not one voice of reason in the whole site. No one willing to concede that Saddam could have conceivably destroyed all stockpiles or that Bush may have exaggerated the degree of certainty he was justified in having based on the circumstantial "evidence" US intelligence agencies had.
No one willing to concede that intentions do not equal stockpiles or that "dual-use" facilities do not even prove intention.
No one willing to concede that a few chemical warheads here and there proves nothing n terms of stockpiles.
No one willing to concede that Bush didn't just say that the burden of proof was on Saddam. Bush said Saddam had WMD's. If he said more than he needed to and got burned, that's his fault.
Saddam was in violation because he did not account for his old WMD. But that does not mean that there is no difference between not accounting for and definitely having.
Bush should have told US that he did not know for sure, and let us decide whether we wanted to invade based on Saddam not having accounted for WMD.
1 posted on
09/22/2004 8:00:04 AM PDT by
jtesh
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
To: jtesh; Admin Moderator
Here kitty kitty kitty ...
2 posted on
09/22/2004 8:01:51 AM PDT by
asgardshill
(Got a lump of coal? Tell Mary Mapes to 'shove it' - in 2 weeks you'll have a diamond.)
To: jtesh
I like mine extra crispy.
3 posted on
09/22/2004 8:02:09 AM PDT by
WorkingClassFilth
(Savor the present as the days of Kerry's whine and poses. It'll be a nice memory when you are old.)
To: jtesh
You're about to feel a little sting ...
4 posted on
09/22/2004 8:02:58 AM PDT by
asgardshill
(Got a lump of coal? Tell Mary Mapes to 'shove it' - in 2 weeks you'll have a diamond.)
To: jtesh
To: jtesh
And you are? And your point is? And we should care why?
6 posted on
09/22/2004 8:03:36 AM PDT by
Solson
(The path of least resistance is the path of the loser. - Phil Weltman)
To: jtesh
" Bush said Saddam had WMD's. "Don't think so. You gotta site for that?
7 posted on
09/22/2004 8:05:54 AM PDT by
bayourod
(The parrot is dead. Honor your guarantee now Dan Rather.)
To: jtesh; Conspiracy Guy; marmar; MeekOneGOP
Yeah lets run foriegn policy with a count of hands.....moron.
8 posted on
09/22/2004 8:06:11 AM PDT by
bad company
(What's the font kenneth?)
To: jtesh
If you are a convicted felon and ATTEMPT to buy a weapon that is off limits to you, you have committed a crime. If you ATTEMPT to hire a hitman, you have committed a crime.
Saddam Hussein repeatedly ATTEMPTED to obtain/develop Weapons of Mass Destruction.
He obviously had such materials when he gassed people in Iraq. The questions are, did he use them all up, destroy them, or send them off to other countries (as he did with money)?
Also, a thing to consider with the anthrax mailings; if it requires a lot of overhead to be able to weaponize anthrax, is it likely that we have seen the last of the anthrax that was mailed or is there a sizable stockpile someplace (in America or another country)?
11 posted on
09/22/2004 8:09:43 AM PDT by
weegee
(What's the provenance, Kenneth? Where did the forged SeeBS memo come from?)
To: jtesh
By troll. Tried to give you a chance.
13 posted on
09/22/2004 8:12:01 AM PDT by
Conspiracy Guy
(Dan Rather, "I lied, but I lied about the truth".)
To: jtesh
You again? What do you think about Slim Whitman? Barry Mainilow? Pirates? Cats? Zots?
15 posted on
09/22/2004 8:12:53 AM PDT by
4CJ
(Laissez les bon FReeps rouler)
To: jtesh; Americanwolf; AQGeiger; Arrowhead1952; Beaker; BenLurkin; baltodog; big'ol_freeper; ...
You Are Being Hunted.17 posted on
09/22/2004 8:13:04 AM PDT by
Old Sarge
(ZOT 'em all, let MOD sort 'em out!)
To: jtesh; Zavien Doombringer; 4mycountry; Constitution Day; VRWCmember; Poohbah; dighton; ...
No one willing to concede that Bush didn't just say that the burden of proof was on Saddam.No one willing to say that you're clueless, troll?
22 posted on
09/22/2004 8:15:27 AM PDT by
mhking
("Honey, WHERE...IS...MY....SUPER SUIT?" --Samuel L. Jackson, "The Incredibles")
To: jtesh
To: jtesh
27 posted on
09/22/2004 8:18:27 AM PDT by
scott0347
(Commander of the 0347th Lancer Brigade, Operator of the Immaculate Steamroller)
To: jtesh
Give me the list of people who said Saddam DIDN'T have WMD's???????
30 posted on
09/22/2004 8:18:57 AM PDT by
OSHA
(Cheap Shots, Low Blows and Late Hits. Free Delivery. Fast Friendly Service with a Smile!)
To: jtesh
John Kerry, you must quit posting on Free Republic without identifying yourself.
35 posted on
09/22/2004 8:22:48 AM PDT by
Grampa Dave
(When will the ABCNNBC BS lunatic libs stop Rathering to Americans? Answer: NEVER!)
To: jtesh
WMD's are still there buried in the sand someplace. If not then you should feel proud that we have liberated millions of oppressed people you heartless commie.
41 posted on
09/22/2004 8:24:25 AM PDT by
Teflonic
To: jtesh
You are outta here, troll.
53 posted on
09/22/2004 8:34:35 AM PDT by
Arrowhead1952
(Charter member of the VRWC - and proud of it. - - - Hear BS on See BS.)
To: jtesh
WMD's ?
USA Today
Fox News
Washington Post
San Diego Union Tribune
Al Qaeda Ties? Notice the airliner (Sept 11, 2001), and train cars, (Madrid 3/11/04), in the Salman Pac terrorist training facility outside Baghdad in this 2000 satellite photo. Click the image to get high resolution.
57 posted on
09/22/2004 8:41:32 AM PDT by
DocRock
(Why don't the RNC protesters come down here and help clean up after Charley and Frances?)
To: jtesh
65 posted on
09/22/2004 9:05:08 AM PDT by
doug from upland
(Dan Rather is a journalist like Michael Moore is a pole vaulter.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
