Another smokescreen by another bushie apologist. You have just proved the point... it is all about power grab by the neocons... another failed try after their imperialistic ambitions were castrated in Vietnam.
I'd rather be in Murtha's shoes in PA than Santorum's. Fake Rick may well lose his seat to a DEM nobody knows by voters casting votes against Santorum. We may see big numbers this fall even against REPs running basically unopposed. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11379.xml?released=927 The WMD thing won't amount to anything. Powell blew that up forever with his presentation at the UN about the bioweapon trucks - the ones that were really Meals On Wheels. Awful sad ending for a distinguished career there.
Arty shells from 1986? Degraded, benign, lost artillery shells from the Iraq/Iran war? And you trumpet this bullshit as relevant? Good god, what a fool. And yes, Bush is an idiot and a liar. And if there's a God and a heaven and a hell then he will surely burn right along with UBL.
If Saddam had choose to use his WMD - Saddam knew the hole he would in up in would not be for hiding - but for his eternal dirt nap. He apparently choose to live like a trap door spider. I hear too that the inspectors were there to verify the destruction of the admitted WMD he has - not to find them. Saddam decides the "inspectors" are no longer welcome - in spite of the UN resolutions - one is left to conclude - not all the WMD were destroyed as promised. Today- it is confirmed. Whaaa!
Fascinating how the hard right wing around here just plugs its ears and keeps repeating 'the left doesn't care about our security, the left doesn't care about our security'. I love how these people take the rantings of a few moron PC lefties and then tar everyone who doesn't love Pat Robertson with the same brush. From the beginning, concerned, patriotic people from both the right and left have been quietly asking the same questions - 1 ) Where does it end? Is Ahmadinejad less of a threat than Saddam? Will the U.S. wage preemptive wars against anyone who displayed Saddam's level of preparedness to do harm to the U.S? Will the U.S. wage preemptive 'war' against any country whose government might be capable of turning a blind eye to a terrorist training camp? It is absurd to suggest that the U.S. has less reason to invade Iran than it had to invade Iraq. 2) Does anyone really believe that the U.S. can take a billion-acre template labelled 'Democracy' and get a thousand Blackhawks and fly it over Iraq and drop it and turn Iraq into a Western-style democracy? Doesn't it occur to any of these militia-types that these countries are divided along cultural/tribal/ethnic/religious lines that have existed for thousands of years? There isn't one in twenty of the right- wing warmongers on here who can even define the difference between Sunni and Shi'a. Can they not look at the Russian experience in Afghanistan and realize that they will need to occupy the country forever to achieve their goals? Are they willing to do this? 3) Power in Afghanistan is already flowing back to the Taliban, because these are the dynamics that have existed for thousands of years. What the hell happened to the U.S. promise to stay on and foster the fledgling democracy there?? 4) Let's look at things for the perspective of the U.S. fighting men and women, who got jerked around by their commanders and by those who sent them in there in the first place. Let's forget for a moment the lack of body armour and APCs. Outside of the U.S., all we see are interviews with U.S. personnel who are asking - 'What in the hell are we doing here? What is our mission? Is it to fight the 'insurgents'? The 'insurgents' are 'insurgent' BECAUSE WE ARE HERE!! As soon as we leave there is no insurgency. What's that? You say Iraq will descend into civil war if we leave? Sure, that may be right. So what does that mean? We stay here and get our limbs blown off in order to fulfill the mission of... the mission of.... our mission to fight the 'insurgents'... who are 'insurgent' because we are here??' (I say - Let them kill each other in a civil war if they want- let them fight until every one of their men is dead in a ditch.) 5) How is it that anyone believes the US is any safer because of the efforts in Iraq?? It is dangerous and dishonest to suggest this. I would almost say that the effort has simply increased the number of young Muslim men willing to give their life in order to take out a few Americans, but the fact is that there are a long list of these people. Just imagine how much safer the U.S. would be today if all the money spent on this 'war' (and the amount is staggering) was spent securing the borders, gathering better intelligence, and infiltrating domestic organizations and carrying out small, super-targeted strikes on individuals and organizations worldwide who represent them biggest threats. I'm not saying that the US isn't safer from terrorist attack than it was pre-911, just that the 'war' in Iraq isn't the reason. To be honest, in the past 6 months, here on ET, there has been a noticeable change in the tone of the hard right here. Guys seem to be starting to distance themselves from this 'war' and only a few maniacs are still shouting 'WMD are there and the war is right and dems are U.S. haters and we are winning and GWB will go down as the greatest U.S. president and the mission is clear and Gitmo is legal and the left are 'in a corner' '(??? - that one is really weird considering that the tide of informed opinion has turned against this 'war', even among the right).
TraderNik... a very well written post. However, you don't seem to be with us... then you must be with them... Thanks for the thoughts.
I notice that the shouters have studiously avoided any reference to this question. Gee, I wonder why....?
I have a question for you guys. I haven't done research, but was wondering if it is possible that Hussein secretly gave to Kadafi the WMDs, which Kadafi in such a "nice" gesture gave up in good faith ? Was or is this a possibility ?