1journeyman
Active Member
Originally Posted by Beth
..., we can't just "justify" what we do "after the fact" because the WMB thing fell through.
Agreed. That's why I hate we ever brought it up. We should have just stuck with the "Iraq is threatening our peacekeeping forces" so we're taking them out.
..., we can't just "justify" what we do "after the fact" because the WMB thing fell through.
Agreed. That's why I hate we ever brought it up. We should have just stuck with the "Iraq is threatening our peacekeeping forces" so we're taking them out.
mythrenody
Member
Well What's done is done,But did anyone mention that it took Germany 10 years to rebuild and become completly independent after ww two? I see it as the same thing,There was resist groups but they gave up after awhile and the ppl were war torn and didn't want to fight.
scubadoo
Active Member
Iraqi WMD Evidence
(written by a chap who still considers himself liberal)
The Democrats have been launching salvos of accusation against the Bush adminstration, accusing Bush and Co. of lying about Saddam's WMD threat. I can see how people might believe that Bush exaggerated the WMD claims, especially after the embarassing performance of Colin Powel before the UNSC. But there is another side to this story, one that can't be discounted so readily.
As Christopher Hitchens in his November 14 2005 Slate article∞ points out "...After decades in which the Baathists had been caught cheating and concealing, what room was there for the presumption of innocence? Hans Blix, the see-no-evil expert who had managed to certify Iraq and North Korea as kosher in his time, has said in print that he fully expected a coalition intervention to uncover hidden weaponry." Hitchens continues: "...We did not know and could not know, until after the invasion, of Saddam's plan to buy long-range missiles off the shelf from Pyongyang, or of the centrifuge components buried on the property of his chief scientist, Dr. Mahdi Obeidi."
The evidence for an ongoing Iraqi WMD effort:
* Long-range missiles
Lead by Hans Blix, the UN Inspection team's discovery that Iraqi's long-range missiles exceeded the permitted range and/or payload abilities. Saddam Hussein's prohibited missile program stands as the most indisputable case for Iraq's continued violation of the United Nation's resolutions.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79283,00.html∞
* The regime's negotiations with North Korea for longer-ranged missiles
Iraq's existing missiles were exceeding the permitted range, but for some reason Iraq needed even more-powerful missiles than they had been able to manufacture for themselves. Syria was reported to be the location of the negotiations, where Iraqi emissaries met to discuss a North Korean missile deal in Damascus. A North Korean in the Middle East? You might think that the police state aparatus in Syria would be fully aware of such goings on.
* The binary chemicals stored near empty, chemical-weapon munitions
Jack Kelly's article∞ mentions the drums of binary chemicals near a missile battery has been confirmed from multiple news sources, nobody challenges the veracity of the Army discovery, the press was right there with them: "The 4th Infantry Division discovered in an ammo dump near the town of Baiji 55 gallon drums of chemicals which, when mixed together, form nerve gas. They were stored next to surface-to-surface missiles which had been configured to carry a liquid payload."
* Centrifuge parts and blueprints buried in the yard of the Iraqi chief nuclear scientist who told U.S. interrogators that he was ordered to keep the bombmaking tools ready to resume production at a moment's notice.
* The discovery of nearly two dozen artillery shells loaded with Sarin and mustard gas, which was reported in June 2004 by Iraq Survey Group chief Charles Duelfer.
* The Duelfer report disclosed that Iraq had set up large facilities that were laying dormant only waiting for the collapse of sanctions to resume operation. Both Duelfer and Kay found Iraq had "a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses with equipment that was suitable to continuing its prohibited chemical- and biological-weapons [BW] programs," the official said. "They found a prison laboratory where we suspect they tested biological weapons on human subjects." They found equipment for "uranium-enrichment centrifuges" whose only plausible use was as part of a clandestine nuclear-weapons program. In all these cases, "Iraqi scientists had been told before the war not to declare their activities to the U.N. inspectors," the official said.
(written by a chap who still considers himself liberal)
The Democrats have been launching salvos of accusation against the Bush adminstration, accusing Bush and Co. of lying about Saddam's WMD threat. I can see how people might believe that Bush exaggerated the WMD claims, especially after the embarassing performance of Colin Powel before the UNSC. But there is another side to this story, one that can't be discounted so readily.
As Christopher Hitchens in his November 14 2005 Slate article∞ points out "...After decades in which the Baathists had been caught cheating and concealing, what room was there for the presumption of innocence? Hans Blix, the see-no-evil expert who had managed to certify Iraq and North Korea as kosher in his time, has said in print that he fully expected a coalition intervention to uncover hidden weaponry." Hitchens continues: "...We did not know and could not know, until after the invasion, of Saddam's plan to buy long-range missiles off the shelf from Pyongyang, or of the centrifuge components buried on the property of his chief scientist, Dr. Mahdi Obeidi."
The evidence for an ongoing Iraqi WMD effort:
* Long-range missiles
Lead by Hans Blix, the UN Inspection team's discovery that Iraqi's long-range missiles exceeded the permitted range and/or payload abilities. Saddam Hussein's prohibited missile program stands as the most indisputable case for Iraq's continued violation of the United Nation's resolutions.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79283,00.html∞
* The regime's negotiations with North Korea for longer-ranged missiles
Iraq's existing missiles were exceeding the permitted range, but for some reason Iraq needed even more-powerful missiles than they had been able to manufacture for themselves. Syria was reported to be the location of the negotiations, where Iraqi emissaries met to discuss a North Korean missile deal in Damascus. A North Korean in the Middle East? You might think that the police state aparatus in Syria would be fully aware of such goings on.
* The binary chemicals stored near empty, chemical-weapon munitions
Jack Kelly's article∞ mentions the drums of binary chemicals near a missile battery has been confirmed from multiple news sources, nobody challenges the veracity of the Army discovery, the press was right there with them: "The 4th Infantry Division discovered in an ammo dump near the town of Baiji 55 gallon drums of chemicals which, when mixed together, form nerve gas. They were stored next to surface-to-surface missiles which had been configured to carry a liquid payload."
* Centrifuge parts and blueprints buried in the yard of the Iraqi chief nuclear scientist who told U.S. interrogators that he was ordered to keep the bombmaking tools ready to resume production at a moment's notice.
* The discovery of nearly two dozen artillery shells loaded with Sarin and mustard gas, which was reported in June 2004 by Iraq Survey Group chief Charles Duelfer.
* The Duelfer report disclosed that Iraq had set up large facilities that were laying dormant only waiting for the collapse of sanctions to resume operation. Both Duelfer and Kay found Iraq had "a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses with equipment that was suitable to continuing its prohibited chemical- and biological-weapons [BW] programs," the official said. "They found a prison laboratory where we suspect they tested biological weapons on human subjects." They found equipment for "uranium-enrichment centrifuges" whose only plausible use was as part of a clandestine nuclear-weapons program. In all these cases, "Iraqi scientists had been told before the war not to declare their activities to the U.N. inspectors," the official said.
scubadoo
Active Member
Yet more.....
Christopher Hitchens reflects on Saddam's chief nuclear physicist's book The Bomb in My Garden.∞
* After the 2003 war the facilities at Al Tuwaitha (the location of the the large remaining uranium stockpile) were found to have been expanded, with vast new underground facilities having been constructed, some of which were discovered to be highly radioactive. Satellite photos from 2002 that showed new construction at al Tuwaitha, which had been largely destroyed in prior U.S. bombing raids during the first Gulf War and Operation Desert Fox. Nor was the IAEA regimen itself really tough with only 2-3 inspections per year. On the site the IAEA permitted Iraq to retain the 50 kg of bomb-grade uranium that was used in the breeder-reactors: That 50 kg alone was either sufficiently close to or in fact weapons-grade U-235, and would've been enough to build two nuclear warheads. In the early 1990's Iraq had in fact started a crash program that would've used thier extant bomb-grade uranium, and had retained the plans and knowledge-based to resume that program at a later date.
"The plutonium processing was dispersed on-site by the bombing in 1991," said Michael Levi, the Federation's director. "But the Iraqis started to rebuild it. And they continued building there after 1998, when the Iraqis ended the inspections. "
According to Charles Duelfer in his report to the United States Congress, he confirmed that the Al Tuwaitha laboratory "was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development." and that the research continued until the U.S. invasion in 2003. He also reported that Iraq was "preserving and expanding knowledge to design and develop nuclear weapons." (Source: Duelfer's testimony before the U.S. Congress.)
Christopher Hitchens reflects on Saddam's chief nuclear physicist's book The Bomb in My Garden.∞
* After the 2003 war the facilities at Al Tuwaitha (the location of the the large remaining uranium stockpile) were found to have been expanded, with vast new underground facilities having been constructed, some of which were discovered to be highly radioactive. Satellite photos from 2002 that showed new construction at al Tuwaitha, which had been largely destroyed in prior U.S. bombing raids during the first Gulf War and Operation Desert Fox. Nor was the IAEA regimen itself really tough with only 2-3 inspections per year. On the site the IAEA permitted Iraq to retain the 50 kg of bomb-grade uranium that was used in the breeder-reactors: That 50 kg alone was either sufficiently close to or in fact weapons-grade U-235, and would've been enough to build two nuclear warheads. In the early 1990's Iraq had in fact started a crash program that would've used thier extant bomb-grade uranium, and had retained the plans and knowledge-based to resume that program at a later date.
"The plutonium processing was dispersed on-site by the bombing in 1991," said Michael Levi, the Federation's director. "But the Iraqis started to rebuild it. And they continued building there after 1998, when the Iraqis ended the inspections. "
According to Charles Duelfer in his report to the United States Congress, he confirmed that the Al Tuwaitha laboratory "was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development." and that the research continued until the U.S. invasion in 2003. He also reported that Iraq was "preserving and expanding knowledge to design and develop nuclear weapons." (Source: Duelfer's testimony before the U.S. Congress.)
scubadoo
Active Member
Sarin, Mustard Gas Discovered Separately in Iraq
Monday, May 17, 2004
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html∞
BAGHDAD, Iraq — A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday.
Bush administration officials told Fox News that mustard gas was also recently discovered.
"...Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News that he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border. .... "Saddam is the type who will not store those materials in a military warehouse. He's gonna store them either underground, or, as I said, lots of them have gone west to Syria and are being brought back with the insurgencies," George told Fox News. "It is difficult to look in areas that are not obvious to the military's eyes. "I'm sure they're going to find more once time passes," he continued, saying one year is not enough for the survey group or the military to find the weapons. "
"...Artillery shells of the 155-mm size are about as big as it gets ... the 155 howitzer can launch high capacity shells over several miles; current models used by the United States can fire shells as far as 14 miles. One official told Fox News that a conventional 155-mm shell could hold as much as "two to five" liters of sarin, which is capable of killing thousands of people under the right conditions in highly populated areas. "
Monday, May 17, 2004
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html∞
BAGHDAD, Iraq — A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday.
Bush administration officials told Fox News that mustard gas was also recently discovered.
"...Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News that he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border. .... "Saddam is the type who will not store those materials in a military warehouse. He's gonna store them either underground, or, as I said, lots of them have gone west to Syria and are being brought back with the insurgencies," George told Fox News. "It is difficult to look in areas that are not obvious to the military's eyes. "I'm sure they're going to find more once time passes," he continued, saying one year is not enough for the survey group or the military to find the weapons. "
"...Artillery shells of the 155-mm size are about as big as it gets ... the 155 howitzer can launch high capacity shells over several miles; current models used by the United States can fire shells as far as 14 miles. One official told Fox News that a conventional 155-mm shell could hold as much as "two to five" liters of sarin, which is capable of killing thousands of people under the right conditions in highly populated areas. "
scubadoo
Active Member
Still more same article.....
"...Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective."
They believe the mustard gas shell may have been one of 550 for which former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein failed to account when he made his weapons declaration shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom began last year. "
"...Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective."
They believe the mustard gas shell may have been one of 550 for which former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein failed to account when he made his weapons declaration shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom began last year. "
scubadoo
Active Member
Yet more form this lengthy article written in November 2005...with other past news articles included......Read if you want...or simply ignore...
How can anyone ignore the evidence cited by a senior counter-proliferation official that meetings did in fact occur between Niger officials and would-be buyers from Iraq, Libya, North Korea and two other countries, and that the uranium was to be mined from abandoned - and hence unregulated and unmonitored - uranium mines in Niger.
The Iraqis had a reasonable motivation to obtain a new illicit source of uranium: The existing ore was still under IAEA seal, and it'd be a convenient alibi were those sealed stockpiles left undisturbed - "Look, see? No tampering!" The Iraqis had already resumed clandestine nuclear weapons development efforts after inspections were curtailed in '98, but they would benefit from having access to a great deal more ore to sift out the relatively miniscule fractions of high-grade uranium needed as bomb-grade precursor. If they did this while keeping two sets of books, they could obscure their activities from the IAEA and other foreign interference: The old, untampered uranium stockpile would be their alibi that they were doing nothing new, while a clandestine effort was underway elsewhere, away from prying eyes.
Remember too, that the IAEA got fooled by the North Koreans and there is no reason to believe the IAEA was any better a nuclear cop in Iraq.
see also:
http://www.nytimes.com/financialtime...373295002.html
How can anyone ignore the evidence cited by a senior counter-proliferation official that meetings did in fact occur between Niger officials and would-be buyers from Iraq, Libya, North Korea and two other countries, and that the uranium was to be mined from abandoned - and hence unregulated and unmonitored - uranium mines in Niger.
The Iraqis had a reasonable motivation to obtain a new illicit source of uranium: The existing ore was still under IAEA seal, and it'd be a convenient alibi were those sealed stockpiles left undisturbed - "Look, see? No tampering!" The Iraqis had already resumed clandestine nuclear weapons development efforts after inspections were curtailed in '98, but they would benefit from having access to a great deal more ore to sift out the relatively miniscule fractions of high-grade uranium needed as bomb-grade precursor. If they did this while keeping two sets of books, they could obscure their activities from the IAEA and other foreign interference: The old, untampered uranium stockpile would be their alibi that they were doing nothing new, while a clandestine effort was underway elsewhere, away from prying eyes.
Remember too, that the IAEA got fooled by the North Koreans and there is no reason to believe the IAEA was any better a nuclear cop in Iraq.
see also:
http://www.nytimes.com/financialtime...373295002.html
ophiura
Active Member
I'm tellin' ya, ScubaDoo...
I'm really grateful for all your references and articles, but for some people you could post absolute proof and it won't make a difference. It can be like banging your head against a wall. Still, thanks for finding those
I am not a big fan of how Bush is running this war, BUT I think to say "he took us to war and lied" is way off base. If the intelligence was wrong, it was wrong coming from many sources around the world. If someone lied, it would be more accurate to be blaming the CIA or something, not the president. But everyone saw this intelligence, and a whole heck of a lot of people bought into it and now those people are trying to back out. Nuh-uh. We have a short memory in this country. Hardly remember 9/11 I think. And so these politicos think they can change their tune and no one will know better.
Finish the job, and more importantly, IMO, let our military do THEIR job...IMO, it is not peacekeeping, it is not being election monitors, it is not rebuilding, it is not humanitarian outreach and PC grins for the media at home while they worry about every action they take and word they say and being stabbed in the back by the so called "free press."
I really hope, though it took a tragedy, that Jordan will start kicking some butt.
We need to finish this job. Leaving would be the greatest victory for terrorists ever. If we left now, what WAS the purpose of losing those we've lost?
I'm really grateful for all your references and articles, but for some people you could post absolute proof and it won't make a difference. It can be like banging your head against a wall. Still, thanks for finding those
I am not a big fan of how Bush is running this war, BUT I think to say "he took us to war and lied" is way off base. If the intelligence was wrong, it was wrong coming from many sources around the world. If someone lied, it would be more accurate to be blaming the CIA or something, not the president. But everyone saw this intelligence, and a whole heck of a lot of people bought into it and now those people are trying to back out. Nuh-uh. We have a short memory in this country. Hardly remember 9/11 I think. And so these politicos think they can change their tune and no one will know better.
Finish the job, and more importantly, IMO, let our military do THEIR job...IMO, it is not peacekeeping, it is not being election monitors, it is not rebuilding, it is not humanitarian outreach and PC grins for the media at home while they worry about every action they take and word they say and being stabbed in the back by the so called "free press."
I really hope, though it took a tragedy, that Jordan will start kicking some butt.
We need to finish this job. Leaving would be the greatest victory for terrorists ever. If we left now, what WAS the purpose of losing those we've lost?
scubadoo
Active Member
John Tierney was an UNSCOM weapons inspector in Iraq.
When asked: " Why didn't we find WMD's?" He responded:
"On finds, the key word here is "find." UNSCOM could pursue a lead and approach an inspection target from various angles to cut off an escape route, but at some point, the Iraqis would hold up their guns and keep us out. . .knowing that as long as there were armed guards between us and the weapons, we would never be able to "find," as in "put our hands on," the weapons of mass destruction. The western press mindlessly took this up and became the Iraqis' tool."
So where did the WMD's go?
Tierney gives a detailed answer which can be summarized in a word --
"Syria"
When asked: " Why didn't we find WMD's?" He responded:
"On finds, the key word here is "find." UNSCOM could pursue a lead and approach an inspection target from various angles to cut off an escape route, but at some point, the Iraqis would hold up their guns and keep us out. . .knowing that as long as there were armed guards between us and the weapons, we would never be able to "find," as in "put our hands on," the weapons of mass destruction. The western press mindlessly took this up and became the Iraqis' tool."
So where did the WMD's go?
Tierney gives a detailed answer which can be summarized in a word --
"Syria"
jones
Member
Ok, think back to when supposedly the democrats and republicans agreed to go to war. They did not agree to go to war, they agreed to give the president of the united states unilateral authority to go to war so as to cut through the red tape when it became absolutely necessary. Have you forgotten about the debates over giving the U.N. more time to conduct the inspections for WMDs? And the rest of the government could only make decisions based on intelligence that the white house offered them. And by now we should all be aware of the quality of that intel. And whoever said that the only ones to be blamed are the troops. Youve got to be kidding me. So now we blame the troops for foreign policy decisions? The members of our military are providing a brave, honorable, and absolutely necessary service for our country. Yes, of course they agree to put their lives on the line for our country when they enlist. However, with the enlistment is an implied agreement that the government will not move them into harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. They do not enlist to have their dedication, their patriotism, and in fact their lives, taken frivolously. But I'm afraid that is what this administration has done. As far as when do we bring them home, unfortunately we have created a mess, we've created a situation thats breeds anti U.S. sentiment. We now have to try and fix what this administration has so royally blundered. But anyone who believes that we will make Iraq a paradise, or that we can afford to wait until there are no more radical islam extremists, is mistaken. It has to be sooner than later for the sake of our country.
scubadoo
Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
I'm tellin' ya, ScubaDoo...
I'm really grateful for all your references and articles, but for some people you could post absolute proof and it won't make a difference. It can be like banging your head against a wall. Still, thanks for finding those
I am not a big fan of how Bush is running this war, BUT I think to say "he took us to war and lied" is way off base. If the intelligence was wrong, it was wrong coming from many sources around the world. If someone lied, it would be more accurate to be blaming the CIA or something, not the president. But everyone saw this intelligence, and a whole heck of a lot of people bought into it and now those people are trying to back out. Nuh-uh. We have a short memory in this country. Hardly remember 9/11 I think. And so these politicos think they can change their tune and no one will know better.
Finish the job, and more importantly, IMO, let our military do THEIR job...IMO, it is not peacekeeping, it is not being election monitors, it is not rebuilding, it is not humanitarian outreach and PC grins for the media at home while they worry about every action they take and word they say and being stabbed in the back by the so called "free press."
I really hope, though it took a tragedy, that Jordan will start kicking some butt.
We need to finish this job. Leaving would be the greatest victory for terrorists ever. If we left now, what WAS the purpose of losing those we've lost?
I predict something will break betrween now and 2008...just a gut feeling and a hunch. Too much evidence and the media and folks "believe" all the serching and discoveries are over...or, that everything has been disclosed to the public.
My prediction is there will be some humble pie passed around.....JMO
No, I am not a big fan of Bush...and I would take this stance concenring my support and continued support of the action taken regardless if the president was Dem or Rep.
I'm tellin' ya, ScubaDoo...
I'm really grateful for all your references and articles, but for some people you could post absolute proof and it won't make a difference. It can be like banging your head against a wall. Still, thanks for finding those
I am not a big fan of how Bush is running this war, BUT I think to say "he took us to war and lied" is way off base. If the intelligence was wrong, it was wrong coming from many sources around the world. If someone lied, it would be more accurate to be blaming the CIA or something, not the president. But everyone saw this intelligence, and a whole heck of a lot of people bought into it and now those people are trying to back out. Nuh-uh. We have a short memory in this country. Hardly remember 9/11 I think. And so these politicos think they can change their tune and no one will know better.
Finish the job, and more importantly, IMO, let our military do THEIR job...IMO, it is not peacekeeping, it is not being election monitors, it is not rebuilding, it is not humanitarian outreach and PC grins for the media at home while they worry about every action they take and word they say and being stabbed in the back by the so called "free press."
I really hope, though it took a tragedy, that Jordan will start kicking some butt.
We need to finish this job. Leaving would be the greatest victory for terrorists ever. If we left now, what WAS the purpose of losing those we've lost?
I predict something will break betrween now and 2008...just a gut feeling and a hunch. Too much evidence and the media and folks "believe" all the serching and discoveries are over...or, that everything has been disclosed to the public.
My prediction is there will be some humble pie passed around.....JMO
No, I am not a big fan of Bush...and I would take this stance concenring my support and continued support of the action taken regardless if the president was Dem or Rep.
Scuba, you are very compelling with your references....however, if those references were absolutely true, why on earth does not The President go on national TV with all of his experts at hand and lay it out for us and the world? The silence is thick, and telling, IMO. Is he above answering to the citizens? What is it? He has admitted he made a mistake, so who are we to argue with The President? Why does everyone feel the need to argue about all the other reasons to go to war in the absence of WMBs?
We need to justify the war because of the lack of WMBs is the answer. Afterall, we have to have a "cause" to go to war since we are not imperialists. Is anyone going to say that the President did not acknowledge that he was wrong about WMBs?
We need to justify the war because of the lack of WMBs is the answer. Afterall, we have to have a "cause" to go to war since we are not imperialists. Is anyone going to say that the President did not acknowledge that he was wrong about WMBs?
scubadoo
Active Member
Originally Posted by jones
Ok, think back to when supposedly the democrats and republicans agreed to go to war. They did not agree to go to war, they agreed to give the president of the united states unilateral authority to go to war so as to cut through the red tape when it became absolutely necessary. Have you forgotten about the debates over giving the U.N. more time to conduct the inspections for WMDs? And the rest of the government could only make decisions based on intelligence that the white house offered them. And by now we should all be aware of the quality of that intel. And whoever said that the only ones to be blamed are the troops. Youve got to be kidding me. So now we blame the troops for foreign policy decisions? The members of our military are providing a brave, honorable, and absolutely necessary service for our country. Yes, of course they agree to put their lives on the line for our country when they enlist. However, with the enlistment is an implied agreement that the government will not move them into harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. They do not enlist to have their dedication, their patriotism, and in fact their lives, taken frivolously. But I'm afraid that is what this administration has done. As far as when do we bring them home, unfortunately we have created a mess, we've created a situation thats breeds anti U.S. sentiment. We now have to try and fix what this administration has so royally blundered. But anyone who believes that we will make Iraq a paradise, or that we can afford to wait until there are no more radical islam extremists, is mistaken. It has to be sooner than later for the sake of our country.
Would you care to comment about Mogadishu and the lives lost , harms way, that nesessary thing..lives taken frivoiuosly and all those other positions as it applies to that operation by a different administration?
Ok, think back to when supposedly the democrats and republicans agreed to go to war. They did not agree to go to war, they agreed to give the president of the united states unilateral authority to go to war so as to cut through the red tape when it became absolutely necessary. Have you forgotten about the debates over giving the U.N. more time to conduct the inspections for WMDs? And the rest of the government could only make decisions based on intelligence that the white house offered them. And by now we should all be aware of the quality of that intel. And whoever said that the only ones to be blamed are the troops. Youve got to be kidding me. So now we blame the troops for foreign policy decisions? The members of our military are providing a brave, honorable, and absolutely necessary service for our country. Yes, of course they agree to put their lives on the line for our country when they enlist. However, with the enlistment is an implied agreement that the government will not move them into harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. They do not enlist to have their dedication, their patriotism, and in fact their lives, taken frivolously. But I'm afraid that is what this administration has done. As far as when do we bring them home, unfortunately we have created a mess, we've created a situation thats breeds anti U.S. sentiment. We now have to try and fix what this administration has so royally blundered. But anyone who believes that we will make Iraq a paradise, or that we can afford to wait until there are no more radical islam extremists, is mistaken. It has to be sooner than later for the sake of our country.
Would you care to comment about Mogadishu and the lives lost , harms way, that nesessary thing..lives taken frivoiuosly and all those other positions as it applies to that operation by a different administration?
scubadoo
Active Member
okay..I'll post more evidence...
As early as January 2003, Loftus said, U.S. intelligence had identified a stream of tractor-trailer trucks moving from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon, but that “the significance of this sighting did not register on the CIA at the time.” U.S. intelligence sources, Loftus continued, “believe the area contains extended-range Scud-based missiles and parts for chemical and biological warheads.”
In August 2003, Loftus reported that U.S. intelligence suspected they had located the WMD, but “getting to them will be nearly impossible for the U.S. and its allies because the containers with the strategic materials… are located in Lebanon's heavily fortified Bekaa Valley, swarming with Iranian and Syrian forces, and Hizbullah and ex-Iraqi agents.”
And according to : “The relocation of Iraq’s WMD systems took place between January 10 and March 10 (2003) and was completed just 10 days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq. The banned arsenal, hauled in giant tankers from Iraq to Syria and from there to the Bekaa Valley under Syrian special forces and military intelligence escort, was discharged into pits 6-8 meters across and 25-35 meters deep dug by Syrian army engineers. They were sealed and planted over with new seedlings. Nonetheless, their location is known and detectable with the right instruments.”
Last year, columnist Larry Elder reported that a Syrian journalist who defected to
[hr]
reported that his friends in Syrian intelligence told him “exactly where the stuff is buried." He named three sites in Syria, which the Israelis confirmed. They know where the stuff is [and] we know from Israeli and defectors' intelligence that the son of the Syrian defense minister was paid 50 million bucks to bring the stuff across the border and bury it.”
As early as January 2003, Loftus said, U.S. intelligence had identified a stream of tractor-trailer trucks moving from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon, but that “the significance of this sighting did not register on the CIA at the time.” U.S. intelligence sources, Loftus continued, “believe the area contains extended-range Scud-based missiles and parts for chemical and biological warheads.”
In August 2003, Loftus reported that U.S. intelligence suspected they had located the WMD, but “getting to them will be nearly impossible for the U.S. and its allies because the containers with the strategic materials… are located in Lebanon's heavily fortified Bekaa Valley, swarming with Iranian and Syrian forces, and Hizbullah and ex-Iraqi agents.”
And according to : “The relocation of Iraq’s WMD systems took place between January 10 and March 10 (2003) and was completed just 10 days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq. The banned arsenal, hauled in giant tankers from Iraq to Syria and from there to the Bekaa Valley under Syrian special forces and military intelligence escort, was discharged into pits 6-8 meters across and 25-35 meters deep dug by Syrian army engineers. They were sealed and planted over with new seedlings. Nonetheless, their location is known and detectable with the right instruments.”
Last year, columnist Larry Elder reported that a Syrian journalist who defected to
[hr]
reported that his friends in Syrian intelligence told him “exactly where the stuff is buried." He named three sites in Syria, which the Israelis confirmed. They know where the stuff is [and] we know from Israeli and defectors' intelligence that the son of the Syrian defense minister was paid 50 million bucks to bring the stuff across the border and bury it.”
jones
Member
Um, by the way, your articles ar not proof or evidence. They're articles, written by a person with an objective and a slant, just like every article for and against. Besides, it really doesn't matter, we were supposed to be fighting a war on terror, in response to 9/11. Instead we left that war, and tried to tie Iraq the the immediate problem. Have you forgotten that Iraq banned Bin Laden? That they were not connected with Al Qaida? If we were looking for a "bad" man dictator to take out, to make the people safer, or even a country that had the capacity of being dangerous and was compiling the resources to be a threat, then we should have been many other places in the world before Iraq. It was supposed to be about terroism. What ever happened to that war I wonder.
