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.
I understand, from someone who works in a high level defense job outside of the government, that Rumsfeld has been sort of a "whipping post" for this administration ever since they went into office. I believe that he is a frontman, just like Bush is, and that the actual puppet strings are being managed by others behind the scene.
Now that Rumsfeld is gone, it's going to be interesting to see who takes his *real* position as the guy to take the blame and the abuse.
Is your friend going to leak the information to the New York Times? I'd like to know who is running the show.
I'm glad you are doing so well in the current US economy. When it comes time to pay some of the national debt, they can go to you to get money since you're one of the ones who has it all. This war is costing billions of dollars that ordinary Americans don't have -- so I think, since you support it, you should pay for it too.
I don't think there is anybody that does not agree we need to get a hold of the national dept. What does our national dept have to do with our economy. Two separate issues. You guys that try and melt them together have one agenda in mind.
WWW.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq-wmd-declassified.pdf (broken link) and several others but you really have to look for it ,for some reason it isn't common Knowledge. HUM Media Maybe, posibly, probly, I have never met a media outlet that gives the Republicans good press aside from Fox. Regardless of how far back you go. In the medias eye's Republicans Evil. Aside from Fox Thay are 90% biased.
From the FOXNews Report: Hundreds of WMDs found in Iraq
June 22, 2006
"...contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."...
"Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."
FL TN Nana...I say, as I've said before many times, the basic opinion of the American public, government officials and other countries was that Saddam more than likely had WMD. He had never been truthful and we didn't want to take the chance that he didn't have them...besides the fact that the United Nations was a total joke to him.
By the way, the mustard and sarin gases might have been degraded, but both were very capable of being deadly if insurgents or terrorists got ahold of them. The Department of Defense stated that they were not useable in the way that they were intended...
You know...if only those countries that were involved in that "Oil for Food" scandal (Russia and France) wouldn't have been making all that money, the invasion of Iraq would have been much more accepted by others.
Like Sweattea said in a previous post...after 17 times of ignoring the rules, at what point in time do you say...that's enough? Are rules just made to be broken? What's the point? If that's the case, let's just go ruleless...might learn a lot.
Last edited by Kimbercuddles; 12-17-2006 at 07:58 PM..
Reason: forgot something
By the way, the mustard and sarin gases might have been degraded, but both were very capable of being deadly if insurgents or terrorists got ahold of them. The Department of Defense stated that they were not useable in the way that they were intended...
There are things in your local hardware and feed store that are very deadly if insurgents or terrorists get hold of them. That doesn't warrant an invasion of Oklahoma.
We were not told that Saddam had stuff that could be used as a WMD. Of course, he did. We sold him quite a lot of them! We were told that he had an active WMD program. We were told that Saddam was a year away from developing a nuclear bomb (Bush said this). We were told that Saddam had ties with al Qaeda (Bush, Rice, and Rumsfeld all said this at one time or another). In speech after speech, Bush and Rice and Cheney linked 9/11 to Iraq. Those were all lies. Every one of them. Not misinformation, since there was not a shred of evidence to support one of them. They were outright lies.
There are things in your local hardware and feed store that are very deadly if insurgents or terrorists get hold of them. That doesn't warrant an invasion of Oklahoma.
We were not told that Saddam had stuff that could be used as a WMD. Of course, he did. We sold him quite a lot of them! We were told that he had an active WMD program. We were told that Saddam was a year away from developing a nuclear bomb (Bush said this). We were told that Saddam had ties with al Qaeda (Bush, Rice, and Rumsfeld all said this at one time or another). In speech after speech, Bush and Rice and Cheney linked 9/11 to Iraq. Those were all lies. Every one of them. Not misinformation, since there was not a shred of evidence to support one of them. They were outright lies.
You guys continuously bring this up. The theory that President Bush made all this up was debunked by the 04 elections. Everybody read the same intelligence and came up with the same conclusion.
ignoring the rules, at what point in time do you say...that's enough? Are rules just made to be broken? What's the point? If that's the case, let's just go ruleless...might learn a lot.
Like... containing prisoners without due cause/process?
Violating our contry's Constitution and the Geneva Convention?
The link should stay, I think they only remove actual websites.
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.