Posted on 05/18/2004 9:23:50 AM PDT by Living Free in NH
Breaking news ... nothing follows
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Heck- If I am wrong? I am wrong and will say so. Just my opinion.
But those chemical filled artillery shells supposedly didn't exist.
And, according to JG, Sarin, Tabun, Mustard Gas, VX, Blood agent, and other chemical sweapons aren't WMD's.
Nevermind that international agreements for decades have recognised them as such.
But if the artillery shells weren't in Iraq, then how is it that one, unmarked without the internationally recognised green band, appear.
Did Blix, ack, lie?
That "one" shell means a heck of alot more than you're stating.
Stop minimising it.
Minimizing it? Read what Bush and Powell claimed Sadaam had before this war began? I am not the one minimizing anything! It is you who are lowering the bar all the time for what passes for WMDs. 800 Americans are dead for a two sarin gas shells? A substance that a high school kid with a chemical set could make if he put his mind to it?
We didn't go into Iraq because he had Sarin Gas or Mustard Gas.
Substances he used widely against Iran in the first gulf war and we kew about it! And didn't care.
Suddenly we fear them after 9/11?
Grow up.
Why don't you go back and do your homework.
During Clinton's stench in orifice, how many times did Saddam violate the SURRENDER agreement that Saddam himself signed?
And exactly what was supposed to happen when said agreement was violated?
"800 Americans are dead for a two sarin gas shells?"
UNMARKED chemical weapon shells.
And yes, your statement HERE is minimising it.
Saddam had hundreds of TONS of the stuff stockpiled after Desert Storm that we KNEW of.
After the inspectors were kicked out, Saddam moved the stuff we knew about.
When teh inspectors went back in prior to our stomping Sadman flat, they went right to where teh stuff had been and guess what.
Not only were the stockpiles we knew of gone, but the monitoring equipment left in place was gone too.
Sadman also had a policy of leaving his chem weapons unmarked.
And out of several multi-acre ammo depots that we know of, we've only gotten to ten of them so far.
And there's ALOT more there to look into.
You ARE minimising it.
And no, Bush and Powell didn't claim that as the sole purpose for going in.
But, don't let facts get in your way.
Your "Viva la revolution!" buddy JohnGalt never let fact get in his way.
"It is you who are lowering the bar all the time for what passes for WMDs."
Care to quote me on this?
Or are you merely moving the goal posts like your buddy JohnGalt did?
Sarin IS a WMD, and has been defined so by international treaty/accord.
Russia never invaded Germany because their plan called for the use of Sarin, GB, and VX.
Which we would have responded to with nukes.
The Russians weren't stupid.
And they even admitted that Sarin, GB, and VX were WMD's.
Why can't YOU admit it?
Admit waht? That Sadaam had some rusty shells he never bothered to use when we invaded him? How many of his scientists and generals and lackies do we have under lock and key right now? They haven't told us where the scary WWI stockpiles of WMD are?
Our troops found doznes of buried old mustard gas shells near Basra about two months ago- 15 years old, useless, and coroded.
Again- we knew he had this stuff. So do many other countries.
If we actually thought Sadaam had WMD capability with advanced delivery systems would we have deployed troops in a tiny staging area like Kuwait for months before this war?
Total lie.
What constitutes a WMD.
Russia agreed to the definition in use internationally and now being redefined by those with an agenda.
France and Germany both agreed to the same definition.
Matter of fact, the definition in use by the US is the definiton used the world over.
"Again- we knew he had this stuff."
From your post 399
"The hand picked man of the President- David Kay- has said that we were wrong about Sadaam and the WMDs. We have how many of Sadaam's scientists in custody? How many of his top generals and goons? Not one of them will tell us where they are? Not one of them wants a nice new life in America with a small house and white picket fence?
No. Sorry. If there were stockpiles of this stuff or advanced programs we would have found them a long time ago and loudly proclaimed so to the world."
So which is it, did he have any, or is it not there?
Did teh Sarin shells in fact exist?
According to David kay, no.
So which is it?
Don't care honestly. I am not the one who wanted to go into Iraq. I am not the one who has to prove anything. You do.
I have stated that I didn't care if Iraq had a million sarin gas shells. It would still not be a wise war or one that was justified.
Isn't it funny. We talk about Iraq's "nuke" program. Which apperently was in the toilet. Cheney - weeks before we invaded said that Iraq was very close to getting a nuke.
Sure they were. If for a second we thought that Iraq had a nuke or was close to having one we would have not invaded.
We don't invade countries that can actually hurt us. North Korea is perfect example. Says she has a nuke and what do we do? Talk. Not on the "axis of evil" any longer it seems.
Message to the world- get a nuke fast or the USA might invade you.
"Don't care honestly."
Well, if you don't care, why bother talking about it?
"I am not the one who has to prove anything. You do. "
How JohnGaltian of you.
Here's the deal, I asked YOU teh question.
YOU answer.
Capice?
Unless, of course, you're in a corner you talked yourself into and feel you need to try to bluff your way out.
"I have stated that I didn't care if Iraq had a million sarin gas shells. It would still not be a wise war or one that was justified."
And a second ago you were mentioning David Kay and his fallacy of saying that such shells did not exist.
THEN you turn around and say, "We knew they were there."
AND you see nothing contradictory there.
But, again, don't ket fact get in your way. Do go on.
You really haven't done your honework, AND you smugly state that you don't care.
Thus, you seem to feel justified that you don't actually have ot answer any questions.
How about answering, just for the record?
I don't know. I don't know if Sadaam had WMDs or not. The evidence is meager to non existent to say that he did. I don't know what source to believe. What sources do you believe?
Again. I never cared if he had any WMD or not. And frankly that isnt why we are in Iraq and never was. The WMD scare stories were a sales pitch to the American people for this war. Used to scare soccer moms into supporting this bogus war.
"The evidence is meager to non existent to say that he did."
100 ammo depots that we know of.
50 acres each.
Sarin shells NOT marked with green band, thus appearing to be an ordinary HE 155 shell.
And if you don't care, again, why bother to talk about it?
If your statement were true, then you would not be in this thread.
First of all, there were many, MANY other reasons given for going into Iraq, not the least of which was 12 years of endless violations of 17 UN resolutions. All we ever heard from day one was that we needed the UN's blessing on this, as if that somehow has any effect on whether it is right or wrong.
I suspect you are someone who genuflects before the UN, and if so, why does this matter so little to you that you just erase it in Orwellian fasion from your memory?
Second -- Remember, Burke-meister, that they found 30 Mig jets buried in the sand last summer. Mig jets are a bit bigger than 155mm artillery rounds. They had a LOT of empty desert to hide these chemical weaspons in. Plus a friendly, fellow-Baathist neighbor to the west.
If this was not Iraq but Germany just rescued from a neo-Nazi regime and this shell was found, would you be as willing to bend over backwards to give them the benefit of the doubt?
Plus I must point out that you are conflating two issues: It's not the fact that these weapons exist that was a cause for war (and only partially at that anyway), it's WHO HAD THEM and more importantly WHAT HE WAS LIKELY TO DO WITH THEM. Like, say, sell/give them to Al Qaeda & Co.
If you had a daughter and knew that her boyfriend was a drunk who insisted on driving her to the prom and back, I'd like to think you'd pull him out of the car and beat him senseless before she could even get in the car.
Why would you do that? Because cars are inherently dangerous (in which case it would make more sense to beat up the car, as lefties like to do figuratively) or because it was dangerous in THIS PUNK'S HANDS?
See the difference?
Don't forget the violation of the terms of surrender signed by Saddam himself after Desert Storm.
But teh leftists always sniffle and whine while saying that the signing was under duress.
Too bad, so was Japan's declaration of surrender and Germany's declaration of surrender during WWII.
If Saddam had used sarin on US troops during the first gulf war, Baghdad would not exist. :/
Very good point and one that few people remember.
I recall a very subtle message sent to Saddam by Bush 41 to the effect of "If you use WMD we WILL nuke you."
Supposedly the USN Carriers had the "special weapons" onboard for their aircraft in the event Saddam unleashed a Chemical attack on the coalition.
Do you really think that we would concentrate 100,000 American troops in such a tiny staging area like Kuwait for months at a time before the war if we thought Sadaam could kill "millions of Americans"? Or as Condi said- "Do we have to wait for the mushroom cloud in NYC?"
One of the major reasons for going into Iraq was that Sadaam might pass his "WMDs" onto terrorists.
That was a pumped up story for months if not weeks.
The question I always asked during that periond was what was to prevent Sadaam from giving WMDs to terrorists once we invaded?
No answer of course.
And to this day we have two Sarin gas shells that was commonly used against Iran along with Mustard gas shells that are useless.
Heck even Rummy said to be cautious over this "find"- of which we have heard little lately.
What a threat?
How many times do Freepers have to be smacked hard in the eye by this administration before they press charges?
You're still missing teh point.
You've fired and looked everywhere but.
Burke's back, after a bit of a hiatus.
Post #416.
Looks like he's making an excuse for his anti-war stance and WMD denials.
I don't know why I keep doing this. Must be a glutton for punishment or feel REALLY sorry for slow people. But here goes.
"Do you really think that we would concentrate 100,000 American troops in such a tiny staging area like Kuwait for months at a time before the war if we thought Sadaam could kill "millions of Americans"? Or as Condi said- "Do we have to wait for the mushroom cloud in NYC?"
The only place that we had in the reigon to prepare troops is Kuwait. The firing ranges and manuver ares are there. Army Central Command (ARCENT or 3rd Army however you want to look at it) also has their forward HQ there. Kuwait is also where the military does 75% of it's real world desert training. Makes perfect sense to stage for an attack on Iraq from there. Preparations for an invasion on the scale of OIF doesn't just happen over night. There are months of rehersals...practice and training for every possible scenario that could happen. It's rehearsed...rehearsed and rehearsed again. The repeated drilling is what allowed us to look like we moved so effortlessly into Iraq.
Plus the logistical assets needed for that many troops takes time to get moved into the area. Beans bullets and MRE's for a force that size take time to move. And then there's getting the equipment inplace. That takes months too.
It took the time from when President Bush threw down the gauntlet to the U.N. until we moved across the berm to get everything into place.
"One of the major reasons for going into Iraq was that Sadaam might pass his "WMDs" onto terrorists.
That was a pumped up story for months if not weeks."
And as things have played out over the last year and in the last week specifically, it turns out it was a legitimate reason. Not a pumped up story...a legitimate concern.
"The question I always asked during that periond was what was to prevent Sadaam from giving WMDs to terrorists once we invaded?
No answer of course."
You mean no answer that would fit your purview of the situation. IMHO...God himself could come down and tell you all of the reasons we went into Iraq were legitimate and you'd STILL be saying that "it doesn't prove anything"
We don't know yet that Saddam DIDN'T give WMD to the terrorists. But would you prefer them detonating a 155mm shell filed with a gallon of Sarin blowing up in your neighborhood...or at your kids school before you believe the terrorists have WMD? Wouldn't you prefer we find it SOONER (i.e. with the terrrosts and BEFORE they can deploy it) or later when 2000-3000 people in Anytown, U.S.A. are doing the dying cockroach from exposure to a chemical attack?
"And to this day we have two Sarin gas shells that was commonly used against Iran along with Mustard gas shells that are useless."
EXACTLY! Those are shells that Saddam and his leigon of apologists said were destroyed YEARS ago. He LIED! How many more are out there buried in the desert or sitting unmarked in the hands of insergents being prepped as an I.E.D.? And how do you know the Mustard Gas shells are useless? Are you an expert on chemical weapons?
"How many times do Freepers have to be smacked hard in the eye by this administration before they press charges?"
If there was legitimate deception then FReepers across the country and the world would be in an uproar. The silence you hear from them isn't their ignoreance as you think it is nor is it a silent agreement to your Kerry-esque "nuances". They simeply don't subscribe to yoir kook theories.
Let me ask one question and see if you can answer it with something close to a logical answer.
Why are you cheering hard for the bad guys and so hard against the U.S. where all of this is concerned?
Burekman1 has been banned or suspended.
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.