WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon 865 Replies latest social current

• 

  dubla

  william-

  Yeah Bush got his information from a reliable source, a 12 year old students essay paper.

  i keep hearing this about bush, and about powells presentation.....do you have any links to back this up? it was my understanding that the only government using this 12 yr. old information was the u.k., in the dossier: "Iraq -- Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation". as far as i can tell, the only way this was linked to the u.s. or powell was the fact that the u.s. mistakenly backed up this dossier as credible, and that powell praised it during his presentation. to my knowledge, none of powells presentation stemmed from this report, even though realist and others would have the average reader believe this. i could be way off here, and if so, id appreciate some links.

  aa
• 

  Simon

  The problem is, the UK posts the dossier, the USA refers to the british 'evidence' and the UK then refers to what the president says. They have their own big circular argument of "proof" going on.

  I think their at the stage where they are only fooling themselves and the most die-hard believers now.
• 

  ThiChi

  Since we have not found Saddam or his sons after the war, maybe they don’t exist either.....Give the British and US some time here............
• 

  Simon

  Since we have not found Saddam or his sons after the war, maybe they don’t exist either.....Give the British and US some time here............

  What completely Amazing, utterly convincing logic.

  You'll be telling me next to watch out for the loch-ness monster or UFO's !

  It's strange that the same people who were so against the weapons inspectors being given more time now want to give the British and US governments a "signed check" when it comes to delivering proof.

  Of course, it is not really comparable as the UN weapons inspectors did not instigate a war on the lack of evidence.

  I'd brace yourself - IT AINT THERE !

  How long have they had? How long do they need? How feasible is it that the retreating, belleagured Iraqi army managed to transport millions (?) of tons of chemical weapons, weapons factories and missiles under the watchful eye of the US spy satellites and the total air superiority.

  You'lll be telling me next that the satallites were turned off and they forgot to put film in the spy planes.
• 

  dubla

  simon-

  The problem is, the UK posts the dossier, the USA refers to the british 'evidence' and the UK then refers to what the president says. They have their own big circular argument of "proof" going on.

  i was specifically talking about powells presentation. ive heard more than one person on this thread alone accuse powell of using a 12 year old student report as part of this presentation.......the problem is, posters fabricate statements, and then when called to the mat on them, they simply ignore. you know this tactic well, so i dont have to explain it to you.

  and what of the intelligence reports of other countries? do you honestly believe that the u.k. and u.s. were on an island with their belief that saddam had wmd?

  It's strange that the same people who were so against the weapons inspectors being given more time now want to give the British and US governments a "signed check" when it comes to delivering proof.

  the same can be said of the other side.....its strange that the same people who wanted to give the inspectors months, even YEARS to search iraq, now want the weapons to be found yesterday.

  aa
• 

  Simon

  the same can be said of the other side.....its strange that the same people who wanted to give the inspectors months, even YEARS to search iraq, now want the weapons to be found yesterday.

  There is a huge difference

  The weapons inspectors did not claim to know where any alleged weapons were or if the existed.

  On the other hand, the administration claimed to know for a fact that they existed and had photo's and other documented proof of them.

  The basic question that has not and cannot be satisfactorily answered is:

  If the weapons did exist and the 'evidence' real, where are they now? Why weren't they monitored? How could they be moved secretly without notice by a force with total air superiority.
• 

  William Penwell

  Bush supporters are admitting that some of the US intelligence was faulty, makes one wonder if they have being caught lying about some of the information, what else have they lied about? It’s like a judge that catches a defendant in a lie, he can discount anything else the defendant says.

  Will
• 

  Jayson

  The weapons inspectors did not claim to know where any alleged weapons were or if the existed.

  On the other hand, the administration claimed to know for a fact that they existed and had photo's and other documented proof of them.

  The basic question that has not and cannot be satisfactorily answered is:

  If the weapons did exist and the 'evidence' real, where are they now? Why weren't they monitored? How could they be moved secretly without notice by a force with total air superiority.

  Blix said that he believed that WMD existed and the a program existed. Do you need proof of this!? If this is false then why was Iraq not given the "all clear" by the UN? The UnitedStates is not the UnitedNations. Oh heck, this is just unbelievable. Saddam never had WMD? WHY NOT JUST SHOW PROOF TO BLIX & Co as commanded THEN? The answer is simple the UN is a soap box for every dictatorship to preach fire and damnation of the "great satan" and Israel. Saddam was an icon of Arab defiance of the West. As long as the EU could maintain a dominance in the region his "threat" factor was managable. After all in a war who would be called? France? No. Germany? No. Even the UK? Not alone. Nope they would rely on the US to do all heavy military ops and then give credit to the UN for keeping society safe once again. They never intended to do the job. They were unable to.

  TOTAL AIR SUPERIORITY. If only intel and tech were so advanced as to have star trek tricorders to monitor the warp trail of Iraqi's moving WMD and detecting underground bunkers. Why is there drug trafficing in the US? You know with all that tech to monitor the world. How did anthrax get into the US mail? If it can be done in the US then it can, and has been done, and WMD have been used in and by Iraq. They did not comply with the UN. They knew the US was comming and they got exactly what they deserved! Now with rebuilding Iraq the people will get what they deserve!
• 

  dubla

  william-

  was my question too difficult for you? im going to assume by your silence that your statement was indeed simple fabrication. the fact that you cannot back up your own blather with one simple source is very telling.

  simon-

  There is a huge difference

  i agree. the inspectors were not sent to iraq to search for weapons of mass destruction, they were sent there to oversee the disarming of iraq. this should take MUCH, MUCH less time than actually scouring the countryside to search for hidden weapons. HUGE difference indeed.

  aa
• 

  ThiChi

  ""It's strange that the same people who were so against the weapons inspectors being given more time now want to give the British and US governments a "signed check" when it comes to delivering proof.""

  That's my point: If we can give the UN 12 years, why can't we give the US and Britian more than 12 weeks?