Get dates?
Well, the war DID result in our fine fighting men getting dates:
Well sure, your logic’s faulty, but that doesn’t stop Rumsfeld from using the same strawman argument:
Maybe you should call him, and clue him in that YOU have been running around saying he didn’t exist. -It’d be a real intelligence coup for the chickenhawks. 
Well, we’ve found several immobile palaces that belonged to him, taking up acres & acres of riverfront real estate.
Unlike those damnable WMDs, who must think they’re the Cheshire Cat or something.
I would think we would be able to produce at least one Sadaam (AKA a Sadaam “double”)
Just to keep things in perspective, we control all of this country (USA) and we still have crime and whatnot.
Osama never existed either.
Seriously, how can any of you honestly believe the WMD don’t exist? He actually USED them, and the inspectors left in 1998 with the job unfinished. So what happened to them? Do you honestly believe he destroyed them after the inspectors left? Why? Do you harbor strange thoughts that Hussein was really a responsible statesman?
Well, where are they?
Lets not forget the Bush administration didnt assert that a few easily hidden weapons were to be found. We were told by Colin Powell at the UN:
Iraq had sixty-five ACTIVE chemical munitions bunkers. Thats SIXTY-FIVE. And they are supposed to have been ACTIVE as recently as February. How many locations have tested positive for any WMDs? Zero. The US is operating with extremely sensitive detection equipment. If something is there, you can bet they will know.
Iraq was sitting on between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons. Thats TONS, not ounces, not pounds.
Iraq had a continuing program to develop nuclear weapons, as well as a “cadre” of scientists dedicated to this task.
A reward is offered for any information leading to the discovery of WMDs which is a vast amount of money to me, and to many Iraqis is an unimaginable sum. You would think ONE guy would step forward.
Sure. Saddam Hussein had WMDs at one point. But there appears to be nothing there now. Why? Where did it go? I dont know.
The point is we were given very specific amounts. Rumsfeld even had specific locations. We were told that the administration was absolutely sure of where and how much.
And so far zip. Not a little. Not considerably less than originally thought. ZERO. NADA. ZILCH.
That’s all true, now explain how all that equals “Bush lied”.
Just because they aren’t there doesn’t mean Bush knew they weren’t there and made the whole thing up.
Well, whose desk does the buck stop at? There’s two possibilities here:
- Bush lied.
- Bush was lied to by the underlings he appointed.
In Case 1, he’s a liar. In Case 2, he’s a bad President. Take your pick.
Actually, Saddam Hussein was a car repair man from Scranton. All those tv spts? faked, every last one of them. He never existed. What they really don’t want you to know is that there isn’t even an IRAQ!
we were told the WMD were able to be deployed 45minutes after SH’s command, like, they were there, ready to be fired in an instant, not undectable after eons of searching for them.
when is it plain enough for a lie to be called just what it is? - a lie?
when will ppl admit they were conned, by a leader whos motives are questionable? - to say, at the very least?
Zan
I’m willing to wager that Cheney’s gin rummy partner in his “undisclosed secure location” is none other than SH.
Yes your logic is faulty - childishly so. We have plenty of evidence, public evidence that can be validated or falsified, that he existed.
Now if Bush was saying, “trust me, there is this evil man we need to kill, can’t tell you more it’s all hush-hush” and then as evidence offers a picture of Osama bin Laden with a big black bushy moustache crudly drawn on in crayon, then I’d be as suspicious as I was about the continued existence of WMD’s with a delivery system that threatened the UK or the USA.
On a serious note. I haven’t found a cite yet, but has anyone
else heard the following?
April 7, C Rice makes a diplomatic trip to Russia.
April 8, One flight arrives at Bagdad Intl. Airport, a military transport plane from Moscow. A convoy of a dozen or so vehicles drive from the Russian embassy to the airport. They have assurances they will not be fired on by allied forces. They are fired on anyway and the Russians are pissed. But the convoy makes it to the airport without incident, they unload, and the flight returns to Moscow. So is SH living it up with vodka and cavier in the suburbs of Moscow?
Is there perhaps a tacit agreement between wealthy world leaders such that they can fade into the woodwork while publicly they scream for their head on a platter?
Scranton, eh? Methinks Saddam might actually be our own casey1550!
What proof have we that Bush exists? It seems a bit far fetched to me that this guy could end up as the most powerful man in the world. We should be told.
I remember this. I heard since that a russian paper stated that the whole issue was revolving around documents belonging to the Irakis secret services that both american and russian services wanted. According to the paper, the russians would have gotten their hands on the documents first and would have left with them, and the americans opening fire on the convoy wouldn’t have been an accident.
I would add that I’ve no particular reason to believe or not to believe this story…I’m merely reporting it.
The inspectors left with 99% of the weapons destroyed.
As for the rest, who knows? Perhaps the most likely explaination is that they simply expired; chemical weapons only have a shelf life of five years or so, maximum, under optimal storage conditions – and Iraq hardly offered optimal storage facilities. The idea that Saddam could do nothing but watch his remaining few WMDs turn into so much useless sludge is not hard for most chemists to believe.
Okay, everyone seems to have had a lot of fun with this tongue in cheek [I hope] analogy. But while I fully beleive in the flesh and blood existence of Suddam and Osama, it begs the question: In Orwell’s 1984, blind nationalism was fueled by the scheduled 3 minute hate against the fictitious enemy of the state, Emmanuel Goldstein. Having recently watched “Simone” with Al Pacino, and looking back to “Wag the Dog,” or perhap’s “Brazil,” I wonder how feasible it would be to create a digital enemy for the state to point a finger at when it seems convenient.
**Yes your logic is faulty - childishly so. We have plenty of evidence, public evidence that can be validated or falsified, that he existed.
**
We know the WMD existed to. What happened to them? Even if they are destroyed, we will eventually find them.
**The inspectors left with 99% of the weapons destroyed.
**
According to who? I recall other inspectors, notably Ritter, saying they were just about to reach the good stuff when they were pulled out.
If your going to bring Ritter into it, why not actually provide a quote? For example: