New and Improved Version of 'Bush Did It"

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The left never ceases to amaze me, denial is their best trait, here you go, all post 9/11 dates in BOLD so you can't miss it this time, it makes more sense every time someone like you makes this mistake, no wonder your so easily lead to the slaughter, I mean polls......

Oh, BTW Coyote, here it is again.....lmao

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

The CON$ never ceases to amaze me, playing dumb is their best trait.
I made no "mistake!" After 9/11 the Bush administration SUDDENLY changed their tune from their OWN claims BEFORE 9/11.

Here is the lying Bush-Whacker's OWN CIA and State Department saying in FEBRUARY of 2001, before Bush and Cheney cooked the evidence, that Iraq had no WMDs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs"
-George Tenet, 2/07/2001

"We believe the sanctions have been effective, and Saddam Hussein's regime has no weapons of mass destruction."
-Condoleeza Rice, February 16th, 2001

"Containment has been achieved, and we now believe Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction or the capability of producing them."
- Colin Powell, February 23rd, 2001

So basically, you've both just shown that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats in Washington knew what the hell they were talking about when it came to Iraq.

Fighting over who was less incompetent than the other seems kind of stupid to me, but hey, have at it.

 

[geauxtohell]

I'm an Independent. Though I do lean right.

Can't remember how many didn't vote for the war but I don't think it was many. Kinda a collaborative effort by both the Dems and the Reps pushed along by bad intel.

Your right that the war wasn't very well run and it turned into a mess that I don't think any of the planners expected.

Did I agree with the war?? Was of two minds because of the WMD's. The fact that every major intelligence agency was giving the same info really worried me. Of course in hindsight it should never have been fought. No. Iraq was a big mistake one I'm sure the Bush administration would take back in a heartbeat if they could.

Congress failed in their duties by turning into the WH's rubberstamp after 9-11. That doesn't change the fact that the Bush Administration made the case for this war and led us into it. Let's not forget that. The Bush crew, for reasons that will be forever debated, badly wanted to go into Iraq to the point of crooking the evidence (whether that was intentional or a "fog of war" - "We see what we want to see" sort of thing will also forever be debated).

However, let's not allow the responsibility to be shifted off of the culprits. The right wing talking heads have been trying to do that for years now, and it's so absurd it insults my intelligence, and it should insult yours as well.

I was opposed to Iraq from the onset (though had limited capacity to speak out since I was on Active Duty), if for no other reason than the concept of "preventative war" is so ludicrous that, prior to it's official adoption by the Bush Administration, I would think that it would only be found in an Orwell novel.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm an Independent. Though I do lean right.

Can't remember how many didn't vote for the war but I don't think it was many. Kinda a collaborative effort by both the Dems and the Reps pushed along by bad intel.

Your right that the war wasn't very well run and it turned into a mess that I don't think any of the planners expected.

Did I agree with the war?? Was of two minds because of the WMD's. The fact that every major intelligence agency was giving the same info really worried me. Of course in hindsight it should never have been fought. No. Iraq was a big mistake one I'm sure the Bush administration would take back in a heartbeat if they could.

Congress failed in their duties by turning into the WH's rubberstamp after 9-11. That doesn't change the fact that the Bush Administration made the case for this war and led us into it. Let's not forget that. The Bush crew, for reasons that will be forever debated, badly wanted to go into Iraq to the point of crooking the evidence (whether that was intentional or a "fog of war" - "We see what we want to see" sort of thing will also forever be debated).

However, let's not allow the responsibility to be shifted off of the culprits. The right wing talking heads have been trying to do that for years now, and it's so absurd it insults my intelligence, and it should insult yours as well.

I was opposed to Iraq from the onset (though had limited capacity to speak out since I was on Active Duty), if for no other reason than the concept of "preventative war" is so ludicrous that, prior to it's official adoption by the Bush Administration, I would think that it would only be found in an Orwell novel.

In any case, Congress authorized Bush to go to war. They did not order him to do so. The decision to invade was made three months later on Bush's orders.
At the time, Hans Blix, the UN weapons inspector was telling the world their was no evidence of WMDs and if given time, he could prove it. It was then that Bush decided there was no more time

 

[SFC Ollie]

Saddam's WMD<br>have been found

Facts or Fiction?

 

[Coyote]

Saddam's WMD<br>have been found

Facts or Fiction?

WorldNetDaily.


'nuff said.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Saddam's WMD<br>have been found

Facts or Fiction?

WorldNetDaily.


'nuff said.

Gee I suppose I could have found the same information in 20 other places but I simply ran into this one.

 

[Claudette]

What did Saddam gas the Kurds with????

Interesting read Ollie. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???

 

[Coyote]

I'm an Independent. Though I do lean right.

Can't remember how many didn't vote for the war but I don't think it was many. Kinda a collaborative effort by both the Dems and the Reps pushed along by bad intel.

The resolution to go to war in Iraq passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23 (21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent ) and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133. 156 (126 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 6 Republicans) had the balls to vote against it. The rest succumbed to the post-9/11 politics of fear run amuck and failed, abysmally to do their job of checking the intelligence or asking tough questions.

Your right that the war wasn't very well run and it turned into a mess that I don't think any of the planners expected.

Did I agree with the war?? Was of two minds because of the WMD's. The fact that every major intelligence agency was giving the same info really worried me. Of course in hindsight it should never have been fought. No. Iraq was a big mistake one I'm sure the Bush administration would take back in a heartbeat if they could.

They actually weren't - many of them had contradicting intelligence that was purposely disregarded or they pointed out the intelligence was unreliable. This included international intelligence agencies.

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20 but unfortunately in this case there was significant doubt both here and abroad about the case for war so that excuse is weak. Incompetence, fear and the imposition of ideology over data is to blame.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm an Independent. Though I do lean right.

Can't remember how many didn't vote for the war but I don't think it was many. Kinda a collaborative effort by both the Dems and the Reps pushed along by bad intel.

The resolution to go to war in Iraq passed the Senate by a vote of 77 to 23 (21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent ) and the House of Representatives by a vote of 296 to 133. 156 (126 Democrats, 1 Independent, and 6 Republicans) had the balls to vote against it. The rest succumbed to the post-9/11 politics of fear run amuck and failed, abysmally to do their job of checking the intelligence or asking tough questions.

Your right that the war wasn't very well run and it turned into a mess that I don't think any of the planners expected.

Did I agree with the war?? Was of two minds because of the WMD's. The fact that every major intelligence agency was giving the same info really worried me. Of course in hindsight it should never have been fought. No. Iraq was a big mistake one I'm sure the Bush administration would take back in a heartbeat if they could.

They actually weren't - many of them had contradicting intelligence that was purposely disregarded or they pointed out the intelligence was unreliable. This included international intelligence agencies.

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20 but unfortunately in this case there was significant doubt both here and abroad about the case for war so that excuse is weak. Incompetence, fear and the imposition of ideology over data is to blame.

We got the intelligence that Cheney demanded. He kept sending them back till he got the report he wanted

 

[saveliberty]

Saddam's WMD<br>have been found

Facts or Fiction?

WorldNetDaily.


'nuff said.

Gee I suppose I could have found the same information in 20 other places but I simply ran into this one.

Judging from Coyote's nose, I'd say he has a cold or sniffed Cerberus' butt. Feed a cold Coyote.

 

[Coyote]

Saddam's WMD<br>have been found

Facts or Fiction?

WorldNetDaily.


'nuff said.

Gee I suppose I could have found the same information in 20 other places but I simply ran into this one.

Just because you could've found it in 20 other places doesn't grant it any more legitimacy.

That was an April 2004 article. A couple of more current articles:

Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (yes, it's Wiki, but Wiki is convenient in that it summarizes and does give sources for it's claims)

CNN.com - Report: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq - Oct 7, 2004

As for WorldNetDaily - their reputation for accuracy and love of conspiracy theory rivals the tabloids.

 

[Coyote]

WorldNetDaily.


'nuff said.

Gee I suppose I could have found the same information in 20 other places but I simply ran into this one.

Judging from Coyote's nose, I'd say he has a cold or sniffed Cerberus' butt. Feed a cold Coyote.

Nah...that's just the reek from WND

But.....speaking of feeding.....if you've got chocolate I'll go easy on the source.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What did Saddam gas the Kurds with????

Interesting read Ollie. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???

I have seen these same claims in other places like straight from David Kay if I remember right. But the Bush haters will never admit to any of this being true. I wonder what else we never found. The desert can swallow things up. But I hope that's it. I do not want to find stockpiles anywhere, ever.

 

[geauxtohell]

What did Saddam gas the Kurds with????

Interesting read Ollie. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???

I have seen these same claims in other places like straight from David Kay if I remember right. But the Bush haters will never admit to any of this being true. I wonder what else we never found. The desert can swallow things up. But I hope that's it. I do not want to find stockpiles anywhere, ever.

The thing is, we made the accusation, we acted on it, we have the burden of proof.

Whether he truly abandoned his WMD program a decade or so ago (which is what a lot of the evidence points too) or not, we set ourselves up to look foolish by essentially prompting a situation where we had to find a smoking gun to vindicate ourselves.

 

[Coyote]

What did Saddam gas the Kurds with????

Interesting read Ollie. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???

I have seen these same claims in other places like straight from David Kay if I remember right. But the Bush haters will never admit to any of this being true. I wonder what else we never found. The desert can swallow things up. But I hope that's it. I do not want to find stockpiles anywhere, ever.

You know....you talk about "Bush-haters" but I don't hate the guy. I hated many of his policies vis a vis science, environment and public health and the war in Iraq. I think he was a decent person but he was incompetent as a president. I put him in the same category as Carter. And I think he was surrounded by ideologues who knew how to play him. In the end, it was a tragedy because he really is decent. I was reading an article somewhere where Cheney at the end of his term in office was pressuring Bush relentlessly to pardon Libby. Bush gave it a lot of though and discussed it with his legal advisor (I think) - asking if he felt that Libby was sincerely sorry and counsel didn't feel that he was and Bush refused to do it. It was a point of friction between him and Cheney at the end of their presidency but it was also an example of Bush's character along with his ongoing silence in the midst of criticism and his refusal to criticize Obama. Unlike Cheney and, unfortunately - Obama, who has publically cast blame on the prior administration. Though I feel the blame is deserved, it is also inappropriate to publically state it of a former president.

 

[edthecynic]

The left never ceases to amaze me, denial is their best trait, here you go, all post 9/11 dates in BOLD so you can't miss it this time, it makes more sense every time someone like you makes this mistake, no wonder your so easily lead to the slaughter, I mean polls......

Oh, BTW Coyote, here it is again.....lmao

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

The CON$ never ceases to amaze me, playing dumb is their best trait.
I made no "mistake!" After 9/11 the Bush administration SUDDENLY changed their tune from their OWN claims BEFORE 9/11.

Here is the lying Bush-Whacker's OWN CIA and State Department saying in FEBRUARY of 2001, before Bush and Cheney cooked the evidence, that Iraq had no WMDs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs"
-George Tenet, 2/07/2001

"We believe the sanctions have been effective, and Saddam Hussein's regime has no weapons of mass destruction."
-Condoleeza Rice, February 16th, 2001

"Containment has been achieved, and we now believe Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction or the capability of producing them."
- Colin Powell, February 23rd, 2001

So basically, you've both just shown that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats in Washington knew what the hell they were talking about when it came to Iraq.

Fighting over who was less incompetent than the other seems kind of stupid to me, but hey, have at it.

No, clearly the Bush CIA and State Department had it right!!!!!!!! They said there were no WMDs in Iraq in Feb of 2001. Only after Bush and Cheney perverted the intelligence data after 9/11 did people get it wrong when they gave Bush the benefit of the doubt.
So basically, you are playing dumb.

 

[SFC Ollie]

ISG believes that none of these events weakened Saddam’s resolve to possess a robust CW capability. Baghdad believed its need for chemical weapons was justified, based on its fear of hostilities with Iran and Israel. The Regime, we judge, was also motivated by an unstated desire to elevate its status among Arab nations. ISG believes that Saddam deferred but did not abandon his CW ambitions.

* Saddam implied, according to the former Presidential Secretary, that Iraq would resume WMD programs after sanctions in order to restore the “strategic balance” within the region and, particularly, against Israel.

There is an extensive, yet fragmentary and circumstantial body of evidence suggesting that Saddam pursued a strategy to maintain a capability to return to WMD production after sanctions were lifted by preserving assets and expertise. In addition to preserved capability, we have clear evidence of his intent to resume WMD production as soon as sanctions were lifted. All sources suggest that Saddam encouraged compartmentalization and would have discussed something as sensitive as WMD with as few people as possible.

ISG expended considerable time and effort investigating longstanding Iraqi assertions about the fate of CW munitions known to have been in Baghdad’s possession during the Gulf war. We believe the vast majority of these munitions were destroyed, but questions remain concerning hundreds of CW munitions.

Since May 2004, ISG has recovered dozens of additional chemical munitions, including artillery rounds, rockets and a binary Sarin artillery projectile (see Figure 5). In each case, the recovered munitions appear to have been part of the pre-1991 Gulf war stocks, but we can neither determine if the munitions were declared to the UN or if, as required by the UN SCR 687, Iraq attempted to destroy them.

# For several years, Special Republican Guard officers concealed the “know-how” documents, which Husayn Kamil ordered collected in 1991. These officers used safehouses in the Ghaziliyah and Hay at Tashri neighborhoods of Baghdad and a farm in Abu Ghurayb to hide the documents.
# In late 2002, weeks before the arrival of the UNMOVIC inspectors in Iraq, NMD employees reportedly were ordered to collect all documents indicating discrepancies between the number of chemical and biological munitions destroyed or used and the total number produced. These documents, which filled 16 boxes, were being turned in to the IIS to be hidden or disposed of.

Unresolved Issues

In March 2003, when UN inspectors departed Iraq, many contentious issues remained unresolved. Additional issues have emerged from ISG investigations. ISG investigated these matters with interviews, site visits, documents searches and material sampling. ISG made progress understanding most of the unresolved issues, but a few vital areas remain outstanding. With the degradation of the Iraqi infrastructure and dispersal of personnel, it is increasingly unlikely that these questions will be resolved. Of those that remain, the following are of particular concern, as they relate to the possibility of a retained BW capability or the ability to initiate a new one.

* ISG cannot determine the fate of Iraq’s stocks of bulk BW agents remaining after Desert Storm and subsequent unilateral destruction. There is a very limited chance that continuing investigation may provide evidence to resolve this issue.
* The fate of the missing bulk agent storage tanks.
* The fate of a portion of Iraq’s BW agent seed-stocks.
* The nature, purpose and who was involved in the secret biological work in the small IIS laboratories discovered by ISG.


All of the Above was taken from the Duelfer Report. But you wouldn't have heard about it from the MSM, And I only jumped around in the report. I could probably find 5 times this much showing even more violations and more unanswered questions. For instance somewhere in there is the Missile engine testing facility built for testing engines way over sized.

Anyway believe what you will. I believe we had no choice but to go back into Iraq and take Saddam out. Should have done so in 91.

Iraq Survey Group Final Report

 

[rightwinger]

What did Saddam gas the Kurds with????

Interesting read Ollie. Kinda makes you wonder don't it???

I have seen these same claims in other places like straight from David Kay if I remember right. But the Bush haters will never admit to any of this being true. I wonder what else we never found. The desert can swallow things up. But I hope that's it. I do not want to find stockpiles anywhere, ever.

Yes it is possible to hide weapons. What is hard is to hide a paper trail of how those weapons were produced, stored and transported. As much as Bush tried, he could not find a single document hinting of their existence.
He also could not find a single Iraqi who was involved in manufacturing, procuring, transporting or hiding these weapons

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

No, clearly the Bush CIA and State Department had it right!!!!!!!! They said there were no WMDs in Iraq in Feb of 2001. Only after Bush and Cheney perverted the intelligence data after 9/11 did people get it wrong when they gave Bush the benefit of the doubt.

You can certainly theorize that, but there is no definitive proof that is what happened.

 

[edthecynic]

No, clearly the Bush CIA and State Department had it right!!!!!!!! They said there were no WMDs in Iraq in Feb of 2001. Only after Bush and Cheney perverted the intelligence data after 9/11 did people get it wrong when they gave Bush the benefit of the doubt.

You can certainly theorize that, but there is no definitive proof that is what happened.

Well then, how do YOU explain how the Bush CIA and State Department got it right in February of 2001 and then after 9/11 suddenly the intelligence was completely wrong??????