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 read the article, not sure what more there is to read; Carter is putting his own opinion on issues, even though he has no basis for this opinion. Carter decides upon himself to be some kind of spokesman for Bush, eyt Bush did not solicit him to do so, nor does what Carter state line up with any Bush official.
It is fact however that the Bush administration has stated there was no WMD program in Iraq.
This is also why the George W. Bush administration did not crow about the approximately 5,000 chemical munitions that U.S. forces uncovered throughout Iraq, as recently reported by the New York Times.
"Since May 2004, Coalition forces have recovered 4,996 filled and unfilled pre-DESERT STORM (1991 Gulf War) Iraqi chemical munitions; both serviceable and unserviceable, including 420 munitions recovered between April 2009 and March 2011."
"Of the 420 CW munitions recovered from April 2009 to March 2011, 393 of these rounds were nonviable CW munitions. The nonviable CW munitions were incapable of holding a chemical agent fill because they were environmentally degraded, punched or drilled, or were never filled and lacked the fill plug necessary to contain the chemical fill. The remaining 27 CW munitions remained in such a condition as to still be considered viable."
"Since May 2004, Coalition forces have recovered 4,996 filled and unfilled pre-DESERT STORM (1991 Gulf War) Iraqi chemical munitions; both serviceable and unserviceable, including 420 munitions recovered between April 2009 and March 2011."
"Of the 420 CW munitions recovered from April 2009 to March 2011, 393 of these rounds were nonviable CW munitions. The nonviable CW munitions were incapable of holding a chemical agent fill because they were environmentally degraded, punched or drilled, or were never filled and lacked the fill plug necessary to contain the chemical fill. The remaining 27 CW munitions remained in such a condition as to still be considered viable."
Gee, did someone forget to count the rounds spent? Ya know, the ones SH fired on his own citizens?
This "discovery" came out some time ago and has already been discredited as proving that the weapons were of the the type that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld were sniffing out. Why is this being rehashed? Are the right-wing extremists out of talking points?
Also -- doesn't anyone remember the Bush WH Correspondents Dinner with Bush's jokes about looking for WMDs (under the bed, etc.). Really think he would have done that if they had, in fact, found anything?
Carter Andress should be ashamed of himself, if the concept even exists in his vocabulary.
Citing the New York Times for "5,000 WMD" when the actual text was:
Quote:
Then, during the long occupation, American troops began encountering old chemical munitions in hidden caches and roadside bombs. Typically 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets, they were remnants of an arms program Iraq had rushed into production in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war.
All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.
Someone explain to me why chemical weapons that couldn't be effin' fired constituted a threat worth goign to war over. Someone explain to me how ammunition that predates 1991 in any way supports the GWB administration's claims of active weapons programs, mobile bioweapon labs, uranium enrichment programs?
The goalposts have been moved so far so fast, it's astonishing they haven't achieved escape velocity.
This is an awesome quote, though:
Quote:
The limited number of combat troops available did not permit fixing them at every site where WMD were found or might be found.
If the vaunted WMD had been anything but a smokescreen, shouldn't guarding them have been, I dunno, a priority or something? I refuse to believe that the US military is that incompetent. If the actual strategic purpose of the war had been to secure WMD, there would have been forces allocated to guard WMD sites. But that didn't happen, eh?
Oh, and why didn't the administration shout the existence of those so-called WMD sites from the rooftops? Because even Karl Rove thought it impossible to spin them into a justification for that stupid little war.
While I am no big fan of Any of the Bushes .. I have to say that I always knew that George W. Bush was right on this!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrClose
Come back after you read the entire article.
Come back after you figure out what yellow-cake is.
Quote:
After U.S. Central Command called on us to help transport, from Iraq, enough yellowcake uranium to make several atomic bombs stored at Saddam’s nuclear weapons complex,...
That's propaganda and disinformation, not to mention completely false.
Atomic bombs? What is that? A technical term?
So, how many "atomic bombs" does this Göbbels-wannabe think Saddam could have made?
Saddam never had a "nuclear weapons complex."
Quote:
...enough yellowcake uranium to make 14 or so nuclear bombs with technology that the Iranians and Libyans already possessed...
Ah, so we come to the crux of the matter, which is more Iran propaganda.
14 "nuclear bombs." What kind of nuclear bombs?
And 14, out of yellow-cake? Not gonna happen.
Notice the use of "yellow-cake" as disinformation and fear-mongering. It's akin to "nuclear program," another nondescript term that means nothing.
Yellow-cake is like "car."
What does that mean? Compact? Sedan? Coupe? SUV? Mini-van? Truck?
He's preying on ignorant people to get that knee-jerking.
"Since May 2004, Coalition forces have recovered 4,996 filled and unfilled pre-DESERT STORM (1991 Gulf War) Iraqi chemical munitions; both serviceable and unserviceable, including 420 munitions recovered between April 2009 and March 2011."
"Of the 420 CW munitions recovered from April 2009 to March 2011, 393 of these rounds were nonviable CW munitions. The nonviable CW munitions were incapable of holding a chemical agent fill because they were environmentally degraded, punched or drilled, or were never filled and lacked the fill plug necessary to contain the chemical fill. The remaining 27 CW munitions remained in such a condition as to still be considered viable."
That pretty much sums it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409
Gee, did someone forget to count the rounds spent? Ya know, the ones SH fired on his own citizens?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,297 posts, read 54,124,717 times
Reputation: 40601
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger
None of that matters. Really. If you actually read the resolution (that a majority of Democrats in the senate [including Hillary Clinton] voted for) which gave Bush the authority to invade Iraq, you'll find that Iraqi troops were violating the cease-fire on an almost daily basis. That alone was enough to justify the removal of Hussein.
Which should have been considered nothing to make Saddam's removal a priority in post 9/11 America.
it has been proven beyond a doubt that Iraq had no WMD program, and every Bush official including Bush himself has stated this.
Incorrect. You cannot back up that claim with facts. It was not proven one way or the other. We DO know that Saddam Hussein stated, after capture, that he wanted everyone to believe he did have a WMD program because he wanted to scare Iran, whom he wrongly perceived to be the greater threat. You people totally and completely ignore that, you don't even know how to respond. There is evidence that Iraq may have sent chemical weapons to Syria when it became evident we were about to invade. Iraqi generals and even David Kay, former head of the Iraq Survey Group, have suggested so. We do know Syria had/has chemical weapons because they've used them. Where did they come from?
Incorrect. You cannot back up that claim with facts. It was not proven one way or the other. We DO know that Saddam Hussein stated, after capture, that he wanted everyone to believe he did have a WMD program because he wanted to scare Iran, whom he wrongly perceived to be the greater threat. You people totally and completely ignore that, you don't even know how to respond. There is evidence that Iraq may have sent chemical weapons to Syria when it became evident we were about to invade. Iraqi generals and even David Kay, former head of the Iraq Survey Group, have suggested so. We do know Syria had/has chemical weapons because they've used them. Where did they come from?
Same place Iraq got them from. Now how does buying them from another country correlate to having a chemical weapons development & manufacturing program of your own?
Shouldn't you of necessity agreed to have instead, invaded the country or countries that were providing him with those? Oooopsy; now that would have proven totally embarrassing.
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.
