OT: Apple, tree..not falling far from...etc

Page 2 of 5  


Trust AND verify.

I don't either because the AUMF was needed to force Saddam Hussein to accept inspectors. When those inspections showed, conclusively, that Iraq had no nuclear weapons program any notion that Iraq was threat vanished. Chemical and bioweapons just aren't in the same category.

Saddam Hussein didn't just kill Shia Iraqis, he also killed Iraqi Kurds.

Nonsense. It recognizes that Iraq's WMD infrastructure was destroyed in the 1991 war and subsequent UNSCOM inspections. No factories, no weapons. One of the key elements to understanding why Iraq was not a threat was the short shelf life of Iraqi chemical weapons. With the exception of mustard, they degraded to ineffectiveness in months.
Another key is to recognize that even with chemical weapons, Saddam Hussein was never able to permanently expand beyond his borders.
By the time we invaded there was no credible evidence that Iraq had nuclear chemical or biological weapons, or that production was imminent.
ANY nation with a chemical industry can make chemical weapons. That Iraq had to potential to do so is virtually a tautology.
--
FF




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

In order to do that, she'd have had to take a trip herself and validate all the raw data. Outside of that, she just had to put her faith in the intelligence experts. If she had read the report, rather than just having the high points read to her, that would have verified nothing.

Yes. They are. They weren't just looking for nukes. Chemical and biological weapons are considered weapons of mass destruction depending on their payload and delivery system.

That's interesting. I'd like to read more from an authoritative source about the shelf life of chemical and biological weapons. can you point me to one? I've read that many of the biological weapons (anthrax spores, etc) can last many decades when stored correctly. But then again, I'm no expert.

Right. There are two reasons for that: 1 - Iran fought back. Otherwise they'd be annexed. 2 - Kuwait didn't fight back. They WERE annexed. Kuwait is not a part of Iraq today because we went over there and forced them out.
The only reason that Iraq wasn't able to expand beyond their borders is because two nations forced them back.

If we had been looking only for the capability to do so, then yes. But that was hardly the case, was it?
Listen, I'm not pro-war. I want us out of there. But you're making the same assertions made by all those who are bleating that W just WANTED a war, that maybe he didn't get a pony on his fifth birthday and this is his way of making up for it. It doesn't hold water. You've told us why there shouldn't have been a war. Why do you think there is a war? Is it the pony thing, or the pleasing daddy thing, or what?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You left out one of many other possibilities. One of them being that W sold his soul to the big guns of special interest groups, and the war was pay-back time. "We'll get you the job, but once in there, you owe us." The defense contractors, KBR, and many more 'big guns' have done extremely well because of that war. Then again, you could be one of those who doesn't believe The Carlyle Group exists or that they have any influence in foreign policy. (Look at their BOD) It has NEVER been different... follow the money. Who benefits? The 5th birth day pony arguments, etc,....you are right, those do not hold water.
Another possibility is pressure from a religious lobby, to bring on the New World Order that Bush 41 talked about.
What the hell do I know... but don't limit W's motives to simple thoughts. r
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

So he and Dick Cheney decided that killing millions would be a cool way to make some extra cash? Jebus made him do it?
Unfortunately, both sides of this debate over simplify what little factual information we're allowed to see, then villify and ridicule the other viewpoints until we're left with very little real information on which to base our opinions.
I don't personally buy the military industrial complex made him do it theory. There's been non-stop warring for every moment human existence. It's a secure business to be in.
As for Jebus? Or Mo-Bomb-ad? Those may be more credible theories considering what people are continuing to do in religions name.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't think The Decider decided anything. He had no choice. He OWED them. When you sell your soul.... you OWE. He has no real feelings left. Sold them. He's dead inside. Typical for a megalomaniac with an inferiority complex.
Cheney on the other hand, is one piece of work. There is nothing I would put past him. Nothing.
I trust my gut feeling on that one.
r
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

He wouldn't be the first. The Saudis certainly made a lot of money from the invasion.

One side lied. The other sides may speculate as to why, but that doesn't change the facts.
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

You think only the people on one side of this issue are lying? I doubt that. Seriously. Really. You realize I'm talking politics here right? And I wish we knew what the facts really are. Point is, we don't.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Your doubts are well-founded. I don't think that. But clearly one lying side had the power and made the decisions.
However, the point that Iraqi chemical weapons were short-lived has never been disputed by any parties to the controversy. The Bush administration never even tried to rebut that, they jsut ignored the argument.

Have you any doubt at all that the yellowcake documents submitted to the IAEA were forgeries?
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

Like the rest of this debacle, we're relying on the information we're being fed. The yellowcake uranium info was just one piece of many.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So can you think of anything the other sides have lied about that were as blatant?
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

Not off hand. Can you prove that the yellowcake papers were lies purposefully propogated by W, and not just bad information given to him as they've claimed? I know you can't. Neither can I. We don't have access to the real facts here. You can believe what you believe with all your heart, but verifiable facts are in short supply.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm thinking Betty Crocker is behind the whole viral advertising campaign to sell her lemon cake.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can you find anyone who has examined the documents and said they were NOT fake? I know you can't.

Can you find any credible source who disputes the _central_ argument, that Iraqi chemical weapons were short-lived? I know you can't.. Can you find many sources who say they were short-lived? I know you can.
--
FF




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Indeed,he is not nearly as stupid as he sounds. His success is the result of way too many people misunderestimating him.
--
FF



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yup. Here's one reference:
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0403-10.htm Quote:
"However, of all the administration members with potential conflicts of interest, none seems more troubling than Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney is former CEO of Halliburton, an oil-services company that also provides construction and military support services - a triple-header of wartime spoils.
"A few weeks ago, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers awarded a no-bid contract to extinguish oil well fires in Iraq to Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton. The contract was granted under a January Bush administration waiver that, according to the Washington Post, allowed "government agencies to handpick companies for Iraqi reconstruction projects."
"The contract, which was not announced until more than two weeks after it was awarded, was open-ended, with no time limits and no dollar limits. It was also a "cost-plus" contract, meaning that the company is guaranteed to recover costs and then make a guaranteed profit on top of that. Its value is estimated at tens of millions of dollars."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If an advesary called you on the telephone and told you that he was coming over to take your car and destroy it but he waited several months before showing up to do so, given that you had months before he would show up, would you hide it in a very safe place? IMHO it takes about 2 cents worth of common sense to realize that with SH having several months of warning that he would naturally hide his weapons. I would. I think some that do not believe that are easily deceived.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Leon wrote:

I don't think they're that easily deceived. Hillary and the rest of the congresscritters are generally smart people. Generally selfish, egotistical, elitist people, but intelligent. They spin all of this information to suit their political agendas and aspriations. Both parties. They aren't the ones being deceived.
There was evidence of some shipments going to other sympathetic countries, there were scientists that claimed to have been working on chemical, nuclear and biological weapons research right up until the time the Iraqi government shut their facilities down.
There isn't however, hard evidence gathered by our inspectors to verify these claims. But as you said, given enough time, that evidence is not that hard to get rid of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree. They were afraid of being smeared as weak or disloyal.

There is evidence that Iraq's upper class fled the country on the eve of the invasion. I find that unremarkable. If you have access to information that Saddam Hussein moved his chemical weapons infrastructure or even weapons themselves out of the country please let us know what it is.

Which facilities and in what years were they shut down?

What evidence do you have that there was anything to hide?
--
FF



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

Read the previous two sentences. I think I just said there wasn't any.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Then I think you accept the argument that the case for Iraqi having WMD was bogus.
Better late than never.
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.