|
Iraq Had No WMD Stockpiles (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Flotser |
| quote: | Originally posted by DR86
:rolleyes: |
what's wrong? |
|
|
| DR86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Flotser
what's wrong? |
do you honestly believe that all the WMD's are in Syria? |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Flotser
The Iraqi WMD's are in Syria. |
The Israeli WMD are in Israel. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
The Israeli WMD are in Israel. |
I KNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEW IT!!! :disbelief :disbelief time teach them a lesson!!:mad: :wtf: |
|
|
| Flotser |
| quote: | Originally posted by DR86
do you honestly believe that all the WMD's are in Syria? |
Of course i dont know . but Yes i do believe what i've said. It just makes me feel weired everytime people see Syria as another peacful arab country. Asad is a dictator, and a stupid one. also Assad's political party is a brother-party of Saddam's party (i forgot its name).
and there is an: "U.S. intelligence consensus: Iraqi WMD shipped to Syria".
call me stupid but i still trust U.S. intelligence.
and a google link here...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...iraqi+wmd+syria |
|
|
| borron |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
The Israeli WMD are in Israel. |
Israel is a WMD :p |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by borron
Israel is a WMD :p |
Source?
:p |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
He sort of said that, but he also said that people had every good reason to believe that Iraq DID have WMDs, in spite of their actual physical existence or lack thereof.
There's an important distinction between Bush acting on incomplete evidence/exercising poor judgment/"jumping the gun", and him actually fabricating evidence and spreading lies in order to gain power and kill innocent people.
Everybody misquotes Kay (and other reports) by simplying parroting that Iraq was unlikely to have WMDs - but by ignoring the fact that pre-existing evidence suggested a very good chance of them having WMDs (to such an extent that even the Iraqi generals believed it), and that this was an impossible hypothesis to thoroughly test as long as Iraq refused thorough inspection, people are twisting the facts to give Bush a sinister, tyrannical image. Realistically, it is more likely that he just went with the "better to be safe than sorry" attitude.
It may well be true that Bush is some sort of tyrannical dictator, but even if that's the case, *this* is not the evidence which proves it. |
That pre-existing evidence goes back to the 1990's. The US used that same information for a war done in 2003.. The US intelligence did not rely on updated information, they just went with those 1990's info, how credible does that makes them?!?! where they pressure to over exaggerate?!?!.. Now, That intelligence commission investigation the 9/11 and the war, asked for an extente, why?!?! because the Administration does not want to release the "supposed" information that they have, essential for the Intelligence committy to keep going with their investigation, doesnt that sound fishy?:thepirate |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by LiquidX
That pre-existing evidence goes back to the 1990's. The US used that same information for a war done in 2003.. The US intelligence did not rely on updated information, they just went with those 1990's info, how credible does that makes them?!?! where they pressure to over exaggerate?!?!.. Now, That intelligence commission investigation the 9/11 and the war, asked for an extente, why?!?! because the Administration does not want to release the "supposed" information that they have, essential for the Intelligence committy to keep going with their investigation, doesnt that sound fishy?:thepirate |
If people had evidence in 1990 that I had several kilos of cocaine under my bed, and no one checked there for 10 years, and after 10 years I wouldn't let anybody come into my room to check under my bed, and if all my friends were still saying that I had a stash of coke, wouldn't it be logical to assume that I did in fact have some coke?
Maybe I sniffed it all, or sold it all, or just burned it all in the past 10 years... or, maybe, I got rid of most of it but kept just a few grams and that's why I didn't want to let anyone in my room. Or maybe there's no coke but there are phone numbers of the people I sold it to.
The point is, there was pre-existing evidence that Iraq had WMDs, and there was very little evidence to support that they'd gotten rid of them. That doesn't actually mean that they DIDN'T get rid of them - it just means that the U.S. was acting on whatever intelligence they had, however correct or incorrect, which pointed to there being at least a potential of them still having the WMDs. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
If people had evidence in 1990 that I had several kilos of cocaine under my bed, and no one checked there for 10 years, and after 10 years I wouldn't let anybody come into my room to check under my bed, and if all my friends were still saying that I had a stash of coke, wouldn't it be logical to assume that I did in fact have some coke?
Maybe I sniffed it all, or sold it all, or just burned it all in the past 10 years... or, maybe, I got rid of most of it but kept just a few grams and that's why I didn't want to let anyone in my room. Or maybe there's no coke but there are phone numbers of the people I sold it to.
The point is, there was pre-existing evidence that Iraq had WMDs, and there was very little evidence to support that they'd gotten rid of them. That doesn't actually mean that they DIDN'T get rid of them - it just means that the U.S. was acting on whatever intelligence they had, however correct or incorrect, which pointed to there being at least a potential of them still having the WMDs. |
Interesting analogy. Not to mention that nothing was ever done about the coke that you were KNOWN to have. Wasn't the first violation itself enough to merit action? |
|
|
| DR86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Flotser
Of course i dont know . but Yes i do believe what i've said. It just makes me feel weired everytime people see Syria as another peacful arab country. Asad is a dictator, and a stupid one. also Assad's political party is a brother-party of Saddam's party (i forgot its name).
and there is an: "U.S. intelligence consensus: Iraqi WMD shipped to Syria".
call me stupid but i still trust U.S. intelligence.
and a google link here...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...iraqi+wmd+syria |
believe me, i know that Syria is not a peaceful arab country. i'm lebanese, and i dislike the Syrian government...a lot.
But even though Assad is a member of the Baath party, he's not stupid enough to hide Saddam's WMD's in his country. He's already a possible target for the U.S., and he's not going to worsen his case by hiding those weapons.
And I must say that I highyl distrust American "intelligence" these days. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
If people had evidence in 1990 that I had several kilos of cocaine under my bed, and no one checked there for 10 years, and after 10 years I wouldn't let anybody come into my room to check under my bed, and if all my friends were still saying that I had a stash of coke, wouldn't it be logical to assume that I did in fact have some coke?
Maybe I sniffed it all, or sold it all, or just burned it all in the past 10 years... or, maybe, I got rid of most of it but kept just a few grams and that's why I didn't want to let anyone in my room. Or maybe there's no coke but there are phone numbers of the people I sold it to.
The point is, there was pre-existing evidence that Iraq had WMDs, and there was very little evidence to support that they'd gotten rid of them. That doesn't actually mean that they DIDN'T get rid of them - it just means that the U.S. was acting on whatever intelligence they had, however correct or incorrect, which pointed to there being at least a potential of them still having the WMDs. |
- Yes, there was evidence that Iraq once had WMD. Now, there was NO evidence if they destroyed them, or not. One of the reasons why at the end Germany and France strongly went against a war, was because last minute intelligence, somewhat started to suggest that Saddam MAY have got rid of the weapons, so did the Chief Weapons Inspector, Hanx Blix, who because of that, asked for more time. But Bush administration, blindly believed on a every piece/small evidence given, not even proving it to be right/correct evidence ( Uranium in Africa, all those chemical facilities with supposed Chemical Weapons ) .. and well, all the things he had mentioned on the State of The Union to the American public. Bush administration did not back up, and it was obvious enough, because Bush WANTED Saddam out of power, no matter what. Overall, THIS did not, and still Does not Justify a country to go to war.. the US commited an act of IMPERIALISM, and its a big shame that the US intelligence was SO wrong.. it has lost lots of credibility, although the ones looking dirty are the Bush Administration. |
|
|
|
|
