Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IRAQ HAD NO STOCKPILES...SO WHAT?
Neal Nize ^ | 10/7/04 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 10/07/2004 6:31:27 AM PDT by NotchJohnson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-130 next last
To: Michael81Dus

For "Germany" read "some German companies" if that helps. As if that makes it better...


61 posted on 10/07/2004 7:37:16 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
But I doubt that he posed a threat to the whole world - at least by 2003.

You are right, he was not a threat to the whole world in 2003. He loved Germany and France, and Russia and China too. He was just a threat to the US and Israel. We drew straws, and the US came up with the longer straw, and we took him out.

62 posted on 10/07/2004 7:40:02 AM PDT by Defiant (The question is, "are you better off now than if Al Gore had been elected in 2000?".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: AaronInCarolina

Well, what means "fooling". It´s always hard to criticize the actions of the past. Anyway, I feel that we were wrong to bash the axis of weasels so harsh - with the knowledge we have today. It´s still speculation and we all should be careful with judgments.


63 posted on 10/07/2004 7:40:23 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
But I doubt that he posed a threat to the whole world

This is an arrogant thing to say. Apparently the United States may not attack someone unless he poses a threat TO THE WHOLE WORLD.

In other words, it's NOT ENOUGH just to be an enemy of the United States itself. No. He must be a threat TO THE WHOLE WORLD. Otherwise, no war, United States!

Sorry but frankly I don't give a rat's ass about what kind of threat Saddam Hussein was to the "world". It's the United States which interests me, as an American citizen. I hope that's ok with me.

People from Germany saying the US shouldn't attack X because X poses no threat to Germany just really pisses me off.

now that we all learned that he had no WMD when the war started?

You think he had "no WMD" when the war started?

Does that include anthrax? Give your proof please that Saddam had no anthrax.

64 posted on 10/07/2004 7:43:14 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

I was responding to a guy who wrote that Saddam posed a threat to the WHOLE WORLD! I told him that I doubt that, and now you reproach me with arrogance? Who are you? Check the timeline of posts before slamming me.


65 posted on 10/07/2004 7:45:08 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
A couple of problems with that. Japan attacked us, Iraq didn't.

That's not a "problem with that", that's a feature of the analogy. For "Iraq" substitute "Germany".

Japan attacked us, Germany didn't. So why the hell did we open a front against Germany? That's the analogy.

And if you will check your history you will see that Germany declared war on us on December 11, not the other way around.

Yeah? Well so what? Germany posed no direct threat to the continental US. We could have "contained" that threat.

66 posted on 10/07/2004 7:45:19 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

That makes it better, because it is very important to me that the German governments (conservative pro-US Kohl as well as socialist anti-US Schröder) are not corrupt and follow our laws.


67 posted on 10/07/2004 7:46:25 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

See post #65.


68 posted on 10/07/2004 7:47:01 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: NotchJohnson

Much of the extensive documentation of Iraq's WMD came from ... Clinton's administration. In 2001, there were rumors of landmines left behind by the Clintons.


69 posted on 10/07/2004 7:50:38 AM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NotchJohnson

Why, then, did Sodamn Insane fight the UN inspectors tooth and nail, and do everything in his power to obstruct their work? If memory serves, Bush went into Iraq, after the UN inspectors were effectively kicked out of the country.

That's sure not the behavior of someone who has nothing to hide.


70 posted on 10/07/2004 7:51:21 AM PDT by Darnright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan

It went well beyond gas masks. They also had atropine injectors, which is a nerve agent antidote.


71 posted on 10/07/2004 7:53:35 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

I have never heard any reports that Iraq had anthrax. Prove to me that they did.


72 posted on 10/07/2004 7:53:49 AM PDT by Greenback_dollar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

"A couple of commissions and studies and investigations have all come to the conclusion that he didn't have something to hide"

If these "commissions" are comprised of people like Blix, or some of the members of our 911 commission, I rest my case.


73 posted on 10/07/2004 8:01:33 AM PDT by zygoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Greenback_dollar; Dr. Frank fan

In addition, according to my news sources, the CIA report (which comes just in time to hurt Bush, I suspect) says that Iraq had no nuclear, biological or chemical weapons by 2003.


74 posted on 10/07/2004 8:03:30 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Every fair-equipped army has atropine injectors. We had training injectors, but in state of war those will be replaced with real atropine injectors. This is not abnormal.


75 posted on 10/07/2004 8:05:05 AM PDT by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: NotchJohnson
Let's talk about biological weapons. Duelfer testified that Iraq could have restarted its program and produced mustard agent in months, and nerve agent in less than a year.

Thats not talking Biological Weaopns.

76 posted on 10/07/2004 8:08:56 AM PDT by chudogg (www.chudogg.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
That makes it better, because it is very important to me that the German governments (conservative pro-US Kohl as well as socialist anti-US Schröder) are not corrupt and follow our laws.

That's very nice that the German government is not corrupt but this has nothing whatsoever to do with whether sanctions would have worked, which was the actual point I was responding to. Understand now?

I was responding to a guy who wrote that Saddam posed a threat to the WHOLE WORLD! I told him that I doubt that

Sorry, my mistake there. I'm glad we agree then that Whether Saddam Posed A Threat To The Whole World can and should not be the test of anything. Frankly, even Hitler would have failed that test (Hitler posed very little threat to, oh, Siam).

77 posted on 10/07/2004 8:09:40 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus

You were equipped to face a Soviet army that was felt likely to use nerve agents on a large scale. Are you trying to say Iraq was similarly equipped to face us?

And they had the real thing, not training injectors.


78 posted on 10/07/2004 8:11:17 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (hoplophobia is a mental aberration rather than a mere attitude)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Michael81Dus
How would a German know what a real threat to the real world is?
79 posted on 10/07/2004 8:11:43 AM PDT by ApesForEvolution (You will NEVER convince me that Muhammadanism isn't a veil for MASS MURDERS. Save your time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Greenback_dollar
I have never heard any reports that Iraq had anthrax. Prove to me that they did.

Iraq (along with the US and USSR) is one of the few countries known to have produced weaponized anthrax. Moreover, in the mid-90s declarations, Iraq declared that it possessed a large amount of such anthrax, which has never been accounted for (whether destroyed or what). These are undisputed facts.

As such, the prudent presumption here is that this anthrax still exists. And the appropriate challenge to the WMD-debunkers is that they need to Prove that it doesn't if they want their conclusions to carry weight.

80 posted on 10/07/2004 8:14:44 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-130 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson