Pretty Scary Stuff

[eMarkM]

There was an excellent edition of the PBS show Frontline called The Jesus Factor that went into great detail about Bush's faith and its impact on his policies.

[MtSmalls]

"Saddam would have persued WMD's"

Well in 13 years of UN weapons inspections (since the first Gulf war in 91), he had LESS capacity to produce them than in 91. Sounds like he was going in the wrong direction, and the world community was actually being effective.

The invasion has cost the lives of thousands of Iraqis needlessly.
"If you had to live in a society where the leader rourinely arrested tortured and had raped countles citizens for purely political reasons, and because of his Stalinist paranoia, would you think 40K lives too high a price to pay for freedom"

If I am not mistaken this is exactly what is going on in China and North Korea, countries that actually have WMD's? Should we now be loading up the troops for invasions there?

Don't get me wrong, I believe that both democracy and free societies are things to be desired and fought and died over. But that's not why we invaded Iraq.

[vulturesrow]

The Duelfer report shows that Saddam would be able to reconstitute WMD production very quickly, indeed within months for certain agents.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong, I believe that both democracy and free societies are things to be desired and fought and died over. But that's not why we invaded Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe how many people still think this. So why did we invade Iraq? Obviously you didn't hear Clinton, Gore, Albright, and even Kerry saying we had to go into Iraq back in 1998 did you?

Goto the pnac website to see all of this which is thoroughly documented.

Kerryoniraq.com will also show a video of Kerry talking about Iraq.

[wacki]

Vulturesrow, I suggest that you create text file so you can copy and paste a response full of links everytime someone like this shows up. I'm going to create my own auto response tonight.

[MtSmalls]

PNAC, also known as Project for a New American Century, AKA the think tank birth place of the Neo-con movement. Hardly unbiased place for information.

In early 2003, we were told that we had to invade Iraq before they attacked us. They had tens of thousands of gallons of mustard gas, VX, sarin etc. We know right where it is (probably because we sold it them in the 80's).

If Bush had come to Congress and the American people and said: This is an evil dictatorship and we need to go in there and free these people, he would have been laughed out of the chamber and immediately become a lame-duck president.

Democracy is NOT why we invaded Iraq. Come to think of it, there was NO reason to invade Iraq

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

Democracy is NOT why we invaded Iraq. Come to think of it, there was NO reason to invade Iraq

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to Clinton, Gore, and Albright. Then again their words are on the PNAC so I guess they must be biased as well. *sarcasm*

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-20040623.htm



No reason... What so ever.... Just like no Twin Towers.... No quote from Putin.... No 47 quotes from Cinton....

I expect your going to reply with "just like no WMD's..." Well when do you want to fight them, when France and Russia were done fortifying them? If you think the loss of life is big now....

[lastchance]

We invaded Iraq because we thought there were WMD's. We thought Iraq was a much bigger threat to America than it really was.

I bet the EV of invading Iraq using only what we knew then is much higher than what Iraq really has.

Plus, I felt something in the Bush Administration trying to rush the Iraq war a bit. Maybe it wasn't a logical decision, maybe it was. Maybe they were really afraid of what Saddam would do, given time.

I don't know... But that's my best guess.

[nicky g]

"The Duelfer report shows that Saddam would be able to reconstitute WMD production very quickly, indeed within months for certain agents. "

Any backwards ass regime in the world could begin production of "certain ("WMD") agents" within a few months; some things just aren't that difficult to produce. The fact is he wasn't producing them and there was an extremely detailed monitoring system which had prevented WMD production for a decade and was continuinf to prevent him from producing them. Furthermore there was no evidence he had the slightest bit of intention to using any WMD at any point against the US and the WMD he could have resumed producing would by and large not be useful for the terrorists who do want to attack the US (ie al-Qaida), whom he wasn't working with anyway.

All the Duelfer report found was that Iraq "retained the knowledge base" for production of some substances (ie those scientists were still around and had that knowledge; well what should they have done, killed them? Sent them to work on US or Israeli WMD programmes?) and that Saddam would have tried to do "whatever it takes" to defend Iraq against an attack from Iran . Oh and that he was working to "undermine" the sanctions (whereas any other country would of course have sat back and let its economy be completely wrecked for as long as the US and the UK thought necessary). He had no WMD, he had no active WMD programmes and he was confined by a massive monitoring system that would have stayed in place regardless of whether or not the sanctions were lifted. That you guys are still trying to defend the war on WMD grounds after all that happened is quite simply pathetic. Are you seriously saying the war was legitimate because he could have at some undefined point in the future have resumed production of some kind of WMD? Even if it were true, which it isn't because of the monitoring system, noone would have supported a war based on that. "We need to invade Iraq because at some point in the future Saddam could resume production of some kinds of chemical weapons". Come on.

That's my post for the month.