Yep, and Reagan gave them a slap on the hand.
Check it out.
Button Masher
Originally Posted by Melf
Iraq gassed Iran during their war? How come I never heard of this?
Yep, and Reagan gave them a slap on the hand.
Check it out.
I Hate Yoshi
omigosh...
It was pretty sad...
SC
Okay, but that's called a liberal "spin".
See, on one hand you say it's BS because foxnews is biased. Then you say it's BS because it's Kay doing the report. Then you say there's no "independent verification" and the scientists might not be telling the truth.
If I took your factual evidence and gave it the same treatment you're giving me I could say:
The liberal media you're quoting is biased and it's BS because they have an agenda and it's not verified by the U.S. government so it's a vast media conspiracy to get a Democrat elected. Which is an argument that I would never make, let's just get that clear.
When I say that you twist media coverage to suit your needs to present your case, the above is a clear example of how you dismiss "the other side" of the issues completely without consideration. Sorry, but that kind of debating and factual presentation just doesn't work for me. You can't selectively make examples from certain media sources and than wantonly ignore the same sources when it doesn't meet your needs.
That's what we call B-I-A-S, something which you clearly have.
Sausage-in-training
Urm no, I dont care about elections etcetera at this point.
The isseu is much more clearcut then you make it out to be.
Back in January, Bush, Cheney, Powel, Rumsfeld, Rove and their assorted pets claimed they had irrefuteable proof, I contested that and made a case why they had jack shit, proved that the irrefuteable proof they claimed to posses was just a bunch of made up shit designed to scare people into submission.
We are now 10 months later and Kay just vindicated me yet again, as the UN did when they indicated that the IRREFUTEABLE proof consisted of misinterpretations and forged documents, that the unmaned drones didnt exist and the factories the US claimed were used for WMD purposes were either destroyed in 91, under constant UN monitoring or simply didnt exist.
Ill reiterate a point I made back in january, Powell holds up a vial with white stuff in it and shows CG pics(artists rendering) of trucks as IRREFUTEABLE EVIDENCE that Iraq has WMD, back then I drew an analogy, I have a schlong that would shame a stallion used for breeding, im not gonna drop my pants but hey if you want im willing to write it on a piece of paper, if that isnt cocnlusive and irrefuteable proof that im hung like a horse, what is?
No, the issue is far *LESS* clearcut then you make it out to be.
Let's get to your "hung like a horse" analogy. If I cut your dick off, how would anyone ever have known whether or not you have/had a large projectile? The only way to find it would be in the pickle jar in Madam X's House of Horror's who purchased the thing and hid it. Get my point?
Powell clearly stated that his evidence was irrefutable - he also stated that the evidence was being moved, destroyed, and otherwise hidden. He also stated that they had "first hand accounts" from "eye witnesses" about the WMD program.
First hand accounts are often enough to sentence people to serious jail time without "hard" evidence.
From that Powell speech:
"Five large cargo trucks appeared along with a truck-mounted crane to move missiles," he said. "We saw this kind of house cleaning at close to 30 sites. Days after this activity, the vehicles and the equipment that I've just highlighted disappeared."
One must wonder why you never mention Blair or all of the other countries that supported this action by the U.S.
Once again, my sole purpose in this thread is point the finger of blame where it lies:
Bush, his Cabinet, the CIA, Congress, and the citizens of the United States of America.
Furthermore, with or without WMD, Hussein was a horrid dictator who has been, by some counts, responsible for 200,000+ Kurdish civilian casualties. Whether or not Bush had the support of the UN (who also did a 180, I might add) or not, I think those atrocities alone warrant action (that the UN did NOT take, as usual) on the part of SOMEONE.
Hell, why not just let him do his thing like Hitler and Stalin (the majority of the world has no clue that Stalin killed TWENTY ONE MILLION of his OWN people). It's much easier for the UN and the rest of the planet to ignore that stuff than to actually do anything about it. Want to point out that the U.S. sold stuff to Iraq and considered them a key player in the Mideast? That's fine. While you're at it, mention that after '90, it was Russia, Germany, and France selling them key missile components and military hardware and resources - they had a distinct ECONOMIC interest in keeping Hussein in power and their protest(s) over the Iraqi invasion have more to do with that than any WMD argument that might be presented here. Who do you think gave them the fucking technology for nuclear power? Who supplied them with infrastructure (pipelines, plants, cabling) during the past 12 years? Europe, Russia, China. All of which "let the dictatorship slide".
My point is that EVERY country is dirty, plays dirty, and has alterior motives despite what they may say in public. Chirac is just as big a bastard as Bush and so is Putin and Schroeder. To think otherwise is just foolhardy.
Sausage-in-training
No dice dude, if they could follow the movements of such large trucks how come the best they could come up with were CG artists renderings?
One would asume they would take a few satelite pics as proof of these things actually existing right?
And first hand accounts are enough to sentence a murderer yes, that is if someone has been murdered.
What we have here is the US claiming there was a murder, yet no body was prodfuced, no one seems to be missing and the acused is denying everything, not only that but the one claiming there was a murder is someone who has lots to gain from saying there was one.
Youre arguments dont fly, irrefuteable evidence was claimed to be had, irrefutable evidence has still not been presented 10 months later despite a monumental efford by over 200K people.
As for Blair, I dont have to, he is getting grilled nicely by former secretary Robin cook, a guy from within his own party who DOESNT lack the moral strength to stand up against his own leader.
Like Bush isn't getting raked over the coals?
Once again, you're selectively ignoring what IS there and twisting what you say isn't. Saddam had/used chemical weapons in the past (regardless of who supplied them), the UN mandated that he disarm, the UN got booted out of Iraq, Saddam refused to let them back in until faced with enormous pressure (if he had nothing to hide, why bother?), didn't cooperate with them fully, was found to be in breach of the UN Charter (by the UN itself - were they all smoking something, too?), still was less than cooperative and was coercing Iraqi scientist's not to talk through death threats to their families (again, if nothing to hide then why bother?), and ultimately paid the price for his huge ego and acts of torture and death. Sorry, but your argument doesn't fly.
200,000 dead, chemical weapons used on civilians, chemical weapons used in warfare, shiites killed in southern Iraq, defying the UN, invading Kuwait, firing missiles at Israel, scorched earth (his own country!) policies, his sons raping and fucking whoever they pleased and killing them afterwards if they mouthed off, torturing enemy soldiers and parading them on TV.
WMD or no WMD - fuck Saddam and his regime. They have enough to go on without them. And I truly think they WILL find them.
200K people? Are you on crack?
Sausage-in-training
Nope, thats how many US soldiers are present hehehe.
And again he didnt boot the inspectors out they left, after pressure allowed unfettered acces to scientists etcetera, its pretty wel documented that he complied with the UN the last few months in any way they wanted.
Also fun note, the Iraqi scientists to this day are saying the same things they said before Saddam was ousted.
And dont start on the soldiers on TV bit, the US did exactly the same BEFORE AND AFTERthose 6 were shown on TV.
1.)200,000 U.S. Soldiers present /= 200,000 people looking.
2.) To say that he allowed "unfettered access" and complied with the UN inspectors "in any way they wanted" is intellectually dishonest. If you want to believe that, that's fine.
Hans Blix, in his address to the UN on March 7, 2003 said that Iraq's cooperation was "improving" but that they still hadn't fully disarmed in accordance with provision 1441, from over a decade earlier. THe UNMOVIC and IAEA inspectors had stated that during briefings to the Security Council on January 27 and February 14 that Iraq was gradually increasing its cooperation with the UN. Yet, both deemed the cooperation insufficient
February 24, 2003, U.S., France, UK, Spain, say that Iraq's cooperation is not fully satisfactory and that weapons inspections could not countinue indefinitely. Even France had problems with Saddam's level of cooperation.
Those are the facts. Look it up.
3.) I doubt the scientists had any fun at all.
4.) No, the U.S. didn't do "the same thing" before and afterwards. POW's were not shown - did you even see that Al Jazeera feed? To compare that with anything shown by the U.S. government is irresponsible. Oh, are you talking about what might have been shown on CNN, ABC, Fox, or the like? Sorry, that's not part of the U.S. government. Al Jazeera's feeds were supplied by Iraqi controlled TV stations. :P
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks