For the LAST fucking time...

[candycorn]

If I have to hear one more ignorant person on this board claim that "there were no WMD's in Iraq", my head might explode. The country was FILLED with WMD's, and even MSNBC has acknowledged that fact...


Sarin-loaded bomb explodes in Iraq - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq - NBCNews.com

There were no WMDs found in Iraq.

Boom.

 

[8537]

Again, have to change the conversation once you realized how misinformed you were about a topic that you're all too happy to spout off on anyway.

The issue is not whether we backed Saddam in the 80's. The issue is WMD's in Iraq. And clearly you are really embarassed that you have had no idea what you've been talking about. You know, we'd all respect you a lot more if you just admitted you were wrong for once...

So the Bush administration had "no idea" what they were talking about?!

it's amazing that people can be so invested in their own stupidity that they'll lick the boot and carry the water for people who admit they don't need their boot licked nor their water carried.

 

[bucs90]

From Chuck Pfarerr's book, Seal Target: Geronimo

It is a chilling fact that thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq. These weapons have been used by Al Qaeda against coalition and NATO forces on dozens of occasions. This has been confirmed by countless sources, most recently in the released WikiLeaks cables.

So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?

The Republicans won’t touch this because it would reveal the incompetence of the Bush administration in failing to neutralize the danger of Iraqi WMD (instead of preventing Weapons of Mass Destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq has accelerated the acquisition, manufacture, and use of chemical weapons by Al Qaeda). The Democrats won’t touch it because it would show President Bush was right to invade Iraq in the first place. It is an axis of embarrassment. And the press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's. The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time.

Media credibility is why.

Guess the Tea Party is right. Government cant do shit right....even fight a war with the most well funded military in the world.

Amen! But we've all know that for a long time. The sad part is how the main stream media has just become a propaganda arm for the Dumbocrats. Their job is to hold both party's feet to the fire. Instead, all they do is push the idiot liberal agenda blindly.

Yep. But its no better on Fox. Or CNN. Basically, if you have to use a remote control to get it, it's flawed.

Wanna get "real" news? Go by a coffee shop at 6am and talk to some night shift cops coming off duty. You'll find out whats really happening in our cities (and be a bit frightened). As for national news and global news........we're fucked. We have NO WAY of getting the real story.

So I say......fuck it. Its football season, enjoy.

 

[GoneBezerk]

In the end, liberals wish Saddam was still killing and torturing Iraqis but Joe Biden is telling everyone Iraq is Obamination's greatest feat....insane.

 

[P@triot]

No, everyone knows they found a few chemical weapons from the time Reagan was supporting Saddam.

Anyone with half a brain realized that we didn't invade Iraq in search of a few expired chemical weapons from the time Rummie was shaking Saddam's hand.

The Bush administration - those with the most to win if such weapons were found - freely admit we found no WMD's. You still try to carry a bag for them that they don't even want carried.

You're so stupid, I don't even have to argue with you - your arguing with yourself. Just read your own words that I have highlighted for everyone to see. LMAO!!!

Fucking idiot. a few expired cannisters of mustard gas aren't evidence of chemical weapons. That's why Bush admitted we found no WMD's.

Awww.... wook at the wittle dumbocrat throwing his temper tantrum. You're the one contradicting yourself in the same post. Don't swear at me because I highlighted your own words, which made you look like the fucking fool that you are.

By the way, the more you desperately try to down play the WMD's (ie "expired canisters"), the bigger fucking idiot you come across. If you took the time to read anything, you'd know that sarin gas was detonated against coalition forces by Al Qaeda. You'd also see the two tons of nuclear material the US moved out of Iraq. Still want to keep going? I've got enough facts and information to bury you and embarass you (though clearly you're doing a good job of that on your own based on the words I highlighted )...

 

[healthmyths]

SO FU,kkk what???


OH in case you are too stupid or too young the guy on the left is FDR President of the USA and the guy on the right Murdered 20 million of his own people!

Also.. YOU are so..f...king ignorant you have idea of the cold war do you?
You have no idea of the war that was going on in the Middle East by proxies Iraq for USA/
Iran/Russia.. both proxies!

 

[candycorn]

There were no WMDs found in Iraq.

 

[P@triot]

In the end, liberals wish Saddam was still killing and torturing Iraqis but Joe Biden is telling everyine Iraq is Obamination's greatest feat....insane.

Ironic isn't it? The Dumbocrats claim to be humanitarian's, yet when Saddam Hussein is raping thousands of women, torturing tens of thousands, and murdering hundreds of thousands with chemical weapons (kurds in the north), the Dumbocrats want to stand on the sideline and cheer for Saddam.

Evidence 4,954,201 that the Dumbocrats are the party of hypocrisy...

 

[8537]

You're so stupid, I don't even have to argue with you - your arguing with yourself. Just read your own words that I have highlighted for everyone to see. LMAO!!!

Fucking idiot. a few expired cannisters of mustard gas aren't evidence of chemical weapons. That's why Bush admitted we found no WMD's.

Awww.... wook at the wittle dumbocrat throwing his temper tantrum. You're the one contradicting yourself in the same post. Do swear at me because I highlighted your own words, which made you look like the fucking fool that you are.

I didn't contradict myself. There were no WMD's. There was a few expired canisters.

By the way, the more you desperately try to down play the WMD's (ie "expired canisters"), the bigger fucking idiot you come across.

Take it up with the Bush administration. They agree with me.

You'd also see the two tons of nuclear material the US moved out of Iraq.

LOL! You're right!!!! A bunch of UN- sealed nuclear material was moved out of the country. I'm afraid you think that helps your cause. Still want to keep going?

Or do you want to quit carrying the water for people who freely admit you're wrong?

 

[Billo_Really]

If I have to hear one more ignorant person on this board claim that "there were no WMD's in Iraq", my head might explode.

How do you think I feel seeing you guy's still trying to make that dog hunt?

The country was FILLED with WMD's, and even MSNBC has acknowledged that fact...

Funny you should mention MSNBC...

...from your own link:

"...the discovery does not provide evidence that Saddam was secretly producing weapons of mass destruction after the Gulf War, as alleged by the Bush administration to justify the war that removed him from power."
- David Kay, former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq

"...the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons."
- Hans Blix, former weapons inspector

Aging, decaying cans of sarin, buried and forgotton in the desert, does not constitute WMD's. And how could it possibly be a weapon of mass destruction, when it couldn't even kill the two soldiers who were transporting it back to the lab?

 

[8537]

SO FU,kkk what???
View attachment 20814

OH in case you are too stupid or too young the guy on the left is FDR President of the USA and the guy on the right Murdered 20 million of his own people!

you have a problem with us working with the Soviets to defeat Hitler? Had a better idea, did ya? Maybe sacrifice a few million Americans to invade the USSR like Crusader Frank had in mind?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So the mushroom cloud they were worried about could have been caused by these chemical weapons that the U.S. government gave to Saddam?

 

[P@triot]

I remember reading the classified reports about the troops coming across WMD stockpiles but it was classified to make sure the foreign terrorists didn't rush to find them to use them.

Meanwhile the dumbfuck liberals were all over the TV, internet, etc talking out their asses about what they didn't know and still do today.

Oh, Saddam's WMDs are most likely in Syria....

Exactly! Dumbocrats are two things - ignorant and loud mouth - and that is a bad combination. They are so quick to open their mouth's, then it comes back to haunt them and they get their panties in a bunch trying to defend their ignorant position instead of just acknowleding they were wrong.

 

[P@triot]

SO FU,kkk what???
View attachment 20814

OH in case you are too stupid or too young the guy on the left is FDR President of the USA and the guy on the right Murdered 20 million of his own people!

you have a problem with us working with the Soviets to defeat Hitler? Had a better idea, did ya? Maybe sacrifice a few million Americans to invade the USSR like Crusader Frank had in mind?

You have a problem with the Reagan Administration working with Saddam to defeat Iran? Thank you for once again defeating your own argument with your own ignorance...

 

[bobcollum]

If I have to hear one more ignorant person on this board claim that "there were no WMD's in Iraq", my head might explode. The country was FILLED with WMD's, and even MSNBC has acknowledged that fact...

there were no WMD's in Iraq

 

[P@triot]

Media credibility is why.

Guess the Tea Party is right. Government cant do shit right....even fight a war with the most well funded military in the world.

Amen! But we've all know that for a long time. The sad part is how the main stream media has just become a propaganda arm for the Dumbocrats. Their job is to hold both party's feet to the fire. Instead, all they do is push the idiot liberal agenda blindly.

Yep. But its no better on Fox. Or CNN. Basically, if you have to use a remote control to get it, it's flawed.

Wanna get "real" news? Go by a coffee shop at 6am and talk to some night shift cops coming off duty. You'll find out whats really happening in our cities (and be a bit frightened). As for national news and global news........we're fucked. We have NO WAY of getting the real story.

So I say......fuck it. Its football season, enjoy.

I agree with you for the most part about national news. But rather than saying "we're fucked", why aren't we pushing back at these assholes? The only one telling the real truth any more is TheBlaze.com and Breitbart.com.

 

[Jackson]

From Chuck Pfarerr's book, Seal Target: Geronimo

It is a chilling fact that thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq. These weapons have been used by Al Qaeda against coalition and NATO forces on dozens of occasions. This has been confirmed by countless sources, most recently in the released WikiLeaks cables.

So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?

The Republicans won’t touch this because it would reveal the incompetence of the Bush administration in failing to neutralize the danger of Iraqi WMD (instead of preventing Weapons of Mass Destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq has accelerated the acquisition, manufacture, and use of chemical weapons by Al Qaeda). The Democrats won’t touch it because it would show President Bush was right to invade Iraq in the first place. It is an axis of embarrassment. And the press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's. The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time.

And the press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's[/B]. The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time

There in lies the problem. If journalism were just reporting as it should be, they would not have the vested interests in hiding a story.

 

[IGetItAlready]

So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?

Because the current administration is STILL running against Bush, despite his being ineligible to run for the past 8 years.
But don't tell the mindless leftist masses, you'll just confuse them.

 

[P@triot]

If I have to hear one more ignorant person on this board claim that "there were no WMD's in Iraq", my head might explode.

How do you think I feel seeing you guy's still trying to make that dog hunt?

The country was FILLED with WMD's, and even MSNBC has acknowledged that fact...

Funny you should mention MSNBC...

...from your own link:

"...the discovery does not provide evidence that Saddam was secretly producing weapons of mass destruction after the Gulf War, as alleged by the Bush administration to justify the war that removed him from power."
- David Kay, former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq

"...the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons."
- Hans Blix, former weapons inspector

Aging, decaying cans of sarin, buried and forgotton in the desert, does not constitute WMD's. And how could it possibly be a weapon of mass destruction, when it couldn't even kill the two soldiers who were transporting it back to the lab?

Chemical weapons are WMD's, no matter how much you try to deny that fact to continue the official party line that it was "an unjust war". By the way, if you could actually read, you would see that the sarin gas immediately started to kill both techs and would have had it not been for the atropine they were both carrying.

Ah, but the idiot liberal dumbocrat is not one to let the facts get in the way of some good propaganda, right?

 

[del]

i'm definitely voting for bush now