State department and hillary verify WMDS in syria..

[Moonglow]

www.thecable.foreignpolicy.com

Interesting.....state department verifies bashar assad sitting on a neato arsenal of wmds.
note to libs and independents..

Sarcastic question..gee which middle east political party did assad and saddam belong to?BAATH.

so,now libs,are you going to say yiur old XXXXX hero is a liar?
bush did **** up. Announcing his intentions so this lot was moved from iraq to syria.

So got any proof, nah, didn't think so.

 

[paulitician]

**** Hillary Clinton and all other War Mongering Globalist assholes!

 

[Decepticon]

What I want to know is what happens when we invade Syria and Saddam's WMD's aren't there either?

CONZ are so STUPID, even YEARS AFTER it's all too apparent they were lied to and played for CHUMPS by Bushco and the neocons, they STILL cling to the lies the Bush administration told them rather than admit they were wrong. Not to mention their apparently willingness to send our young men and women into battle because of shitty intelligence, poorly interpreted. AGAIN!

Is there any lesson so painful, you CONZ might actually LEARN it? Or does pretending you didn't go to war for nothing and wreck the economy through your agenda of deregulation work to inoculate you from your dismal failures?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Why do you cap certain words as if the emphasis from your blathering becomes more relevant if you do?
Just curious.

it's like having a conversation with a tourrette suffering person....

 

[peach174]

www.thecable.foreignpolicy.com

Interesting.....state department verifies bashar assad sitting on a neato arsenal of wmds.
note to libs and independents..

Sarcastic question..gee which middle east political party did assad and saddam belong to?BAATH.

so,now libs,are you going to say yiur old XXXXX hero is a liar?
bush did **** up. Announcing his intentions so this lot was moved from iraq to syria.

So got any proof, nah, didn't think so.

This guy said so:

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.

"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."

Mr. Sada's comments come just more than a month after Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam "transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria."

 

[IndependntLogic]

Sooooo.........Syria has wmd's but Iraq didn't? I'm deeply flummoxed.

Agreed.

VERY perplexing.

This might call for some visual aids.

Let's go old school. Let us start with a "map."

Let's see if we can locate Iraq in relation to Syria.

Now, HOW might ol' Saddam have gotten the WMDs that he didn't have out of Iraq?

Hm.

Yep.

It's a puzzlement alright.

WOW Color me shocked.

Syria has WMD's??

No. We don't need to invade them.

Gotta love Liability! Um yeah. They're close to each other. oooh! I guess that means that Iraq is pals with Saudi Arabia? Hey, Israel is pretty close! They must be buddies too! Un f-ing real how stupid people can be when they want to believe something because of political blindness.

The article cited indicate that this has nothing to do with Iraq at all - that Syria has had their own program for years. The article indicates that Bush was wrong about Iraq and in contrast, this is to be taken "Syria-lessly" (sorry, couldn't help it!).
From the article you cite: "We are talking about legitimate WMDs here -- this isn't Iraq. The administration is really concerned about loose WMDs."

And for those completely blinded by party to the obvious, Syria supported the coalition against Iraq in the Gulf War. When Saddam took power, Syria closed their embassy. These weren't "pals" folks.

But even then, as the article claims, the ONLY concern revealed is because we know Syria has had their own program.

This just adds to the long list of reasons we should not listen to the Republicans who are importuning for us to get more involved in Syria. Instead, we should listen to Obama and Clinton - Stay TF out of it.
We don't know who is behind the uprising.
We don't have access to 1000 miles of shoreline as we did in Libya.
We know at least 20 - 30% of the population still support al-Assad and it could be more.
Heavy collateral damage would be impossible to avoid, so we'll end up looking like bad guys.
It's NOT our f-ing business.

 

[Peach]

Agreed.

VERY perplexing.

This might call for some visual aids.

Let's go old school. Let us start with a "map."

Let's see if we can locate Iraq in relation to Syria.

Now, HOW might ol' Saddam have gotten the WMDs that he didn't have out of Iraq?

Hm.

Yep.

It's a puzzlement alright.

WOW Color me shocked.

Syria has WMD's??

No. We don't need to invade them.

Gotta love Liability! Um yeah. They're close to each other. oooh! I guess that means that Iraq is pals with Saudi Arabia? Hey, Israel is pretty close! They must be buddies too! Un f-ing real how stupid people can be when they want to believe something because of political blindness.

The article cited indicate that this has nothing to do with Iraq at all - that Syria has had their own program for years. The article indicates that Bush was wrong about Iraq and in contrast, this is to be taken "Syria-lessly" (sorry, couldn't help it!).
From the article you cite: "We are talking about legitimate WMDs here -- this isn't Iraq. The administration is really concerned about loose WMDs."

And for those completely blinded by party to the obvious, Syria supported the coalition against Iraq in the Gulf War. When Saddam took power, Syria closed their embassy. These weren't "pals" folks.

But even then, as the article claims, the ONLY concern revealed is because we know Syria has had their own program.

This just adds to the long list of reasons we should not listen to the Republicans who are importuning for us to get more involved in Syria. Instead, we should listen to Obama and Clinton - Stay TF out of it.
We don't know who is behind the uprising.
We don't have access to 1000 miles of shoreline as we did in Libya.
We know at least 20 - 30% of the population still support al-Assad and it could be more.
Heavy collateral damage would be impossible to avoid, so we'll end up looking like bad guys.
It's NOT our f-ing business.

Yep, India, No. Korea, Russia and Iran sold them all they needed.

 

[Peach]

I was there,and saw so much in the way of manufacrured substances,buried,etc..

Okay maybe so. But I'm sure you're aware that everyone here claims to have graduated from Harvard with a specialty in Constitutional Law, MIT with a PhD in Physics; oh yes and an LLM in Tax from NYU; received six purple hearts during their TOD's in IRaq, Afghanistan and of course the places they can't mention and so on...
So I'm not sure what you saw but I'm very confident there were no WMD's in Iraq. Except the ones we gave them, which went inert long before the first Gulf War.
The evidence is overwhelming to this effect.
I in no way am saying I believe you to be a liar, btw.

Harvard has fields of concentration.

 

[Decepticon]

Why do you cap certain words as if the emphasis from your blathering becomes more relevant if you do?
Just curious.

it's like having a conversation with a tourrette suffering person....

Are you ever going to say something relevant or salient or are you just going to call me names...because if that's what you want...here you go....

Having a conversation with you is not unlike having one with a retarded syphilitic chimp who incessantly masturbates into his OWN mouth.

Glad you went there, amateur?
Did you like the part where I cap'd "OWN" to let everyone know with EXTRA EMPHASIS where your manjuice goes?

Carry on. Like that chimp, you certainly don't need ME here for you to continue what it is you do.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Yep, India, No. Korea, Russia and Iran sold them all they needed.

Well the article states clearly they had their own program for years but it would be reasonable to speculate that Iran might have helped them. While Iraq was Sunni under Saddam, Iran and Syria were Shia Allies.
Of course, once Bush put in a Shia government, that barrier was eliminated and now all three share the same radical flavor of kool-aid. Wonderful.

In any case, we should ignore the Republicans who are calling for us to get more involved and listen to Obama and Hillary. This one is VERY different than Libya.

 

[Liability]

Agreed.

VERY perplexing.

This might call for some visual aids.

Let's go old school. Let us start with a "map."

Let's see if we can locate Iraq in relation to Syria.

Now, HOW might ol' Saddam have gotten the WMDs that he didn't have out of Iraq?

Hm.

Yep.

It's a puzzlement alright.

WOW Color me shocked.

Syria has WMD's??

No. We don't need to invade them.

Gotta love Liability! Um yeah. They're close to each other. oooh! I guess that means that Iraq is pals with Saudi Arabia? Hey, Israel is pretty close! They must be buddies too! Un f-ing real how stupid people can be when they want to believe something because of political blindness.

The article cited indicate that this has nothing to do with Iraq at all - that Syria has had their own program for years. The article indicates that Bush was wrong about Iraq and in contrast, this is to be taken "Syria-lessly" (sorry, couldn't help it!).
From the article you cite: "We are talking about legitimate WMDs here -- this isn't Iraq. The administration is really concerned about loose WMDs."

And for those completely blinded by party to the obvious, Syria supported the coalition against Iraq in the Gulf War. When Saddam took power, Syria closed their embassy. These weren't "pals" folks.

But even then, as the article claims, the ONLY concern revealed is because we know Syria has had their own program.

This just adds to the long list of reasons we should not listen to the Republicans who are importuning for us to get more involved in Syria. Instead, we should listen to Obama and Clinton - Stay TF out of it.
We don't know who is behind the uprising.
We don't have access to 1000 miles of shoreline as we did in Libya.
We know at least 20 - 30% of the population still support al-Assad and it could be more.
Heavy collateral damage would be impossible to avoid, so we'll end up looking like bad guys.
It's NOT our f-ing business.

The point, of course, was not that their spatial proximity made them friends, you sub-moron.

The point was that sending WMD over the border to Syria required no special magic.

They were already similarly inclined.

The reason for that has already been expressed right here in this very thread, ya pathetic dim wit.

 

[paulitician]

What I want to know is what happens when we invade Syria and Saddam's WMD's aren't there either?

CONZ are so STUPID, even YEARS AFTER it's all too apparent they were lied to and played for CHUMPS by Bushco and the neocons, they STILL cling to the lies the Bush administration told them rather than admit they were wrong. Not to mention their apparently willingness to send our young men and women into battle because of shitty intelligence, poorly interpreted. AGAIN!

Is there any lesson so painful, you CONZ might actually LEARN it? Or does pretending you didn't go to war for nothing and wreck the economy through your agenda of deregulation work to inoculate you from your dismal failures?

Error in your programming there Obama-Bot. We're talking about your girl Hillary Clinton claiming Syria has WMD. Reboot and try to keep up.

 

[paulitician]

Yep, India, No. Korea, Russia and Iran sold them all they needed.

Well the article states clearly they had their own program for years but it would be reasonable to speculate that Iran might have helped them. While Iraq was Sunni under Saddam, Iran and Syria were Shia Allies.
Of course, once Bush put in a Shia government, that barrier was eliminated and now all three share the same radical flavor of kool-aid. Wonderful.

In any case, we should ignore the Republicans who are calling for us to get more involved and listen to Obama and Hillary. This one is VERY different than Libya.

So ignore Clinton claiming Syria has WMD? Cool. Gotcha.

 

[IndependntLogic]

WOW Color me shocked.

Syria has WMD's??

No. We don't need to invade them.

Gotta love Liability! Um yeah. They're close to each other. oooh! I guess that means that Iraq is pals with Saudi Arabia? Hey, Israel is pretty close! They must be buddies too! Un f-ing real how stupid people can be when they want to believe something because of political blindness.

The article cited indicate that this has nothing to do with Iraq at all - that Syria has had their own program for years. The article indicates that Bush was wrong about Iraq and in contrast, this is to be taken "Syria-lessly" (sorry, couldn't help it!).
From the article you cite: "We are talking about legitimate WMDs here -- this isn't Iraq. The administration is really concerned about loose WMDs."

And for those completely blinded by party to the obvious, Syria supported the coalition against Iraq in the Gulf War. When Saddam took power, Syria closed their embassy. These weren't "pals" folks.

But even then, as the article claims, the ONLY concern revealed is because we know Syria has had their own program.

This just adds to the long list of reasons we should not listen to the Republicans who are importuning for us to get more involved in Syria. Instead, we should listen to Obama and Clinton - Stay TF out of it.
We don't know who is behind the uprising.
We don't have access to 1000 miles of shoreline as we did in Libya.
We know at least 20 - 30% of the population still support al-Assad and it could be more.
Heavy collateral damage would be impossible to avoid, so we'll end up looking like bad guys.
It's NOT our f-ing business.

The point, of course, was not that their spatial proximity made them friends, you sub-moron.

The point was that sending WMD over the border to Syria required no special magic.

They were already similarly inclined.
The reason for that has already been expressed right here in this very thread, ya pathetic dim wit.

By similarly inclined, you mean what? Similarly inclined ENEMIES?

Look, Liability we all know the only thing between you and an intelligent post is your IQ and that's fine. The people needs pudgy dumb people too.

What part of "Syria had their OWN program" is too difficult for you to understand. Oh wait. NM.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Yep, India, No. Korea, Russia and Iran sold them all they needed.

Well the article states clearly they had their own program for years but it would be reasonable to speculate that Iran might have helped them. While Iraq was Sunni under Saddam, Iran and Syria were Shia Allies.
Of course, once Bush put in a Shia government, that barrier was eliminated and now all three share the same radical flavor of kool-aid. Wonderful.

In any case, we should ignore the Republicans who are calling for us to get more involved and listen to Obama and Hillary. This one is VERY different than Libya.

So ignore Clinton claiming Syria has WMD? Cool. Gotcha.

Why would I ignore that? My position is simply that we shouldn't go invading yet another country in the ME. Why is yours different?

 

[Annie]

Just an observation, search 'back when' on WMD's moving from Iraq to Syria are pay per view, at MSM sites:

https://www.google.com/search?q=ira...f.,cf.osb&fp=541b09d131a788ce&biw=882&bih=409

 

[paulitician]

Well the article states clearly they had their own program for years but it would be reasonable to speculate that Iran might have helped them. While Iraq was Sunni under Saddam, Iran and Syria were Shia Allies.
Of course, once Bush put in a Shia government, that barrier was eliminated and now all three share the same radical flavor of kool-aid. Wonderful.

In any case, we should ignore the Republicans who are calling for us to get more involved and listen to Obama and Hillary. This one is VERY different than Libya.

So ignore Clinton claiming Syria has WMD? Cool. Gotcha.

Why would I ignore that? My position is simply that we shouldn't go invading yet another country in the ME. Why is yours different?

You have an error in your Obama-Bot programming. Hillary Clinton is claiming Syria has WMD. She is 'Warning' about their WMD. So how do you take her 'Warning' to mean she's stating we shouldn't get more involved? Looks like you got lost in the translation somewhere. What do you think her 'Warning' will lead to? Think about it.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Just an observation, search 'back when' on WMD's moving from Iraq to Syria are pay per view, at MSM sites:

https://www.google.com/search?q=ira...f.,cf.osb&fp=541b09d131a788ce&biw=882&bih=409

I give you credit for this post and I remember those rumors. I have friends in NIS, ForCon and Cal. There was a lot of speculation and then excuse making but zero was ever substantiated. The thing that I'm sure will be in there somewhere, was all the confusion and obfuscation over whether Iraq was sending WMD's to Syria or they were getting help from Syria's WMD program for their own but again, this never panned out.
The one thing that will be verified if you do searches like that, is that we knew that Syria had their own program - which is my assertation.

 

[The T]

Damn! Now we have to spend another trillion and thousands of lives to invade them too?

An Invasion is unlikely. But we will fund and help with the bombing & killing. They should be labelling Assad 'Worse than Hitler' any day now. So stay tuned.

It's just another diversion for Obama.

Anything to divert attention from his abysmal record.

 

[paulitician]

'Wag the Dog.'