For the LAST fucking time...

I couldn't care less about the links provided Bob.
You and dipshit cubed are attempting to make the point that all the references to "WMDs" or the lack there of that have been batted around for over a decade now were in fact referring to Saddam's "NUCLEAR" weapons as if EVERYONE is supposed to be as dense as your average liberal and eat that shit up without question.

For the love of all things tragically retarded already!!! Are you paid to be so utterly stupid?

Nobody else was trying to invade them though.

Talk isn't the same as war, you should know that.

So that would be a yes on the whole pay thing...
Outstanding, keep up the good work.

Fun fact Bob, you'd not be forced to incessantly change the argument nor the subject if you put a bit of thought into your position before crapping it all over the internets. ;)

Wow, politics makes you turn on me like a bad dog.

Own it, it's your bag. :thup:
 
Nobody else was trying to invade them though.

Talk isn't the same as war, you should know that.

So that would be a yes on the whole pay thing...
Outstanding, keep up the good work.

Fun fact Bob, you'd not be forced to incessantly change the argument nor the subject if you put a bit of thought into your position before crapping it all over the internets. ;)

Wow, politics makes you turn on me like a bad dog.

Own it, it's your bag. :thup:

BOOM!!!
Bob drops the hammer and suddenly the debate is over!
:udaman:
 
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 IN IRAQ.:eusa_whistle:
IF THERE WERE, WHERE DID THEY GO AND WHY DIDN''T WE GO GET THEM?:confused:
BUSH ADMITTED IRAQ WAS A MISTAKE, WHY CAN'T YOU?

Bush Admits Iraq Had No Weapons of Mass Destruction, No Link to 9/11
BUSH: Now, look, I -- part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction...
Bush Admits Iraq Had No Weapons of Mass Destruction, No Link to 9/11

Bush Admits Iraq Was a Mistake.
bush admits iraq was a terrible mistake - Yahoo! Video Search
 
Last edited:
So the mushroom cloud they were worried about could have been caused by these chemical weapons that the U.S. government gave to Saddam?

Nobody ever said they were worried about a "mushroom cloud". In fact, their #1 concern was a chemical or biologocial weapons because the Administration was well aware of how difficult it would be for any terrorists to either obtain and/or detonate a nuclear warhead. Don't spread misinformation - it's an unappealing trait in anyone.

take your own advice :thup:

I have links to major news outlets - including radical left wing outlets - to support the facts I stated.
 

THERE WERE NO WMDs IN IRAQ.:eusa_whistle:

Click all of the links I posted and have someone read the news stories to you (since you clearly can't read)

IF THERE WERE, WHERE DID THEY GO AND WHY DIDN''T WE GO GET THEM?::confused:

Click all of the links I posted and have someone read the news stories to you (since you clearly can't read) - we recovered some (such as the two tons of nuclear materials) and Al Qaeda recovered & used others (such as Sarin gas).

BUSH ADMITTED IRAQ WAS A MISTAKE, WHY CAN'T YOU?

Click all of the links I posted and have someone read the news stories to you (since you clearly can't read) - it will explain why Bush and the GOP would prefer to avoid this conversation

Bush Admits Iraq Had No Weapons of Mass Destruction, No Link to 9/11
BUSH: Now, look, I -- part of the reason we went into Iraq was -- the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't, but he had the capacity to make weapons of mass destruction...
Bush Admits Iraq Had No Weapons of Mass Destruction, No Link to 9/11

Click all of the links I posted and have someone read the news stories to you (since you clearly can't read) - it will explain why Bush and the GOP would prefer to avoid this conversation

Bush Admits Iraq Was a Mistake.
bush admits iraq was a terrible mistake - Yahoo! Video Search[/QUOTE]

Click all of the links I posted and have someone read the news stories to you (since you clearly can't read) - it will explain why Bush and the GOP would prefer to avoid this conversation
 
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?

After the Shaw was driven out of Iran, the US wanted another asset in the region.

So Reagan funded the ascendancy of Hussein.

The Reagan/Bush administrations poured money and weapons into Iraq for nearly a decade. We gave him [things like] chemical weapons and we looked the other way.

Turn off talk radio and study history. You are embarrassing yourself. Go to a library and study a deep, thorough, academic, peer-reviewed source. Do you know anything about how our Cold War conflict with the Soviet Union affected our alliances in the region? You need to study more and post less.


United States support for Iraq during the Iran

FYI: you should read the following book.
Sowing Crisis: The Cold War and American Dominance in the Middle East

Take a course on the middle east
http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/course_detail.aspx?cid=8593

Please stop posting partisan bullshit and study history.
 
Last edited:
Oh look, yet another fucking article from a major national news outlet CONFIRMING WMD's in Iraq:

Tests Confirm Sarin in Iraqi Artillery Shell | Fox News

Old news from 2004 of old outdated stockpiles of nerve agents that Saddam used against his own people. This isn't even news. Good grief, get a grip. These weapons were of no threat to the United States. If there were any real weapons that could have posed a danger to the US or any other country, they were likely moved to Syria before we entered the country, but I'm not convinced they even existed in the first place.
 
It appears that virtually everything you believe is bullshit.


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.
 
Old news from 2004 of old outdated stockpiles of nerve agents that Saddam used against his own people. This isn't even news. Good grief, get a grip. These weapons were of no threat to the United States. If there were any real weapons that could have posed a danger to the US or any other country, they were likely moved to Syria before we entered the country, but I'm not convinced they even existed in the first place.

Nerve agents are WMDs, you fucking moron.
 
Oh look, yet another fucking article from a major national news outlet CONFIRMING WMD's in Iraq:

Tests Confirm Sarin in Iraqi Artillery Shell | Fox News




One entire artillery shell? One?

You a fuking idiot. I had a real Rotty. He was a dumb dog but smarter than you.
Why don't you be a bad ass and head on over to Iraq and find the rest of them shells. They are there. I know they are. Fox said so. Write a book when you get back. You could be on Fox.
 
While I agree that there were WMD in Iraq because Saddam used them I think there is no use discussing it the liberals will never admit it.

Although all the democrats that voted for military action thought the same thing.

Never mind that during the whole of the Clinton administration we did almost nothing in regards to being attacked. When the Cole was attacked what was the US response? Nothing. A blatant act of war resulted in no military action. When our people were attacked in other places the response was always to run, to pull out. THAT attitude lead to 9/11. After the first WTC bombing, treated like a criminal activity, nothing really done. At least with 9/11 we said NO MORE.
 
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

Sorry, I don't believe it just because of your stupid post and that MSNBC reported it. It would be out by now and WIDESSPREAD news if in fact this were happening. I'm pretty sure when Bush said Chemical weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION that's what he was going for. Not just some drum filled with mustard gas. Sure that would kill alot of people. But Bush was looking for MASS DESTRUCTION WMDs. Were there any? No!!!!!!!!!! So STFU with your nonsense just because you are a bush lover.
 
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?

Well, I can concede, you ingrate.

There was a chemical weapon (As in singular, sans plural).

This is clearly a strong case you have! Good luck on the next case Inspector Gadget! :lol:
 
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.

Could you repeat that?
 

Forum List

Back
Top