QUOTE(Buffmaster)Try reading the entire thread before mouthing off, your little rant has already been covered.
None of the points in my post have been addressed by those wanting to believe in Iraqi WMD.
chemical WMD found in Iraq???
- raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
To XEN, we have a lot of information about what they found that has never been declassified. Some haven't even been translated.
--------
Lightfoot, the crimes against Saddam Hussein have NO statute of limitations. We could execute him for the missile strike on our embassy alone... and THAT IS PROVEN. In fact, Clinton talked about doing it. Once allegedly guilty , you can at any time be demanded to bring yourself to trial. He refused.
The Security Council has five permanent members. We are the big gun of the big five. Britain is number 2. Though Russia was at one time. As senior member of the Security Council, we issues that warrant.
We LEGALLY declared a warrant for Saddam Hussein's capture. He resisted. WE WENT AND GOT HIM.
If you shoot at the cops, when they come for you,.. they shoot back.
We did violate his borders, by the warrant we issued. We met with criticism because we got tired of arguing. We did not find ALL the material evidence belived to to be in his possession, but we did find that most of his own generals don't even know what he did with half the stuff. We also found documented evidence that he acknowedged "burying" Weapons of Mass Destruction in Syria. Syria has denied the allegations. We are not pursuing a course of action against Syria, but being that Saddam his fighter jets by burying them, there is no reason to think he is incapable or uninclined to do so. In fact, he was in a hole himself when they caught him.
-----
The biggest problem with this scenario is they did hype the threat, and *understandably so*. HE IS BEING TRIED FOR PAST CRIMES PUNISHABLE BY DEATH. We had just suffered a major attack, and the whole Afghanistan Taliban threat was recovering for another round. They went with a worst case scenario to give other people validation for the need to arrest him for crimes of the past. Some people will only do what is right when facing imminent and personal repercussions to do so.
problem is they in their media storm kinda forgot to keep reminding people of what Saddam is actually accused of. And it became an issue like so. Say a guy kills a prostitute in a drunk driving accident, and flees the country, even though he is a imortant figure in the government. Then he comes back, with foreign influence, and they kinda sweep it under the rug. He never goes to jail. Then they get a warrant to search his place for illegal drugs. They can bring him in on the previous charges, and still search his house for further evidence. But if he is a Kennedy, he will go to rehab, at most.
Well,.. Saddam isn't a Kennedy.
--------
Lightfoot, the crimes against Saddam Hussein have NO statute of limitations. We could execute him for the missile strike on our embassy alone... and THAT IS PROVEN. In fact, Clinton talked about doing it. Once allegedly guilty , you can at any time be demanded to bring yourself to trial. He refused.
The Security Council has five permanent members. We are the big gun of the big five. Britain is number 2. Though Russia was at one time. As senior member of the Security Council, we issues that warrant.
We LEGALLY declared a warrant for Saddam Hussein's capture. He resisted. WE WENT AND GOT HIM.
If you shoot at the cops, when they come for you,.. they shoot back.
We did violate his borders, by the warrant we issued. We met with criticism because we got tired of arguing. We did not find ALL the material evidence belived to to be in his possession, but we did find that most of his own generals don't even know what he did with half the stuff. We also found documented evidence that he acknowedged "burying" Weapons of Mass Destruction in Syria. Syria has denied the allegations. We are not pursuing a course of action against Syria, but being that Saddam his fighter jets by burying them, there is no reason to think he is incapable or uninclined to do so. In fact, he was in a hole himself when they caught him.
-----
The biggest problem with this scenario is they did hype the threat, and *understandably so*. HE IS BEING TRIED FOR PAST CRIMES PUNISHABLE BY DEATH. We had just suffered a major attack, and the whole Afghanistan Taliban threat was recovering for another round. They went with a worst case scenario to give other people validation for the need to arrest him for crimes of the past. Some people will only do what is right when facing imminent and personal repercussions to do so.
problem is they in their media storm kinda forgot to keep reminding people of what Saddam is actually accused of. And it became an issue like so. Say a guy kills a prostitute in a drunk driving accident, and flees the country, even though he is a imortant figure in the government. Then he comes back, with foreign influence, and they kinda sweep it under the rug. He never goes to jail. Then they get a warrant to search his place for illegal drugs. They can bring him in on the previous charges, and still search his house for further evidence. But if he is a Kennedy, he will go to rehab, at most.
Well,.. Saddam isn't a Kennedy.
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |
- Buffmaster
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:37 am
- Location: The Alamo
WMD: Lost and Found
WMD's
Big Red died 23 NOV 2001
You owe your success to your first wife. You owe your second wife to your success---Sean Connery
You owe your success to your first wife. You owe your second wife to your success---Sean Connery
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |
- Buffmaster
- Posts: 3570
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:37 am
- Location: The Alamo
Post: Ex-CIA agent's warnings on WMD validity ignored
Bombshell? The Dems are dancing in the streets
Why is he coning out now? That's right, November is right around the corner, and at the same time, the Dems are starting to care about us again.
Why is he coning out now? That's right, November is right around the corner, and at the same time, the Dems are starting to care about us again.
Big Red died 23 NOV 2001
You owe your success to your first wife. You owe your second wife to your success---Sean Connery
You owe your success to your first wife. You owe your second wife to your success---Sean Connery
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |
- x3n
- Posts: 1177
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 3:22 pm
I don't get the enthusiasm to provide "WMDs" as the driving force behind this war, when years later, only Santorum is trying to get attention over these findings.
Why him, why not Rumsfield, or press Secretary, just Santorum.
Why him, why not Rumsfield, or press Secretary, just Santorum.
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |
- raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
Rick Santorum fought to get this out, because it is enough to show people, there is a presence of collateral WMD material. that is enough to constitute a threat.
he has already acknowledged there is a good deal that is not being shown to the public.
most everyone else is not concerned with making operational intelligence public, for the sake of proving that collateral WMD material exists. and they don't want any more public.
Cheney has nothing to do with it. And Bush doesn't care what people want to know, he doesn't like giving up information about Anti-Terror Operations.
And most people don't want to make a big deal out of it, because it is not the HUGE PAYLOAD most people were expecting.
but as a person who saw furst-hand what a tiny tablet of noxious gas did to a room full of navy recruits, I can tell you now, no civilian will truly understand the threat those findings pose.
he has already acknowledged there is a good deal that is not being shown to the public.
most everyone else is not concerned with making operational intelligence public, for the sake of proving that collateral WMD material exists. and they don't want any more public.
Cheney has nothing to do with it. And Bush doesn't care what people want to know, he doesn't like giving up information about Anti-Terror Operations.
And most people don't want to make a big deal out of it, because it is not the HUGE PAYLOAD most people were expecting.
but as a person who saw furst-hand what a tiny tablet of noxious gas did to a room full of navy recruits, I can tell you now, no civilian will truly understand the threat those findings pose.
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |
- x3n
- Posts: 1177
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 3:22 pm
-
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:38 pm
I'm bumping this so I remember to read it tomorrow. This is definitely interesting.
BBcode: | |
Hide post links |