I urge all pro-war folks to read this entire article. I don't think anyone here is interested in "I told you so!" 's but more importantly, it is urgent that we all understand that we have been led like sheep down this destructive path.
We are in a dangerous time, and we MUST collectively stop our leaders by having our voices heard. If we do not, we will continue down this path to our own eventual demise.
This article reveals quite a bit of good information, please read it.
Weapons of Mass Disappearance
How do take your country to war when it doesn't really want to go? You could subcontract with another nation, fight on the sly and hope no one notices. But if you need a lot of troops to prevail and you would like to remind everyone in the neighborhood who's boss anyway, then what you need most is a good reason — something to stir up the folks back home.
entire article:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... -1,00.html
WMD (Weapons of Mass Disappearance)
Moderator: Super Moderators
-
CindyLouWho
- Pirate
- Posts: 3533
- Joined: 01-02-2003 03:00 AM
WMD (Weapons of Mass Disappearance)
Last edited by CindyLouWho on 06-01-2003 10:18 PM, edited 1 time in total.
-
Devastated
- Moderator - Hammock Expert
- Posts: 4943
- Joined: 12-29-2002 03:00 AM
-
alphacentaura
- Pirate
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: 02-18-2003 03:00 AM
- Contact:
Looks like a typical Problem, Reaction solution manipulation
CindyPants wrote: I urge all pro-war folks to read this entire article. I don't think anyone here is interested in "I told you so!" 's but more importantly, it is urgent that we all understand that we have been led like sheep down this destructive path.
We are in a dangerous time, and we MUST collectively stop our leaders by having our voices heard. If we do not, we will continue down this path to our own eventual demise.
Excellent point and ariticle, Cindy Pants!
It smells and looks like a typical "Problem, Reaction, Solution" manipulation, as frequently and eloquently articulated by David Icke.
Problem = weapons of mass destruction ( nuclear, biolgogical etc)
Reaction = "we can't allow this - something must be done"
Solution = war with Iraq, which was the original gameplan in an unknown larger picture/motive regardless, and not congruent to the 'smoke and mirror's reason in line with the original alleged 'problem'.
For those who either are not familiar with the 'Problem, Reaction, Solution' concept, more detailed information and explanation can be found here at the David Icke website under "Who really rules the World":
http://www.davidicke.com/icke/visitor.html
There is also a very interesting article by Jim Marrs ( books: "Rule by Secrecy", "Crossfire - The Plot that Killed Kennedy", "Alien Agenda", "Psi Spies" etc) titled "An Overview of the War on Terrorism" here:
http://www.davidicke.com/icke/articles3/warterror.html
Last edited by alphacentaura on 06-02-2003 07:29 AM, edited 1 time in total.
CounterPunch Wire, May 29, 2003 http://counterpunch.org/wmd05292003.html
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Who Said What When (Wolfowitz fesses-up
at the tail end of this section-Ed)
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction." -Dick Cheney, August 26, 2002
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used
for the production of biological weapons." -George W. Bush, September
12, 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world." -Ari Fleischer, December 2, 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." -Ari Fleischer,
January 9, 2003
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the
materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX
nerve agent." George W. Bush, January 28, 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of
mass destruction, is determined to make more." -Colin Powell,
February 5, 2003
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have." -George Bush, February 8, 2003
"So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its
weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our
judgment has to be clearly not." -Colin Powell, March 8, 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt
that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the
most lethal weapons ever devised." -George Bush, March 17, 2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information
that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . . .all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes." Ari Fleischer, March 21,
2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses
weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those
weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have
produced them and who guard them." -Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22, 2003
"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass
destruction." -Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board , March 23, 2003
"One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are
a number of sites." -Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark, March 22,
2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and
Baghdad." -Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003
"Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of
mass destruction U.S. forces find-and there will be plenty." -Neocon
scholar Robert Kagan, April 9, 2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from
officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of
mass destruction will be found." -Ari Fleischer, April 10, 2003
"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with
Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps
he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find
them." -George Bush, April 24, 2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need
. . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in
that country." -Donald Rumsfeld, April 25, 2003
"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so." -George Bush,
May 3, 2003
"I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had
weapons of mass destruction." -Colin Powell, May 4, 2003
"I never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass
destruction in that country." -Donald Rumsfeld, May 4, 2003
"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of
Saddam Hussein-because he had a weapons program." -George W. Bush,
May 6, 2003
U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and
find" weapons of mass destruction. -Condoleeza Rice, May 12, 2003
"I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago-I mean,
there's no q uestion that there were chemical weapons years ago-
whether they were destroyed right before the war, [or] whether
they're still hidden." -Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st
Airborne, May 13, 2003
"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them
to be found. I still expect them to be found." -Gen. Michael Hagee,
Commandant of the Marine Corps, May 21, 2003
"Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're
interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass
destruction." -Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff,
May 26, 2003
"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the
answer." -Donald Rumsfeld, May 27, 2003
"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction [as justification for invading Iraq] because it was the
one reason everyone could agree on." Paul Wolfowitz, May 28, 2003
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Who Said What When (Wolfowitz fesses-up
at the tail end of this section-Ed)
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons
of mass destruction." -Dick Cheney, August 26, 2002
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used
for the production of biological weapons." -George W. Bush, September
12, 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is
once again misleading the world." -Ari Fleischer, December 2, 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." -Ari Fleischer,
January 9, 2003
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the
materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX
nerve agent." George W. Bush, January 28, 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of
mass destruction, is determined to make more." -Colin Powell,
February 5, 2003
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized
Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the
dictator tells us he does not have." -George Bush, February 8, 2003
"So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its
weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our
judgment has to be clearly not." -Colin Powell, March 8, 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt
that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the
most lethal weapons ever devised." -George Bush, March 17, 2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information
that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical
particularly . . .all this will be made clear in the course of the
operation, for whatever duration it takes." Ari Fleischer, March 21,
2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses
weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those
weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have
produced them and who guard them." -Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22, 2003
"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass
destruction." -Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board , March 23, 2003
"One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are
a number of sites." -Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark, March 22,
2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and
Baghdad." -Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003
"Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of
mass destruction U.S. forces find-and there will be plenty." -Neocon
scholar Robert Kagan, April 9, 2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from
officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of
mass destruction will be found." -Ari Fleischer, April 10, 2003
"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with
Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps
he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find
them." -George Bush, April 24, 2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need
. . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in
that country." -Donald Rumsfeld, April 25, 2003
"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so." -George Bush,
May 3, 2003
"I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had
weapons of mass destruction." -Colin Powell, May 4, 2003
"I never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass
destruction in that country." -Donald Rumsfeld, May 4, 2003
"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of
Saddam Hussein-because he had a weapons program." -George W. Bush,
May 6, 2003
U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and
find" weapons of mass destruction. -Condoleeza Rice, May 12, 2003
"I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago-I mean,
there's no q uestion that there were chemical weapons years ago-
whether they were destroyed right before the war, [or] whether
they're still hidden." -Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st
Airborne, May 13, 2003
"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had
weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them
to be found. I still expect them to be found." -Gen. Michael Hagee,
Commandant of the Marine Corps, May 21, 2003
"Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're
interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass
destruction." -Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff,
May 26, 2003
"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the
answer." -Donald Rumsfeld, May 27, 2003
"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction [as justification for invading Iraq] because it was the
one reason everyone could agree on." Paul Wolfowitz, May 28, 2003
-
eliza_nightvoice
- Pirate
- Posts: 1814
- Joined: 01-20-2002 03:00 AM
I find it very interesting that this whole issue is "in the news" because members of the EU are holding the US accountable. They are requesting the proof for "immediate need for military action."
We in the US went right along with the game plan: chest thumping and flags flying all along the way It made no difference if the reason for the action was today's reason or yesterday's reason. Who needs to think. No matter what the reason, we're always right because we've got the biggest stick on the block.
Sad.
We in the US went right along with the game plan: chest thumping and flags flying all along the way It made no difference if the reason for the action was today's reason or yesterday's reason. Who needs to think. No matter what the reason, we're always right because we've got the biggest stick on the block.
Sad.
-
Devastated
- Moderator - Hammock Expert
- Posts: 4943
- Joined: 12-29-2002 03:00 AM
NV, I disagree. Many, many of us on this board and elsewhere demonstrated against the war, editorialized about it, etc. But like the rest of us, protestors are shocked at the lies and deceit that are/were being sprayed about like fireworks. Everybody "forgot" the US election was stolen and that these guys have a serious agenda of ruling and pillaging the world.
I'd say lots of us are in shock, and as Joe Quinn says, now that we can see the true nature of the beast, what do we do? Will it make a difference? And, don't count on elections. So don't bring up the pallid argument that the dems don't have a candidate. I'm not sure it matters, given reality.
We didn't let it happen, but we should have seen it coming....not that it would have made any difference.
There's a too long time with no peace of mind until "elections" anyway, and I'm sure the powers that be will take us further towards the Empire. Many adventures to be had between now and November of 2004. Ugh.
I'd say lots of us are in shock, and as Joe Quinn says, now that we can see the true nature of the beast, what do we do? Will it make a difference? And, don't count on elections. So don't bring up the pallid argument that the dems don't have a candidate. I'm not sure it matters, given reality.
We didn't let it happen, but we should have seen it coming....not that it would have made any difference.
There's a too long time with no peace of mind until "elections" anyway, and I'm sure the powers that be will take us further towards the Empire. Many adventures to be had between now and November of 2004. Ugh.
You don't have to believe everything that you think...
-
Cherry Kelly
- Pirate
- Posts: 12852
- Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
- Contact:
Interesting article -
Talk radio hosts have been discussing it - and offering this (paraphrased)
Do you call the UN liars about Saddam's WMDs? The UN stated he had them - gave out lists.
Are you saying Clinton lied about them when he stated he was bombing to get rid of WMDs?
Are you saying that Saddam lied when he admitted to having them?
SO when the inspectors went before this last war - why didn't Saddam SHOW PROOF of their destruction?
All Saddam had to do was show that they had been destroyed. He did not do so - ask yourself why. BY showing proof of their destruction HE could have remained in power.
Former Iraqi scientists have admitted to working on their creation and some have said they helped destroy some of them AFTER US TROOPS ENTERED IRAQ earlier this year.
- - - paraprhased from talk shows - Hannity, Rush, Colmes (before he left for his honeymoon), Drudge, two local KC talk shows, one BBC ham radio group, and couple talk shows picked up late night - over FM radio.
OK so where are they? To date at least TWO of the mobile labs have contained paperwork and equipment that is KNOWN to have been tied to the production of WMDs. Missiles for delivery have been found (warheads shown on major tv news - warehouse showing them in neat rows. Other missiles have been found - also on banned lists. BUT where are the other WMDs?
SPECULATION: from scientists who monitor water from Tigris, Euphrates noted exceedingly high chemical amounts in waters prior to and during the operations in Baghdad. Excessive parts per hundred of Sarin in "pesticide" containers. Unaccounted for trucks and RR cars which seem to have "disappeared" over the borders during and prior to US/Brit/etc troops entering Iraq.
Talk radio hosts have been discussing it - and offering this (paraphrased)
Do you call the UN liars about Saddam's WMDs? The UN stated he had them - gave out lists.
Are you saying Clinton lied about them when he stated he was bombing to get rid of WMDs?
Are you saying that Saddam lied when he admitted to having them?
SO when the inspectors went before this last war - why didn't Saddam SHOW PROOF of their destruction?
All Saddam had to do was show that they had been destroyed. He did not do so - ask yourself why. BY showing proof of their destruction HE could have remained in power.
Former Iraqi scientists have admitted to working on their creation and some have said they helped destroy some of them AFTER US TROOPS ENTERED IRAQ earlier this year.
- - - paraprhased from talk shows - Hannity, Rush, Colmes (before he left for his honeymoon), Drudge, two local KC talk shows, one BBC ham radio group, and couple talk shows picked up late night - over FM radio.
OK so where are they? To date at least TWO of the mobile labs have contained paperwork and equipment that is KNOWN to have been tied to the production of WMDs. Missiles for delivery have been found (warheads shown on major tv news - warehouse showing them in neat rows. Other missiles have been found - also on banned lists. BUT where are the other WMDs?
SPECULATION: from scientists who monitor water from Tigris, Euphrates noted exceedingly high chemical amounts in waters prior to and during the operations in Baghdad. Excessive parts per hundred of Sarin in "pesticide" containers. Unaccounted for trucks and RR cars which seem to have "disappeared" over the borders during and prior to US/Brit/etc troops entering Iraq.
Cindy posted:
The war in Iraq was based largely on intelligence about banned arms that still haven't been found. Was America's spy craft wrong - or manipulated? Hmm..., now let's look at this.
CK posted:
Talk radio hosts have been discussing it... - - - paraprhased from talk shows - Hannity, Rush, Colmes (before he left for his honeymoon), Drudge, two local KC talk shows, one BBC ham radio group, and couple talk shows picked up late night - over FM radio.
Glad to see you got a wee bit of this from HAM, otherwise it might give the impression you were getting all your info from Clear Channel.
Do you call the UN liars about Saddam's WMDs? The UN stated he had them - gave out lists.
Question: Based on what? US intel? UK intel? UN intel? No tell intel?
CK: Are you saying Clinton lied about them when he stated he was bombing to get rid of WMDs?
LOL The right NEVER believed ANYTHING Clinton ever said! They accused him of everything including murder! NOW they hold him up as a paragon of truth?
CK: Are you saying that Saddam lied when he admitted to having them?
LOL DITTO and MORE! Is the right saying that a mass murderer should be believed?
CK: SO when the inspectors went before this last war - why didn't Saddam SHOW PROOF of their destruction?
Hey, remember Michael Corleone standing up to the police chief in front of the hospital when the chief came to finish off Don Corleone? He and the florist held their hands in there coats like they had guns. They faked the chief till the 'family' showed up. Hmm... Something about the "though guy complex"? Think about the fakes, faints and lies the N. Koreans are engaged in. Think about the whole mind set of the US and USSR during the cold war. "They won't attack us because of MAD". Maybe SH watched to many old movies . Maybe he really believed the way to protect himself from invasion was to make the US think our military would suffer massive casualties? Maybe he really believed he was/is Nebukanezar as many have said.
CK: All Saddam had to do was show that they had been destroyed. He did not do so - ask yourself why. BY showing proof of their destruction HE could have remained in power..
See above. One wonders if it was a very bad miscalculation on SH's part. Not every dictator is a smart guy. Some are downright stupid. Think about Hitler especially towards the end of the war. He was a basket case. Incapable of rational thought. Along with many other illogical moves, he transferred critically needed military assets to step up the killing in the camps.
CK: Former Iraqi scientists have admitted to working on their creation and some have said they helped destroy some of them AFTER US TROOPS ENTERED IRAQ earlier this year.
Again, do we belive these guys? A mobster goes on trial and the prosecution trots out a string of hitmen and thugs, the prosecutor has made deals with, as "star" witnesses. Ask your self how credible they are? If you were a former Iraqi scientist wouldn't you tell your interrogators what they wanted to hear to get yourself off the hook?
CK: OK so where are they? To date at least TWO of the mobile labs have contained paperwork and equipment that is KNOWN to have been tied to the production of WMDs. Missiles for delivery have been found (warheads shown on major tv news - warehouse showing them in neat rows. Other missiles have been found - also on banned lists. BUT where are the other WMDs?
Other? Other? Where are ANY WMDs? Empty labs and empty warheads are NOT WMDs. They are just empty labs and warheads. Banned by the UN yes but not WMDs.
CK: SPECULATION: from scientists who monitor water from Tigris, Euphrates noted exceedingly high chemical amounts in waters prior to and during the operations in Baghdad. Excessive parts per hundred of Sarin in "pesticide" containers. Unaccounted for trucks and RR cars which seem to have "disappeared" over the borders during and prior to US/Brit/etc troops entering Iraq.
SPECULATION(s):
- 1) It was the US intelligence apparatus that failed and it was the administration Hawks who then cherry picked the intel they wanted to pass on to POTUS.
-or- 2) No WMD in the first place?
-or- 3) The WMDs still in the hands of SH (underground)
-or- 4) The WMDs are dispersed through out the region.
All just speculations of course. Just like everyone else on the street, on the radio, in the press... we don't know.
The info is starting to paint a pretty scarry picture though. We are either clueless idiots, have been lied too or Saddam is the Houdini of the Dessert.
Two final points that would be funny if the whole thing weren't so tragic:
1) The Bush administration is begging to be given more time to find the WMD. Wasn't it just a couple of months ago that the UN weapons inspectors were begging for more time to find the WMD? Bush said noway and put the hammer down. Is there any logic hear?
2) Before the war everyone was pretty sure the WMD were within the borders of Iraq. Now...? Who knows. Feel safer now; anyone?
The war in Iraq was based largely on intelligence about banned arms that still haven't been found. Was America's spy craft wrong - or manipulated? Hmm..., now let's look at this.
CK posted:
Talk radio hosts have been discussing it... - - - paraprhased from talk shows - Hannity, Rush, Colmes (before he left for his honeymoon), Drudge, two local KC talk shows, one BBC ham radio group, and couple talk shows picked up late night - over FM radio.
Glad to see you got a wee bit of this from HAM, otherwise it might give the impression you were getting all your info from Clear Channel.
Do you call the UN liars about Saddam's WMDs? The UN stated he had them - gave out lists.
Question: Based on what? US intel? UK intel? UN intel? No tell intel?
CK: Are you saying Clinton lied about them when he stated he was bombing to get rid of WMDs?
LOL The right NEVER believed ANYTHING Clinton ever said! They accused him of everything including murder! NOW they hold him up as a paragon of truth?CK: Are you saying that Saddam lied when he admitted to having them?
LOL DITTO and MORE! Is the right saying that a mass murderer should be believed?CK: SO when the inspectors went before this last war - why didn't Saddam SHOW PROOF of their destruction?
Hey, remember Michael Corleone standing up to the police chief in front of the hospital when the chief came to finish off Don Corleone? He and the florist held their hands in there coats like they had guns. They faked the chief till the 'family' showed up. Hmm... Something about the "though guy complex"? Think about the fakes, faints and lies the N. Koreans are engaged in. Think about the whole mind set of the US and USSR during the cold war. "They won't attack us because of MAD". Maybe SH watched to many old movies . Maybe he really believed the way to protect himself from invasion was to make the US think our military would suffer massive casualties? Maybe he really believed he was/is Nebukanezar as many have said.
CK: All Saddam had to do was show that they had been destroyed. He did not do so - ask yourself why. BY showing proof of their destruction HE could have remained in power..
See above. One wonders if it was a very bad miscalculation on SH's part. Not every dictator is a smart guy. Some are downright stupid. Think about Hitler especially towards the end of the war. He was a basket case. Incapable of rational thought. Along with many other illogical moves, he transferred critically needed military assets to step up the killing in the camps.
CK: Former Iraqi scientists have admitted to working on their creation and some have said they helped destroy some of them AFTER US TROOPS ENTERED IRAQ earlier this year.
Again, do we belive these guys? A mobster goes on trial and the prosecution trots out a string of hitmen and thugs, the prosecutor has made deals with, as "star" witnesses. Ask your self how credible they are? If you were a former Iraqi scientist wouldn't you tell your interrogators what they wanted to hear to get yourself off the hook?
CK: OK so where are they? To date at least TWO of the mobile labs have contained paperwork and equipment that is KNOWN to have been tied to the production of WMDs. Missiles for delivery have been found (warheads shown on major tv news - warehouse showing them in neat rows. Other missiles have been found - also on banned lists. BUT where are the other WMDs?
Other? Other? Where are ANY WMDs? Empty labs and empty warheads are NOT WMDs. They are just empty labs and warheads. Banned by the UN yes but not WMDs.
CK: SPECULATION: from scientists who monitor water from Tigris, Euphrates noted exceedingly high chemical amounts in waters prior to and during the operations in Baghdad. Excessive parts per hundred of Sarin in "pesticide" containers. Unaccounted for trucks and RR cars which seem to have "disappeared" over the borders during and prior to US/Brit/etc troops entering Iraq.
SPECULATION(s):
- 1) It was the US intelligence apparatus that failed and it was the administration Hawks who then cherry picked the intel they wanted to pass on to POTUS.
-or- 2) No WMD in the first place?
-or- 3) The WMDs still in the hands of SH (underground)
-or- 4) The WMDs are dispersed through out the region.
All just speculations of course. Just like everyone else on the street, on the radio, in the press... we don't know.
The info is starting to paint a pretty scarry picture though. We are either clueless idiots, have been lied too or Saddam is the Houdini of the Dessert.
Two final points that would be funny if the whole thing weren't so tragic:
1) The Bush administration is begging to be given more time to find the WMD. Wasn't it just a couple of months ago that the UN weapons inspectors were begging for more time to find the WMD? Bush said noway and put the hammer down. Is there any logic hear?
2) Before the war everyone was pretty sure the WMD were within the borders of Iraq. Now...? Who knows. Feel safer now; anyone?
-
CindyLouWho
- Pirate
- Posts: 3533
- Joined: 01-02-2003 03:00 AM
-
Cherry Kelly
- Pirate
- Posts: 12852
- Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
- Contact:
mudwoman -
sigh -- pull out the DEM playbook for more answers?
Lets get this straight - when a DEM claimed Iraq/Saddam had WMDs and bombed - that was fine - hip hip horray. BUT now that iwas a GOP who took action - boo hiss boo.
- - - - - - -
STOP!
- - - - - -
Get rid of the party playbooks and start thinking.
the UN - you know UNITED NATIONS - Other countries - said Iraq/Saddam has WMDs - he has not accounted for them.
Its not JUST WMDs - take a look at terrorism - follow the $$$ trail.
The military found how many THOUSANDS of dollars -- US$ -- hidden away? Why is that - where did it come from? Why not IRAQ $$ - oh wait Saddam's son took three large trucks and hauled off Iraq millions of dollars from banks - hmm where is that money? I will give 25K ((US$$)) to family of suicide bombers - PLO?? - paraphrase - Saddam Al Jazeera tv/radio. Saddam/Iraq - al Qaida link has been proven to be real - terrorist training camps have been proven to be real - hmm - meaningless??
Thousands buried in mass graves - and no not just Iranians or war related groups - but graves of anyone who opposed Saddam. meaningless?
- - -
Just like when the so-called looting of the museum was first reported - and everyone was yelling at why didn't US troops protect the museum? The anti-Bu****es sure loved that one - course they didn't know what to say when it was proven that the looting didn't happen. Typical.
We gotta stop playing the handbooks - start thinking on our own - start by looking up a few facts.
The UN -- remember those United NATIONS - said A-he had them. Later inspections - hmm some destroyed - yes! yes! OK but where are the missing TONS -- not just a few - but tons - where are they? Forget the playbooks and think - where could they be? IF they were destroyed - where is the evidence? On one hand you have scientists who are no longer afraid of being killed by Saddam and his henchmen who say YES we had them up to the days before US entered Iraq. YES some were destroyed, but we aren't to believe these scientists? We are suppose to overlook the empty labs - still FULLY equipped and UNLOOTED? That those labs haven't been used in how many years? RIGHT -- you believe that? That would be like the revenours believing the still sitting in the woods all bright and shiny hasn't been in use in YEARS.
sigh -- pull out the DEM playbook for more answers?
Lets get this straight - when a DEM claimed Iraq/Saddam had WMDs and bombed - that was fine - hip hip horray. BUT now that iwas a GOP who took action - boo hiss boo.
- - - - - - -
STOP!
- - - - - -
Get rid of the party playbooks and start thinking.
the UN - you know UNITED NATIONS - Other countries - said Iraq/Saddam has WMDs - he has not accounted for them.
Its not JUST WMDs - take a look at terrorism - follow the $$$ trail.
The military found how many THOUSANDS of dollars -- US$ -- hidden away? Why is that - where did it come from? Why not IRAQ $$ - oh wait Saddam's son took three large trucks and hauled off Iraq millions of dollars from banks - hmm where is that money? I will give 25K ((US$$)) to family of suicide bombers - PLO?? - paraphrase - Saddam Al Jazeera tv/radio. Saddam/Iraq - al Qaida link has been proven to be real - terrorist training camps have been proven to be real - hmm - meaningless??
Thousands buried in mass graves - and no not just Iranians or war related groups - but graves of anyone who opposed Saddam. meaningless?
- - -
Just like when the so-called looting of the museum was first reported - and everyone was yelling at why didn't US troops protect the museum? The anti-Bu****es sure loved that one - course they didn't know what to say when it was proven that the looting didn't happen. Typical.
We gotta stop playing the handbooks - start thinking on our own - start by looking up a few facts.
The UN -- remember those United NATIONS - said A-he had them. Later inspections - hmm some destroyed - yes! yes! OK but where are the missing TONS -- not just a few - but tons - where are they? Forget the playbooks and think - where could they be? IF they were destroyed - where is the evidence? On one hand you have scientists who are no longer afraid of being killed by Saddam and his henchmen who say YES we had them up to the days before US entered Iraq. YES some were destroyed, but we aren't to believe these scientists? We are suppose to overlook the empty labs - still FULLY equipped and UNLOOTED? That those labs haven't been used in how many years? RIGHT -- you believe that? That would be like the revenours believing the still sitting in the woods all bright and shiny hasn't been in use in YEARS.
Originally posted by Cherry Kelly
mudwoman -
sigh -- pull out the DEM playbook for more answers?
I officially quit the party a couple of years ago. I have since that time most often referred to them as the Doormats. I don't think they are sending me a "playbook".
posted by CK
Lets get this straight - when a DEM claimed Iraq/Saddam had WMDs and bombed - that was fine - hip hip horray.
I thought it was necessary (no hip hip horray from me) because like every other shmuck (Please don't read into this term. I KNOW what the word means in Yiddish. Hint: my daughter's name is Shoshanna.) I thought our intel was good.
posted by CK
BUT now that iwas a GOP who took action - boo hiss boo.
It's not the party it's the dead US troops! And the dead UK troops! (By the way, Somalia was up-the-rear-dumb!) In matters of war and dead troops I don't care if POTUS is a Martian!
posted by CKSTOP!
Get rid of the party playbooks and start thinking.
the UN - you know UNITED NATIONS - Other countries - said Iraq/Saddam has WMDs - he has not accounted for them.
I NEVER said SH wasn't supposed to be stocked to the rafters with WMDs. I believed it like every one else. READ my posts. I said it over and over again. The little bitty parts in the above posts about how maybe out intel was crap or cherry picked. The rest clearly stated as Speculations on my part as we - NONE of us have the facts (maybe even POTUS).
It's all boils down to this my friend, can we trust our intel guys (scarry) or is this The Gulf of Tonken Redux (really scarry)?
posted by CKIts not JUST WMDs...
We were talking about WMDs in this thread, and I still am.
PS: posted by CK...one BBC ham radio group...
I didn't know you were a HAM. I probably just missed that fact. Cool!
I'm taking my test next Sat. 
mudwoman -
sigh -- pull out the DEM playbook for more answers?
I officially quit the party a couple of years ago. I have since that time most often referred to them as the Doormats. I don't think they are sending me a "playbook".
posted by CK
Lets get this straight - when a DEM claimed Iraq/Saddam had WMDs and bombed - that was fine - hip hip horray.
I thought it was necessary (no hip hip horray from me) because like every other shmuck (Please don't read into this term. I KNOW what the word means in Yiddish. Hint: my daughter's name is Shoshanna.) I thought our intel was good.
posted by CK
BUT now that iwas a GOP who took action - boo hiss boo.
It's not the party it's the dead US troops! And the dead UK troops! (By the way, Somalia was up-the-rear-dumb!) In matters of war and dead troops I don't care if POTUS is a Martian!
posted by CKSTOP!
Get rid of the party playbooks and start thinking.
the UN - you know UNITED NATIONS - Other countries - said Iraq/Saddam has WMDs - he has not accounted for them.
I NEVER said SH wasn't supposed to be stocked to the rafters with WMDs. I believed it like every one else. READ my posts. I said it over and over again. The little bitty parts in the above posts about how maybe out intel was crap or cherry picked. The rest clearly stated as Speculations on my part as we - NONE of us have the facts (maybe even POTUS).
It's all boils down to this my friend, can we trust our intel guys (scarry) or is this The Gulf of Tonken Redux (really scarry)?
posted by CKIts not JUST WMDs...
We were talking about WMDs in this thread, and I still am.
PS: posted by CK...one BBC ham radio group...
I didn't know you were a HAM. I probably just missed that fact. Cool!
I'm taking my test next Sat.
Last edited by mudwoman on 06-15-2003 12:40 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Does anybody on the planet earth know what is going on? My last 2 posts in this thread (if read carefully) ask many more questions than posit opinions. I still am wondering...
I remember the wine sipping cookouts with agents when I was married to a 'company' man. These smooth, worldly, black ops men were NOT fooling around. There was an occasional 'look' exchanged when those in charge were mentioned. A look that conveyed a thousand words. These men knew the score, that the higher-ups were clueless.
Brings to mind the FBI field agents who's concerns were brushed aside before 9-11. Hmm...
_____________
Blow to Blair over 'mobile labs'
Saddam's trucks were for balloons, not germs
Peter Beaumont and Antony Barnett
Sunday June 8, 2003
The Observer
Tony Blair faces a fresh crisis over Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, as evidence emerges that two vehicles that he has repeatedly claimed to be Iraqi mobile biological warfare production units are nothing of the sort.
The intelligence agency MI6, British defence officers and technical experts from the Porton Down microbiological research establishment have been ordered to conduct an urgent review of the mobile facilities, following US analysis which casts serious doubt on whether they really are germ labs.
The British review comes amid widespread doubts expressed by scientists on both sides of the Atlantic that the trucks could have been used to make biological weapons.
Instead The Observer has established that it is increasingly likely that the units were designed to be used for hydrogen production to fill artillery balloons, part of a system originally sold to Saddam by Britain in 1987.
The British review follows access by UK officials to the vehicles which were discovered by US troops in April and May.
'We are being very careful now not to jump to any conclusions about these vehicles,' said one source familiar with the investigation. 'On the basis of intelligence we do believe that mobile labs do exist. What is not certain is that these vehicles are actually them so we are being careful not to jump the gun.'
The claim, however, that the two vehicles are mobile germ labs has been repeated frequently by both Blair and President George Bush in recent days in support of claims that they prove the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction....
http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0, ... 95,00.html
I remember the wine sipping cookouts with agents when I was married to a 'company' man. These smooth, worldly, black ops men were NOT fooling around. There was an occasional 'look' exchanged when those in charge were mentioned. A look that conveyed a thousand words. These men knew the score, that the higher-ups were clueless.
Brings to mind the FBI field agents who's concerns were brushed aside before 9-11. Hmm...
_____________
Blow to Blair over 'mobile labs'
Saddam's trucks were for balloons, not germs
Peter Beaumont and Antony Barnett
Sunday June 8, 2003
The Observer
Tony Blair faces a fresh crisis over Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, as evidence emerges that two vehicles that he has repeatedly claimed to be Iraqi mobile biological warfare production units are nothing of the sort.
The intelligence agency MI6, British defence officers and technical experts from the Porton Down microbiological research establishment have been ordered to conduct an urgent review of the mobile facilities, following US analysis which casts serious doubt on whether they really are germ labs.
The British review comes amid widespread doubts expressed by scientists on both sides of the Atlantic that the trucks could have been used to make biological weapons.
Instead The Observer has established that it is increasingly likely that the units were designed to be used for hydrogen production to fill artillery balloons, part of a system originally sold to Saddam by Britain in 1987.
The British review follows access by UK officials to the vehicles which were discovered by US troops in April and May.
'We are being very careful now not to jump to any conclusions about these vehicles,' said one source familiar with the investigation. 'On the basis of intelligence we do believe that mobile labs do exist. What is not certain is that these vehicles are actually them so we are being careful not to jump the gun.'
The claim, however, that the two vehicles are mobile germ labs has been repeated frequently by both Blair and President George Bush in recent days in support of claims that they prove the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction....
http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0, ... 95,00.html
Last edited by mudwoman on 06-15-2003 05:58 PM, edited 1 time in total.
-
CindyLouWho
- Pirate
- Posts: 3533
- Joined: 01-02-2003 03:00 AM
You raise important questions, Mudwoman. But I think you might be directing them toward the wrong poster here. She must know more than even our own government? Wish she'd just let them all in on her "findings" (which she gathered via some "report" or un-named "talkshow") that way we wouldn't be raising so many seriously dire questions.
I have given up on discussing this with her as her head is sadly hidden in the sand. She's given up her "playbook" and now deeply immersed in reading the "GWB Mind-Massage-Manual".
I've attempted to explain that no one here ever DENIED that there were WMDs. The question is/was WHEN were they there and why did we use WMD's as a reason to go to war when our intelligience was SO FLAWED? She continues to argue about empty labs & war-heads ... and I continue to fall asleep. She continues to tell us to "Ask Ourselves" so many questions that she can never begin to answer herself. Sad.
Because our intel was flawed IS the reason that we SHOULD NOT have gone to war, ripped apart military families .... many FOREVER and cut our "ally" list so significantly ... and likely set ourselves up for lots of incoming/upcoming terrorism.
These things just don't matter enough for the pro-war folks. (note I use Pro-War, not Republican since many Republicans were smart enough to see the error of our ways). The fact that so many soldiers families lost their loved ones makes no difference. The proof of this particular Pro-War poster (and others) is also in the fact that she paid no mind to the thread "In Memoriam". (pretty telling!)
What matters to pro-war folks is the "Yeah buts" .. ie. Yeah But, he massacred his own people ... (yes, he's a tyrant), Yeah But, he is an imminent threat to American ... (nope, he was not), Yeah But, he was a Hitler-In-The-Making ... (and.. your point?), Yeah But, we are self-appointed Global Police and we must rule the world and gift it with our Democracy ... (Yes, sadly this is true.)
I have given up on discussing this with her as her head is sadly hidden in the sand. She's given up her "playbook" and now deeply immersed in reading the "GWB Mind-Massage-Manual".
I've attempted to explain that no one here ever DENIED that there were WMDs. The question is/was WHEN were they there and why did we use WMD's as a reason to go to war when our intelligience was SO FLAWED? She continues to argue about empty labs & war-heads ... and I continue to fall asleep. She continues to tell us to "Ask Ourselves" so many questions that she can never begin to answer herself. Sad.
Because our intel was flawed IS the reason that we SHOULD NOT have gone to war, ripped apart military families .... many FOREVER and cut our "ally" list so significantly ... and likely set ourselves up for lots of incoming/upcoming terrorism.
These things just don't matter enough for the pro-war folks. (note I use Pro-War, not Republican since many Republicans were smart enough to see the error of our ways). The fact that so many soldiers families lost their loved ones makes no difference. The proof of this particular Pro-War poster (and others) is also in the fact that she paid no mind to the thread "In Memoriam". (pretty telling!)
What matters to pro-war folks is the "Yeah buts" .. ie. Yeah But, he massacred his own people ... (yes, he's a tyrant), Yeah But, he is an imminent threat to American ... (nope, he was not), Yeah But, he was a Hitler-In-The-Making ... (and.. your point?), Yeah But, we are self-appointed Global Police and we must rule the world and gift it with our Democracy ... (Yes, sadly this is true.)
-
TheBlackHand
- Pirate
- Posts: 533
- Joined: 07-16-2002 02:00 AM
- Contact:
Well, I figure I might as well chime in here, for what it's worth.
Not much I can say that hasn't already been said. I actually agree with the Anti-war crowd on this one, for the most part, though I'll never join them in thier dance around the burning effigy. (The Office deserves respect. Albiet, a grudging respect at times. Don't like the guy? Fine, don't give him your vote...but don't give him the finger either. Have some class.)
I never fully bought into the WMD story as a reason to go to war. Matter of fact, I never fully bought into the humanitarian arguments for going to war. Nevertheless, those are the reasons we had to work with. Those were reasons, good and/or not-so good, that motivated the troops to do what they did...and did well. If you've never been in that situation I wouldn't expect you to understand.
Personally, I think there were other ways to get it done...but we had our orders (I had mine, they had thiers, hopefully you'll never have yours). Now we have to deal with what's been done. I have my doubts as to whether we'll be able to do it, whatever "it" is.
Which is another problem. There doesn't seem to be much of a plan for winning the peace. None that I've seen or heard of anyhow. Perhaps they DO have one & it'll develop over time. Those things do take time...but I dunno.
I truly believe that anyone who say's they're totally fine with the fact that these apparently mythical mass cache's of WMD's haven't been found yet is really not being honest with themselves...or anyone else. The situation seems cut and dried to me. Either our intelligence was lacking or we were lied to. Perhaps a little bit of both. Each is excusable under certain circumstances. However, only the former meets my own acceptible criteria for excuse in this instance. I can understand a misunderstanding of data...but a deliberate misinterpretation...well, that sort of thing can be treasonous.
Anyone here for a Capitol Hill hearing? I think it'd be appropriate and might be for the better, whatever your take on it. In any case, this...issue...seems a bit more weighty than a Presidential pole smoker with a dirty dress.
If these WMD's don't turn up and turn up soon our credibilty gap with the rest of the world is going to widen. That's a fact. I guess we'll then be forced to fill it with money...or bodies. Let's hope it isn't both.
(Cindy, get off your "In Memorium" high horse. Part of me believes that you used that thread to salute the soldiers with one hand while stabbing them in the back with the other. The rest of me says you can't be all that bad. Anyway, Memorial Day...and every day...means more around my house than BBQ and beer.)
Not much I can say that hasn't already been said. I actually agree with the Anti-war crowd on this one, for the most part, though I'll never join them in thier dance around the burning effigy. (The Office deserves respect. Albiet, a grudging respect at times. Don't like the guy? Fine, don't give him your vote...but don't give him the finger either. Have some class.)
I never fully bought into the WMD story as a reason to go to war. Matter of fact, I never fully bought into the humanitarian arguments for going to war. Nevertheless, those are the reasons we had to work with. Those were reasons, good and/or not-so good, that motivated the troops to do what they did...and did well. If you've never been in that situation I wouldn't expect you to understand.
Personally, I think there were other ways to get it done...but we had our orders (I had mine, they had thiers, hopefully you'll never have yours). Now we have to deal with what's been done. I have my doubts as to whether we'll be able to do it, whatever "it" is.
Which is another problem. There doesn't seem to be much of a plan for winning the peace. None that I've seen or heard of anyhow. Perhaps they DO have one & it'll develop over time. Those things do take time...but I dunno.
I truly believe that anyone who say's they're totally fine with the fact that these apparently mythical mass cache's of WMD's haven't been found yet is really not being honest with themselves...or anyone else. The situation seems cut and dried to me. Either our intelligence was lacking or we were lied to. Perhaps a little bit of both. Each is excusable under certain circumstances. However, only the former meets my own acceptible criteria for excuse in this instance. I can understand a misunderstanding of data...but a deliberate misinterpretation...well, that sort of thing can be treasonous.
Anyone here for a Capitol Hill hearing? I think it'd be appropriate and might be for the better, whatever your take on it. In any case, this...issue...seems a bit more weighty than a Presidential pole smoker with a dirty dress.
If these WMD's don't turn up and turn up soon our credibilty gap with the rest of the world is going to widen. That's a fact. I guess we'll then be forced to fill it with money...or bodies. Let's hope it isn't both.
(Cindy, get off your "In Memorium" high horse. Part of me believes that you used that thread to salute the soldiers with one hand while stabbing them in the back with the other. The rest of me says you can't be all that bad. Anyway, Memorial Day...and every day...means more around my house than BBQ and beer.)
Last edited by TheBlackHand on 06-16-2003 01:58 AM, edited 1 time in total.
-
CindyLouWho
- Pirate
- Posts: 3533
- Joined: 01-02-2003 03:00 AM
Scott,
If you believe I would salute w/ one finger and stab a soldier in the back with the other, then you surely don't know me at all. In any event, I believe you're grasping to say something hurtful (as I did, in pointing out the In Memoriam thread). One point I did want to make with Cherry especially, is to help her understand what this war COST us in terms of soldiers lives as that point has never been a consideration in any of her posts. It is the MAIN point many of us have been trying to make.
Meanwhile, I do appreciate your service to our country and I actually appreciate your humor (albeit, not as much when its directed at me, wink .. ah crap, nevermind, let her rip I can take it!). Please understand that I have never had any animosity toward a soldier who is given marching orders, even if/when I don't agree with the ORDERS. A soldier has a job to do, and it is to be respected.
I did appreciate reading the above post. The "rest of you" is right. I'm really not all that bad ... and I have references!
Peace,
Cindy
If you believe I would salute w/ one finger and stab a soldier in the back with the other, then you surely don't know me at all. In any event, I believe you're grasping to say something hurtful (as I did, in pointing out the In Memoriam thread). One point I did want to make with Cherry especially, is to help her understand what this war COST us in terms of soldiers lives as that point has never been a consideration in any of her posts. It is the MAIN point many of us have been trying to make.
Meanwhile, I do appreciate your service to our country and I actually appreciate your humor (albeit, not as much when its directed at me, wink .. ah crap, nevermind, let her rip I can take it!). Please understand that I have never had any animosity toward a soldier who is given marching orders, even if/when I don't agree with the ORDERS. A soldier has a job to do, and it is to be respected.
I did appreciate reading the above post. The "rest of you" is right. I'm really not all that bad ... and I have references!
Peace,
Cindy