Preview of 2008 DNC convention and their top candidates.
Posted on 06/21/2006 6:59:15 PM PDT by Wombat101
I've been watching the liberal talking heads on several shows this evening spin the discovery of 500 Chemical warheads in Iraq.
I have but one word to describe it:
INSANITY
The 'talking points' (which are transparent, and understandably so; democrats (small 'd' intentional) have only had a few hours to react to Rick Santorum's news conference) being trotted out to degrade the "Bush was right about WMD's" argument, revolve around three points;
1. These are not the WMD's we went to war for
2. These WMD's are too old to be a danger to anyone
Idiocy, plain and simple.
To take the first...ahem...argument; if these "aren't the WMD's we went to war for" then just which one's would you need to find to justify the war in the first place? A WMD is a WMD, is it not? On a certain level, this defense seems to imply two things; democrats knew these weapons would be found, in which case they would simply deny, deny, deny, and secondly, it implies there is another batch of WMD's out there; Laura Schwartz just implied it on Hannity and Colmes.
Which leads to the question; if there's another batch of WMD's (you said these aren't "the ones"), then where are the others? And aren't you the people who said that none existed in the first place? We have now gone from arguing that none exist, to finding definitive proof that they did, to using "yeah, but there are more" as a counter-argument.
On the second argument that the weapons are too old; having handled explosives and weapons a great deal in my lifetime, I have always had a great deal of respect for the destructive power of such things. You always treat any weapon as if it were live or loaded, and age doesn't mean a damned thing.
As a matter of personal experience, I remember when I was stationed at Subic Bay in the Philipines. Construction on the base was a frequent occurance, and occasionally, construction and maintenance crews came upon unexploded ordnance from past wars. I remember, vividly, one day when a construction crew came across a buried naval artillery shell, which we later learned was a leftover from the Spanish-American War. This was in 1987, so, the shell had been buried for nearly 90 years.
Guess what?
When the EOD people came to remove it (they actually blew it up in place) not only did the explosives THEY used go up, so did the shell's. A 90 year old shell was able to explode, sure with a little help, but explode it did.
In this day and age, landmines are a cause celebre. Millions of them remian hidden and buried all over the world and thousands are injured and maimed by them annually, the vast majority in Southeast Asia. If I recall, the Vietnam War ended in 1975. The war in Cambodia and Laos went on a decade more, yet almost every day, reports come in of children being injured ny landmines left over from that conflict.
So,if 90 year old naval shells can go "BOOM" and 40 year old landmines can do likewise, what makes you think a sarin-filled artillery round buried in the sand of Mesopotamia can't?
Yes, a chemical weapon works on different prinicples, and unlike some conventional explosives, are far less stable and susceptible to the ravages of time and enviornment. But, to dismiss the possibility that even "old" sarin or mustard gas shells are "harmless" is incredibly stupid. To insist upon it for political purposes is CRIMINAL STUPIDITY.
This sort of stupidity is not wholly an affectation adopted for political purposes, either. There is a strange, inverted dialectic to it, as well. So, while 500 WMD artillery shells in the hands of Saddam Hussein (and potentially, terrorists) is "no big deal", 500 S&W revolvers in the hands of private citizens, with licenses, is. One is no big deal, the other is a "crisis" and a "tragedy" and a "threat to our children's safety".
I say we ask John Kerry and Teddy Kennedy to personally go to Iraq and help destroy these shells with their bare hands, and Mrs. Clinton with her fangs.
Nothing will convince them. And I mean nothing.
The problem for the Dems (besides disastrous timing in view of their pomposities in the Senate) is that dismissing 500 warheads as too old or not enough leads directly to the question "how many would be enough for you to admit that Bush was right?" That's a deadly question - either they have to admit to a number higher than that or admit that no find however massive would be adequate. The latter is, of course, the truth.
Mental illness often works that way, you know.
Preview of 2008 DNC convention and their top candidates.
I'm sure a lot of the stuff is old. The best material was moved to Syria before the war.
It's about time that the big news stations start to report fair and honestly. With all of the political prejudices that a liberal media displays, it's sickening when they can not even attribute a success to a conservative administration.
Thanks for a great post.
Obviously. But hey, I look at it this way; every one of their catchy mantras has gone down in flames over the past few years;
"No Blood for Oil"? Well, the gas station around here is selling premium unleaded for $3.49. Where's all this free oil we're supposed to be stealing?
"Bush Lied, People Died"? Well, we just proved Bush DIDN'T lie and if we hadn't gone in, Saddam would have killed many more than we did, just for SPORT.
"I Voted for it before I Voted Against It"? How long before John Kerry flip-flops yet again and takes credit for being prescient? I say before the morning news shows hit the airwaves.
Welcome. Thanks for saying it was "great"!
Finding nukes wouldn't be enough to convince moronic libs. But we could keep playing "Bush Was Right" just to tic 'em off.
|
I have a suggestion to "defuse" the problem. Kennedy and Kerry will claim these WMD's are impotent because of age. So I guess they would not mind setting off just one sarin cannister say on the Lexington Green and see if its a shot heard around the world, or a huge dud?/sarcasm alert
LOL! C'mon, that's not fair, that's like betting on the sun rising in the morning...
I'd like to present each of them with a gift, couretsy of the US Army:
A new paperweight, constructed from an "old,inert, seriously degraded, pre-1991" Iraqi sarin shell.
Think they'll send a "Thank you" note?
Too old?? Hardly. A few years back at American University in Washington DC some construction outfit was digging around and hit a bunch of old chemical shells from WW1. These shells consisted of two parts which were supposed to mix when the shells were fired creating poison gas. It was discovered that the shells were gradually disintegrating and that this mix could take place at any time. Yes still as dangerous as the day they wee buried, in fact more so.
Those WMDs are at three locations in Syria, according to General McInerney (who's been expressing this view on FNC for years now. ....and I agree with him). They were moved there in the six months leading up to the war while we we putzing around attempting to win the unwinnable (UN support). According to the General, the reasons we've made no attempt to go after them (in Syria) are many, but it's mainly because we'll inevitably find Russian, French, and German fingerprints all over the place, which would highly embarrass these nations (to put it mildly) at a time when we need their support.
"C'mon, that's not fair, that's like betting on the sun rising in the morning..."
(Best South'ren drawl) Momma didn't raise no fool, Suh...
These aren't the WMDs you were looking for....
There's no AQ Saddam connection...
Bush is Hitler...
Don't need to tell me: I'm an old Navy AO1. I know all about such things.
They surely are between a rock and a hard place, aren't they? So they will do what the MSM is doing--basically ignore it or pooh-pooh it.
Pretty soon the pooh will be all over them, as I think this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.