Saddam said no WMD, Bush/Blair said WMD

[Sultan]

So now should we not have a UN Resolution authorising force against nations who invaded a sovereign nation which is a member of the UN after they had declared that they did not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction in the report they submitted to UN earlier last year?

Are all the US government supporters (not Bush supporters) now turn their tails and claim this to be a moral war? I think those 9/11 hijackers had the same idea, that their cause was moral. They murdered 3000 innocent people. At last count, I believe the Iraq war had over 13000 fatalities.

And as a reminder to the many who were maimed, do a google on Ali who lost both his arms.

Who are the terrorists now?

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: Sultan
"...I think those 9/11 hijackers had the same idea, that their cause was moral. They murdered 3000 innocent people. At last count, I believe the Iraq war had over 13000 fatalities.

Maybe they figured two wrongs = a right?

How many of those 13,000 fatalities were from Saddam's mass graves?

 

[Sultan]

None of these 13000 were from Saddam's mass graves. Link

None of these 604 either were from Saddam's mass graves. Link

Here is another mass grave: Link
And another: Link2
And another: Link3

Dont go off topic brother. Last time I heard the UN Council debating for War, the US was insisting Saddam's Iraq was an imminent threat. I didnt hear any mention of "oh it is morally right to lie to remove Saddam" and murder 13000 people in the process, besides flattening (what was left of) the infrastructure.

For God's sake's people, how can you even talk about morals when this president (and others before him) have to LIE!!! If you cant be moral enough to SPEAK the truth, then how can you have the crown of morality to invade another country???

 

[gsaldivar]

LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

 

[Moonbeam]

We had the Project for a New American Century waiting for an excuse to happen and along came 9/11. We had our psycho-killers all in the right positions to move Penoccio's mouth to say nucular threat, mushroom omelets and eggs to break, and Americans were off on a nose growing killing spree. Now the chickens have come home to roost and along comes bird flu. Can't you just shut up or must we slaughter our chicken-hawks. You should understand we are a deeply frustrated people who watch television ads. We lust for our neighbors model and might get fired tomorrow. It's tense being an American and there lots of horrible pressure. Please forgive us our killing spree. It feels good in the night to grab hold of our might and give it to the rest of the world. Lots of people will die and some may cry, but by golly it makes us feel righteous. Back in gulf war days and oil fire haze we promised Iraq a revolution. So the Iraqis took up arms and marched into those mass graves while we tittered and said, oops we're sorry, we'll get your oil later.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

What is the arithmetic for McNamara?

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

so its time for the US and do the "moraly right thing to do" and invade alot of African countries which are all much much worse set than Iraq ever was when it comes to doing the moraly right thing to do

 

[Sultan]

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

I didnt hear Bush say that during the UN Debate. Nor in the State of the Union Address. Apparently, neither China, nor France, nor Germany, nor Russia held your opinion.

You people will come up with ANY excuse to justify the war. First the loud mouthed rant about UN resolutions not being followed. Which apparently were since Iraq does not possess any WMD, and as it said in its report, it had destroyed what was there. Next the rant of non-cooperation with the UN Inspection Team when Hans Blix himself said he and his team needed more time. Then the rant about WMD, which arent there.

And now gsaldivar comes up with another brilliant one. Ever thought that in other parts of the world Bush is seen as a Weapon of Mass Destruction? And since no other nation can match the US in its military strength, individuals will now more than ever target American civilians.

Dont give me those numbers. This country itself betrayed the Shias. This country itself provided the resources for Saddam to gas the Kurds. And now this country is responsible for 13000 more deaths. You're just cow dung.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

Why didn't the Dub use those facts to try and garner support for the invasion instead of Misleading the American Public on how Hussien was a threat to the USA because of vast Stockpiles of WMDs, a Nuclear Weapons Program and alleged ties with Al Qaeda? Because if he would have tried the American Public would have told him to stick his war against Iraq up his ass and instead concentrate on the war on Terrorism, especially in Afghanistan!

 

[beyoku]

is there a way that we know a mass grave is not a cemetary. Or casualties from the iran/iraq war - Loads of people died. This is the first thing i thought of when the term mass grave all of a sudden popped up. Has anybody else thought of this?

 

[Nietzscheusw]

This war was a mafia war. One mafia against another.
One bigger mafia taking total control of a smaller mafia with which it previously had business ties.
Mafias rule the world.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

I always find "talking points" interesting. When did this one evolve? Did it exist before the war . . . or did it gain providence as the search for WMD started looking shaky in the summer?

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

I always find "talking points" interesting. When did this one evolve? Did it exist before the war . . . or did it gain providence as the search for WMD started looking shaky in the summer?

It's actually from Joe Liebermann's new "tough foreign policy" image:

link 1

link 2 (9th paragraph)

link 3 (5th paragraph)

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: beyoku
is there a way that we know a mass grave is not a cemetary. Or casualties from the iran/iraq war - Loads of people died. This is the first thing i thought of when the term mass grave all of a sudden popped up. Has anybody else thought of this?

Usually, bodies in a cemetary don't have missing digits/limbs and/or holes in the back of the skull...

Also, it's rather difficult for the populations of entire villages to succumb to natural causes all at the same time.

 

[cumhail]

My question (though truth be told, I already know the answer) is... Will Bill O'reilly apologize and stop trusting Bush now?

"If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?"
--Bill O'reilly in a March 18, 2003 interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

You do realize all of those quotes refer to the same Lieberman statement given less than a week ago? So your parry did not work . . . the notion that Saddam IS/WAS a WMD is not new. I'm perfectly satisfied to give Lieberman credit if he coined the phrase much earlier. Otherwise, my query still stands . . .

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
You do realize all of those quotes refer to the same Lieberman statement given less than a week ago? So your parry did not work . . . the notion that Saddam IS/WAS a WMD is not new. I'm perfectly satisfied to give Lieberman credit if he coined the phrase much earlier. Otherwise, my query still stands . . .

Yes, I did notice that. It's also pretty obvious to me that it's not a new notion.

I wasn't trying to "parry" you - I was trying to help you out. You said you were interested in how "talking points" evolve. I thought you would also find those links of interest.

But, I'm not going to go hunting for you to find out who said it first... try Google - I hear it works great.

Regardless of who said it first -

It was valid to say then, and it remains valid to say now.........

Saddam Hussein has done more damage and killing in Iraq than we ever have.

 

[LongCoolMother]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

Why didn't the Dub use those facts to try and garner support for the invasion instead of Misleading the American Public on how Hussien was a threat to the USA because of vast Stockpiles of WMDs, a Nuclear Weapons Program and alleged ties with Al Qaeda? Because if he would have tried the American Public would have told him to stick his war against Iraq up his ass and instead concentrate on the war on Terrorism, especially in Afghanistan!

reddawn is right. and no one dares answer him because they cant. why didnt te president straight up tell the american people this? maybe then there would be support for the war? why did he have to LIE that there were stockpiles of WMD? no one here claims it isnt good to remove a tyrant from power. no one argues that, everyone argues the fact that that is NOT the reason given by the bush administration to go to war. the reason given was WMD, and NOT anything else, and that was a direct LIE.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: cumhail
My question (though truth be told, I already know the answer) is... Will Bill O'reilly apologize and stop trusting Bush now?

"If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?"
--Bill O'reilly in a March 18, 2003 interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."

Nice find. But you know O'Reilly will say that the fact that no WMD have been found doesn't mean that Iraq is clean.

I'm still going to send it off to O'Reilly though.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LongCoolMother

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
LOL.... I'm off topic???

I thought we were talking about IRAQ, not Cameroon, Rwanda and Somaila....!

Saddam Hussein IS a weapon of mass destruction.

Maybe they don't teach arithmetic at the training camp..... I'll help you count......

100,000 Iraqi Kurds killed by Saddam Hussein

As many as 300,000 dead in over 250 mass graves in Iraq!

Why didn't the Dub use those facts to try and garner support for the invasion instead of Misleading the American Public on how Hussien was a threat to the USA because of vast Stockpiles of WMDs, a Nuclear Weapons Program and alleged ties with Al Qaeda? Because if he would have tried the American Public would have told him to stick his war against Iraq up his ass and instead concentrate on the war on Terrorism, especially in Afghanistan!

reddawn is right. and no one dares answer him because they cant. why didnt te president straight up tell the american people this? maybe then there would be support for the war? why did he have to LIE that there were stockpiles of WMD? no one here claims it isnt good to remove a tyrant from power. no one argues that, everyone argues the fact that that is NOT the reason given by the bush administration to go to war. the reason given was WMD, and NOT anything else, and that was a direct LIE.

Ooops - how quickly people forget.
"The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.

We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)" - 2003 SoTU.

Yeah, guess Bush never mentioned anything but WMDs

It's a nice chant and all but entirely false to say that "the reason given was WMD, and NOT anything else".
Oh, and your assertion that Bush "claimed" stockpiles is shakey at best. If you would have read his statements ont he matter he asserted that "our intelligence...", or "the XXX says..." - But that too is a nice attempt at trying to make it seem Bush made things up - but again is false.

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Saddam Hussein has done more damage and killing in Iraq than we ever have.

You know you are in trouble when the comparison becomes US actions in Iraq vs Saddam's actions in Iraq. I hear Iranians have done less damage and killing in Iraq as well.

I will give you the benefit of a doubt that you aren't so clueless to believe I was talking about Lieberman or the evolution of talking points in the abstract. Point of fact it was clearly nukes, nukes, nukes, mushroom cloud, Saddam, Al Qaeda, 9-11, 9-11, Saddam . . . which morphed into WMD, Saddam, Saddam, 9-11, 9-11, Al Qaeda, Saddam . . . then after the war it became 9-11, WMD programs, Saddam, Al-Qaeda . . . and now it's become Saddam, WMD program activities and its corollary Saddam IS a WMD. Granted the Bushies have been attempting to demonize Saddam for some time . . . it's a shame they didn't listen when AI and HRW when they were chastising the US for associating with Saddam's regime in the past.

 

[Gaard]

More reasons were given, perhaps 'mentioned' would be a better word, but there remains two facts...

1) WMD was, BY FAR, the primary reason given for this war.
2) Without the threat of WMD (real or perceived) we wouldn't have gone to war.

Isn't it a kind of comical to say that "So what if the primary reason given was wrong? The secondary reason (an 'eventuality' if you believe Dari) is enough to justify this war" when, if not for the primary reason given, we wouldn't have been there in the first place?

Moonbeam posted a statement yesterday that sums it up nicely. "We did the right thing, according to Bush,but he had to lie to do it." Now, whether you believe we were lied to or not, if the right thing to do (oust Saddam) was enough to justify this war, why go for anythiong else?

Some people (and we all know who) claim it was an automatic authorization for us (or any member of the UNSC) to wage war with Iraq. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim this Article 51. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim 1441 gave us the right. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim we went in to oust an evil dictator. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

 

[wkabel23]

Originally posted by: Gaard
More reasons were given, perhaps 'mentioned' would be a better word, but there remains two facts...

1) WMD was, BY FAR, the primary reason given for this war.
2) Without the threat of WMD (real or perceived) we wouldn't have gone to war.

Isn't it a kind of comical to say that "So what if the primary reason given was wrong? The secondary reason (an 'eventuality' if you believe Dari) is enough to justify this war" when, if not for the primary reason given, we wouldn't have been there in the first place?

Moonbeam posted a statement yesterday that sums it up nicely. "We did the right thing, according to Bush,but he had to lie to do it." Now, whether you believe we were lied to or not, if the right thing to do (oust Saddam) was enough to justify this war, why go for anythiong else?

Some people (and we all know who) claim it was an automatic authorization for us (or any member of the UNSC) to wage war with Iraq. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim this Article 51. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim 1441 gave us the right. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

Some people claim we went in to oust an evil dictator. If this is so, why did we spend so much time looking for other reasons?

 

[DT4K]

Even if our intelligence was wrong about Saddam having stockpiles, it is clear to me that he was a very real threat to our safety. And I'm still wondering how we were supposed to verify the destruction of the previously known stockpiles of WMD when it is so obvious now that Saddam was continuing to violate resolutions and attempt to deceive the U.N.
Supposedly, even Saddam thought he had usable WMD's based on reports from his own scientists.


"We've shared in the classified report about two dozen major cases of where Iraq hid equipment or engaged in prohibited activities that were not permitted under the U.N. resolution," Kay said.

Kay did not reveal any bombshells about the deposed regime's weapons program but said he had enough evidence to show that Saddam had been violating U.N. disarmament resolutions up until as recently as this year, including by having very substantial chemical and biological weapons plans.

"At this point, we have found substantial evidence of an intent of senior-level Iraqi officials, including Saddam, to continue production at some future point in time of weapons of mass destruction."

"In addition to intent, we have found a large body of continuing activities and equipment that were not declared to the U.N. inspectors when they returned in November of last year," Kay

 

[Nietzscheusw]

The Pentagon should permanently invade every acre on Earth to verify there is no threat to the USA on it.
There is no other way to be safe.
Then the Moon.
Then the solar system.
Then the milky way.
Then the universe. What's this dark matter anyway?