Yes, you and Bush have said that before but they are no where to be found.
Doesn't matter. They had them, it has not been proven they were destroyed, therefore they continued to be a threat.
Read the reports of the weapons inspectors carefully. In 1998, they supposed that Saddam still had weapons based on records maintained by Saddam. However, there was a caveat.....they were the first to admit that Saddam's records were poor. By 1998, they were sure they had gotten at least 95% or more of Saddam's WMD.
They went back in 2002 to make sure they got 100% of them. But Bush/Blair would not let them finish......I suspect because they did not want it proven that Saddams' WMD were gone. The WH's plan was to use that possibility as the ultimate reason for attacking Iraq.
I am surprised a self acknowledged smart guy like you didn't see through that charade.
No, it doesn't because they are non existent.
No, they aren't "nonexistent". They're missing in action.
It was one thought they were MIA but no one was sure.....it was no more than supposition. That's why the UN inspectors went back into Iraq in 2002.
They cold be in the hands of Al Qaeda,
Not likely.........there were little if any ties between al Qaeda and Saddam. Another Bush lie exposed.
they could be in Syria,
Yeah, just like the former Iraqi leaders. How many have turned up in Syria? How many......and we were threatening to attack them over that issue. Another Bush lie exposed.
or they could have been destroyed.
Then that made our attack on Iraq superfluous. Lives have been lost and billions have been spent so that the Iraqi civilians can march against us and attack our troops. Brilliant, just brilliant......no wonder you think Bush is masterful. This whole war was a brilliant move if you were an Iraqi sympathesizer.........as for the ave. American Joe, its shit. Do you think Bush was an Iraqi in another life?
But we knew they existed, and to that extent they continue to be a potential threat.
Da nile, da nile, da nile......when do you think you will ever leave that state?
Why do you continue to ignore that at best they manipulated the info and at worst outright lied?
I don't think there is evidence anyone "lied". I have no problem, if as a strong leader, Bush needed to spin the available information a particular way to accomplish his objectives, that's fine.
Finally, the truth about who you are comes out. And you wonder why people call neocons fascist. You do get it now, don't you?
Bottom line: I find it acceptable for Bush to spin this information to bring the public along, even though I would have objected had Clinton done the same thing. Not for political reasons, but for the reasons I've mentioned.
You're very sick!
I have a feeling a lot of people see it the same way.
I hope not because then its very likely this country is doomed.
Subject Titles Only
Full-Text
Message Boards Terms of Use
Silicon Investor |
