WTF??!! WMD's after all!!!!

[Politico]

We know Iraq had chemical weapons all along because we sold them to them.

So Bush didn't lie.

End of story.

Yes he did. CNN told us so.

 

[August West]

We know Iraq had chemical weapons all along because we sold them to them.

So Bush didn't lie.

End of story.

Bush didn`t lie? Only 935 times he did.
Study Bush aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

 

[JakeStarkey]

Elektra, thank you, and please go study the evidence before writing crazy things about orphans being forced against their wishes into homosexual life styles.

 

[JoeB131]

Here's the problem. Chemical weapons really AREN'T a weapon of mass destruction. They really don't cause that much damage unless you use a mass barrage. Even in World War I, they only accounted for 4% of fatalities. They weren't used at all in World War II.

tell that to the kurds fuckstick

Of the 182,000 Kurds killed in the Al-anfal campaign, only about 3200 were killed in a chemical attack. the rest were killed with bullets and artillery and starvation. It took 15 sorties of 7-8 planes each, and was done in cordination with conventional bombardments with high explosives and napalm. .

So really, under the most ideal conditions- not that much damage.

BUT OH MY GOD, SADDAM MIGHT HAVE SOME BLISTER AGENT THAT EXPIRED YEARS AGO, THE WAR HAS TO HAPPEN!!!!!!

Fact is, we didn't give a fuck about the Kurds until Saddam started threatening the Oil Company Profits and the Zionist's ability to play "God Loves us the Very Best."

 

[JoeB131]

From a practical perspective, what is your opinion of the effects of VX vs. say, Ebola?

If you had a choice, which one would you choose?

.

It would depend what protective equipment I had. Ebola is only spread through the passing of bodily fluids.

 

[JoeB131]

Well, to start with, we had Saddam's sons in Law, who told Scott Ritter and other inspectors that we had really gotten most of the WMD's.

We had invoices from all the countries that sold Saddam components, and compared them to what was destroyed or accounted for, and we knew we got most of them.

Scott Ritter? Even a Bush hater like you knows Ritter was a leftist clown determined to embarrass the Bush WH. And what would you expect "Saddam's sons in law" to claim? Seriously? And let's say that Bush had admitted the nastiest stuff that Saddam had was trucked into Syria....imagine the outcry to go get it and engage another front when we already had Iran on opposite flank. And let's get real....the reason for the invasion of Iraq was to draw in al-Qaida to fight our Military instead of our office workers in the WTC and Pentagon. They ran from us in Afghanistan so we had to draw them to us somewhere nice and flat and open....Iraq fit the bill....and we murdered them by the bushel.

Not that I buy for a moment that Saddam trucked his goodies to Syria when Bashir Assad was his enemy. But what you are saying is that Bush lied about where the weapons went.

And, no, invading a country that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda did not diminish Al Qaeda. IN fact, what it did do was lose most of the international sympathy we had with the rest of the world, as we kind of looked like the jackasses when there wreen't any WMD's found.

 

[JoeB131]

"Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”"

Ibid

Of course no one likes criticism. But some folks expect to be able to lie their way out of being held responsible when they make a mistake.

This sounds exactly like the mindset of the Liberals in the White House making the decisions which led to the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi on the day & night of 9/11/12.

Liberals can not be trusted with great power. They do this shit instinctively.

Hardwiring.

That's why Mitt Romney lost.

He isn't a well practiced liar.

Romney is a Mormon. Mormons can't tell the difference between truth and lies. They are really that stupid.

But to the point. We did not go to war with Iraq over Expired canisters of chemical weapons that had been buried in 1991. We went to war because Saddam was making a nuke and was going to give it to Bin Laden.

Bush Lied. People Died.

 

[JoeB131]

Don't hide behind some faux concern for "our men" when you're talking to someone that has actually been there. If you have a point regarding the risk posed by Saddam having binary-agent Sarin or Mustard weapons vs. nuclear weapons then make it.

Are you saying without the "mushroom cloud" statement you would have not supported the invasion?

I would say that if Bush had said, "We know Saddam is nowhere near a nuke and he doesn't have Anthrax, but we think he might still have some chemical weapons from 1991 that have no doubt expired because they've exceeded their shelf life, but darn it, we need to go after that guy anyway because he tried to kill my Daddy once!"

Most sensible people would have laughed at him.

 

[JoeB131]

Binary agents do not deteriorate in relatively short periods of time. The shells discussed in the article were every bit as lethal as they were the day they were manufactured.

Subject SHELF LIFE OF IRAQ S CW AGENTS

Did you actually read what you posted?

Here, I will help you out.

20 FEBRUARY 1991

1. CIA AND DIA AGREE THAT IRAQLS CURRENT STOCKS OF

MUSTARD ARE STABLE AND SHOULD REMAIN EFFECTIVE FOR SEVERAL

YEARS.

Point being- Anything they made in 1991 would have been expired by 2003.

CIA AND DIA HAVE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENTS OF THE SHELF

LIFE OF IRAQ'S UNITARY NERVE AGENTS. BOTH AGENCIES AGREE THAT

IRAQ HAS ENCOUNTERED DIFFICULTY OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS WITH

THE SHELF LIFE OF ITS UNITARY NERVE AGENTS. DIA BELIEVES THAT

THE PROBLEM PERSISTS, THAT THE STOCKPILE OF NERVE AGENTS WILL

BE UNUSABLE BY LATE MARCH, AND THAT DAMAGE TO PRODUCTION

FACILITIES WILL FORCE THE IRAQIS TO RELY ON STOCKPILED AGENTS.

 

[DriftingSand]

We know Iraq had chemical weapons all along because we sold them to them.

That may be but the punchline for the past 9 or 10 years is that there were no WMD's. Go out and ask 100 people today and 95% of them will say no WMD's.

This isnt a thread about whether we should have went or not.........its about how crooked our government is. No wonder Obama lies every day.......he got it from Bush!!!

We're getting hosed s0ns!!! They want all this partisan bickering going on while they amass more and more government power!!

It may boil down to ones definition of "weapon of mass destruction." I generally think of nuclear bombs capable of mass physical damage. I've never really thought of chemical weapons as WMDs but I suppose that they are in a sense when you think of the damage done to human life and health. So, from that perspective, I suppose WMDs did exist but I was honestly expecting our troops to find "big time" nuclear warheads. So I must say that when those types of WMDs weren't actually found I did lose confidence in Bush's administration as a result.

 

[Care4all]

Sorry, but Gomer Bush and his henchmen/woman claimed there was an ACTIVE chemical and nuclear weapons program not a bunch of crap leftover from the 1980s. This stuff wasn`t a threat to the U.S.

That's like saying that a nuclear bomb like the ones dropped on Japan in 1945 wouldn't be a threat today because they are old.

NO, it's not the same at all....radio active nukes last for millennia, chemical and biological weapons deteriorate in relatively short periods of time.

Powell and Rice said in January of 2001 Saddam and his weapons capability were not a threat....

We also abolished 96.5% of ALL arsenal in Iraq, including chem and biological during gulf war 1, operation dessert storm...according to our military/gvt.

Binary agents do not deteriorate in relatively short periods of time. The shells discussed in the article were every bit as lethal as they were the day they were manufactured.

Subject SHELF LIFE OF IRAQ S CW AGENTS

i don't care....chemical weapons , whatever....they are not nukes, they have no mushroom cloud, they are no reason to send our men off to die for...period.

Don't hide behind some faux concern for "our men" when you're talking to someone that has actually been there. If you have a point regarding the risk posed by Saddam having binary-agent Sarin or Mustard weapons vs. nuclear weapons then make it.

Are you saying without the "mushroom cloud" statement you would have not supported the invasion?

Yes, without nukes there was no constitutional reason to send our men and women off to their possible deaths.

I've always had plenty at stake with my father and husband...

 

[Conservative65]

From a practical perspective, what is your opinion of the effects of VX vs. say, Ebola?

If you had a choice, which one would you choose?

.

It would depend what protective equipment I had. Ebola is only spread through the passing of bodily fluids.

So we are told. There were lots of things about AIDS told related to the same concept only later to be deemed wrong.

 

[BullKurtz]

Not that I buy for a moment that Saddam trucked his goodies to Syria when Bashir Assad was his enemy. But what you are saying is that Bush lied about where the weapons went.

And, no, invading a country that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda did not diminish Al Qaeda. IN fact, what it did do was lose most of the international sympathy we had with the rest of the world, as we kind of looked like the jackasses when there wreen't any WMD's found.

Hey, I told ya what happened and why......not my duty to correct your sorry horseshit further. Just understand that when you spew your ignorant crap around folks who know better....well, you'll just get laughed at.

 

[JakeStarkey]

BullKurtzUSMC, no true blue American buys any of what you are selling.

 

[JoeB131]

Not that I buy for a moment that Saddam trucked his goodies to Syria when Bashir Assad was his enemy. But what you are saying is that Bush lied about where the weapons went.

And, no, invading a country that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda did not diminish Al Qaeda. IN fact, what it did do was lose most of the international sympathy we had with the rest of the world, as we kind of looked like the jackasses when there wreen't any WMD's found.

Hey, I told ya what happened and why......not my duty to correct your sorry horseshit further. Just understand that when you spew your ignorant crap around folks who know better....well, you'll just get laughed at.

Okay, guy, nobody looks at the Iraq War and says, "What a great thing that was".

 

[Youch]

New York Times lead today........

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0

Should tell every board member here........the government, no matter who is in charge, is lying to us every single day!!!

Most in the government at the time, including myself, was telling the world the truth, that WMD did exists. It wasn't hard to prove, given that we sold most of it to them, given that the 10s of thousands of Kurds were killed by it, and many, many US personnel were involved in dealing with it.

But liberal media and academia and politicos chose a different path. And masses of maleducated drones bought into it. Thus the ignorant flatulence we've seen and read since.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Is this story losing its RW luster already?

That is encouraging.

 

[Geaux4it]

From a practical perspective, what is your opinion of the effects of VX vs. say, Ebola?

If you had a choice, which one would you choose?

.

It would depend what protective equipment I had. Ebola is only spread through the passing of bodily fluids.

And you know this how?

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

From a practical perspective, what is your opinion of the effects of VX vs. say, Ebola?

If you had a choice, which one would you choose?

.

It would depend what protective equipment I had. Ebola is only spread through the passing of bodily fluids.

And you know this how?

-Geaux

Well, gosh, darn, Cleetus, that's what SCIENTISTS tell us. I know you don't have those down in Talking Snake Country. Where Rick Perry cut the shit out of medical spending and then wonders why his state is the one getting hit....

 

[Geaux4it]

From a practical perspective, what is your opinion of the effects of VX vs. say, Ebola?

If you had a choice, which one would you choose?

.

It would depend what protective equipment I had. Ebola is only spread through the passing of bodily fluids.

And you know this how?

-Geaux

Well, gosh, darn, Cleetus, that's what SCIENTISTS tell us. I know you don't have those down in Talking Snake Country. Where Rick Perry cut the shit out of medical spending and then wonders why his state is the one getting hit....

Thanks. Just as I thought. You don't know as your source is not credible

-Geaux