Weapons search team leaving ? - Tell me this isn't a joke.

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Who? What people weren't sure? What goverments? There was a lot more than just Pentagon intelligence. Four countries invaded you know.

France, Germany, Mexico, Chile, Angola, Turkey, Russia, China. Their offical position did not state Iraq had WMD nor did it state that Iraq had no WMD.

One of the biggest criticisms of the admin. was that the reason for the war kept changing. WMD was hardly the one and only stated reason.

Wrong. The justification used by Bush to get authorization from Congress as well as the legal pretext he used to start the war was all about WMD and the threat Iraq posed to the security of the US. The same goes for the UK.
Here's Bush's first public speech about going after Iraq. See anything other than WMD for justification? Didn't think so.

So it is your contention that this administration never made mention of Saddam being a cruel dictator, his links to terrorism, never mentioned Iraq in the same sentence as 9/11, never stated he was threat to his neighbors, etc, etc. as being further or additional reasons to remove Saddam from power?
Is your memory really that bad or is it something more serious?

Could the US convince the public and the world that an attack on Iraq is legit based on Saddam being a dictator or some shady links to terrorism? No. Bush needed some legal justification for this attack.
Yes, the admin did mention Iraq and 9/11 in the same sentence, but the two had nothing to do with each other.

Calm down guys, you're going to make Ultra have an anyurism as he frantically beats his computer keys draped in nothing other than an American flag and singing Hail to the Chief
Ultra, you say four other countries invaded as well? Poland had 200 troops there, hardly a contribution, Australia had what, around 2000? And why do you think any of the 40 or so countries in the "coalition of the willing" (hahahahaha) even participated? Do you think Micronesia really cares whether Iraq is a threat to its naighbours? I don't think so. They were in it for the money. Spin it as you want Ultra, the reason given to the world was the threat posed to the world by Iraq possesing, without a doubt and with unquestionable evidence, WMD. No one would support this if it was to remove a brutal dictator, and even Iraq's neighbours, whe were supposedly threatened, did not go out of their way to support military action. The only enthusiastic supporter in that area was Israel, and it is not our responsibility to do that countries dirty work. We gave a justification, it turned out to be crap, and save some mammoth discovery, the credibility of the US has been hurt thanks to that monkey and his trainers who currently run this country. As aforementioned, Iraq + 9/11 + support from the easily manipulated masses = Anything the admin wants. Read Carbonyl and my signature, its so appropriate to these times that it is scary.

Your state of oligophrenia is becoming more advanced. I am not trying to spin anything. I am simply refuting what has been posted here. Were there any countries out there who were saying that Iraq did not have WMD? No. Did our admin. use more than one reason for justifying the war with Iraq? Yes. Did we act alone? No. You can continue to change the subject or ask corrollary questions all you want. I don't really care. What I have stated is fact which cannot be said for every post in this thread.

You're dismissed.

Ooooooooooohh oligophrenia, look who's using the big words. How long did it take you to look that one up? Too cool just to say mental retardation? You cannot respond without a personal attack can you tough guy? My point is that our MAIN reason has so far been a total sham. You cannot stop your rah rah rah America BS long enough to admit it. And I pointed out that the so called support we got from the "coalition of the willing" was another total joke, something else you cannot admit. Both of which are facts. You cannot answer my "corrollary" questions because it would debunk your argument. Only England really provided anything substantial to the invasion. What did the other forty + do? Face it, most of the world, including Kuwait and SA, who were invaded or threatened by Saddam refused to endorse, so no one is going to settle for the "other reasons" outlined by the admin. Did our administration say anything else was more important than WMD? NO. Try this one: Your irrational bellicism is an obvious avowal to your benightedness. But oh no, I'm dismissed, so never mind. Jackass.

Coalition of the willing (taken from White House website, note how the US is included in this list):

Afghanistan (Thank you Mr. Karzai, your Ford Mustang and Girls Gone Wild DVD are in the mail)
Albania
Angola
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy (Vast mojority of population opposed)
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau (Oh my god! Palau! Now we're talking)
Panama
Philippines
Poland (You have our blessing and our 200 soldiers, cheers)
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain (Vast mojority of population opposed)
Tonga
Turkey (You can't use our land, and we want $26bil., but yeah, you got our support)
Uganda
Ukraine
United Kingdom
United States (Really??!!!)
Uzbekistan

 

[cpumaster]

Originally posted by: ncircle

Originally posted by: Fencer128

The hunt will continue under a new Iraq Survey Group, which the Bush administration has said is a larger team. But the organizers are drawing down their weapons staffs for lack of work, and adding expertise for other missions

So not all is as the title suggests....

BTW

i will also add that i do not feel the united states has to justify anything to the UN. or other countries.
i fully support the United States doing what is in the best interest of the United States.

That's fine in principle - but when the US's actions start to have big impacts on other countries - and not always positive - that arguement doesn't hold out. It argues well for this scenario but is by no means a universally good idea! Too much like "might is right".


Cheers,

Andy

right, is a matter of perspective in any conflict.
might, determines the outcome.

you wouldn't have problem with China attacking Taiwan then? or China in Tibet? or Serbian killing the people in Kosovo, since they have the might, it's ok

 

[cpumaster]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
Here's a question. Before the war who, besides Iraq and Scott Ritter, was saying that Iraq did not have WMD?


Czar if you want to be a mod go talk to them about it otherwise shut up.

Ultra Quiet you're an a$shole, please go away....

 

[bigcfromcinci]

oops..wrong forum...I don't need an asswippin

cheers!

 

[bigcfromcinci]

.

 

[Phuz]

Or is reading comprehension not tought in Canada where you got your education?

Taught, maybe?

 

[UltraQuiet]

LilBlingBlingDingDing - thanks for proving my point. 'preciate it.

cpumaster - same comment made to czar goes to you. Get over it.

 

[Alistar7]

U.S. Weapons Hunters Hindered in Iraq

How about a list of countries opposed to the war that DID not have huge oil deals with Saddam or made illegal arms sales?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Alistar7, did you actually read the link you posted? It makes the US seem at best grossly unprepared and at worst bungling idiots. Regardless, the link has little bearing on the hypocrisy of war opponents. It has great bearing on the apparent hypocrisy of the war proponents.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
LilBlingBlingDingDing - thanks for proving my point. 'preciate it.

cpumaster - same comment made to czar goes to you. Get over it.

No Ultra, thanks for proving mine, I think even people who share your views can agree that you have serious issues.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
LilBlingBlingDingDing - thanks for proving my point. 'preciate it.

cpumaster - same comment made to czar goes to you. Get over it.

No Ultra, thanks for proving mine, I think even people who share your views can agree that you have serious issues.

Whatever you say college girl. Your public display of your ignorance continues.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet


Were there any countries out there who were saying that Iraq did not have WMD?

Bush's proof of WMDs has been questioned and show to be false since the beginning.

Did our admin. use more than one reason for justifying the war with Iraq? Yes.

Of course, if one startts getting too much attention switch to another. Just another transparent gimmick of the administration.

[/quote]
Did we act alone? No. [/quote]

The fact the we coerced some other countries into this mess has nothing to do with it. This was obviously Bush's war.

 

[LilBlinbBlahIce]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
LilBlingBlingDingDing - thanks for proving my point. 'preciate it.

cpumaster - same comment made to czar goes to you. Get over it.

No Ultra, thanks for proving mine, I think even people who share your views can agree that you have serious issues.

Whatever you say college girl. Your public display of your ignorance continues.

I like the way UQ thinks that every single person on this planet who does not agree with his country bumpkin point of view is "an ignorant college girl", without any evidence to back up his charge (don't bother trying to prove me wrong now, I don't really care, nor does anyone else in this forum). It does wonders to prove what a cosmopolitan, informed and urbane gentlemen he really is. From this point on, I invite anyone else who is sick and tired of him wasting thread space to join me in compeltely ignoring him and not to respond to any of his pointless posts. Don't start crying now UQ, I'm sure other hard core individuals like Dari etc. will give you a shoulder to lean on and vent your frustrations.

 

[ConclamoLudus]

Perhaps we were wrong. Perhaps there are no WMD's left anymore. What does this mean? Was it outdated or bad intelligence reports that led us to believe so, or was it a big lie that Bush used to get rid of Hussein? You decide I guess.

So WHAT IF the weapons were destroyed. We obviously thought there were weapons there. Who do you blame for this. Do you blame a despotic ruler for not complying peacefully to the rules and regulations that were laid out for disarmament (Hussein)? Or do you blame someone who may have been taking advantage of it (Bush)? I can tell you who I think is a worse person, and I'm sure plenty would disagree, but I doubt the majority. Hussein is no longer a burden or a threat of any kind to the Middle East. Sadly Saddam could have stopped this war on more than one occasion (I'm sure some will defend him on this though.) Its unfortunate that Hussein was more worried about his ego than the citizens of his country.

IF (and I mean IF) we have made this mistake I really hope that it isn't good news for anybody. Nobody should feel vindicated for this, because this mistake has the potential to smear any diplomatic relations with the US and the Middle East. It would be a smear on America and not just the Republicans or the Bush Administration. Nobody should be happy about this. It would be bad news to all involved if we don't recover some weapons. I for one take a little vindication that no matter what the Iraqi people will have a much stronger chance of success in the pursuit of happiness.

Some will gloat at any information that discredits Bush but to the Middle East and Terrorists and probably World Opinion this will discredit the US more than just Bush.

I still believe they'll find something, but I think it is far too late for those who don't want them to find something to believe that it would be a legitimate find. There will always be people (and media) who will discredit anything that is given out by an elected official that they don't like, and there will always be people (and media) that will take what their elected official says as gold. The truth takes time to filter through both of those groups. A lot of time unfortunately.

Who do you blame? Bush or Hussein?

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet

Originally posted by: LilBlinbBlahIce

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
LilBlingBlingDingDing - thanks for proving my point. 'preciate it.

cpumaster - same comment made to czar goes to you. Get over it.

No Ultra, thanks for proving mine, I think even people who share your views can agree that you have serious issues.

Whatever you say college girl. Your public display of your ignorance continues.

I like the way UQ thinks that every single person on this planet who does not agree with his country bumpkin point of view is "an ignorant college girl", without any evidence to back up his charge (don't bother trying to prove me wrong now, I don't really care, nor does anyone else in this forum). It does wonders to prove what a cosmopolitan, informed and urbane gentlemen he really is. From this point on, I invite anyone else who is sick and tired of him wasting thread space to join me in compeltely ignoring him and not to respond to any of his pointless posts. Don't start crying now UQ, I'm sure other hard core individuals like Dari etc. will give you a shoulder to lean on and vent your frustrations.

If you think that anything a useless, ignorant, insignificant little turd like you thinks, says or does affects me in any way you are sadly mistaken. I would prefer that someone with your inability to read or comprehend plain English ignore me. Your responses are a monumental waste of bandwith and the time it takes to read them.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

ConclamoLudus, why do you think many of us protested at home and in the streets (I was not in SF) so much. If Bush/Blair/Powell had presented the best evidence then their case did not hold water. Yes, I'm sure some will gloat if significant WMD is not found in Iraq in the coming months. But we deserve the ridicule. Our country . . . of the people, for the people, by the people . . . cannot claim we were taken for a ride. Many people got out and pushed when the prelude to war was losing steam and then once the ball was rolling we were all on board. Now that it's over we can hardly contain our glee in patting ourselves on the back for a job well done.

Do you see 24hr coverage of abominable hospital conditions, lack of potable water, poor electrical service, and dwindling food stocks? The American media (and public) don't give a poop. Many areas outside Baghdad resemble the West Bank, Gaza, and dare I say Afghanistan. And what has the NEW suffering of Iraqi people bought . . . Halliburton, Bechtel contracts AND clerics ruling much of Iraq.

 

[Alistar7]

What about the drawings they submitted to the UN that match indentically mobile biological weapons labs they found?

What about the terrorist camp that was described as a training center for WMD, we found that with WMD recipes and dispersion manuals.

Not all the evidence is even in, and there is far more to support their claims than disprove them.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Oh I believe the mobile weapons facility is real. I just deny it was justification for an invasion. Truth be told if IAEA could have refuted Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld claims last summer that Iraq was on the cusp of having a nuke . . . 1441 would have NEVER passed the UN. In the absence of 1441, Bush would have fallen back on the original Gulf Conflict resolutions that scarcely hold water in justifying renewed military aggression against Iraq.

Now if Bush had just tried really really hard to kill Saddam without invading or dropping thousands of munitions. . . I'm sure the vast majority of people NOT living in Iraq would have "seen no evil, hear no evil, speak a little evil but secretly say kill the bastard".

 

[Alistar7]

Eight admitted assasination attempts, why do you think Saddam was so paranoid.

I know you don't think it's a pressing issue, but part of the original requirements was the rreturn of the hundreds of Kuwaiti POW's, never word about them again. The people of Kuwait feel this was an important aspect of compliance and any arguements stating their was full compliance would not hold water in light of the complete lack of information regarding their people. They may have foudn the bodies though....

Remember the other little thing he told us when he described the mobile labs? He worked in one, rpoducing anthrax and botulism, way past 1991....

 

[LunarRay]

The craziest thing occured to me as I read the last few posts...

Why not have made Saddam a friend... why kill him... shower him and his ego with what he needs and get inside his head.... lead him to where we want him and his cohorts to go... then when we have his confidence.... we use him to end the terrorism... he'd be our friend again.. and willing to have center stage and all.. bribe him give him Kuwait in time if it gets him sorted out to our way of thinking... use the best weapon of all against him.... him!