Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq Were Not Those Used to Justify Invasion

The New American ^ | 15 October 2014 | Warren Mass

[Lib-Lickers 2]

that material was all known about long before Bush came into office and was already categorized and stored underground by the UN inspectors that they had over there years before

that yellow cake was not one of the reasons for the invasion and it was useless for anything Iraq had going,, it was from their old nuclear program they had in the early 80’s before the Israelis put an end to it

[Ransomed]

Fine, don’t attack, but to not even make a public statement about it at the time? I mean, why not tell the American people the truth about it now?

Freegards

[JimRed]

So, they finally admit that there WERE WMDs in Iraq. Then they say they were the wrong ones. Typical leftist BS.

[PIF]

Have to ask someone else ... all this 12 year old hind sight is ridiculous ... maybe the folks who are pushing this meme should get down and dirty about all the mistakes made in all the other wars? After all FDR gave us 403 thousand dead and that led to Bush beating Gore which led to 0bama which led to the GOP’s insatiable appetite to eat its own in order to elect either a modern version of Trotsky or Jughashvilli ...

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

I’m used to liberals rehashing the Iraq war and Bush’s so called “lies”. It’s sad to see it on Free Republic. And all because of something Trump said in a debate?

We are watching a civilization die. Part of it is an ignorance of history. The populist candidate, who proves his prowess outside of government, then returns to the adulation of the common man, while threatening those that run the established power structure. Julius Caesar or Donald Trump?

The fact is that our Founding Fathers trusted laws, not men. They would have been aghast at otherwise intelligent people spouting off messianic rhetoric about a political candidate. Individual people don't save the government (that's an old-world idea... the kind they fought against); the system of government protects the people. But we can't change the system overnight, and doing so will mean pain for everyone. So instead, we'll just elect a savior!

I'm recording names and statements here, because, after Trump wins (and, if it's between him and Hillary, I'll vote for Trump myself), I'm going to show up on every thread where some of the (presently) most obnoxious sycophants post and quote back to them everything they are saying now. Fools deserve to be humiliated by their own words...

[Washi]

This is the third or fourth thread I've seen today revisiting the entire Iraq war issue.

This issue has been discussed, in depth, on FR and the overwhelming consensus, among Freepers has been that, given the widely accepted intelligence available at the time, GWBs invasion was justified.

It was only the moonbats that argued the "Bush Lied, People Died" line.

Now I see we are revisiting the whole argument.

Why?

Because Trump supporters are working hard to, again, justify one of Trump's leftist positions/statements so they can continue to feel good in their support for him.

[Ransomed]

No problem, I am just puzzled by Bush’s actions and those convoys.

Freegards

[Hoodat]

that yellow cake was not one of the reasons for the invasion

Again, the reason for invading was that Iraq was in violation of the cease fire agreement from 1991. Read it for yourself.

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ

Enough with the DNC talking points here. Those lies have gone on long enough.

[Lib-Lickers 2]

you can be authorized to do about anything,, nobody said they didn’t have authorization.. it had nothing to do with 500 tons of yellow cake stashed from 1981

oh and then there is this from George W Bush himself admitting they screwed up they never found the WMDs they thought were there:

In a speech before the World Affairs Council of Charlotte, NC, on April 7, 2006, President Bush stated that he fully understood that the intelligence was wrong, and [he was] just as disappointed as everybody else when U.S. troops failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

[fuzzylogic]

The response to the yellow cake is always, “but that was known and under the control of the U.N.”. My response is; yeah, the same U.N. that had been kicked out of the country and was corrupted by the oil-for-food program. Saddam had prepared to restart his nuclear program by keeping the important parts ready-to-go.

The 5000 chemical weapons are always cited as “from the 80’s”. Frankly I don’t care. We knew he had them, knew he’d used them, knew he hadn’t accounted for the destruction of all of them. What were we supposed to do? ...just say, “ah, but we don’t have evidence of NEW ones”???

Saddam was a sick murderer and his sons were worse. He was the biggest supporter of terrorism and was the worst among dictator nations. After 911 the threshold for tolerating these thugs was lowered. I’m glad we took him out, who knows what would have happened if we hadn’t? Things would be much better if it weren’t for Obama, he’s destroyed the opportunity for a stable middle east, all in the name of “ending wars”. That said, nobody ever wants to think about the alternate consequences had we not taken him out.

[Hoodat]

The Authorization enumerates the reasons we went to war in Iraq. Yellowcake is not mentioned. Once again, enough with the lies already. We went to war for the reasons listed in the Authorization for Use of Force in Iraq. It is plainly stated. Iraq was in violation of the cease fire agreement. Do you understand what a cease fire is? It is an agreement where hostile actions are suspended per an agreed set of rules. It is not a permanent end. It is a break. And Iraq violated those rules, thus opening themselves up to a continuation of the 1991 Gulf War.

Enough with the DNC lies already. The resolution was put in writing, passed into law by a Democrat Senate, and signed by the President.

[CommerceComet]

You could summarize the article by saying that we found Iraqi chemical weapons but those don’t count.

[dfwgator]

The m.......... bought some yellow cake. Okay? In Africa. He went to Africa, and he bought yellow cake!
- Are you sure?
- Yes I'm sure BITCH! I got the head of CIA right here to tell you.
- Huddilihuu. “Are you sure? Are you su- " I can't believe you m-------as. That's ridiculous! Me and Jab just come back from Africa...
- Craddle of ---kin' civilization!
- ...And this n---a out here buying some yellow cake...
- From the motherland!
- Are you sure it was yellowcake?
- If ya'll ---as don't believe me i got some yellowcake right here. Look - u see? u believe that?
- Don't drop that ---t!
- I know what I'm doing. Yo i got it wrapped up in this special CIA napkin.
- Don't drop that ---t!
- I'm holdin' on to this --it!
- Pray to God you don't drop that --it!
- Yellowcake....

[Lib-Lickers 2]

you can also listen to Bush say the exact same thing

.. and what was found certainly was not worth an all out invasion of Iraq and the 100,000 casualties and 4000+ dead..

[Hoodat]

LMAO! You are da man!

[Hoodat]

[PrairieLady2]

In my opinion, the topic IS relevant for more than one reason. First, there’s another Bush running for office. The unspoken question is...how many of his brother’s and father’s policies will he support and carry out? Or will he distance himself from their failed policies? Both of the Bush’s were involved in middle east wars.

What’s Jebs! outlook on war in the middle east? Does he see the mistakes that were made and how will his policies impact the middle east? If he can’t or won’t admit to their mistakes, how can we believe him? How can we trust him if he can’t see their mistakes?

Politics is the art of persuasion. People get their minds working when ‘suggestions’ are made. Trump is ‘suggesting’ that there may be issues with Jeb! in light of the prior presidencies of family members.

Can Jeb! handle that? Obviously not. He doesn’t have emotional maturity. He’s a dreamer, like the democrats.

He should be able to look Donald Trump in the eye, man to man, and tell Trump something like this..”We aren’t here to vet my father’s past successes or failures, and we aren’t here to rehash my brother’s successes or failures. We are here to look at what “I” have to offer since I’m not my father or my brother. “I” am running for president here, not them. I have the advantage of the success and errors of family member presidents because they allowed me to learn about what “I” need to do as president.”

Something along those lines, or even different ones..I’m just suggesting one possibility that could open that door to discussion about what makes a Jeb! presidency different from that of his father and his brother.

But what does Jeb! do? He looks helplessly at the audience and the moderators at a Presidential Debate and pleads with them to stop the bully from picking on his family.

REALLY?????

So, when Donald Trump challenges him, it actually puts Jeb in a position to strengthen his candidacy and in the process make the Donald look like a duck.

The Donald is actually doing him a favor and the pathetic whimp is incapable of seeing it!

So yes, the question is relevant. What WILL Jeb! do about the clay feet of the middle east where there is no cohesion, where every man there is a bully, attempting to bully his way through the world in an effort to conquer it for Islam? Jeb! becomes Jello in the face of a bully.

Trump puts question marks in our minds..do we want more failed Bush policies? Do we want more lies about no new taxes, or absent WMD’s in Iraq? Do we want to listen to Jeb’s own lies? He can’t even admit that his dad or brother had both strength’s and weaknesses, nor can he admit his own.

All he can do is stand there and cry helplessly about the bully picking on his family. He can’t even come up with a reasonable challenge to Trump to put Trump on the defensive.

All he can do is cry about eminent domain? Eminent Domain was written into the constitution In 1791. It’s NOT new! Not even a reasonable challenge because he doesn’t tell the whole story. He tries to appeal not to intelligent informed people, but stupid, ignorant ones who are too lazy to do any homework. And in so doing, he makes himself look stupid and inept.

That’s the kind of man who slips and slides sleazy policies in because he can’t deal with honesty and reality face to face. Passive-Aggressive, emotionally immature. He might look ok standing by himself, but put him next to the real thing and he looks like a cheap imitation. He’s guilded brass, not solid gold.

So, we are faced with assessing Trump’s charges. Are they valid, or not? If so, it puts Trump in good standing as someone who speaks truthfully. If not, then it becomes the act of a lying bully.

So we the Jury, the PEOPLE must look at the evidence presented so that we can make an educated decision, a judgement if you will as to the character and abilities of the men who seek to hold office. So yes, we must look over the ‘evidence’ that’s available in the light of time, history, and the presentation of new facts/evidence. That’s our job as voters. WE vet those candidates.

So yes, it’s very relevant for Freepers to rehash the information.

[Hoodat]

.. and what was found certainly was not worth an all out invasion of Iraq and the 100,000 casualties and 4000+ dead..

But then we didn't invade Iraq because of their WMD. We violated because they couldn't account for their WMD which was in direct violation of the 1991 cease fire agreement. You can read it for yourself in the Authorization For the Use of Force In Iraq - a bill introduceed by Tom Daschle (D- SD), passed by a Democrat Senate, and signed by George W. Bush.

The cease fire agreement covers WMD that SADDAM ADMITTED HAVING! Get it? And for eight years, an American President did nothing to secure that WMD. Yet here you are giving Clinton a free pass while lying about Bush's reason for going to war.

[dfwgator]

The Bushes are a lot tighter with the Clintons than Trump will ever be.

[jdsteel]

It gives zero reason to adopt the baseless lies from the left to do so.