, TLC, we'll never know unless he tells us, unless you can successfully represent yourself as the next Kreskin... but we know what he said, and that was that his work would be completed in a matter of months from march 7, 2003- months that the Bush admin refused to allow him in their rush to war...

This forum is obviously some sort of sounding board for angry liberals, which I'm sure is theraputic but, unfortuneately, completely wrong. I can't help but notice far-left group-think in action by the number of cliche' references you have....."fearmongering and misdirection over 9/11", "cherry picking intelligence", "rush to war." Did you cut-and-paste those from the DNC's website?

It is wholly untrue, if you read Duelfer's reports, that there were no nascent WMD programs in progress in Iraq. Hussein had the capability to jump start any or all of these once sanctions were lifted. Is there ANYONE here would thinks that once France and Germany got the UN to lift the sanctions (for their own interests, by the way), that he wouldn't immediately restart these programs? Is there anyone who doubts that? If so, WHY? Give me just one good reason why he would not. Then what? He's free of the sanctions, can import whatever he wants, no inspections.....and the money and capability to develop a nuclear weapon.

So, we get to face Iraq again, years from now, only then his army is completely reconstituted and he has nuclear weapons. Or worse, Saddam has died and his psychotic sons have taken over, who by every measure were even more cruel and unpredictable than him.

These are not problems that we can ignore and hope will go away. I am so sick of liberals whining about this. We can face this problem now, and it's tough.....or we can face it later when it's many times worse.

It is a sad day for all of us when Americans choose to favor a monster like Saddam Hussein over their own president. Put your blind hatred aside for just one minute, pick up and read something other than the New York Times, and try to expand your mind. Liberals constantly lecture about diversity of opinions and freedom of thought, but then lock themselves into a rigid ideology that consists of nothing but seething hatred for Bush. It is sickening.

:laugh: I'm sure that got some people going!