No. These ones:
Try pre-gulf war one. Keep digging.
Posted on 01/26/2006 12:55:39 AM PST by mal
I don't think that meets any clear definition of "conservative" at all. In fact, I would suggest that the use of U.S. military forces to protect a royal family in one country and restore a royal family to the throne in another country represents one of the low points in U.S. history from a conservative perspective.
Yeah but...the MSM and the RATs do not believe this information. Cold they all be wrong? Are they ever right?
WMD was among the reasons just not the only one. UN resolutions and congressioanl resolutions make that clear.
I do not understand where anyone finds debate in that area.
Saddam has been shown to have proscribed items that include some WMD and means to deliver them. That means he was GUILTY. Thus the action to REMOVE him was right and proper ( not to mention overdue IMHO.
You see " the means to deliver them" is a part of WMD. Many people try to seperate that fact. A good solid read of 687 will see people understanding that very point if they read it objectively without any pre conceived bias.
Saddam is done and it took a CONSERVATIVE leader to take action where we saw a LIBERAL leader TALK about action to take but refused to DO it. This is why W was re elected and it is also why we just saw a change in Canada.
People want to talk about possible actions, people want to have the debate. The difference between the left and the right is that the right will actually take the next step to action where the left still wants to talk some more about it.
A couple of chemical shells were used in an IED trying to attack our solders. A couple were sickened. These were among the 550 UNACCOUNTED for chemical weapons that Saddam claimed were destroyed long ago. Where are the rest of them do you suppose?
Please tell me why 55 gallon drums of "pesticide" were located in ammunition dumps. Cmon now are you really that gullible as to belive such nonsense? LMAO @ pesticide.
NOPE, holding those that killed our soldiers accountable isn't conservative at all is it? SHEEEESH!!!!! < /sarcasm > Its a personal responsibility thing.....
You dismiss what we DO do and then slam what we do not do.
Hear this....W said something you might want to revisit.
One By One.
Why the hell this wasn't publicized by the administration, I'll never know. Guess they thought it would be better to be accused of lying about WMDs and suffering serious damage politically. What a stupid move. It's also a damn shame that we knew Syria and Iran was providing foreign fighters, weapons and explosives to the insurgency in Iraq and we did (uh, we're doing) nothing as our troops continue to be killed by IEDs.
ding ding ding
I think you're right. We're building an empire, no matter what it takes to accomplish that goal.
You might be right, but how else is he to get that type of news out? The MSM here and in Europe would never go with that story, does not fit their agenda.
LMAO @ building an empire. Islam is what is attempting to build an empire. You really are Mixed up aren't you!
LOL! Shhh, don't tell everyone.
When my kids grow up, they will rule the northern African continent.
Thanks George!
Did any of you all see the speech at the (I think, it's been a crazy week) University of Kansas the other day? The Iraqi woman yelling thank you, thank you, to President Bush? She made the point that there were WMDs, saying her Kurdish relatives were victims of them.
It was really moving, listening to her words. Made me very proud of my President.
http://www.2la.org/syria/wmd.html
Interesting read here if you care to take the time to check it out.
He He :)
Contrary to ongoing reports by mainstream media outlets, WMDs have been found in Iraq, so reports New York Times best-selling author Richard Miniter in his new book, Disinformation.
Consider these shocking facts:
• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons • Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
This is only a partial list of the deadly weapons Miniter reveals in his new book, Disinformation. Miniter systematically dissects the "No-WMD Myth" (how it started, and why it continues), as well as 21 other War-on-Terror myths perpetuated by the media.
So color me confused as to when we admit there have been WMD's found in Iraq, especially since it only take one of these weapons set off correctly to kill thousands. But hey that would not fit the political agenda of the "news" outlets.....time for truth in advertising and call them propaganda outlets.
I didn't ask that you prove something that doesn't exist. You state they don't exist. That does not make it irrefutable fact. I asked you to back up your statement with facts. You apparently refuse to do so. This makes you unpersuasive and irrelevant.
"Alberta's Child: I'm telling you right now that these so-called WMDs will never be found. Other Freeper: What are you, a DUmmie? Of course they will. Everybody knows they will . . . it's beyond any doubt. Alberta's Child: All right -- let's have a bet on it."
An absurd argument. I'll remind you that another post on FR a few days ago related to an Englishman who had purchased acreage in Normandy on which he'd just recently discovered a WWII German bunker above Utah Beach and near a memorial to that invasion; a bunker heretofore unknown. Since D-Day occurred 62 years ago this year and it took that long to discover a bunker so situated, what makes you believe that evidence of Iraqi WMD cannot yet be discovered? If you want to bet someone, go ahead. Don't come crying here in the future if it goes sour on you.
"I'd also point out that this war was a dismal failure on the part of the U.S. if we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of U.S. lives over these WMDs only to have them spirited out of the country without our knowledge."
Leaving off the balance of your statement was not taking you out of context. We have spent billions of dollars and our loss of life has been in the thousands. WMD has not been found. Whether it's been 'spirited out of the country' without our knowledge remains to be seen. Thus, the second half of your statement contains factual information making the first half of your statement a true representation of your beliefs; i.e. that the war was a dismal failure. I'm not the one deceiving anyone here; you are. You make a statement then you try to obfuscate the issue to make it seem something it isn't. If you wish to continue your delusional insistence that WMD did not exist after 1998 be my guest. But this will be my last post to you. There are far more reasonable and responsible people here at FR to converse with; I see no need to waste my time with the likes of you!
Q Hello, Mr. President. I am an American Iraqi Kurd. I would like to salute you and salute all the troops are freeing 27 million people. They are free. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
Q Mr. President, I would like to share this thought with all our nation and everybody who is questioning what happened to the chemical weapons. Saddam burned 4,500 villagers. I lost more than 10 members of my family under the ground. We found their bones after, when we freed Iraq. Saddam, himself, and his people, his followers, they are chemical weapons. Please stop questioning the administration and their decision. It was the best decision anybody could take. Freeing 27 million people. (Applause.)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060123-4.html
Thank you so much for posting that. I caught a small portion of the speech, I was working and it has been a stressful week so I just caught it in passing, not the details.
It amazes me when I hear the Iraqis praise our President for freeing them, while our own citizens criticize him for going there. I think Iraq is just one part of the WOT and a necessary part. History (if not rewritten by partisan liberals) will prove George W. Bush a brilliant man.
WMDs were only one of many, many reasons we went to war against Saddam, and it wasn't even the top reason. The primary reason was that he turned Iraq into one of the world's foremost terror-sponsoring states and we needed to reduce the number of such states.
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.