Replies

FACT: Saddam Hussein had WMDs. He used them...several times.

Of course. He was our ally. We gave him the anthrax cultures and aided his war against Iran.

He didn't use anthrax in his war against Iran to my knowledge. He used the Russian and French mustard gas, and with their help developed VX gas.

However...we have a fact that you do not dispute.

FACT: The ceasefire agreement that ended hostilities required me to prove he had destroyed them all. FACT: He did not, in fact, prove he destroyed them all.

It's like asking to prove you've stopped beating your wife. And to operate pesticide facilities, you will always have the dual-use technology required for basic nerve gases.

Actually it isn't like asking you to prove you've stopped beating your wife. It's more like asking you to show us you account book, the public one, and the private one.

Saddam could have openly and honestly complied. HE NEVER DID.

Yes, pesticide plants do have a dual-use, and Saddam used the sickening properties of concentrated pesticides on the battlefield instead of having actual nerve gas when the US invaded.

That was never an issue. The issue was compliance. That compliance was never given, with or without dual-use technologies.

So do we have a fact here?

Do we?

The U.N., under whose auspices Bush wanted to invade, rejected that there was adequate evidence that Saddam possessed WMD. Since our invasion, we have found none despite some really loopy threads here at FR.

So what.

FACT: When we invaded we did find documentation by which he had preserved the knowledge base for rebuilding all WMD programs.

You can find much of that same info at any university library. It's not cutting-edge science.

Irrelevant...and factually false. Some of the documentation was posted publicly. At least one of those documents possessed so much nuclear weapons technology that the liberals declared that George Bush was contributing to the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

That was definitely NOT available at any university library.

However, while you are attempting to dismiss the fact, you seem to have submitted to the fact.

FACT: When we invaded we did find documentation by which he had made known his intention to re-build his WMD programs after sanctions were lifted or as opportunity presented.

If sanctions were lifted, then it would be legal anyway. Of course, we would have vetoed any such attempt at the U.N.

The sanctions could only be lifted if Saddam had recanted such efforts. Clearly you have a problem with this fact. It is a fact. It is an indisputable fact. Deal with it.

I don’t give a damn what the media writes, or what any administration official states. I have these facts here, and even they have no right to their own facts.

Again, you dismiss entirely official fact-finding bodies, even those of the GOP or the administration. You have the right to a private truth. I'm not objecting a great deal since it's not unusual. I just think you ought to admit it.

They don't get to make up their own facts. Whether you or not you agree with the groupthink...whether or not you actually read them completely, there are some facts, and I've provided you a few that are undisputed. The ones I've provided are wholly adequate for the points made with which you disagree...without a factual basis.