I don't know who said it first. A friend of mine said it to me this morning so it was the first time I heard it. Either way, the point is made. We know Iraq had WMDs. The weapons inspectors in 1998 knew about them.

Silver Hilton,

Thats an excellent, well thought out post.

Sure stands out in contrast to those ugly and hateful threads. " Just say No" to Hate, Ignorance and Racism.

You're absolutely correct. The key word, however, is had, as in past tense. More and more evidence suggests that prior to the invasion no WMDs existed. Therefore there was no imminent threat to the world, no link to al Quida, nothing to disarm, ergo, no reason to invade.

And the argument, "Doesn't matter, we're better off without Saddam around" is not the issue here. The issue is that the American people were convinced that weapons existed, there was an imminent threat, and there was a link between Osama and Saddam. We're finding out now that the administration grossly abused its power to mislead the American people. Nixon was the last to do that and he had the integrity to resign.

Dosent matter if it helps your idealogical argument. We all know he had them and they are probably hidden somewhere. The whole point is he didnt account for or show anyone he destroyed them. Why would saddam destroy the weapons and then not show the inspectors?

Who has them then Hans Blix? Do you believe he destroyed them out of the kindness of his heart?

In all of history have you ever heard of a leader who did not use everything in his power to stay in control of his country?

If he had them he would have used them! He demonstrated in the past that he was not afraid to do so.

Again, we ALL knew he had them, so if you know for certain he would have used them, than maybe you could tell us where they went.

I take it that you did not hear the weapons instectors say that when they were kicked out of Iraq it had been pretty much disarmed.

There were still some lose ends to take care of but for the most part the weapons had been dealt with.

There is at present no prof that he built more. Only speculation.

Your kidding right? They were "stonewalling" according to Hans. Then in the same sentence stated they were starting to cooperate.

An argument could be made that he would have proved he destroyed WMD in order to stay in power also. He also could have been busy hiding them while the inspectors were there. Maybe not enough time to ready them from the time the inspectors left and when the first bomb dropped.

Man, I wish I knew for certain. I've read quite a few theories lately, and one of the most plausible is that he did, indeed, destroy them. So why didn't he tell anyone? He ruled with fear. He remained in power simply because the world was convinced he had the weapons and was not afraid to use them. How long do you suppose Iran or Turkey would have waited to invade had they known Saddam was defenseless? Saddam is also known for great tactical blunders; I think this was another. It's quite possible he destroyed all the WMDs but stalled reporting it thinking it would keep him in power longer.

Of course the weapons could be buried out there somewhere, but I think each day that possibility becomes more remote. Considering all the CIA and Special Ops people over there investigating, even before the invasion, something more tangible should have turned up by now.

I think the administration may owe Hans Blix an apology soon. They accused him of running around like Scooby Doo without finding anything. The Coalition has much more intelligence resources available than Blix ever did and they have yet to find anything substantial.

GH, good points. We can not know what he was thinking. I believe we will find some, but it will still not be a good enough reason for some and it will justify the war for some also.(some Americans thought he used chem/bio weapons on us during the war,wtf?, the ignorance is kind of scary) I for one hope they find weapons as opposed to more mass graves.

goharley

Good posts, saved me some typing

One point about the CIA, they stated before the war began that they did not believe there was enough evidence to act on!!!

Racerdan, I was not against a war with Iraq. In fact I always thought it was inevitable. I just wanted to hear something more definete than" he could build more." And , "he might make them available to terriorists." Or,"he may us them on the US."

If he could have sold me on the war I would have been as adamant about it as Grandpa. But in the end he just could not do it.

It's clear that the Bush Administration stretched the truth to go to war, and now they're trying to blame the intelligence, Saddam's brutality, and middle east peace process to justify the war.

This is exactly why we need a smart president who adequately understands what's going on to make critical decisions like going to war. As bad as Gingrich was, I'd take him as the president, over dumb ass Bush, anyday.

Speaking of candidates (we WERE speaking about candidates were;t we?).....do you think McCain will make another go of it?

Any thoughts on McCain ?

Aunty M you got it right .....the radical lefties are here in force with the same BS they spew every time...I figured that quote I posted that I received from someone else would bring out the best in them...and it sure did....VIVA FIDEL

I'd love to see McCain run. But from everything I've read, Bush has such a tight leash on the Republicans that no one dare challenge him. That in itself is kinda scary.


I agree, Racerdan, it is scary how some are misled and refuse to consider any other possibilities. I'm sure I'm just as guilty at times, but I try to gather my information from a wide array of news resources, not just the left, right, or US.

Grandpa

<quote by Grandpa>
the radical lefties are here in force with the same BS they spew every time...I figured that quote I posted that I received from someone else would bring out the best in them...and it sure did....VIVA FIDEL

If you consider Silver Hilton reply to that post as BS, then I would beg to differ. His response was that of an educated American, not trying to sell his political party or candidate.. Enough of this Left- Right crap. Time to use some common sense.

My 2 cents

Here's something else that bothers me; Bush said the war was essentially over on 1 May, yet soldiers are still being killed over there. This is what Rumsfeld had to say about it:
Oh? When was the last time policemen in Seattle were shot by snipers on a weekly basis? Or a patrol car was hit with a rocket propelled grenade? These soldiers aren't being killed in drug deals, domestic disputes, robberies, sex crimes, etc. They are being targeted and killed by enemy fire.

This whitewash reminds me of Westmoreland in the late 60's. Remember him? The guy who lied about body counts in SE Asia?

Speaking of SE Asia, the Middle East might just well become another "Vietnam." The top brass in the Pentagon was hesitant to go to Iraq after lessons learned in 'nam. But they're not really the ones in charge; the civilians are. In the past the civilians in charge were ex-military, so they had experience in such matters. Not so today. This is from the Globalist, dated August 2002:
Just more to think about. Actually, Aunty, I'm trying to get this to six pages.

Well, I am REALLY gonna stir up the Hornets nest now, so I imagine as usual this thread will close soon.......

It is ALL about Israel..... You know, God's chosen people and all?
If Israel wasn't in the middle of the Arab world, persecuting the Palestinians and placing all of their immigrating brothers in Palestinian territory..... We would not be doing any of this. I knew a Jewish scholar once (very credible and at a large University) that told me of "The Samson option" which has been policy of the Israeli Gov't since the formation of the Jewish state and the aquisition of the Nuke.... It is a policy that if the existence of the Jewish state comes under question (such as an Arab invasion) and the real threat of them losing their place in the mideast, they will nuke the whole area, effectively keeping their "Birthright" out of enemy hands.
We are so afraid of this option that we will do every thing we can to protect them.
This includes conquering Iraq, Iran, Syria, etc... to show the Arab world that we will conquer them if they don't behave. I doubt there will ever be peace over there, and the quagmire has just begun. Saddens me that we do it for a country (Israel) that thinks they have a "God given" right to occupy what was never theirs and we support that crazy way of thinking.

Ohhhhhhh, I cannot wait to hear whats coming from you folks now..... Just please do not call me "Anti semetic".... any thing else is acceptable....

MC

Sorry AuntyM, guess I should have read them all........ Speed reading on a bulletin board is not the way to go I guess.....

Thanks for not flaming me though!

MC