Skip to comments.
WMD still Awol?
The Daily Brew ^
| May 29, 03
| some liberal smartass with a point
Posted on 05/29/2003 3:32:34 PM PDT by LibertyBelt
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
To: LibertyBelt
What happens when the masses refuse to listen to the cries about lies...
remember...it's all about sex and this President needs to get back to doing the business of the American people...
2
posted on
05/29/2003 3:34:36 PM PDT
by
grumple
To: LibertyBelt
We have not found Saddam Hussein or his sons yet:
Proof positive that they never existed.
3
posted on
05/29/2003 3:34:41 PM PDT
by
Chuckster
To: Chuckster
bump
4
posted on
05/29/2003 3:35:58 PM PDT
by
facedown
(Armed in the Heartland)
To: facedown
Why is it that the people whining about us not finding any WMD yet are those same folks who insisted that we give the UN inspectors more time!
5
posted on
05/29/2003 3:38:40 PM PDT
by
So Cal Rocket
(Free Miguel and Priscilla!)
To: LibertyBelt
At first I was hoping the delay was a rope-a-dope strategery that has worked so brilliantly for Bush in the past. But as more time passes, I will grow more skeptical about finding WMDs(beyond the trailiers and precursors and such)...not that they weren't there.
The problem here is the bold statements "We know, He definitely has, verified etc". That will come back to bite Bush hard if nothing substantial is found.
6
posted on
05/29/2003 3:40:34 PM PDT
by
amused
(Republicans for Sharpton!)
To: LibertyBelt
Well...
Bush, et al: We know abbsolutely Saddam has WMD's
Saddam: I don't have any WMD's.
One side was lying, the other was telling the truth. We went to war to prove who was the liar and who was not. It's beginning to look which was which will become pretty obvious in the reasonably near future. But will the ones who supported the liar (Arab or American as the case may be) change their position? I doubt it.
7
posted on
05/29/2003 3:51:27 PM PDT
by
templar
To: amused
The problem here is the bold statements "We know, He definitely has, verified etc". That will come back to bite Bush hard if nothing substantial is found. Surveys have found that the vast majority of the American people don't care if WMDs are found or not, and every mass grave uncovered, every interview with someone who lost his family, or every picture of happy Iraqis enforces that belief. People have just decided it was already worth it. And the people who are upset WMD haven't been found will automatically switch to "they were planted!" mantra as soon as they are announced.
8
posted on
05/29/2003 3:53:46 PM PDT
by
TomB
To: amused
We knew in 1998 that he had certain WMDs.
The destruction of those WMDs was never documented, as he agreed to do. So, yes, we KNEW that he had those weapons at one time, and he never complied with the requirements of the ceasefire, therefore he got his a$$ kicked.
A salutary lesson to one and all.
9
posted on
05/29/2003 3:54:14 PM PDT
by
Poohbah
(Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
To: TomB
Surveys have found that the vast majority of the American people don't care if WMDs are found or not, and every mass grave uncovered, every interview with someone who lost his family, or every picture of happy Iraqis enforces that belief. People have just decided it was already worth it.I should have qualified my statement better upon re-reading "will come back" should have been changed to "could come back". I see the 2004 election as a likely dog fight. Every morsel of information that can possbily be damning will be used, distorted, made up, whatever. This is a morsel and possibly a meal.
And the people who are upset WMD haven't been found will automatically switch to "they were planted!" mantra as soon as they are announced.
Lefties can't be reached but they can reach out to other people. As you may well know, voting can be a superficial thing. "Where are the WMDs?" could end up being as effective as "it's the economy stupid". It's short, simple and doesn't require deep thinking or qualifiers. Slogans can be effective. Then again I was surprised that more Americans didn't turn on Clinton when he lied to their faces so maybe you are correct that this is a dead issue.
10
posted on
05/29/2003 4:02:42 PM PDT
by
amused
(Republicans for Sharpton!)
To: LibertyBelt
History is replete with govts, and the heads of same, lying to the citizens to advance an agenda. It seems that this president is not any different, although he has already been nominated for sainthood. I heard Michael Medved tell a caller who asked where the WMD were, Michael said, if it was a lie, it was necessary, so much good has come of it.
I guess that the hate Clinton crowd, would have supported him if he would have lied to us like this. Yeah sure they would. For those that still can think for themselves, remember. Both parties lie, politicians are all corrupt or corruptible, and it is a game that never ends. That is why so many don't vote, or participate. They are simply opting out of a fixed game.
11
posted on
05/29/2003 4:05:01 PM PDT
by
jeremiah
(Sunshine scares all of them, for they all are cockaroaches)
To: Poohbah
I believe the WMDs are there I just don;t think we will find them. That doesn't invalidate their existence.
But lengthy explanations are moot when someone can scream "Where are the WMDs?" and that can resonate with the un-informed. Will that happen? I don't know but I know how the left thinks and this is a hammer for them. Whether it is effective remains to be seen.
12
posted on
05/29/2003 4:06:15 PM PDT
by
amused
(Republicans for Sharpton!)
To: LibertyBelt
To all those who are so WORRIED about WMD not being found, I offer this:
Gulf War 1 surrender conditions were many, all of which were BROKEN almost IMMEDIATELY by Sadaam and his gang. The STAR condition was to list the WMD and DOCUMENT their destruction. THAT was NOT done either. So.....when an country who has UNCONDITIONALLY surrendered, BREAKS the conditions set for it the articles of surrender, they thereby offer themselves up for "RESUMPTION OF HOSTILITIES" as if GULF WAR 1 NEVER ENDED. Case closed! Get over it people.
Other than fodder for our enemies within and without it doesn't matter a wit if we find WMD.
13
posted on
05/29/2003 4:14:26 PM PDT
by
PISANO
To: LibertyBelt
Shortly before the start of the Iraq war I heard a news report that stated the Saddam regime buried WMD's in the desert, and then killed those all witnesses (e.g., those who buried the weapons). The report was on for a brief time (maybe a day) and then it disappeared. Does anyone recall that report and/or where to find it?
To: amused
believe the WMDs are there I just don;t think we will find them. That doesn't invalidate their existence. I honestly believe we are sitting on TONS of the stuff, just waiting for the right moment.
But then again, maybe we haven't found any yet. But why is it such a big deal right now? Iraq is the size of California. How long would it take to search California for a couple barrels?
15
posted on
05/29/2003 4:14:35 PM PDT
by
TomB
To: LibertyBelt
We invaded so Haliburton could take over the oilfields. </sarcasm>
16
posted on
05/29/2003 4:24:06 PM PDT
by
CMClay
To: LibertyBelt
I don't care who is in power. I don't like being lied to by those who govern me. Hopefully, the existence of WMD within the context that we went to war to disarm Iraq is established. If not, the credibility of our leaders will be severely undermined when it comes to generating support for the next tough action in the war.
I trusted our leaders' words. I want to continue that trust.
To: Paraclete
What about the bio-trailers????
Comment #19 Removed by Moderator
Comment #20 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson