US gives up search for Iraq WMD

[burner69]

Indeed, but you can't deal with that now. I'm talking last year, what would you do: war with Iraq is on the cards.. what would you do?

But if I was presented with information that said that they may have WMDs, I'd certainly make sure it was substantiated by letting my weapons inspectors search about - the last thing I'd do would be launch a full frontal assault which, if he had these 45min WMDs, would intimidate him into using them, and whether he had them or not, would do what is happening now - giving 'terrorists' a common enemy to team up against, and actively attack.

sixchar
EDIT: didn't mean to sound like a cocky ****.
What I'm trying to get at is its just not on to attack one country because you're scared of them attacking you because they don't like you.
You can't shoot a man dead and say - I thought he had a gun. What you need to do is remove any motive of the man to shoot you. How? Don't kill his mates and don't carry a gun around with intention to attack him - that usually does it.

 

[Edcrab]

I remember my dad saying that Saddam had just given himself the kiss of death (or something, my father is a strange individual, I have to get it from somewhere) with his comments following 9/11. Strangely predictive.

War with Iraq is on the cards...? Huh? Didn't we declare war on them? A cynic would just reply to that with "What would I do? I wouldn't go to war..."

If only the US had ignored the UN and the Arab states who wanted Saddam left in place for stability's sake. They had a point, I guess...

 

[qckbeam]

Indeed, but you can't deal with that now. I'm talking last year, what would you do: war with Iraq is on the cards.. what would you do?

Iraq had nothing to do with anything at all until the government tried to fabricate connections between Saddam and terrorist cells (like Al Qaeda), and pose them as a brand new threat with claims that Saddam not only has WMD's, but would be willing to hand them over to the terrorists he's supposedly so buddy-buddy with. Of course there were no connections to Al Qaeda, and we've thrown in the towel when it comes to looking for those notorious WMD's. Iraq wasn't a true threat; it was created by the government itself. You make it sound as if war was inevitable saying it was "on the cards". Well it wasn't, we are solely responsible for creating this mess. There was never any need for this invasion.

 

[CptStern]

I'm pretty convinced the US knew saddam didnt have WMD ..it was all orchestrated from the very beginning

here's the gist of it

 

[gcomeau]

Conversations on this topic never cease to entertain do they...

Regarding the "WMDs smuggled to Syria" theory. How much sense does this make if you stop to think about it for more than half a second?

Let's see, I'm a hyper-paranoid dictator obsessed with protecting my own ass and I've got the most powerful military on the planet massing on my borders announcing to one and all that they're coming to get me... so I take my most powerful weapons and I give them to another country. Hey, I'm sure they'll give them back if a shooting war breaks out and I need them right? I mean, those Syrians are widely known as trustworthy fellows, I'm sure they can be entrusted with the safekeeping of my massive arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction... and if they don't want to give them back later I'll just sue them or something. Yeah, that's a plan.

That makes loads of sense. That's certainly what I'd expect Saddam to do if he had a bunch of WMDs hidden in the country... dig them all out of hiding so they can be spotted in transit and give them away just when he's most likely to need them to save his own butt.

Regarding the Al Samoud 2 missiles. Yes, they were being destroyed when the troops went in... which means the inspections were working... which means there was no REASON for the troops to go in.

For those unfamiliar with the weapon system, there was some debate about whether those missiles effective ranges was great enough to violate the weapons ban that had been placed on Iraq... Iraq argued it wasn't, the UN inspectors tested them and concluded otherwise... and eventually the Iraqis caved, agreed to destroy the weapons, and began doing so under the supervision of the inspection teams. Yeah, there's an ironclad reason a war needed to be fought right away... they were destroying their weapons! Oh no! Quick, launch an air strike!

Regarding the Duelffer report saying Saddam wanted to get WMDs. Well no kidding. Saddam has been wanting WMDs for a very long time... but it looks like he didn't have any doesn't it? Why do you suppose that is? Umm... the sanctions worked? Just maybe?

Regarding this gem:

The US lead and was a voice of the coalition. The only nation that tried to stop it was France threatening a veto of the vote go to war and germany doing the same. The other nations expressed no reservations about going to war.

I'm at a loss for words. Really. How can anyone be so completely uninformed about the state of the world around them? France and Germany were the only ones? Other nations expressed no reservations!?!?!?!?!?!?

What planet were you living on in 2003? The EU parliament passed a resolution before the war stating that any pre-emptive strike agains Iraq "would not be in accordance with international law and the UN Charter and would lead to a deeper crisis involving other countries in the region." France, Germany, Russia, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Greece, Austria, Liechtenstein, Vatican City, Belarus, Slovenia, Croatia, Canada, Mexico (you know, those big masses of land north and south of the US), Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, the entire 52 member African Union, China, India, almost the entire Arab League, Malaysia, Indonesia, New Zealand...

All of the above were opposed to the war. France and Germany may have been threatening a veto but they never had to use it because the US and the UK admitted that they weren't even going to bother bringing a resolution to the Security Council to authorize hostilities against Iraq because they couldn't even get the votes necessary to force France or Germany to use their veto!

And I'm sorry, but the "coalition" was a joke. Try comparing it to the Gulf War 1 coalition some time just for giggles.

And this is just skimming the surface of how mind-numbingly idiotic it was to invade Iraq. I can just see Osama on the day he finds out that was happening jumping up and down and hooting with glee in whatever little hiding place he's got himself stashed away in. Probably didn't stop for a week.

 

[GiaOmerta]

gcomeau, Saddam expected this to be just like the Gulf War.

He didnt expect the United States to eveunatally siege the capital. In fact, Saddam never used he's chemical weapons in the KTO during the Gulf War. He wasnt willing to use them as of yet. He wasnt willing to use them in the Gulf War within the KTO.

 

[yadalogo]

Saddam has used chemical weapons on his people, what are you talking about?

 

[seinfeldrules]

It's really sad that, as mentioned before, nobody will get screwed for this.

Last time I checked, Tenet "resigned". Furthermore, do you have inside access to the CIA's employment/termination records?

I'm pretty convinced the US knew saddam didnt have WMD

Bush must have had pretty long strings to get Clinton in on his 'master plan'. I really dont know why you use links like these, then bash anybody who uses FOXNews.

 

[CptStern]

did you read the document?

 

[seinfeldrules]

Stern its 90 pages long, at 11:20 PM...

I'll make you a deal, I'll read the document after you read all of Kopel's 59 Deceits. Again, why are you allowed to post from progressive.org, but nobody can post links from FOXnews?

 

[gcomeau]

gcomeau, Saddam expected this to be just like the Gulf War.

The first Gulf war was launched to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

This one was launched to invade Iraq and go straight after Saddam.

What exactly is it that you think was leading him to believe they were going to be the same?

He didnt expect the United States to eveunatally siege the capital.

Uh-huh... and why wouldn't he have been thinking that?

In fact, Saddam never used he's chemical weapons in the KTO during the Gulf War.

The coalition wasn't coming for his head in the first Gulf War.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Saddam didn't see America as a threat, he saw Isreal as a threat. (this is in the recent report on the WMDs) - he didn't expect the war to be like it was.


Woah woah woah.. people saying that Saddam should have been left in power.. he ran a secret police.. the people of Iraq lived in absolutely appalling conditions (ok, this hasn't changed yet. but it will with time) .

The people of Iraq no longer have to fear arbitrary arrest, torture or rape. We've removed a dictator who gassed his own people, gassed the kurds, has obtained (but this decayed long before we went to war) enough VX nerve agent to gas the population of the entire world.. and had a replica building of the manhatten project.. only lacking 1 vital componant..


Yep. We should have left him alone. :\

 

[Tr0n]

Saddam didn't see America as a threat, he saw Isreal as a threat. (this is in the recent report on the WMDs) - he didn't expect the war to be like it was.


Woah woah woah.. people saying that Saddam should have been left in power.. he ran a secret police.. the people of Iraq lived in absolutely appalling conditions (ok, this hasn't changed yet. but it will with time) .

The people of Iraq no longer have to fear arbitrary arrest, torture or rape. We've removed a dictator who gassed his own people, gassed the kurds, has obtained (but this decayed long before we went to war) enough VX nerve agent to gas the population of the entire world.. and had a replica building of the manhatten project.. only lacking 1 vital componant..


Yep. We should have left him alone. :\

QFE and QFT.

Double kill!

 

[Raziaar]

...hmmm ......duh?

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

Dick Cheney August 26, 2002



Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

George Bush March 18, 2003


We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad.

Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003


We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003


We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.

George Bush May 3, 2003




time's up

Heh, you forgot the quotes where Kerry said there was WMD's too. Why did you forget those stern? You're usually very good about these things. But I forget that you only care about the truth when it supports your agenda.

 

[burner69]

Saddam didn't see America as a threat, he saw Isreal as a threat. (this is in the recent report on the WMDs) - he didn't expect the war to be like it was.


Woah woah woah.. people saying that Saddam should have been left in power.. he ran a secret police.. the people of Iraq lived in absolutely appalling conditions (ok, this hasn't changed yet. but it will with time) .

The people of Iraq no longer have to fear arbitrary arrest, torture or rape. We've removed a dictator who gassed his own people, gassed the kurds, has obtained (but this decayed long before we went to war) enough VX nerve agent to gas the population of the entire world.. and had a replica building of the manhatten project.. only lacking 1 vital componant..


Yep. We should have left him alone. :\

What? Saddam didn't see America as a threat?! They were sending battleships and troops down ready to invade. They had been saying "Let us search for WMDs or we'll invade", Bush'd been hammering on at his people that this guy was the biggest threat in the entire world. And he didn't think the US was a threat?!

If we wanted to overthrow Saddam that's what we should have said when we went in. As it stands I think that was very far behind on Bush's motives. And there are plenty of other evil dictators knocking around, what about them?
Saddam was evil, but so is starting a WAR for all the wrong reasons. Two wrongs....

Now the Iraqi people have to live in fear of being shot or bombed by the coalition, fear of being shot by insurgants, if they sign up for anything good for the community - fear of being beheaded or executed some other way by terrorists, fear of being blown up by suicide bombers etc etc. It's estimated your chance of death in Iraq has increased several times - I think that was from the Lancet report.

But of course all that will get better. Like Afghanis---oops! No, that place is f**ked. We'll just leave that and invade a few other places first, might come back to it later... maybe. Of course Iraq will be different.... surely.

 

[burner69]

Last time I checked, Tenet "resigned". Furthermore, do you have inside access to the CIA's employment/termination records?

Bush must have had pretty long strings to get Clinton in on his 'master plan'. I really dont know why you use links like these, then bash anybody who uses FOXNews.

The public need to see these things happening, or they'll have no faith in government.
If I went out and said such and such a place is a threat, let's invade and it WASN'T... I'd expect to be fired, or something. As far as I know it wasn't even Bush who admitted this lack of WMDs. Idiot - hate that guy.

 

[GiaOmerta]

Saddam has used chemical weapons on his people, what are you talking about?

Exactly. The same murderous leader we dethroned.

The first Gulf war was launched to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

This one was launched to invade Iraq and go straight after Saddam.

What exactly is it that you think was leading him to believe they were going to be the same?

He figured military installions and strongholds would be bombed. He never predicted a full scale ground invasion, and if such an invasion took place, France and other finacial allies could of stopped the United States and Britian diplomatically. He figured bombing similar to those during Operation Desert Fox. What was the purpose of that anyways? Operation Desert Fox?

 

[ComradeBadger]

What? Saddam didn't see America as a threat?! They were sending battleships and troops down ready to invade. They had been saying "Let us search for WMDs or we'll invade", Bush'd been hammering on at his people that this guy was the biggest threat in the entire world. And he didn't think the US was a threat?!

If we wanted to overthrow Saddam that's what we should have said when we went in. As it stands I think that was very far behind on Bush's motives. And there are plenty of other evil dictators knocking around, what about them?
Saddam was evil, but so is starting a WAR for all the wrong reasons. Two wrongs....

Now the Iraqi people have to live in fear of being shot or bombed by the coalition, fear of being shot by insurgants, if they sign up for anything good for the community - fear of being beheaded or executed some other way by terrorists, fear of being blown up by suicide bombers etc etc. It's estimated your chance of death in Iraq has increased several times - I think that was from the Lancet report.

But of course all that will get better. Like Afghanis---oops! No, that place is f**ked. We'll just leave that and invade a few other places first, might come back to it later... maybe. Of course Iraq will be different.... surely.

Like Afganistan.. oh yeah, real ****ed, held their first democratic elections recently. People were thrilled at being able to exercise their vote.

Oh, and look at the countries America has rebuilt post-war:

Germany

Japan.

Oooo they're doing badly. :upstare:

[I don't mean to be quite so sarcastic.. please don't take it personally ]

 

[seinfeldrules]

The public need to see these things happening, or they'll have no faith in government.

And then get the CIA agents killed by revealing their identity?

 

[Edcrab]

It was right to remove Saddam from power, I just don't understand the timing.

Fabricated terrorist threats were just used as a topical excuse- I just don't get it. We bow to UN/Arab pressure to leave Saddam alone in the first Gulf War, then ignore international opinion and capture him years later. Woo hoo and all, but why the timing, when a war on a Muslim state would be seen as a stab at the religion as a whole? Man...

 

[CptStern]

Heh, you forgot the quotes where Kerry said there was WMD's too. Why did you forget those stern? You're usually very good about these things. But I forget that you only care about the truth when it supports your agenda.

why would I care if Kerry believed there were WMD or not? so? I'm non-partisan, I'm not rooting for the "other guy". He's just as guilty of complicity as bush is ...although he's more so

The same murderous leader we dethroned

and aided militarily, and sold wmd to, and turned a blind eye to, and called ally and friend during his worst crimes, and vetoed a resolution brought up by iran to try saddam for crimes against humanity and acts of aggression


3000 people killed on american soil and you go after the guy responsible for 0 american deaths ...ya I can see the logic there

The people of Iraq no longer have to fear arbitrary arrest, torture or rape.

instead they have endure their country being bombed back to the stone age ...I was listening to an interview on the bbc with a doctor in bagdad who had performed 18 ceasaerian sections on women by candlelight during the first 2 weeks of the occupation

they also have to endure:

...their country occupied

...their government handed over to a murderer, cia stooge and terrorist (google Iyad allawi, Iraqi national accord)


...their infant mortality rate is second only to sierra leon, during saddam's time it was one of the lowest in the region ...well pre-sanction days that is:


"It’s a hard choice, but I think, we, think, it’s worth it."

- Madeline Albright, 60 Minutes question about the over half a million children killed by the Iraqi sanctions



....their people in constant fear of being blown to bits for some foreign/domestic radical ideology (terrorists)


...their country's rapid descent into hell on earth chaos, where people are murdered/abducted/raped/tortured by many different factions/groups/armies/radicals

We've removed a dictator who gassed his own people, gassed the kurds, has obtained (but this decayed long before we went to war) enough VX nerve agent to gas the population of the entire world.. and had a replica building of the manhatten project.. only lacking 1 vital componant..

"Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene."

source


US companies that sold biological/chemical weapons/compounds/facilities to saddam

US companies sold goods to Saddam DURING the sanctions


this war/occupation has absolutely nothing to do with bringing saddam to justice

 

[Raziaar]

why would I care if Kerry believed there were WMD or not? so? I'm non-partisan, I'm not rooting for the "other guy". He's just as guilty of complicity as bush is ...although he's more so

Ahahahahahaha. You think I can just ignore the months, weeks of your pro Kerry attitude and defense of him?

 

[CptStern]

kerry is more progressive but no better than bush ...bush came with a whole bunch of religious morality baggage ..in essence he's a christian right mouthpiece ...kerry was/is a bit more liberal when it comes to church and state ...did you think for a minute I believed that kerry being in office would change the war in iraq? :upstare:

 

[burner69]

Ahahahahahaha. You think I can just ignore the months, weeks of your pro Kerry attitude and defense of him?

When there's no decent leader to vote for, I think Kerry was the lesser of two evils. Ergo, be pro-Kerry to be anti-Bush. I'm assuming anyway.

Can't ignore that the western world has hardly hindered Saddam throughout his reign of terror and killing.

 

[yadalogo]

Saddam brought order to his country and surrounding countries now we have removed that!

 

[RZAL]

Saddam brought order to his country and surrounding countries now we have removed that!

I would like to see you definition of disorder.

 

[burner69]

Saddam brought order to his country and surrounding countries now we have removed that!

He hardly went the right way about it, but you do have a point... to an extent. If we hadn't just invaded Afghanistan, and we hadn't gone running around yelling "terrorist" and "WMD horder" at Saddam, but said "Hey, what a nasty evil man, let's go overthrow him" I wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

[Absinthe]

He hardly went the right way about it, but you do have a point... to an extent. If we hadn't just invaded Afghanistan, and we hadn't gone running around yelling "terrorist" and "WMD horder" at Saddam, but said "Hey, what a nasty evil man, let's go overthrow him" I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I agree with you to a certain degree. If the administration had just been up-front about a humanitarian cause (assuming it's genuine), I really wouldn't have had too much of a problem with it.

But I also think that the timing of the war was bad as well.

 

[GiaOmerta]

He hardly went the right way about it, but you do have a point... to an extent. If we hadn't just invaded Afghanistan, and we hadn't gone running around yelling "terrorist" and "WMD horder" at Saddam, but said "Hey, what a nasty evil man, let's go overthrow him" I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I can see why you disagree with the war in Iraq.
But Afghanstan?
They harbored the terrorists responsible for the acts on 9/11. They paid the price. They longer exist.*
Afghanistan is a better place as a result of it.

*They=Taliban, former government of Afghanstan

 

[CptStern]

I can see why you disagree with the war in Iraq.
But Afghanstan?
They harbored the terrorists responsible for the acts on 9/11. They paid the price. They longer exist.*
Afghanistan is a better place as a result of it.

*They=Taliban, former government of Afghanstan

so we should invade the US?

 

[GiaOmerta]

Yes we should. We kill every single American too. We should hang them. We should behead them. We should litter the streets of the United States with their dismembered bodies. What do you think?

 

[CptStern]

nah, a regime change would be good enough :E


btw you're not disputing that the US harbors terrorists are you?

"if you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist" - George W Bush

 

[GiaOmerta]

An Italian president then. Buddy Cianci?
Main thing about Bush, is that he doesnt like Cuba. I love Cuba. So much potental there. They arent even the bad commies. Castro is a good guy. That bum JFK got what he deserved for the stunt he tried to pull.

 

[CptStern]

not loving cuba is one ..pardoning of a known terrorist who's responsible for the deaths of 73 civilians is beyond reproach

 

[GiaOmerta]

I'm not too worried about the Anti-Cuban terrorist. Someone like me will clip him.

 

[burner69]

Like Afganistan.. oh yeah, real ****ed, held their first democratic elections recently. People were thrilled at being able to exercise their vote.

Oh, and look at the countries America has rebuilt post-war:

Germany

Japan.

Oooo they're doing badly. :upstare:

[I don't mean to be quite so sarcastic.. please don't take it personally ]

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/story.jsp?story=584408
We hold Kabul, that's it. Aghanistan is doing dandy :thumbs:

 

[burner69]

I can see why you disagree with the war in Iraq.
But Afghanstan?
They harbored the terrorists responsible for the acts on 9/11. They paid the price. They longer exist.*
Afghanistan is a better place as a result of it.

*They=Taliban, former government of Afghanstan

I was complaining about invading Iraq after Afghanistan. Although I don't like wars, Afghanistan was justifiable in my books... well... was... now we've kinda left the place to go to Iraq - that's my prob.

 

[Edcrab]

Pfft, Afghanistan was badly handled, probably even more so than the Iraq war.

There's a country with a government that's harbouring terrorists... so what do we do? Bomb the hell out of civillian settlements that already look like they've been nuked. They're practically Third World, and the drug trafficing and rival warlords continually stir up chaos- admidst all that they probably didn't notice the odd bomb, mind.

Infiltrate the mountains? Yes. Deploy troops in built up areas? Yes. Bomb the outlying villages due to suspected military activity? Wah? It put me in mind of the awful things I used to do in RTSs when bored, such as systematically blow up cities since I had nothing better to do. The mountain operation is going ahead smoothly (despite the eventual failure to find Osama), so let's blow things up while we wait for a Mission Complete message! Yay!

 

[burner69]

Pfft, Afghanistan was badly handled, probably even more so than the Iraq war.

There's a country with a government that's harbouring terrorists... so what do we do? Bomb the hell out of civillian settlements that already look like they've been nuked. They're practically Third World, and the drug trafficing and rival warlords continually stir up chaos- admidst all that they probably didn't notice the odd bomb, mind.

Infiltrate the mountains? Yes. Deploy troops in built up areas? Yes. Bomb the outlying villages due to suspected military activity? Wah? It put me in mind of the awful things I used to do in RTSs when bored, such as systematically blow up cities since I had nothing better to do. The mountain operation is going ahead smoothly (despite the eventual failure to find Osama), so let's blow things up while we wait for a Mission Complete message! Yay!

Frighteningly, yet vividly put.
If life is a game, at the moment it's command and conquer.

 

[JNightshade]

It's going so badly you'd think it's Daikatana