Erroneous assumptions do not = solid proof.
When talking about war are assumptions a good thing? Erroneous or not.
When talking about war are assumptions a good thing? Erroneous or not.
No actors to pay?!? LOL. Disney certainly can't lose any more credibility with Moore.
Their documentaries were notoriously staged for years.Intelligence assessments are called that for a reason since getting "solid proof" is typically impossible in a totalitarian country when they are hostile to your intentions. Asking for "solid proof" prior to action is asking for paralysis. We don't demand that of our police forces even in the guarantee of our most basic rights under the Bill of Rights.
Andrew,
Does our president know this? When he said 'solid proof' what he really meant was 'to the best of our knowledge'?
part of the solid proof was in the form of testimony from a former Iraqi WMD scientist. He described in such great detail mobile Bio WMD labs he worked in that we were able to make accurate drawings and show them to the UN, who of course had never seen nor heard of these in 12 years of inspections. What do ya know, we found 2 of them, outfitted and layed out exactly as Powell claimed with no other use other than ILLEGITIMATE biological production. Filtration systems that were used to wipe out any chemical signature of the agents produced prove their intended use, even if you somehow forget the confession and overwhelmingly accurate information provided.
Remember when they went to the UN and also said there is a terrorist traning camp associated with Al-Qaida that we believe is being used to train and teach WMD uses in combat. Do you think that might be the same terrorist training camp we fought against
al-qaida for in Iraq where we found recipes for WMD and dispersion manuals? Yes traces of ricin were found there, but that grows there naturally, forget it is one Al-Qaida's preferred WMD. You do remember the admitted Al-Qaida member arrested in London this year in Jan? he was making ricin himself.
Bush could get shot with an Iraqi anthrax bullet by OBL and you wouldn't stop your spinning....
Remember when they went to the UN and also said there is a terrorist traning camp associated with Al-Qaida that we believe is being used to train and teach WMD uses in combat. Do you think that might be the same terrorist training camp we fought against
al-qaida for in Iraq where we found recipes for WMD and dispersion manuals? Yes traces of ricin were found there, but that grows there naturally, forget it is one Al-Qaida's preferred WMD. You do remember the admitted Al-Qaida member arrested in London this year in Jan? he was making ricin himself.
Bush could get shot with an Iraqi anthrax bullet by OBL and you wouldn't stop your spinning....
Alistar7 - I hope you're kidding. Not about the fact that a scientist testified. But about that being 'solid proof'. He may very well be legit, and is telling the truth...but that isn't even close to being proof. I somehow doubt that this is what Bush was talking about....but if it was, he should've said "We have the word of a former Iraqi scientist", not "We have solid proof".
We may find that the Iraqi scientist who surrendered in the war was also right about the things he claimed, such as all the WMD were destroyed only months before the war to eliminate the evidence.
Did he tell us anything else that was found to be true? He claoimed to have worked in the WMD program, and then he led us to an open field where precursor chemicals were recently buried, ones he himself could have QUICKLY turned into WMD.
Gaard, intelligence is often "spooky" at best, those labs are a slam dunk for our intelligence. Their existence was not even KNOWN outside of Iraq, and the UN still couldn't find them after we alerted them of their existence.
Not one member of the UN security council would come out and say they believed Saddam did not have any WMD left, they all knew about the TONS unaccounted for and Iraq's ability to produce mass amounts very quickly as well as Saddam's past and his current games and non-compliance, some members even knew of modern arms that somehow slipped into Iraq from their own countries, ooohh the shame, I can't believe so many people will be apparently shocked to death to find out Iraq had WMD programs and weapons, it is like jumping in the ocean and being suprised when you get all wet....
Did he tell us anything else that was found to be true? He claoimed to have worked in the WMD program, and then he led us to an open field where precursor chemicals were recently buried, ones he himself could have QUICKLY turned into WMD.
Gaard, intelligence is often "spooky" at best, those labs are a slam dunk for our intelligence. Their existence was not even KNOWN outside of Iraq, and the UN still couldn't find them after we alerted them of their existence.
Not one member of the UN security council would come out and say they believed Saddam did not have any WMD left, they all knew about the TONS unaccounted for and Iraq's ability to produce mass amounts very quickly as well as Saddam's past and his current games and non-compliance, some members even knew of modern arms that somehow slipped into Iraq from their own countries, ooohh the shame, I can't believe so many people will be apparently shocked to death to find out Iraq had WMD programs and weapons, it is like jumping in the ocean and being suprised when you get all wet....
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
With all due respect, you keep repeating this claim, but you have yet to back it up. The one article you linked talks about a scientist who hadn't worked in the Iraqi weapons program for many years. He said the weapons were destroyed before he left, i.e., sometime before the mid-90's. That is NOT anywhere close to the "months before" claim you keep throwing up.
To corroborate this, the Iraqi defector who provided Bush's "evidence" about mass quantities of NBC materials (and about the mobile labs) also stated that he had personal knowledge that these materials were destroyed BEFORE he left Iraq. Bush, Powell, & Co. conveniently left this out when they were bullying Congress and the U.N. to go to war.
Every time I pointed this out in other threads, you disappeared. I suspect you misread the article and are too embarrassed to acknowledge it. If it's real, I would truly like to see the article; it would be interesting new information. If not, give it up already.
It's semantics. What I was addressing in my post (I'm responding to your earlier question) is that people seem to be asking for a vial of nerve agent with the inscription "Made in Iraq" in the hands of US intelligence prior to taking any action whatsoever. As for what President Bush was referring to when he said "solid proof", I either don't know or can't say. People seem to critisize the US for a lack of physical evidence prior to invading. I merely wanted to point out that physical evidence is obviously not easy to obtain when someone runs a secret police force in a country and shoots at our planes flying overhead.
It is actually true that the Bush family was connected - if indirectly - to Nazi banks and companies. I have seen the entries in the lib. of Congress.
It is actually true that the Bush family was connected - if indirectly - to Nazi banks and companies. I have seen the entries in the lib. of Congress.
Lots of people were connected indirectly. IBM solds the German punchcard machines which were used to track and process jews to their camps. It took an act of congress to shutdown trade once the war started.
So? If you look around just a little you will find that almost every major company in the US had dealings with Germany and therefore the Nazi's in the thirties. Ford and IBM are some good ones to start with if you want more information. Do you think that the idiot Moore will bring that little fact up in his bashing laughingly so-called documentary?
you are confusing two people, perhaps that is the problem. The one who surrendered DURING the war led us to buried precursor chemicals. He is the one who claimed they were destroyed only months before the war. He is not the one who was out of the "scientific wing" of the program since 1991, but still involved in the program until the mid 90's, I know who you are speaking about.
I guess the one who gave the testimony about the labs was wrong about their destruction, since we have one we can assume they were not all destroyed. Iraqi programs were higly compartmentalized, nobody knew what the others were doing or the scope and extent of the work, this is consistent in almost all interviews.
I am not disappearing. I undertand they have right now ONE team in there searching sites. They have checked just over 100 out of 2,000+. I also know how much Iraq admittedto having and how much of that is unaccounted for. I also know they will never satsify requirements of the resolutions, the retrun of the Kuwaiti POW"S was also a requirement, not going to happen now. Whether the US ever finds what is unaccounted for is irrelevant, Saddam was the only one who the burden of proof rested on, and he failed miserably.
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Again
again, people have lives.
did you get my response? Seems to me YOU can't keep things straight, that must be the problem here.
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
You are probably right, but I've never seen a link to this other scientist you keep mentioning. When I raised this question before, you responded twice with a link to the guy who dropped out years before. I heard TV rumors about someone who claimed weapons had been destroyed just before the war, but as far as I could tell, these rumors disappeared without ever being substantiated. I've never seen a published story with any details re. this other scientist; appreciate your help.
As far as I know, he never claimed the labs were destroyed, just the chemical and biological agents. Specifically, the Iraqi defector Bush & Co. quoted so much said he had personal knowledge that those NBC agents were destroyed.
You... don't... read much... do you...
I couldn't even call this an endictment of Prescott Bush, much less G. W. Bush. You're saying that a guy that owned one share of a bank that he was a director in (which doesn't mean squat) and apparently didn't touch the banking side of is a Nazi? If I have to waste my time telling you how flawed that reasoning is, then you won't understand it anyway.
I'm no great Bush-lover, I surely wouldn't use something this flawed in an effort to bash someone I did dislike (say, Hillary Clinton; the most unqualified candidate ever to win a national office... ever).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter