phillyTIM
Golden Member
- Jan 12, 2001
- 1,942
- 10
- 81
Originally posted by: freakflag
Man...what is with these miniscule timetables people have set for finding WMD's? It's ridiculous to assume we'd find anything by now. The Marines are far more interested in WINNING THE WAR than digging into every pile of sand in a country the size of California. Do you really think that Saddam has them hidden behind a door somewhere? To say that US credibility is at stake after less than a month is just silly.
wrong - if iraq was such the breeding ground for WMD's, and the US had "ROCK SOLID EVIDENCE" they were there, and the US intelligence of the past 12 years had anything to do with it, then the US sure as hell had better be able to produce some evidence NOW. SOMETHING. ANYTHING. Anything to appease those with doubts. Bush and Blair's political hides are on the line here. We were forced into this assassination attempt under the ruse of prolific WMD's...show us the money!
But now over three weeks, Bush ain't found s#it in the sham of a rape of a country. THAT is what is ridiculous.
The longer it takes to produce WMD evidence, the less credibility such evidence has. After all, things can easily be produced and created; just like that sham "evidence" that was found to be untrue in the prelude to war.
In fact, any evidence found under the US regime's total occupation of Iraq can be discounted.