chemical WMD found in Iraq???

News, politics, economy, local and global information, geography, life, living, and travel forum.
Lightfoot
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 6:06 pm

#21

Post by Lightfoot »

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.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
raum
Posts: 3944
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am

#22

Post by raum »

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.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
Buffmaster
Posts: 3570
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:37 am
Location: The Alamo

WMD: Lost and Found

#23

Post by Buffmaster »

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

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
Buffmaster
Posts: 3570
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 11:37 am
Location: The Alamo

Post: Ex-CIA agent's warnings on WMD validity ignored

#24

Post by Buffmaster »

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.
Big Red died 23 NOV 2001


You owe your success to your first wife. You owe your second wife to your success---Sean Connery

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
x3n
Posts: 1177
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 3:22 pm

#25

Post by x3n »

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.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
raum
Posts: 3944
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am

#26

Post by raum »

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.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
User avatar
x3n
Posts: 1177
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 3:22 pm

#27

Post by x3n »

Good enough.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
Bot
Posts: 4503
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:38 pm

#28

Post by Bot »

I'm bumping this so I remember to read it tomorrow. This is definitely interesting.

BBcode:
Hide post links
Show post links
Post Reply