Topic: They lied about wmds
Lindyy's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:25 AM

January 20, 2009 - Liberation Day


NOTnoway noway noway noway

Lindyy

Lindyy's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:29 AM






Lie = Knowing that the information you have been provided by your own intelligence services, who worked closely with others, was not true and using it anyways.

You have to prove the one side to get the lie, and you can't. Know the definition of a lie.
read the downing street memos and you will see, other than that I am done with this with you http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece


I read it, where exactly does it say the Bush administration knew that Saddam had no WMD and decided to go to war anyways?

Guess it must be in hidden text only the enlightened ones like you can read.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece



Exactly, where does it say that the Bush administration knew that Iraq/Saddam had no WMD and thus making it a complete lie as to why we went to war?


Either way Saddam needed to be removed, (he was CRAZY)its how that I question


Well, sadaam could have been removed by the chemical wmp that he used upon the Kurds in the north, the mass graves of that have been blasted across the TV media, he could have been removed by being put through feet first in his plastic shredder that he used on his own people, he could have been removed by behading like he had done to so many, he could have been removed by putting through one of his torture chambers, just to name a few ways he could have been removed.

Lindyy

Drivinmenutz's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:32 AM
i will admit, in retrospect i really dont think our going to Iraq had much of anything to do with al-qaeda... however, that is exactly why we are still there now(to prevent terrorists from taking over Iraq). I really don't know who in Washington actually believed Iraq had wmds. There could be a huge conspiracy of oil and money, etc. Or this information may all be manipulated to make certain memebers in D.C. look really bad. Maybe we really did believe Iraq was a threat somehow. Maybe someone made a horrible mistake. Most likely it was a combination of all of the above. All the information is so screwed up, especially now. It's sad but none of us will ever know for sure what went on.

madisonman's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:33 AM

were do you people come up with these things


these things are called facts....which apparently you can't grasp...
Yousef was out of the United States before the smoke had cleared from the World Trade Center's halls. He escaped to Pakistan just hours after the bombing, where he visited with family and stayed at guest houses funded by Osama bin Laden. In Pakistan, he reacquainted himself with family members and current terrorists, including his uncle, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.
During his stay in Pakistan, Yousef organized several attempted terrorist acts, some of which succeeded (like a violent attack in Iran) and others of which did not (like the attempted assassination of then-president of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto).

In a meeting with Khalid and Abdul Hakim Murad, an old friend of Yousef's, the three discussed airplanes and pilot training. After a few months, all three were dispatched to Manila, the Philippines, under orders from Osama bin Laden to begin plotting direct strikes on the United States.

As with many elements of Yousef's life, it's a bit of a mystery exactly when he first joined forces with al Qaeda. There is some evidence that the first WTC bombing may have been assisted or facilitated by bin Laden, but there's a lot more evidence that Yousef's Manila cell was an al Qaeda shop, financed by bin Laden's brother-in-law, Mohammed Jamal Khalifa.

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/terrorists/ramzi-yousef/

madisonman's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:36 AM
There's a school of thought that Yousef might have been working for Iraq instead of (or in combination with) al Qaeda, particularly since the first WTC bombing took place on the anniversary of the liberation of Kuwait by allied forces in the first Gulf War. However, most theories closely tying Yousef to the government Iraq tend to involve an amount of misdirection and arcane identity switching that's extreme even by the labyrinthine standards of international terrorism. The connection has never been proven.

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/terrorists/ramzi-yousef/

no photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:38 AM
Edited by northrn_yanke on Sun 02/17/08 11:40 AM
and to bring that old story up to current times...


Ramzi Yousef's most recent distinction is his status as the resident of the most expensive studio apartment in the history of the world. His 7 by 12 foot luxury suite comes complete with convenient toilet in the living room, 13-inch black and white TV and the handy chute through prison guards slide his delicious meals.

oh and mad...what was the last book you read....comic books don't count...

Lindyy's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:46 AM
Can anyone possibly imagine what would happen if we 'cut and run'like the democrats want to do, and leave Iraq on its own?

IRAN would rush in in a heart beat, attempt to blast ISRAEL off the face of the earth and be stupid enough to try to do the same to the USA.explode explode

I do not think you will find Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, to name a few, wanting that to happen. They all admitted it was a'good thing' to have sadaam hussein done away with.


Lindyy



Drivinmenutz's photo
Sun 02/17/08 11:47 AM
I agree....if we pulled out right now it would be another terrorist run country.

madisonman's photo
Sun 02/17/08 12:26 PM

Can anyone possibly imagine what would happen if we 'cut and run'like the democrats want to do, and leave Iraq on its own?

IRAN would rush in in a heart beat, attempt to blast ISRAEL off the face of the earth and be stupid enough to try to do the same to the USA.explode explode

I do not think you will find Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, to name a few, wanting that to happen. They all admitted it was a'good thing' to have sadaam hussein done away with.


Lindyy



funny how all of the countries you just mentioned are as bad as saddams government or worse......

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 12:42 PM

I agree....if we pulled out right now it would be another terrorist run country.


That's the truth, or even worse it would end up like Darfur. As I said in another post, there are no easy sollutions;^]

no photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:10 PM
As I said in another post, there are no easy sollutions;


the scariest part of that reality is that there is not even an hint of a solution offered by any of the Democratic runners..

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:12 PM

As I said in another post, there are no easy sollutions;


the scariest part of that reality is that there is not even an hint of a solution offered by any of the Democratic runners..


There is, it's just not talked about much. Personaly I'm fond of Bidens plan;^]

no photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:20 PM
There is, it's just not talked about much. Personaly I'm fond of Bidens plan;^


I didn't know Binden is running....and perhaps you can fill me in on what plans Obama and Clinton have been talking about. I must have missed that

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:24 PM
Biden was a candidate, he's dropped out now. But I suspect he will be kept close by either Hillary or Obama, his experiance and Wilson like ideas are just too valuable to not do so;^]

no photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:26 PM
^^..ok so what were the plans that Obama and Clinton talked about?

FearandLoathing's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:31 PM
The rundown: We cannot leave Iraq now, perhaps years before this we could of but it is NOT an option at this point in time. As far as WMD's go, who has proof they existed? Show me proof they existed, until then we have more than enough proof they did not exist at the time we said they did in the late 80's that would of been different but this is now. Saddam was not a threat at the time the war was started, I've outlined his "threats" in another post and can't be bothered to bring them up again. What ever happened to Osama? Yea we should of caught him before ever making a move into another country, if we set out to do something it should be done before anything else takes priority.

Why is that only few countries are allied with us in the war in Iraq? Of the apparent many that "believed" the WMD's existed, where are they in this war?

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:32 PM
Most of their talk has been concerning time phase withdrawel complimented with employing UN peace keepers. It's already been covered months ago & is considered well known enough that it isn't disscussed as much anymore;^]

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:33 PM

The rundown: We cannot leave Iraq now, perhaps years before this we could of but it is NOT an option at this point in time. As far as WMD's go, who has proof they existed? Show me proof they existed, until then we have more than enough proof they did not exist at the time we said they did in the late 80's that would of been different but this is now. Saddam was not a threat at the time the war was started, I've outlined his "threats" in another post and can't be bothered to bring them up again. What ever happened to Osama? Yea we should of caught him before ever making a move into another country, if we set out to do something it should be done before anything else takes priority.

Why is that only few countries are allied with us in the war in Iraq? Of the apparent many that "believed" the WMD's existed, where are they in this war?


We know Saddam had them at some point, we still have the reciets;^]

FearandLoathing's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:36 PM


The rundown: We cannot leave Iraq now, perhaps years before this we could of but it is NOT an option at this point in time. As far as WMD's go, who has proof they existed? Show me proof they existed, until then we have more than enough proof they did not exist at the time we said they did in the late 80's that would of been different but this is now. Saddam was not a threat at the time the war was started, I've outlined his "threats" in another post and can't be bothered to bring them up again. What ever happened to Osama? Yea we should of caught him before ever making a move into another country, if we set out to do something it should be done before anything else takes priority.

Why is that only few countries are allied with us in the war in Iraq? Of the apparent many that "believed" the WMD's existed, where are they in this war?


We know Saddam had them at some point, we still have the reciets;^]


He had them in 89ish, at least chemical wise.

Turtlepoet78's photo
Sun 02/17/08 01:38 PM
That he did, but most of the world did in fact think he still had them. Kind of irrelevant now tho, we're there & as we've both said, pulling out right now isn't an option;^]