Saddam's Philippines Terror Connection

[Genx87]

Not that he destroyed them, but merely like it seems to be the case that they were lost/destroyed in the aftermath of the first gulf war.

Before the inspectors left they had no evidence that saddam had an active wmd program or any signs that he might pick it up any time soon.

The only evidence so far gathered were the tools stored in some scientist garden and according to him Saddam was waiting for the embargo to be lifted so he could start again.

Ok but the cease fire clearly stated he needed to destroy stockpiles of WMD and provide access to the UN inspectors. He failed on both accounts. They had multiple declarations of weapons programs and stockpiles through the 1990s after they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. In 2002 I see no reason for anybody to believe Saddam didnt have WMD.

I suggest reading my link to get a better idea of what we were dealing with through the 1990s and the mindset politicians and people had in 2002. You cant apply today's knowledge to 2002 and say we were wrong in 2002. We obviously havent found anything in Iraq yet and our intel was bad on the WMD. That is my point, if we are proven false afterwards, then we are justified.

 

[Kappo]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Kappo
Well, neither, actually.
a) you really arent interested in my opinion, you are simply looking for something you can use as an opening or whatnot (ala democraticunderground.com).

b) I am an exceptionally lazy human. Its not a short answer for me.

c) what motivation do I have to appease you?

I am interested in your opinion since I have been reading some of your posts here lately and I would love to know some more about the why. Helps me understand your state of mind, so far it has been very confusing.

If you are lazy then a short version should be easy for you.

All depends on what you are here for, discuss or troll.

I discuss the topic Im in. You are trolling and going out of your way to stay OFF topic. 😉

The reason my mindset is confusing is because I dont pick a side. Liberals make me sick and conservatives piss me off.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

why do you still live in America? just curious...

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


In 2002 would anybody believe he destroyed his stockpiles without the UN forcing his hand and why would they believe that?

By 2002 the war was long over with and we should have just ignored him as he is just a bigmouth twit with no sugermomma america feeding him anymore.

Based on what? Knowledge from 2006?

You can't be the world police, and if you try you are going to make more enemies then friends in the long run, american values do not fit in everywhere.

We have been wiping the ass of the world since 1945, I dont see it ending anytime soon.

Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

Our economic power allowed us to help the rest of the world rebuild. And without our help all of Europe would have fallen under communist control along with the korean peninsula, Taiwan, and probably major parts of our hemisphere.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

why do you still live in America? just curious...

Why do you choose to overlook realities of how a superpower works?

Do you not care to better our country? You have the love of a abused spouse. Seek help.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

why do you still live in America? just curious...

Why do you choose to overlook realities of how a superpower works?

Do you not care to better our country?

you didn't answer my question. if/when you do, I'll address yours.

I just don't understand why you stay here since you consider America the most evil country in the world. You basically said above that we have done nothing positive since 1945, and that everything we do is evil and turns to sh*t. So this begs the question, why do you stay?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


In 2002 would anybody believe he destroyed his stockpiles without the UN forcing his hand and why would they believe that?

By 2002 the war was long over with and we should have just ignored him as he is just a bigmouth twit with no sugermomma america feeding him anymore.

Based on what? Knowledge from 2006?

You can't be the world police, and if you try you are going to make more enemies then friends in the long run, american values do not fit in everywhere.

We have been wiping the ass of the world since 1945, I dont see it ending anytime soon.

Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

Our economic power allowed us to help the rest of the world rebuild. And without our help all of Europe would have fallen under communist control along with the korean peninsula, Taiwan, and probably major parts of our hemisphere.

Oh, you mean our allies? Yeah, letting hitler run rampant across europe did get them pretty mad, good thing we popped in to save what was left (for our own interests) from our ally.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

why do you still live in America? just curious...

Why do you choose to overlook realities of how a superpower works?

Do you not care to better our country?

you didn't answer my question. if/when you do, I'll address yours.

I just don't understand why you stay here since you consider America the most evil country in the world. You basically said above that we have done nothing positive since 1945, and that everything we do is evil and turns to sh*t. So this begs the question, why do you stay?

I never said anything about evil, you did. Does it make you feel evil what I say?

Countries are not living entities they are a product of history. Thus to say one is inherently evil without looking at the big picture is quite childish.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

why do you still live in America? just curious...

Why do you choose to overlook realities of how a superpower works?

Do you not care to better our country?

you didn't answer my question. if/when you do, I'll address yours.

I just don't understand why you stay here since you consider America the most evil country in the world. You basically said above that we have done nothing positive since 1945, and that everything we do is evil and turns to sh*t. So this begs the question, why do you stay?

I bet he doesn't think Americans are evil, just those in power. If he believes that to be true then it's his duty as an American to speak out against them even if those like you feel it's enough to question his patriotism.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


In 2002 would anybody believe he destroyed his stockpiles without the UN forcing his hand and why would they believe that?

By 2002 the war was long over with and we should have just ignored him as he is just a bigmouth twit with no sugermomma america feeding him anymore.

Based on what? Knowledge from 2006?

You can't be the world police, and if you try you are going to make more enemies then friends in the long run, american values do not fit in everywhere.

We have been wiping the ass of the world since 1945, I dont see it ending anytime soon.

Wrong, we have been using the world as our toilet paper since far before 1945 seeing fit to wipe where is convienent to our interests.

We just happened to be lucky enough to be the only major power not bombed into rubble and used that to take advantage.

Our economic power allowed us to help the rest of the world rebuild. And without our help all of Europe would have fallen under communist control along with the korean peninsula, Taiwan, and probably major parts of our hemisphere.

Oh, you mean our allies? Yeah, letting hitler run rampant across europe did get them pretty mad, good thing we popped in to save what was left (for our own interests) from our ally.

Oh are you suggesting we should have pre-emptively invaded Germany without the Germans causing harm to us or being an immediate threat?

The webs we weave.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Not that he destroyed them, but merely like it seems to be the case that they were lost/destroyed in the aftermath of the first gulf war.

Before the inspectors left they had no evidence that saddam had an active wmd program or any signs that he might pick it up any time soon.

The only evidence so far gathered were the tools stored in some scientist garden and according to him Saddam was waiting for the embargo to be lifted so he could start again.

Ok but the cease fire clearly stated he needed to destroy stockpiles of WMD and provide access to the UN inspectors. He failed on both accounts. They had multiple declarations of weapons programs and stockpiles through the 1990s after they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. In 2002 I see no reason for anybody to believe Saddam didnt have WMD.

I suggest reading my link to get a better idea of what we were dealing with through the 1990s and the mindset politicians and people had in 2002. You cant apply today's knowledge to 2002 and say we were wrong in 2002. We obviously havent found anything in Iraq yet and our intel was bad on the WMD. That is my point, if we are proven false afterwards, then we are justified.

He did the first part, the UN inspectors destroyed the rest of his stockpiles in the aftermath, that was their job for the first few years. After years of the inspectors walking all over the country finding nothing Saddam started to limit their access which was the reason why they left.

Throughout the inspection period people actually belived he still was hiding something but no one had any facts regarding that matter. On that very belive the war was waged but only because the US said it had facts.. when they had none.

You are still not justified even if the US does find some evidence because the evidence presented and used as a reason has all been found majorily flawed. This is the same as if the Police would use bogus evidence to raid and arrest a suspect, find nothing. But many months or years afterwards they find evidence. Sure yes, the suspect is guilty but the Police would be guilty as well.

But ultimatly how it sets in the public, in the politicians it all depends on what evidence could be found. If its directly related to the evidence the US presented then it will go mostly as justified, but if it is unrelated to the evidence presented then the justification is still not there.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87


Oh are you suggesting we should have pre-emptively invaded Germany without the Germans causing harm to us or being an immediate threat?

The webs we weave.

Never said that at all, but we did not step in until the war was tidily wrapped up for us (read: we had no other choice unless we wanted to be isolated) and we act like we actually took a major part in germanys downfall, instead of who actually won that war in europe.

This is my opinion only: I do NOT think the european war in WW2 was a victory for america, it was actually a pretty sore loss considering how far we let our "allies" enslave a good part of eastern europe for decades afterword.

Hitler and stalin both blanketed a good part of europe in totalitarism.

And rebuilding europe was not wholly done out of goodwill, it would have been foolish to let it rot seeing as how stalin was ready to finish it off any time.

A good example of how america handled this before is to look at how we left europe after treaty of versailles. after ww2 we HAD to protect our interests once again.

I am not saying we are evil, but to think we just did it for pure love of france and friends (lol look at what americans think o them now) is a bit rose colored goggles.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


Oh are you suggesting we should have pre-emptively invaded Germany without the Germans causing harm to us or being an immediate threat?

The webs we weave.

Never said that at all, but we did not step in until the war was tidily wrapped up for us and we act like we actually took a major part in germanys downfall, instead of who actually won that war in europe.

Obviously you are not a fan of history.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Kappo

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Kappo
Well, neither, actually.
a) you really arent interested in my opinion, you are simply looking for something you can use as an opening or whatnot (ala democraticunderground.com).

b) I am an exceptionally lazy human. Its not a short answer for me.

c) what motivation do I have to appease you?

I am interested in your opinion since I have been reading some of your posts here lately and I would love to know some more about the why. Helps me understand your state of mind, so far it has been very confusing.

If you are lazy then a short version should be easy for you.

All depends on what you are here for, discuss or troll.

I discuss the topic Im in. You are trolling and going out of your way to stay OFF topic. 😉

The reason my mindset is confusing is because I dont pick a side. Liberals make me sick and conservatives piss me off.

hehe, but you brought this in this topic, so its not off topic
"Tons of terrorists in one place outside of the US"

so I ask you who are you talking about? why are they there? and why did they become terrorists?

But that seems to be the case with you, yes, dont exactly pick a side, which is good.

 

[Genx87]

He did the first part, the UN inspectors destroyed the rest of his stockpiles in the aftermath, that was their job for the first few years. After years of the inspectors walking all over the country finding nothing Saddam started to limit their access which was the reason why they left.

Throughout the inspection period people actually belived he still was hiding something but no one had any facts regarding that matter. On that very belive the war was waged but only because the US said it had facts.. when they had none.

You are still not justified even if the US does find some evidence because the evidence presented and used as a reason has all been found majorily flawed. This is the same as if the Police would use bogus evidence to raid and arrest a suspect, find nothing. But many months or years afterwards they find evidence. Sure yes, the suspect is guilty but the Police would be guilty as well.

But ultimatly how it sets in the public, in the politicians it all depends on what evidence could be found. If its directly related to the evidence the US presented then it will go mostly as justified, but if it is unrelated to the evidence presented then the justification is still not there.

There is still about 400 tons of mustard gas and 20-80 tons of VX unaccounted for. He didnt provide proof of destruction on this and kicking UN inspectors out in 1998 voided the other part of the ceasefire that mandated unrestricted access. Something he never complied with but really didnt comply when booting them out of the country.

And I am not arguing the evidence we find will justify our invasion. I am arguing the evidence we had in 2002 does. Saddam didnt comply, the simple fact is in 1998 when he kicked UN inspectors out he should have been removed from power as he violated the ceasefire agreement. But the UN was as usual ineffective with dealing with the situation.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87


Oh are you suggesting we should have pre-emptively invaded Germany without the Germans causing harm to us or being an immediate threat?

The webs we weave.

Never said that at all, but we did not step in until the war was tidily wrapped up for us (read: we had no other choice unless we wanted to be isolated) and we act like we actually took a major part in germanys downfall, instead of who actually won that war in europe.

Then how do you think we could have got involved and not let Hitler run rampant?

This is my opinion only: I do NOT think the european war in WW2 was a victory for america, it was actually a pretty sore loss considering how far we let our "allies" enslave a good part of eastern europe for decades afterword.

I can agree with you that our lack of ambition to force the Soviets hands in Eastern Europe was a travesty. Eastern Europe went from one brutal ideology to another.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

Huh?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

In 41/42?? I think not.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

Huh?

Here is just one little tidbit from ww2 history about americas attitude toward a fascist run france.

After Germany invaded most of Europe during World War II, the islands were controlled by Vichy France. On Christmas Eve 1941, Free French forces led by Rear-Admiral Émile Muselier liberated the islands on behalf of Charles de Gaulle. Saint-Pierre and Miquelon became the focus of a serious rift between Free French forces and the United States Department of State, which was courting Vichy France and threatened to send ships to take the islands back.


The free french forces were hindered by america over and over in a lot of ways, they say the army didnt even like the fact that du galle was allowed to march back into paris when we oh so kindly "liberated" france from the nazis.


There is a lot more to US policy back then then just "we saved frances azz!"

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

In 41/42?? I think not.

Maybe he meant Soviet Tanks hauling ass in reverse in the Ukraine and Russia?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

In 41/42?? I think not.

Maybe he meant Soviet Tanks hauling ass in reverse in the Ukraine and Russia?

Note the "not until" as in 1944 on I guess I should have used dates. And yes, I was reffering to a westwardly direction.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Genx87

He did the first part, the UN inspectors destroyed the rest of his stockpiles in the aftermath, that was their job for the first few years. After years of the inspectors walking all over the country finding nothing Saddam started to limit their access which was the reason why they left.

Throughout the inspection period people actually belived he still was hiding something but no one had any facts regarding that matter. On that very belive the war was waged but only because the US said it had facts.. when they had none.

You are still not justified even if the US does find some evidence because the evidence presented and used as a reason has all been found majorily flawed. This is the same as if the Police would use bogus evidence to raid and arrest a suspect, find nothing. But many months or years afterwards they find evidence. Sure yes, the suspect is guilty but the Police would be guilty as well.

But ultimatly how it sets in the public, in the politicians it all depends on what evidence could be found. If its directly related to the evidence the US presented then it will go mostly as justified, but if it is unrelated to the evidence presented then the justification is still not there.

There is still about 400 tons of mustard gas and 20-80 tons of VX unaccounted for. He didnt provide proof of destruction on this and kicking UN inspectors out in 1998 voided the other part of the ceasefire that mandated unrestricted access. Something he never complied with but really didnt comply when booting them out of the country.

And I am not arguing the evidence we find will justify our invasion. I am arguing the evidence we had in 2002 does. Saddam didnt comply, the simple fact is in 1998 when he kicked UN inspectors out he should have been removed from power as he violated the ceasefire agreement. But the UN was as usual ineffective with dealing with the situation.

He couldnt provide that proof because he had none. And he did not kick them out, the inspectors left because Saddam had not been giving them full access, few hours after the US started airstrikes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167933.stm

What evidence did we have in 2002? that he didnt allow the inspectors full acess? Shortly before the war Saddam did allow them back in with full access.

He might have violated the agreement, but it should have been up to the security council to declare if it was broken or not.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

In 41/42?? I think not.

Maybe he meant Soviet Tanks hauling ass in reverse in the Ukraine and Russia?

Note the "not until" as in 1944 on I guess I should have used dates. And yes, I was reffering to a westwardly direction.

The Nazis invaded Vichy territory in Nov of 1942.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Obviously you are not a fan of history.

We didnt exactly rally behind Du Galle and even let vichy pretty much take over south france as a slap in the face to him. Not until it was looking very grim with soviet tanks hauling azz across the continent.

In 41/42?? I think not.

Maybe he meant Soviet Tanks hauling ass in reverse in the Ukraine and Russia?

Note the "not until" as in 1944 on I guess I should have used dates. And yes, I was reffering to a westwardly direction.

The Nazis invaded Vichy territory in Nov of 1942.

And your point? I was talking more about free frech forces and how america dealt with them, including the rump state known as vichy.

WTB ww2 debating forums where we can all go into more detail 😉