Who Is Right About WMDs in Iraq, the Right or Trump?

[Muhammed]

So who is correct about Saddam's WMDs, Chumps: the Right or Donald Trump?

Simple question. And you will dodge and weave and close this topic and pretend you didn't see it.

Trump was wrong. The fact of the matter is that the NGIC recovered WMD in Iraq, including nerve agents. However what was much more concerning than that IMO, is the fact that Al Qaeda had a WMD research and production facility in the territory they controlled in Iraq. What was also a major concern is that the ROI had an indigenous NBC capability. So even if you got rid of them, they could simply make more at their convenience.

Anyone who says there was no WMD in Iraq is just plain wrong. They are either ignorant of the facts or simply lying.

Really? We found WMD (whatever that means)?

Yes.

(((Liar)))

Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

Of course the Hussein apologists and other LWNJ miscreants in the forum will probably try to say that sarin is harmless.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

cnelsen, post: 17090690

He wasn't lying about the intelligence. The intelligence was phony. Bush is culpable, no doubt. But he wasn't operating in a vacuum. There was the Mossad bullshit, the Feith-Wolfowitz-et al, and members of the press, remember Thomas Cakewalk Friedman?

I agree on pre-inspection intelligence. Bush deliberately and clearly lied about intelligence on March 17, 2003.

If Bush actually had intelligence that left no doubt that Saddam Hussein was hiding the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors, he had to be lying.

(1) Ten days prior he had no such intelligence when he offered in a draft resoloution to the UNSC that Saddam Hussein could remain in power if the inspectors could finish their work within ten days. If Bush had that undoubtably intelligence he could not make that offer to call off the invasion.

(2) So we are to believe that our intelligence agencies gathered sometime between March 7 through March 17 this finding that Iraq was actually hiding WMD from the inspectors. Not at all likely.

(3) If some final moments of decision intelligence was found about actual WMD being hidden during that brief time period, doubtless intelligence would to have witnessed the actual physical location, type and quantities of WMD discovered. We know post-invasion that the invaders had absolutely no idea as to where all that hidden WMD could be found.

(4) If Bush had in fact intelligence on hidden WMD he had already obligated himself and the USA to provide that intelligence to the inspectors in order to be verified. Then when found to be false war would have been avoided. Bush lied by withholding intelligence because he also claimed that all US intelligence was being turned over to the inspectors.

There was no last minute intelligence. Bush clearly lied they day in March when he decided to invade and kill to find those hidden WMD.

 

[Rustic]

cnelsen, post: 17090690

He wasn't lying about the intelligence. The intelligence was phony. Bush is culpable, no doubt. But he wasn't operating in a vacuum. There was the Mossad bullshit, the Feith-Wolfowitz-et al, and members of the press, remember Thomas Cakewalk Friedman?

I agree on pre-inspection intelligence. Bush deliberately and clearly lied about intelligence on March 17, 2003.

If Bush actually had intelligence that left no doubt that Saddam Hussein was hiding the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors, he had to be lying.

(1) Ten days prior he had no such intelligence when he offered in a draft resoloution to the UNSC that Saddam Hussein could remain in power if the inspectors could finish their work within ten days. If Bush had that undoubtably intelligence he could not make that offer to call off the invasion.

(2) So we are to believe that our intelligence agencies gathered sometime between March 7 through March 17 this finding that Iraq was actually hiding WMD from the inspectors. Not at all likely.

(3) If some final moments of decision intelligence was found about actual WMD being hidden during that brief time period, doubtless intelligence would to have witnessed the actual physical location, type and quantities of WMD discovered. We know post-invasion that the invaders had absolutely no idea as to where all that hidden WMD could be found.

(4) If Bush had in fact intelligence on hidden WMD he had already obligated himself and the USA to provide that intelligence to the inspectors in order to be verified. Then when found to be false war would have been avoided. Bush lied by withholding intelligence because he also claimed that all US intelligence was being turned over to the inspectors.

There was no last minute intelligence. Bush clearly lied they day in March when he decided to invade and kill to find those hidden WMD.

Syria inherited Saddam's chemical weapons… Fact

 

[cnelsen]

Of course the Hussein apologists and other LWNJ miscreants in the forum will probably try to say that sarin is harmless.

Haha from the link you provided: "The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added."

So, we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, murdered the leader of the country, lost thousands of American lives, caused the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and spent over a trillion dollars to stop the threat from some chemical weapons (that we probably supplied in the first place) that had been left lying around gathering rust since the 1980s? And you are touting this as a "success"? As justification? You people are a fucking menace. Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman's fat ass should be horse-whipped in public and then hauled off to the roughest penitentiary in the country where he can spend the rest of his life contemplating his crimes.

 

[cnelsen]

cnelsen, post: 17090690

He wasn't lying about the intelligence. The intelligence was phony. Bush is culpable, no doubt. But he wasn't operating in a vacuum. There was the Mossad bullshit, the Feith-Wolfowitz-et al, and members of the press, remember Thomas Cakewalk Friedman?

I agree on pre-inspection intelligence. Bush deliberately and clearly lied about intelligence on March 17, 2003.

If Bush actually had intelligence that left no doubt that Saddam Hussein was hiding the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors, he had to be lying.

(1) Ten days prior he had no such intelligence when he offered in a draft resoloution to the UNSC that Saddam Hussein could remain in power if the inspectors could finish their work within ten days. If Bush had that undoubtably intelligence he could not make that offer to call off the invasion.

(2) So we are to believe that our intelligence agencies gathered sometime between March 7 through March 17 this finding that Iraq was actually hiding WMD from the inspectors. Not at all likely.

(3) If some final moments of decision intelligence was found about actual WMD being hidden during that brief time period, doubtless intelligence would to have witnessed the actual physical location, type and quantities of WMD discovered. We know post-invasion that the invaders had absolutely no idea as to where all that hidden WMD could be found.

(4) If Bush had in fact intelligence on hidden WMD he had already obligated himself and the USA to provide that intelligence to the inspectors in order to be verified. Then when found to be false war would have been avoided. Bush lied by withholding intelligence because he also claimed that all US intelligence was being turned over to the inspectors.

There was no last minute intelligence. Bush clearly lied they day in March when he decided to invade and kill to find those hidden WMD.

When was the phony Mossad intelligence supposedly supplied by that Zacarawi guy delivered to the Admin?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

And Bush didn't start anything there was technically no end to the war Saddam started when he broke the peace agreement.

UNSC Resolution 1441 was a new peace agreement giving Saddam Hussein a final opportunity to comply with all previous Resolutions. That was November 2002.

1441 was the governing Resolution under which resumed inspections were taking place.

The war was over during 1441 and Bush wrote and accepted that condition.

The Bush not Saddam Hussein broke the peace and all chances for resolving the WMD issue peacefully.

That is all public fact. Everyone can know that if they want to take their head out of Bush's lying ass.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Here was the Right's position on WMDs in Iraq, right up to the present day:

Fox News 2002: Iraq Likely Has Weapons of Mass Destruction

Fox News 2003: The Connection Between 9/11 and Iraq



July 2004: UN Confirms: WMDs Smuggled Out of Iraq

Fox News 2006: Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq


September 2012: 63% of Republicans STILL Think Iraq Had WMDs

There were...Syria has them now.

fuck yeah.

the wmd were transported to syria.

What's this???? MORE EVIDENCE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS

GulfLINK Home

December 2012: Will Saddam’s WMDs Fall into the Hands of Al Qaeda?


June 2014:
Saddam’s WMDs: The Left’s Iraq Lies Exposed

The recent turmoil in Iraq brought on by the rise of the Sunni extremist group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has ironically struck a blow to the American Left’s endlessly repeated narrative that there were no weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq prior to the war.

Indeed.. you're expecting Zombie cattle-like creatures who believe they come from monkey's to be able to read and actually comprehend .. Not going to happen..

October 2013: Flashback: Chemical Weapons In Syria Include WMDs Shipped From Iraq



October 2014: Remember folks when you read this ...THERE WERE NEVER NEVER any WMDs!!!

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

We've heard rumors of this, but now we have the proof.

Bush didn't lie after all folks.

January 2015: Saddam's WMDs Went To Syria, Then Lebanon....


August 2015: ISIS Using WMDs. Where Did They Get Them? HMMMMM????



So we see the Right claimed Saddam had WMDs right up until 2015. This milestone is very important to note.



Now, some mainstream Democrats also believed Saddam had WMDs. Their opinions were formed by the information fed to them by the Bush Administration.

But on the extreme left wing fringes of the Democratic spectrum, there were those who said that it was all lies. They held mass protests all over the country.

So here is the far left liberal Democrat position on WMDs in Iraq:

Oh no! "Negged"? Whatever shall I do?

Bush lied to invade Iraq. Bush lied to invade Iraq.

Say it out loud to yourself. "Bush lied to invade Iraq."

Welcome to Earth.

Back then, a very famous registered New York limousine liberal Democrat also voiced his far left position on the fake news channel CNN:


Trump: "I was surprised that she (Nancy Pelosi) didn't do more in terms of Bush and going after Bush. It was almost -- it just seemed like she was going to really look to impeach Bush and get him out of office, which, personally, I think would have been a wonderful thing."

Blitzer: "Impeaching him?"

Trump: "Absolutely, for the war, for the war."

Blitzer: "Because of the conduct of the war."

Trump: "Well, he lied. He got us into the war with lies. And, I mean, look at the trouble Bill Clinton got into with something that was totally unimportant. And they tried to impeach him, which was nonsense. And, yet, Bush got us into this horrible war with lies, by lying, by saying they had weapons of mass destruction, by saying all sorts of things that turned out not to be true."


Trump repeated his far left belief during the 2016 campaign. And the Chumps just sat there and took it. That's why you no longer hear them claiming there were WMDs in Iraq. Because retards vote for anyone who has an R after their name. Even one who was a far left D.

That's how stupid they are.

Yo g, i am honored to be quoted in your OP. But the quote is obviously me being sarcastic.63% of Republicans STILL Think Iraq Had WMDs

 

[whutTHEYsay]

cnelsen, post: 17092182

When was the phony Mossad intelligence supposedly supplied by that Zacarawi guy delivered to the Admin?

Do you know what you are talking about. I don't wear a tin foil hat. Not receiving any signals yet. Explain without a question if you can.

 

[Rustic]

Of course the Hussein apologists and other LWNJ miscreants in the forum will probably try to say that sarin is harmless.

Haha from the link you provided: "The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added."

So, we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, murdered the leader of the country, lost thousands of American lives, caused the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and spent over a trillion dollars to stop the threat from some chemical weapons (that we probably supplied in the first place) that had been left lying around gathering rust since the 1980s? And you are touting this as a "success"? As justification? You people are a fucking menace. Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman's fat ass should be horse-whipped in public and then hauled off to the roughest penitentiary in the country where he can spend the rest of his life contemplating his crimes.

It was a mistake going into Iraq, but it was more of a mistake going into Afghanistan. Afghanistan is where empires go to die Trying to conquer an area that has never been conquered....
Genghis Khan...
Alexander the great…
Roman empire…
The British Empire…
The Soviet union...
Allied forces…
Just to name a few all failed miserably to conquer the area…

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Yo g, i am honored to be quoted in your OP. But the quote is obviously me being sarcastic.63% of Republicans STILL Think Iraq Had WMDs

Sarcasm is not readily obvious in written form. Glad to hear you don't believe that Saddam Hussein was hiding the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors on March 17, 2003, because Bush lied live in TV about that.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Of course the Hussein apologists and other LWNJ miscreants in the forum will probably try to say that sarin is harmless.

Haha from the link you provided: "The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added."

So, we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, murdered the leader of the country, lost thousands of American lives, caused the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and spent over a trillion dollars to stop the threat from some chemical weapons (that we probably supplied in the first place) that had been left lying around gathering rust since the 1980s? And you are touting this as a "success"? As justification? You people are a fucking menace. Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman's fat ass should be horse-whipped in public and then hauled off to the roughest penitentiary in the country where he can spend the rest of his life contemplating his crimes.

It was a mistake going into Iraq, but it was more of a mistake going into Afghanistan. Afghanistan is where empires go to die Trying to conquer an area that has never been conquered....
Genghis Khan...
Alexander the great…
Roman empire…
The British Empire…
The Soviet union...
Allied forces…
Just to name a few all failed miserably to conquer the area…

The US coalition has not attempted to conquer Afghsnstan. Another distraction from the simple question asked.

It was not a mistake because of nuclear weaponized Pakistan is Afghanistan's neighbor. Had al Qaeda and the Taliban been left to be business as usual after 9/11/01 it would have been suicidal for Bush not to take the action he did. Mostly because of Pakistan also being under attack.

 

[Rustic]

And Bush didn't start anything there was technically no end to the war Saddam started when he broke the peace agreement.

UNSC Resolution 1441 was a new peace agreement giving Saddam Hussein a final opportunity to comply with all previous Resolutions. That was November 2002.

1441 was the governing Resolution under which resumed inspections were taking place.

The war was over during 1441 and Bush wrote and accepted that condition.

The Bush not Saddam Hussein broke the peace and all chances for resolving the WMD issue peacefully.

That is all public fact. Everyone can know that if they want to take their head out of Bush's lying ass.

Most likely the weapons of mass destruction he had years to hide them in syria because of the stupidity slow UN negotiation/no fly-zone bullshit.

 

[Desperado]

Iraq was fighting for its' life. If they had WMD's this would have been the perfect time to use them.
They did not. Logic dictates that Iraq never had any WMD'a or else they would have used them against the invading US troops

 

[Rustic]

Of course the Hussein apologists and other LWNJ miscreants in the forum will probably try to say that sarin is harmless.

Haha from the link you provided: "The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added."

So, we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, murdered the leader of the country, lost thousands of American lives, caused the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and spent over a trillion dollars to stop the threat from some chemical weapons (that we probably supplied in the first place) that had been left lying around gathering rust since the 1980s? And you are touting this as a "success"? As justification? You people are a fucking menace. Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman's fat ass should be horse-whipped in public and then hauled off to the roughest penitentiary in the country where he can spend the rest of his life contemplating his crimes.

It was a mistake going into Iraq, but it was more of a mistake going into Afghanistan. Afghanistan is where empires go to die Trying to conquer an area that has never been conquered....
Genghis Khan...
Alexander the great…
Roman empire…
The British Empire…
The Soviet union...
Allied forces…
Just to name a few all failed miserably to conquer the area…

The US coalition has not attempted to conquer Afghsnstan. Another distraction from the simple question asked.

It was not a mistake because of nuclear weaponized Pakistan is Afghanistan's neighbor. Had al Qaeda and the Taliban been left to be business as usual after 9/11/01 it would have been suicidal for Bush not to take the action he did. Mostly because of Pakistan also being under attack.

It has been America's longest war, huge mistake even going there. Like I said empire go there to die.
Just as Bush started the bail out the car companies he had no business going to Afghanistan…

 

[Rustic]

Iraq was fighting for its' life. If they had WMD's this would have been the perfect time to use them.
They did not. Logic dictates that Iraq never had any WMD'a or else they would have used them against the invading US troops

There was a pretty good chance they were in Syria by the time the UN and their slow fucked up way of doing things, checked for them...

 

[whutTHEYsay]

He wasn't lying about the intelligence.

Is it too much to ask you not to speak in broad generic terms about intelligence.

Bush lied only once about intelligence in my view when he claimed to have intelligence on March 17, 2003 that left him no choice but to kick inspectors out in order to bomb and invade to find WMD on his own.

He lied because no such intelligence existed. That is quite different from saying afterward the. Intelligence was all wrong.

 

[Billo_Really]

Is it too much to ask you not to speak in broad generic terms about intelligence.

Bush lied only once about intelligence in my view when he claimed to have intelligence on March 17, 2003 that left him no choice but to kick inspectors out in order to bomb and invade to find WMD on his own.

He lied because no such intelligence existed. That is quite different from saying afterward the. Intelligence was all wrong.

That was a lie to. Bush started the war back in the spring of 2002 by running over 1000 sorties dropping over 600 bombs on over 300 Iraqi targets under the cover of no-fly zone enforcement.

 

[Rustic]

He wasn't lying about the intelligence.

Is it too much to ask you not to speak in broad generic terms about intelligence.

Bush lied only once about intelligence in my view when he claimed to have intelligence on March 17, 2003 that left him no choice but to kick inspectors out in order to bomb and invade to find WMD on his own.

He lied because no such intelligence existed. That is quite different from saying afterward the. Intelligence was all wrong.

The UN "Inspectors" were absolutely incompetent and molasses slow… If Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction he had ages to hide them most likely in Syria.
The UN always has been a fuck up and always will be… Only one thing worse than nationalism is globalism. Fact

 

[Billo_Really]

Haha from the link you provided: "The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added."

So, we invaded a sovereign country that posed no threat to us, murdered the leader of the country, lost thousands of American lives, caused the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and spent over a trillion dollars to stop the threat from some chemical weapons (that we probably supplied in the first place) that had been left lying around gathering rust since the 1980s? And you are touting this as a "success"? As justification? You people are a fucking menace. Thomas "Cakewalk" Friedman's fat ass should be horse-whipped in public and then hauled off to the roughest penitentiary in the country where he can spend the rest of his life contemplating his crimes.

I disagree.

He should spend the rest of his life as a "tossed salad".

 

[Billo_Really]

Come on now, Bush and Cheney saw an easy oil-grab. Iraq barely had a military at that point. The US 'No-Fly Zones', which were illegal, neutralized any real Iraq threat. And the US sanctions alone, killed an estimated 1 Million Iraqis. Most were elderly and children. Iraq was absolutely no threat to the US.

Bush and Cheney used 9/11 as a pretext for their invasion. It was all based on lies. And it turned out to be a horrific blunder. All it achieved, was massive bloody slaughter and the Shiites seizing control of the country. And of course the Shiites are aligned with Shiite Iran. It was a blunder of epic proportions. Americans really should think twice before getting sucked into supporting another brutal war based on evil lies.

What's the problem?

We merely went over there to find out how "our oil" got under "their sand".