American Taken Hostage

[Hangar18]

The only difference between Dubya and everyone else that has been saying unequivocally Iraq had WMD for the last 12 years is he decided it was enough of a threat against our national security to go to war. He did not lie any more than Kerry, Clinton, Kennedy, the other 17 nations on the UN Security Council, or anyone else. It's time to get over it, and face the fact that we are there. now and that's all that matters. Would the world know there are no WMD's if we had not gone to war? No.

The "Bush Lied" rhetoric is a tired and worn out cliche.

 

[Nemont]

I have not heard the outrage about Nick Berg being beheaded. I am curious where Sen. Ted Kennedy's outrage is over this incident. IMHO the media outlets which published these picture of Iraqi prisoners have the blood of Mr. Berg on their hands. Whether it was a cover up at the Pentagon or not the pics of prisoners were classified for a reason, because they were certain to inflame the Muslim world. Now every person, soldier or civilian, in Iraq is a target for the same treatment that was given to Mr. Berg. The left wing of the democratic party has even gone as far to say the beheading is the fault of the U.S.

Regardless of what the liberals will lead you to believe this is a war of cultures. Our culture, which is shocked and horrified by the abuse of Iraqi prisoners, and their culture, where beheading of an "infidel" is celebrated as a great act. If you do not believe that we are in a cultural war of survival then you simply have you head in the sand. The radical Muslims have been at war with us since the early 1990's. The U.S. has just figured it out and will need to be at war with these forces for a long, long time.
Regardless of who occupies the White House we will be in this war for the long haul.

Nemont

 

[WH's OutdoorsChick]

Originally posted by Hangar18:
The only difference between Dubya and everyone else that has been saying unequivocally Iraq had WMD for the last 12 years is he decided it was enough of a threat against our national security to go to war. He did not lie any more than Kerry, Clinton, Kennedy, the other 17 nations on the UN Security Council, or anyone else. It's time to get over it, and face the fact that we are there. now and that's all that matters. Would the world know there are no WMD's if we had not gone to war? No.

The "Bush Lied" rhetoric is a tired and worn out cliche.

I am so with you hanger. I just want some kind resolution for the world and I want us to take some action and move foward instead of dwelling on what can not be changed, and change what we are able to!

 

[ELKCHSR]

I am amazed that some here think they moraly have the right to say any thing for or against this country, they have the rights because of birth, but other than that, it is a lie they live and speak. They have done nothing for the freedoms they take so much for granted. I suppose being an absolute hypocrite comes very easy to some and they can justify any thing they want to in their own minds, no matter how wrong or immoral it is.

 

[BuzzH]

Elkcheese,

You dont have a clue.

Every citizen in the United States, has the absolute right to speak their mind about the Government. If you dont like it, move your ass to a nice place where the the Government controls your thoughts, ideas, and morality.

Questioning the actions of your country and government is a great thing, and I dont believe most people with an IQ higher than a turnip take that right for granted.

Why is it that you have the right to question everything that Clinton did? YOU continually rag on the guy for everything, you reference him constantly in your posts, from inhaling to Monica to ______fill in the blank. But, when someone else questions a lie about justification to head to war, all of sudden the same rights you were afforded in your constant attack on a previous president...should be taken away because you dont agree with it.

That, right there, is the absolute height of hypocricy. I suggest you look up the word hypocrit, I think Gunner is right, you dont understand the words you use.

By the way, I happen to agree with you on some of the crap Clinton pulled, and I also support your guaranteed right to say it.

 

[DUVY]

I say we pull our troops out of their and turn Iraq into a F*cking parking lot the size of Texas
with U.S flags on top of thousands of Oil rigs.
After that, tell every Country around the new parking lot that if they harbor terriorist's they will have their homeland made into a parking lot. Muslims hate Americans we are not going to win over there.

 

[Nemont]

Buzz,
Are all people who thought that Saddam had WMD's liars? They declared the possession and manufacture of many different types of WMD in 1994 and 1996.

If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People -- Version 3.0
by John Hawkins
Since we haven't found WMD in Iraq, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is saying that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Well, if they're going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same "lies" since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Here are just a few examples that prove that the Bush administration didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction...

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002


Daily News

Here is a question nobody, in the Bush lied to go to war camp, has ever answered for me, perhaps you can. Why did Saddam stonewall the U.N. and the few allies he had while watching the U.S. invasion force assemble in Kuwait? He had already been defeated on the battle field by the same army, an Army which in the intervening years had improved its weaponry and technology while his own forces where crippled by economic sanctions. Why would he risk his rule if he didn't have WMD? Don't suppose those could have been sent to Syria, a fellow Baathist dictatorship? Why would Saddam play fool's poker like that?

Here's another question do you want the war on terrorism fought here or there? Just keep wondering what Bush lied about if all the other people who were supposed to know thought that Saddam had WMD.

Nemont

 

[BuzzH]

Nemont,

A question I've never heard an answer to is, if he had WMD's when do you suppose he intended to use them?

For Christ sake, if the U.S. invades your country, why would you NOT use them? Waiting for a more appropriate time? Can you think of a more appropriate time? I sure cant.

The last thing I'd be doing is sending my last ditch effort (wmd's) to kill off my enemies to syria.

Now, to answer your questions.

The reason Sadam stonewalled the UN and the U.S. is simple, he never had any intentions of ever complying with anything the UN or U.S. was forcing him to do...whether or not he had or was intending to have WMD's. To maintain any form of dictatorship, he had to defy the UN and U.S. Wouldnt look too powerful to "his" people if he was bowing to our wishes (weapons inspections), would he???

Personally, the only truth I believe about this war is that its about oil, plain and simple. Why Bush lies and brings up every other reason under the sun to justify this mess of a war is ridiculous, lame, and an insult to anyone with more than 2 brain cells firing.

In my opinion, the absolute best case scenerio in support of Bush, is that he severely misled Congress and the American Public to wage war on Iraq. Which is inexcusable to more than a few U.S. citizens.

I listened to Bush rage over the reasons, "he has WMD's, he has ties to al quaeda".

But, the simple fact is, none have been found, making his assertions FALSE, that is a fact.

However, if you dont believe he lied or at least greatly exaggerated our need to invade Iraq, I respect your opinion.

 

[DUVY]

Bush is not the best President, is their one?
what would some of the other recent Presidents do about 911? I know a big ol NOTHING!
I think all of the Politicians are liars and how does anybody really know what is going on with the events leading up to 911 and the war after.
all I know is they hate us over there weather we are helping or not they are bred that way, so why set over there and kiss their ass and help rebuild, apoint some one sane to run there Country and get out! tell em if they screw up again we will turn their Country into a parking lot.

 

[BuzzH]

DUVY said,"Apoint someone sane to run there Country"...come on now, you arent serious...are you? That isnt likely to happen anytime soon.

I have an even better idea...why didnt we just let Sadam continue to gas, maim, and kill his people as he saw fit? What you propose is the same end result (turning their country into a parking lot), so why did we stop him in the first place? Sadam was actually doing us a favor by ridding the world of his own people...you know the ones that hate us no matter what we do.

We are in a no win situation...

The way we could have "won" is to spank Iraq every now and then, like we did in Gulf War I, without occupying their country. We've committed ourselves to a big fat mess.

 

[Hangar18]

In my opinion, the absolute best case scenerio in support of Bush, is that he severely misled Congress and the American Public to wage war on Iraq. Which is inexcusable to more than a few U.S. citizens.

I listened to Bush rage over the reasons, "he has WMD's, he has ties to al quaeda".

But, the simple fact is, none have been found, making his assertions FALSE, that is a fact.

Correct, his assertions were false. But no more than anyone elses. Saddam had the entire world fooled.

From the news release announcing UN Security Council Resolution 1441 Nov 11, 2002.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2002/SC7564.doc.htm

<snip>

The representative of the United States noted that, while primary responsibility rested with the Council for the disarmament of Iraq, nothing in the resolution constrained any Member State from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by that country, or to enforce United Nations resolutions protecting world peace and security.

The representatives of Mexico, Ireland, Bulgaria, Syria, Norway, Singapore, Colombia, Cameroon, Guinea and Mauritius also spoke.

The meeting, which began at 10:15 a.m., adjourned at 11:40 a.m.

Resolution

The full text of resolution 1441 (2002) reads, as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President,

“Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

“Recognizing the threat Iraq's non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,

<snip>

I think you are wrong to put this squarely on Bush's shoulders. We all want to blame someone. Personally, I blame Saddam and the sub-humans that blow themselves up in the streets of Israel, and the saddistic POS that crashed planes into the WTC, and the sick phucks that beheaded Nick Berg. Since when is it OK to kill people that do not agree with your bastardized version of a religion, and since when is it not OK to erradicate them from the face of the Earth? If you ever get a chance to watch a show called "In the Name of God: Scenes from the Extreme" take it. We have no sense of the degree of hate involved here.

 

[Ithaca 37]

The Berg beheading video is available to anyone who does a google search for it, including the audio. Anyone who is inclined to make excuses for the extremists over there should watch and listen to the video a few times.

 

[BuzzH]

Hangar 18 said, "Since when is it OK to kill people that do not agree with your bastardized version of a religion, and since when is it not OK to erradicate them from the face of the Earth?"

Huh?

Oh, I'd say since about the beginning of time its been OK to kill people who dont agree with your chosen religion. History is plumb full of examples, take a look sometime.

 

[Nemont]

Buzz,
Tariq Aziz, former Iraqi forgein minister, stated that the use of WMD against U.S. Forces was considered but deemed to be too dangerous because of the destruction the U.S. could inflict upon the country of Iraq. We had plans to knock of the dams upstream from Baghdad in the event of a chemical attack, which would have cause massive civilian casualties. In addition there was the implicit threat of Nuclear weapons.

Perhaps the Republican Guard's Commanders, who contolled the WMD's, didn't want have the entire world enraged by the use of WMD. Perhaps Saddam spent so much political capital and time saying he didn't have WMD that he couldn't use them. By passing them onto to Syria he could keep the WMD in Arab and Baathist hands. He believed that he would survive and return because he had always survived before.

Just because no WMD have not been found does not mean they didn't exist. Was the war justified, depends upon whether you believe that preemption is a viable doctrine or not.

Thanks for keeping it civil.

Nemont

ADDED on 5-1704
Breaking news!! While this does not prove that Saddam had a WMD program it is a significant event.

Sarin Gas Released by Iraq Roadside Bomb

Monday, May 17, 2004

BAGHDAD, Iraq — A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent (search) exploded near a U.S. military convoy, but there were no casualties, the U.S. military said Monday.

"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy.

[ 05-17-2004, 09:04: Message edited by: Nemont ]

 

[Hangar18]

Originally posted by BuzzH:
Hangar 18 said, "Since when is it OK to kill people that do not agree with your bastardized version of a religion, and since when is it not OK to erradicate them from the face of the Earth?"

Huh?

Oh, I'd say since about the beginning of time its been OK to kill people who dont agree with your chosen religion. History is plumb full of examples, take a look sometime.

Those are rhetorical questions. You continue to pimp the "Bush lied" phrases in the face of all the circumstances that lead us to this point. I'm saying take the blinders off and assign the responsibility to those who deserve it, that's all. Your "Bush lied" rhetoric is dishonest when you look at the facts. Tell us where Bush made any claims that were unique and original to his administration. The passage from UNSCR 1441 quoted above proves he is merely echoing the claims of the UN Security Council. How does that translate to "Bush lied"?


Oh, and just because history is full of examples of religious fueled murder, (yes, I've read and studied it more than I can stand) it's never been OK, and never will be OK. It took one world history class for me to become completely sure that I will never participate in any organized religion.

 

[Ten Bears]

Just curious, BUZZ / EG, what is your veteran status????? Have you served overseas militarily?

 

[danr55]

What is this they found yesterday? A bomb made from an artillery round with Sarin gas.. Some of that stuff that Iraq didn't have. Isn't that amazing..

 

[FAIRCHASEBEN]

Buzz
Time to take off your I hate Bush blinders , Sarin gas and video of Al Quaeda beheading an American in Iraq . Don't let it ruin your day , there's gotta be something else he's lied about .

 

[BuzzH]

Danr, FCB, thats not a WMD program...try to remember what Dubya said in his go to war speech. You do remember, dont you?

I dont hate Bush, just dislike his lack of a decent policy on nearly all the important issues, in particular his disregard for the environment and hunting/fishing issues.

How a sportsman could vote for him is a mystery.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Yep Buzz, I did notice that right after the last post, you only glanced at what I wrote and posted on it...A little presumptous are we not...Seems you accuse me of the same thing...
You write, "How a sportsman could vote for him is a mystery."
I would answer how could you be a true American and not. Especially to what is sitting in the winds to try and take the seat...