Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bush was just as stupid as Clinton and all the other leading Democrats who kept telling us over and over that Iraq had WMD's.
I've yet to see you ever ask if Clinton was stupid or a liar. Why is that?
Since Saddam admitted that he wanted the world to believe he had WMD's in order to stave off his enemies, I'd say he played a large role in it.
Hillary Clinton wasn't the president, all she was going on was the same lies the Bush administration was feeding the rest of us. The biggest mistake Congress made was believing Bush's lies.
Hillary Clinton wasn't the president, all she was going on was the same lies the Bush administration was feeding the rest of us. The biggest mistake Congress made was believing Bush's lies.
Bill made the same claims even before George. Granted I can understand her not believing anything Bill told her.
You're wrong, there are all kinds of different ways to lie about WMD in Iraq. I remember when Rumsfeld said he knew where these weapons were. I remember when Cheney used information he gave to the New York Times as so-called independent confirmation of his claims regarding these weapons. I remember the Bush Administration describing Dr. Blix as 'deluded' in reaction to his findings that none of the Bush Administration's claims had merit.
Your use of the phrase 'weapons-related program activities' tells me what I need to know. I also remember the fearmongering going from 'weapons' to 'weapons programs' to 'weapons-related program activities' as the Bush administration became more and more desperate to pretend their conquest of Iraq was justified, you see.
My use of 'program' came from the UN, not from the Republicans.
Think about this for a moment.
To date, despite all the computer powers we have at our disposal, the best way to know if a nuclear explosive device would go 'ka-boom' is to actually detonate it. Pakistan and India had their respective clandestine nuclear weapons program and when they finally test detonated their bombs, it was too late to talk about non proliferation. Iraq took the same route.
So if the initials 'WMD' is confined to actual weaponized nuclear explosive devices, aka 'the bomb', then the UN inspection regime was illegal because Iraq never detonated, not even a test device. The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) tacitly targeted 'program'...
Each nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to transfer to any recipient whatsoever nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices or control over such weapons or explosive devices directly, or indirectly; and not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.
There is no way to 'assist', or 'encourage', or 'induce' the manufacture of anything, not even a microwave oven, unless you are going to engage in the startup and maintenance of a program of training and mentoring of said manufacture.
I'm not disputing that the phrase 'weapons program' exists, I was pointing out how your Bush administration got more and more desperate in their efforts to pretend they were justified on conquering Iraq.
I think you meant to say "who are" and the answer is, Bush supporters.
Oh, so it was Saddam's fault that Bush lied to the American public and invaded Iraq, nice one.
Nice try at tortured logic. You simply cannot dispute what I presented about how the UN inspection regime was set up and worked, and if you cannot dispute it, that mean Bush could not have lied. Of course, you are free to expand the definition of 'lie' and 'lying' to absurd dimensions. But that would say more about you and your intellectual dishonesty than about how Bush supposedly 'lied'.
Seriously? You want to turn this into a Romney thread?
You're not responding to my response to your post, but that is not unexpected. Respond to what I wrote in response to your post, or get added to a certain list of mine.
chadders finds it hard to go more than two consecutive posts without throwing that fink progress Romney link up there. doesn't matter if the subject is rutabagas - up it goes
I'm not disputing that the phrase 'weapons program' exists, I was pointing out how your Bush administration got more and more desperate in their efforts to pretend they were justified on conquering Iraq.
I think you meant to say "who are" and the answer is, Bush supporters.
The laymen associate the initials 'WMD' to mean complete weaponized nuclear explosive devices. That is not wrong, but it is incomplete.
I know what a real nuclear bomb look like. When I was active duty back in height of the Cold War, I had to pull 'Victor Alert' duty at RAF Upper Heyford. There were always a few F-111Es loaded with 'the bomb' readied for launch. The B61 is not that large in size. The pair of external fuel tanks on these jets were larger than these nuclear free fall bombs. The first time I saw a VA F-111E, I was in quiet awe at the amount of potential destruction in front of me.
So even back then, as we were taught, the initials 'WMD' included associated programs to acquire, refine, build a test device, and finally to weaponize the device. To 'weaponize' a nuclear explosive device is to literally reconstruct it into a mobile package. You trim excess wiring, use smaller screws/bolts, etc...Anything to reduce weight and mass.
You want to be intellectually shallow and focus on the politics ? That is fine by me. But as someone who once stood literally in awe and fear in front of a real nuclear weapon, the details, technical and otherwise, matters. Like it or not, people like Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, and Kim Jung-il, have no business with nuclear weapons, and I have no problems calling ourselves 'the good guys' compare to them.
Bush cherry-picked the "intel" he chose to accept and then reveal during his propaganda campaign in 2002.
Not surprisingly, he broadcast all the stuff that indicated Saddam might still be working on nukes.
Intel contradicting that viewpoint was suppressed.
Dubya's GOP controlled congress voted almost unanimously in favor of his Iraq resolution.
Some Dems did, too.
263 Pubs voted for, 7 against
111 Dems voted for, 147 against
BTW, the Iraq resolution wasn't a pass to invade Iraq. It urged the prez to exhaust all means short of war prior to taking military action. The entire world knows that he didn't.
Very amusing to see the Bush apologists trying to deflect responsibility to that Dem minority, while turning themselves inside out to carry water for the Pubs.
The UN turned down his attempt to get their approval. Long standing US allies warned him against invading. But ol' Dubya was too darn smart to listen to anybody but Chicken Dick Cheney. Ol' Chicken Dick is amazingly consistent; wrong on almost everything. And every time he opened his silly yap concerning Iraq, he was dead wrong.
Woopsie-doodle! Chicken Dick was wrong again, but the French and Germans were right. So was the UN.
Dubya's defenders are wrong, too.
The whole world knows it. But you're entertaining. so...
BTW, the Iraq resolution wasn't a pass to invade Iraq. It urged the prez to exhaust all means short of war prior to taking military action. The entire world knows that he didn't.
Over a decade of sanctions and inspection that spanned two US Presidents looked like 'exhaust all means short of war' to me.
Over a decade of sanctions and inspection that spanned two US Presidents looked like 'exhaust all means short of war' to me.
And those sanctions and inspections kept Saddam from advancing his nuke program.
What did the invasion accomplish?
It's good that Dubya still has some hangers-on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
