Saddam’s WMDs: The Left’s Iraq Lies Exposed

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by Bluesguy, Jul 9, 2014.

  1. bwinwright

    bwinwright New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow! You are clearly a misinformation or disinformation dork. Left? Right? Are you serious? These are simply wings on the same ugly and evil bird. Who are you trying to fool? The West (USA, UK, and Israel..primarily) led by the Rothschild led international bankers are behind it all.

    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and simply categorize you as a misinformation geek. You are simply ignorant and don't know it. A disinformation dork is one who knows the truth but chooses to lie about it, typically for money and power..like a Bill O'reilly, Sean Hannity, or any other talking head in the mainstream media.
     
  2. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    •President Bush, White House press conference, August 21, 2006

    Who is Obama supposed to believe, you or Bush?
     
  3. DrewBedson

    DrewBedson Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,470
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Wow, all that and not one bit of fact to address my points with.
     
  4. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It only took about 3 weeks to remove Saddam.
     
  5. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes and in the 5 years of inspection prior to that the never found what we found after we removed Saddam, so what exactly it your point, they were lousy at inspecting?

    They made their final report back to the UN before the deadline and Saddam was still not cooperating. Tell me if Saddam had no WMD why didn't they just say so, what else were they looking for?

    No what probably pissed him off was watching the surveilence we had of him moving things out the back doors while Blix's Keystone Cops came in the front.

    Oh they were real but he also knew as Clinton knew it was not realistic to believe the inspectors would find the hidden proscribed materials that Saddam would have used to rearm after the inspections ended and sanctions were lifted.
     
  6. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,003
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Highly concentrated organophosphates that could have been loaded into the hidden undeclared chemical weapons shells and used in a massive chemical attack as they existed. Within weeks refined to more advanced nerve gas.

    Brand new shells hidden from inspectors. Older ones that had been hidden from inspectors and because they were not in proper storage deteriorated, but hidden from inspections. Not all ever accounted for.

    The vast majority of that money spent and lives lost were not due to fight and removind Saddam, it was our fight against al Qaeda after they moved their war front to Iraq, that battle would have taken place in Afghanistan. Iraq was to our advantage and why we were able to decimate them and pretty much destroy them altogether as they existed.

    The stockpiles of ready to go WMD. But if you read his entire statement he is quite clear that was not the danger, Saddam could have and would have easily rearmed within a matter of weeks. And the fact remains the WMD UNSCOM had cataloged and was looking for was never fully and accurately account for.
     
  7. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there was nothing to find, or are you saying bush was lousy at inspecting too

    the fact is, Inspectors were in Iraq, Bush could not even wait for them to leave, he told them to get out, he was starting a war

    and Saddam was cooperating.... Bush did not want Saddam to cooperate and it pissed him off that he was

    .
     
  8. DrewBedson

    DrewBedson Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,470
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Not according to the head inspector Hans Blix.

     
  9. Right Wing

    Right Wing New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Messages:
    989
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would not have treated him as an ally the way George I and Donald Rumsfeldt to before Desert Shield/Storm, but I also would not have intervened agaist him. As evil as he was, there is usually someone worse and he kept Iran in check and did not get along with Al-Qaeda. I would have stayed out of it and just let the trash take out the trash. It wasn't our fight just as the 800 year old Sunni v. Shia war is not our fight.
     
  10. Right Wing

    Right Wing New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Messages:
    989
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We spent trillions and lost thousands of lives to nation build for over a decade in both countries and Al-Qaeda is still operative.

    No, it's much more than that, not to mention the associated costs afterward. Al-Qaeda did not exist in Iraq until Saddam was removed and a vacuum was created. Also, when did Iraq attack us?

    Halliburton.
     
  11. DrewBedson

    DrewBedson Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,470
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    He gave up his job prior to taking office and all his stock to charity while in office so wondering what substance this comment has to back it up with.
     
  12. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113


    The gullibility of the raging masses is truly amazing. The tendency of people to ignore reality so they can maintain partisan ideology is even more so.

    Nobody cares about chemical weapons in Iraq and they never did. Syria has had them for year an no one cared. Heck North Korea was building a nuke while the rhetoric over WMD and propaganda about an the threat of an imminent mushroom cloud on US soil was coming from the Presidents lips.

    We were helping Saddam (under Reagan) while he was using chemical weapons against Iran and his own people. No one cared then and certainly not Rumsfeld. Bush's dad even increased support to Saddam when he replaced Rotten Ronnie.

    What do you think Bush's daddy told him about Saddam's chemical weapons. We didn't care but you should ? Humor.

    What ever reason we went into Iraq ( strategic interest in oil or whatever) it wasn't because of Chemical weapons. That story was for the gullible sheep.
     
  13. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Victory Lapse - Politicizing Osama bin Laden's & Saddam Hussein's Deaths"

    http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/i...g-osama-bin-laden-s---saddam-hussein-s-deaths
     
  14. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The only true thing in your entire post is that al Queda was not in Iraq until we invaded and destabilized the country. The rest of your post has no support in fact.

    It is comforting to know that you believe al Queda has been defeated and we can now dismantle the war on terror.
     
  15. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Correction: kicked out by traitor Bush who said he was going to bomb Iraq.
     
  16. expatriate

    expatriate Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2012
    Messages:
    5,891
    Likes Received:
    86
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bush did tell the inspectors to leave, not Saddam.

    Al Qaeda was not IN Iraq until after we invaded. The war with AQ in Iraq was a war entirely of our own creation... and a costly, foolhardy one at that.

    Bush did indeed admit that even though he claimed to have invaded Iraq in order to disarm them of WMD stockpiles, they, in fact, did not HAVE any. He admitted as such and yet brown nosers like the OP author continue to slavishly uphold Bush's foolishness as brilliance. Really pathetic.
     
  17. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And are we safer now and is there less terrorism in the world then prior to our invasion? Have we reduced our homeland security budget? Have we reduced our military spending? All those imaginary reasons and no evidence that the world is a safer place so I think we can pretty much conclude the war was a waste of lives and money no matter how far fetched the attempts at justification.
     
  18. DrewBedson

    DrewBedson Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,470
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I reported why the invasion occurred, none of them had to do with money.
     
  19. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,342
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Iraq baton was handed to Obama when he accepted the presidency. After the troop pullout Obama completely ignored the changes that Maliki was doing to the government and military that favored his Shiite party. Maliki was the mouse that was having fun when the cat was away. Now we have this mess. The scary thing is, I'm not absolutely positive Obama never intended for Iraq to fall into this crisis.
     
  20. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If Saddam actually had ready to use WMDs as some on this thread assert why didn't he use them against the United States invasion. Oh, I know, he was saving them so ISIS could use them. Very far thinking of Saddam. And now ISIS isn't using them either so I have to wonder which terrorist organization they are saving them for?.
     
  21. mrmeangenes

    mrmeangenes New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2012
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No question about "if" Saddam had a batch of nasty stuff !

    Here is another source on the theft of WMD stock by ISIS :

    https://www.ctc.usma.edu/posts/the-isils-theft-of-wmd-components-in-iraq

    As to "why" Saddam didn't use it against us, please note he was advised-privately, through his Russian contacts-any use of WMD in his part would result in the use of nukes on our part.
     

Share This Page