news: CIA wrong about purported WMDs

[Javert]

the same thing happened with fidel castro, didn't it?

and Panama, Chile, Nicaragua, Vietnam, and Iran.

you know they have plans ,,

We darn well do. Hell, we started the war, we demand profits from it too. </sarcastic imitation>

 

[clarky003]

i'm saying it's not as bad as you may make it out to be

EDIT: i'm glad we can agree on something, sort of.

of course. deception, and purposeful misleading by world leaders isnt that bad is it.

its so screwed up.. all of this for what? keeping us safe. we are in more danger now because of tension alone.

all of this because of a group of people probably sitting around a table with millions in their pockets. talking about what they want next.

 

[not28]

and Panama, Chile, Nicaragua, Vietnam, and Iran.


We darn well do. Hell, we started the war, we demand profits from it too. </sarcastic imitation>

exactly. we have a pretty solid record of f*cking up. sad but true.

 

[clarky003]

exactly. we have a pretty solid record of f*cking up.

lol, so does Blair. hes playing it low profile at the moment though :hmph:

 

[CptStern]

I'm all read up on my history. Germany and France supported him 10x more with oil money than the U.S. It's always BLAME AMERICA FIRST isn't it?

that's not true. France and germany both had billions of $ in investments in iraq. China, Russia, Germany and US all sold Saddam weapons and WMD. The US sold sddam chemical weapons that were used on the iranian army...they also helped with satalite intelligence reports etc

 

[moz4rt]

of course. deception, and purposeful misleading by world leaders isnt that bad is it.

its so screwed up.. all of this for what? keeping us safe. we are in more danger now because of tension alone.

all of this because of a group of people probably sitting around a table with millions in their pockets. talking about what they want next.

when people don't like what goes on and they can't find any evidence of foul play, then out come the conspiracy theories... alwas a conspiracy theory.

 

[not28]

when people don't like what goes on and they can't find any evidence of foul play, then out come the conspiracy theories... alwas a conspiracy theory.

i would consider today's headline "evidence of foul play."

 

[moz4rt]

that's not true. France and germany both had billions of $ in investments in iraq. China, Russia, Germany and US all sold Saddam weapons and WMD. The US sold sddam chemical weapons that were used on the iranian army...they also helped with satalite intelligence reports etc

you said it yourself- France and germany both had billions of $ in investments in Iraq. That means they supported Iraq. That's also what I've been saying from the beginning.

When you said this a while back:

saddam would have been disposed of a long time ago if he hadnt had US support for 20 years.

you forgot to mention France, Germany, China, and Russia. Why did you forget? Because it's always America's fault.

 

[gusolson]

you must live in an all white community. I've seen it here in canada so I'm sure it must be far more prevelant in the US

Sounds like someones prejudiced against Americans (j/k)

Seriously though, I'm happy sadam is gone and Iraq is getting democracy. The war, IMO, has had a far lesser cost than it could have, and much less than I thought it would when it started. As far as terrorist connections saddam may not have been involved with 9/11 but he's definately supported terrorists.

I don't know that the world is safer with sadam gone, but I think that down the road it could be. If Iraq can become a stable democratic nation I think the middle east will benifit. Unfortunately it might take a while, and having US troops pull out might only invite neighboring countries to carve Iraq to peices.

I don't know that WMD's were that good a reason to go to war in the first place, just thee one used to sell the war. It seemed there were far better reasons to do it (humanitarian concerns, failure to follow U.N. guidlines etc.). What's odd. however is that certain things go unreported in the news, such as the existance of a poison factory in northern Iraq. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that poisons should be considered WMD's, 'cause they're not, but where do you draw the line between a normal acceptable weapon and a weapon of mass destruction when they're in the hands of a madman?

 

[moz4rt]

i would consider today's headline "evidence of foul play."

i already said there were mistakes made and i wish things had been done differently. it's when people start saying these things were deliberate and that "bush did this cause he wanted to and for nothing else" that things turn into a conspiracy theory.

 

[not28]

i already said there were mistakes made and i wish things had been done differently. it's when people start saying these things were deliberate and that "bush did this cause he wanted to and for nothing else" that things turn into a conspiracy theory.

we won't know that for sure until after the election; apparently that's when they're going to investigate GWB.

 

[CptStern]

ummm the US put saddam into power in the 1963 coup where the CIA overthrew Abdul Karim Kassim. The US even supplied saddam with a list of people that needed to be eliminated in order to secure power...what makes you think they would put someone in power they didnt want in power ...the current PM is/was on the CIA payroll and was/is a terrorist (he was responisble for a number of terrorist bombings in iraq during saddam's reign)

 

[moz4rt]

you must live in an all white community. I've seen it here in canada so I'm sure it must be far more prevelant in the US

Holy crap are you wrong. The Memphis area (where i live now) has more blacks per capita than anywhere in the US. I have lived in Vancouver (which is hardly an all white community) and Southern CA (same thing).

 

[moz4rt]

ummm the US put saddam intyo power ...what makes you think they would put someone in power they didnt want in power ...the current PM is/was on the CIA payroll and was/is a terrorist (he was responisble for a number of terrorist bombings in iraq during saddam's reign)

sources?


10 char limit

 

[CptStern]

Holy crap are you wrong. The Memphis area (where i live now) has more blacks per capita than anywhere in the US. I have lived in Vancouver (which is hardly an all white community) and Southern CA (same thing).

I meant non-muslim.


sources:

http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/saddam.htm

http://www.representativepress.org/CIASaddam.html

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/2003/04/000696.html

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0609-02.htm

http://www.rense.com/general37/frmer.htm

 

[blahblahblah]

ummm the US put saddam into power in the 1963 coup where the CIA overthrew Abdul Karim Kassim. The US even supplied saddam with a list of people that needed to be eliminated in order to secure power...what makes you think they would put someone in power they didnt want in power ...the current PM is/was on the CIA payroll and was/is a terrorist (he was responisble for a number of terrorist bombings in iraq during saddam's reign)

Apparently you are so enlightened with politics, what would you have done?

I am guessing you would have loved to see Iran take over the Middle East. That would be fun today having to worry about Iran dropping nukes over the US (and over Canada).

Why are you so concerned with American politics? I thought you were Canadian.

 

[CptStern]

iraqi PM was/is a terrorist:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0609-02.htm:

"Dr. Allawi's group, the Iraqi National Accord, used car bombs and other explosive devices... Ex-CIA officer Robert Baer, recalled that a bombing during that period "blew up a school bus; schoolchildren were killed."

 

[blahblahblah]

Link does not exist ^^

randomly chosen from one of your previous links (couple of posts up)

In fact the brutal, blood-stained nature of Uncle Sam goes back all the way to the so-called 'Founding Fathers,' who made no attempt to conceal it. As long ago as 1818, John Quincy Adams hailed the 'salutary efficacy' of terror in dealing with 'mingled hordes of lawless Indians and negroes.' He was defending Andrew Jackson's frenzied operations in Florida which virtually wiped out the indigenous population and left the Spanish province under US control. Thomas Jefferson and his colleagues were not above professing to be impressed by the wisdom of his words.

Yes, this article appears to be unbiased to me. /sarcasm

 

[CptStern]

Apparently you are so enlightened with politics, what would you have done?

I am guessing you would have loved to see Iran take over the Middle East. That would be fun today having to worry about Iran dropping nukes over the US (and over Canada).

Why are you so concerned with American politics? I thought you were Canadian.

meh, that's what patriots always say when they are backed into a corner "what would you have done"

maybe if they hadnt propped him up in the first place he would have been overthrown decades ago. Also what about the Sudan, Haiti, Rwanda why not send troops to protect the civilians there? why itraq? why not anywhere else. Recently Dafar sent troops to Sudan to protect civilians from genocide...given the US' human rights track record US troops should be charging to the rescue any day now.

And why is this an Americans issue? we are all in danger from terrorism thanks to the occupation of Iraq ...thank you very much

Yes, this article appears to be unbiased to me. /sarcasm

not any less biased than fox news or cnn. Who can forget this unbiased news headline: funny I thought she rammed her humvee into another humvee


"Spirited but hungry, rescued prisoner of war Pfc. Jessica Lynch arrived in Germany for treatment of two broken legs and bullet wounds reportedly suffered in a fierce gun battle she waged against her Iraqi captors."

"Foxnews: fair and balanced" my ass

 

[Lil' Timmy]

I guess saying that Ronald Reagan sold weapons to Saddam is just too risque still eh?

also be sure to point out that the chemical and biological weapons he once had were sold to him by US companies..

but.. this doesn't really have a whole lot to do with the discussion at hand. the past is the past, all of you people need to dwell on the present. certainly we should all understand past mistakes and crimes of the US government, and learn from them, but we should also be focusing on how to remedy the current situation.

anyone that doesn't recognize the hipocrasy and underhandedness of american foriegn policy is simply deluded or ignorant. and it's important to realize how this fact has affected our international relationship. but pointing the finger doesn't really solve anything. besides, the only people who don't think our international record is pretty ****ed up probably aren't worth trying to convince. so let's try to progress from the tired blame game.

also, since a lot of you don't seem to understand the history of the situation, i suggest you read up a bit. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html

france, germany (via deustche bank), russia, and china all did business with iraq during the US/UN sanctions. this is, of course, perfectly normal. we did business with them too. in fact, we ripped them off by not paying many of our oil-for-food fees. now, b/c of the toppling of the baathist regime, those countries now have billions of dollars invested in iraq that will likely go un-repaid.


it's way to early to say whether iraq, or the world, is any worse/better off right now than they would have been if we hadn't invaded iraq. certainly it doesn't look any better right now, but it doesn't necessarily look any worse either.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

I am guessing you would have loved to see Iran take over the Middle East. That would be fun today having to worry about Iran dropping nukes over the US (and over Canada).

well, it's the pro-war clan that's always yelling about how saddam is a modern stalin and how he should have been removed at all costs right? don't you think it would have been better to remove saddam before he could have done any damage?

Yes, this article appears to be unbiased to me. /sarcasm

just because the website has an agenda doesn't mean that there is no truth. it's a well-known fact that the 'founding fathers' used terrorism during the revolutionary war. and honestly there have been few events in human history that match the decimation of the native americans. these are simple facts.. i'm not sure how they're pertinent, but facts they are.

 

[Raziaar]

Well, I still feel like even though the major reasoning to take saddam out of power didn't pan out... it was justified in the end. I don't see how other countries can stand by and watch, knowing that brutal dictators are executing their civilians and others by the hundreds, thousands, and hundreds of thousands. It's not lawful in my mind, to stand by and do nothing... letting them resolve their own issues.

If we let world war II resolve its own issues, and the US didn't step in, despite being bombed at pearl harbor... the world wouldn't be the place it is today. Chances are that the genocide on all the people hated by the Nazi regime would have succeded a great deal, and hitler would have kept sweeping across europe and asia, and eventually the world given enough time. Hell, he had planned launching enough nukes on england to completely eradicate the people.

Saddam is not very different... while he doesn't have the power Hitler did, he is very much still a big threat to the world, and his violence to his own people, not even mentioning other people, is brutal. Yes, the US did fund saddam... and even Osama Bin Laden, but do you really think they would have if they could have forseen the things that would have been happening? Every country is known to work for their own agendas... and the USA worked for theirs. It was a bad decision, but it was also a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes. If you made a mistake in the past, would you appreciate being hounded day in day out, and never forgiven/believed to be capable of thinking or doing differently?

 

[DarkStar]

All these links you guys are giving are from some pretty small/unknown/biased sources...Get some BBC, New York Times, or CNN links and I'll start believeing stuff. I don't think the US put Saddam into power, but there's absolutely no question that we supported the man in his war with Iran.

On the issue of WMDs...man the intelligence community has been f*cking up pretty bad huh? I mean, with Sept 11, and then the WMD fiasco, that's two of the worst intelligence failures in US history right in a row. The CIA/NSA/FBI looks like they could use a MAJOR overhaul.

 

[CptStern]

it wasnt justified it was illegal. The UN strictly forbids Pre-emptive strikes...these are UN mandates that US signed and helped write

Darkstar: the news is from alternative press because no american mainstream newmedia would touch it. They have investors to answer to

 

[clarky003]

All these links you guys are giving are from some pretty small/unknown/biased sources...Get some BBC, New York Times, or CNN links and I'll start believeing stuff. I don't think the US put Saddam into power, but there's absolutely no question that we supported the man in his war with Iran.

heres your source: YES THEY DID , lol

 

[blahblahblah]

meh, that's what patriots always say when they are backed into a corner "what would you have done"

maybe if they hadnt propped him up in the first place he would have been overthrown decades ago. Also what about the Sudan, Haiti, Rwanda why not send troops to protect the civilians there? why itraq? why not anywhere else. Recently Dafar sent troops to Sudan to protect civilians from genocide...given the US' human rights track record US troops should be charging to the rescue any day now.

And why is this an Americans issue? we are all in danger from terrorism thanks to the occupation of Iraq ...thank you very much

Yes, terrorists want to blow up whatever city in Cananda. If they are going to target Canada, you are probably becoming aware of terrorism or you have become paranoid. Take your pick.

For somebody who criticizes America, maybe you should come up with solutions instead of saying "meh, that's what patriots always say when they are backed into a corner 'what would you have done'" Not exactly defending your position well.

As for human rights, America can't be everywhere at once. America has to choose between its own self-interest or for some other country it has no interest in. It sounds cold and inhuman, but that is a fact of life. In a perfect world, I would love to see the world in constant harmony, but it wouldn't happen even if America did get involved in everything. Also, how much would you critize America if US troops got killed in Rwanda? Probably as much, if not more than Iraq.

Plus, I don't exactly see Canada running in to Rwanda or any other genocide.

 

[DarkStar]

And for everyone saying that it's okay that there weren't any WMDs because Saddam was a brutal man who killed hundreds of thousands of people...

I don't know if you've been keeping up with the news but there is a major genocide going on RIGHT NOW in the Sudan. But as usually happens with this stuff, America is sitting on its hands.

 

[Raziaar]

it wasnt justified it was illegal. The UN strictly forbids Pre-emptive strikes...these are UN mandates that US signed and helped write

I said *I* feel it was justified...

 

[Lil' Timmy]

It was a bad decision, but it was also a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes. If you made a mistake in the past, would you appreciate being hounded day in day out, and never forgiven/believed to be capable of thinking or doing differently?

this is, of course, exactly the problem with the actions of the US right now. we, have historically exhibited extremely poor judgement in the past. moreover, we've commited criminal acts.

we should never repeat either of those. and there is ample reason to believe that the war with iraq was both.

 

[clarky003]

I said *I* feel it was justified...

lol :x lol

 

[CptStern]

Yes, terrorists want to blow up whatever city in Cananda. If they are going to target Canada, you are probably becoming aware of terrorism or you have become paranoid. Take your pick.

For somebody who criticizes America, maybe you should come up with solutions instead of saying "meh, that's what patriots always say when they are backed into a corner 'what would you have done'" Not exactly defending your position well.

As for human rights, America can't be everywhere at once. America has to choose between its own self-interest or for some other country it has no interest in. It sounds cold and inhuman, but that is a fact of life. In a perfect world, I would love to see the world in constant harmony, but it wouldn't happen even if America did get involved in everything. Also, how much would you critize America if US troops got killed in Rwanda? Probably as much, if not more than Iraq.

Plus, I don't exactly see Canada running in to Rwanda or any other genocide.

why do bother arguing with you if you cant get your facts straight. Canada has been sending aid to rwanda since 1994

btw I gave you my solution. Look this is nothing new. The US has propped up countless dictators tyrants and madmen over the years...saddam was no different

 

[blahblahblah]

this is, of course, exactly the problem with the actions of the US right now. we, have historically exhibited extremely poor judgement in the past. moreover, we've commited criminal acts.

we should never repeat either of those. and there is ample reason to believe that the war with iraq was both.

*Sigh*

Name me a country that has had good foreign relations. You can even name several events.

I can name plenty of instances of where a country botched up foreign relations. Take a look in history, every country has make tons of foreign policy mistakes. Some of them caused major wars. I am not saying the United States is better than any other country, but don't say that the United States is the only country to mess something up regarding a foreign country.

[Edit]: Sending aid? I am sure sending them food and medical supplies will stop the genocide. Don't get me wrong, the aid is much needed in Rwanda, however that will not stop the horrible tragedies going on over there.

 

[Raziaar]

I don't know why people could even think about standing back and doing nothing, if a country passively threatens to have, and to use, weapons of mass destruction. That's asking to sit and do nothing while you are being faced with the threat of being destroyed.

Mugger: I have a gun and i'm going to kill you if you don't give me your money!

Citizen: I can't honestly believe you have a gun, until I see it for myself.

Mugger: GIVE ME YOUR MONEY

Citizen: I'll be on my way now.

<BLAM>

 

[CptStern]

I said *I* feel it was justified...

yes but you're not the US ...your opinion means squat (no flame intended ...you couldnt vote whether the US went to war)


edit: can you guys not get it into your head? Saddam would have been eliminated decades ago by a rival or even a neighbouring power (it's been long known that Jordan and Iran had extreme comtempt for saddam) if it hadnt been for the US support. Saddam was untouchable while an ally of the US

 

[DarkStar]

Darkstar: the news is from alternative press because no american mainstream newmedia would touch it. They have investors to answer to

That didn't stop the mainstream press from jumping all over the Abu Gharib prison scandel. Or this latest report on intelligence failures. Listen, the mainstream press has no problem with making America look bad, but the story has to be true. Sorry, the argument that ALL news organization's are solely responsible only to their investors doesn't hold water with me. It is just a little to conspiracy-laden for my tastes.

Now you're certainly right about SOME news outlets pandering to their investors.....(cough)Fox News(cough)

 

[Lil' Timmy]

I don't think the US put Saddam into power, but there's absolutely no question that we supported the man in his war with Iran.

the cia supported the baath party when it was in overthrew the iraqi government in 1963.. this is a well-known fact.

 

[clarky003]

I don't know why people could even think about standing back and doing nothing, if a country passively threatens to have, and to use, weapons of mass destruction. That's asking to sit and do nothing while you are being faced with the threat of being destroyed.

Mugger: I have a gun and i'm going to kill you if you don't give me your money!

Citizen: I can't honestly believe you have a gun, until I see it for myself.

Mugger: GIVE ME YOUR MONEY

Citizen: I'll be on my way now.

<BLAM>

the difference = this is a war with hundreds of thousands of lives on the line.

you need to be sure first. :dozey:

 

[Raziaar]

yes but you're not the US ...your opinion means squat (no flame intended ...you couldnt vote whether the US went to war)


edit: can you guys not get it into your head? Saddam would have been eliminated decades ago by a rival or even a neighbouring power (it's been long known that Jordan and Iran had extreme comtempt for saddam) if it hadnt been for the US support. Saddam was untouchable while an ally of the US

The president had overwhelming support for the war when it first started... that is a vote in essence. If he had overwhelming numbers of people against it, chances are they wouldn't do it openly. Notice I said openly, something would likely be done away from the public eyes.

 

[DarkStar]

I don't know why people could even think about standing back and doing nothing, if a country passively threatens to have, and to use, weapons of mass destruction. That's asking to sit and do nothing while you are being faced with the threat of being destroyed.

Mugger: I have a gun and i'm going to kill you if you don't give me your money!

Citizen: I can't honestly believe you have a gun, until I see it for myself.

Mugger: GIVE ME YOUR MONEY

Citizen: I'll be on my way now.

<BLAM>

Except Saddam said over and over again that he didn't have any weapons, he never claimed "I have a gun." He f*cked up though by not allowing inspectors to look absolutely everywhere.

 

[DarkStar]

the cia supported the baath party when it was in overthrew the iraqi government in 1963.. this is a well-known fact.

No doubt we officially supported the Baath party, But that is majorly different from a clandestine US operation to put Saddam into power. Which did not occur.