It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

George Bush: Bloodshed in Iraq Is 'Worth It'

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
Some of you anti-war people seriously loose any credibility you could have on your stance when you say things such as,

1.I hope hes assassinated.
2.Any thing regarding Nazis or the Schutzstaffel.
3.Oil War.


If you can make a case without that childish uninformed, unproven bs, name calling, putdowns ect, we conserves might actualy listen to what you have to say.


[edit on 29-6-2005 by C0le]

Is that a promise or just another "certainty"?




posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
.
Get a clue Cole,

The DOE was barred from telling reporters the truth about aluminum rocket tubes being totally unusable as centrifuge tubes.

Intentionally misrepresenting the facts is called Lying.

Are you one of those dumb puppy Republicans that eat up what ever droppings Bush & Co. leave for you?

Bush should be tortured a long time before he is killed.
Clean assasination would not pay due respect to all of his victims.
Of course he is mostly a meatpuppet anyway, all of the instigators should be taken out as well.

Oil War?
Of course.
Our ONLY interest in the Middle East other than Israel is Oil.
Wake up, get a clue guy.

Idiot War?
Absolutely!
.


joi

posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
Some of you anti-war people seriously loose any credibility you could have on your stance when you say things such as,

1.I hope hes assassinated.
2.Any thing regarding Nazis or the Schutzstaffel.
3.Oil War.


If you can make a case without that childish uninformed, unproven bs, name calling, putdowns ect, we conserves might actualy listen to what you have to say.

[edit on 29-6-2005 by C0le]


Are you kidding?
I have found many more conservatives on these boards name calling and spewing venom , than the anti-war folks



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Actually, it is a little known fact that WMDs and/or the materials needed for making such weapons WERE found in Iraq.

Hmm? Did you know that?

I read awhile back that in December, 2003, British and Dutch troops did infact come upon shells filled with mustard gas.

It is a fact that Saddam Hussein had WMD. The question is 'where did he transfer them to?'

Another country? Most likely.

-wD



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by slank



Thanks for proving my point slank




posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I will post this here also, so you can see why this War and Bloodshed is "Worth IT"!




posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeBDeviL
Actually, it is a little known fact that WMDs and/or the materials needed for making such weapons WERE found in Iraq.

Yeah its also a majorly known fact that the WMD's where being destroyed.
It was also a fact that the materials needed to make one are availble in EVERY country...


Hmm? Did you know that?

Know that ANY country can make a WMD?


I read awhile back that in December, 2003, British and Dutch troops did infact come upon shells filled with mustard gas.

Oh you mean those left over ones mixed up with regular shells left over from pre GW1...
Yeah real WMD production going on there...


It is a fact that Saddam Hussein had WMD. The question is 'where did he transfer them to?'

Yeah or mabye the better question is this, "Where presents the biggest supply of oil.."


Another country? Most likely.

Mabye up his 6....



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   
As far as WMD's are concerned, devil, you atleast gotta be open to the possibility that there are large caches in Iraq that we havent found, heck look back at the large underground bunker they found a month or so ago.

Stuff like this cant realy be debated on "yet"

Heck remember at the beggining of the war we found, planes, burried under the sand, not in shelters or anything, but just covered with sand,

www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...

How do you know they didnt bury the weapons also?



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
As far as WMD's are concerned, devil, you atleast gotta be open to the possibility that there are large caches in Iraq that we havent found, heck look back at the large underground bunker they found a month or so ago.

You mean that pre GW1 chache that was forgotten?
You also do relise they WHERE destroying the weapons.
Hell they showed a video of the UN weapon inspectors watching them drive bull dosers over missiles..


Stuff like this cant realy be debated on "yet"

Oh cant it?


Heck remember at the beggining of the war we found, planes, burried under the sand, not in shelters or anything, but just covered with sand,

www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...
www.newsmax.com...

How do you know they didnt bury the weapons also?

Yeah they wherent burried in desporation?
They wouldnt bury weapons like WMD's in just sand because that would wreck them...



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   
The halliburton rise is quite nice.

The 5 year chart doesnt lie.





credit yahoo finance: finance.yahoo.com...

Halliburton reminds me of the whole gomery inquiry in canada.

Government contracts etc....



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 05:18 PM
link   
.
What exactly are you smoking Cole?

We have been in Iraq for years now, and the place has been scoured looking for WMDs,

*NewsFlash!*

No WMDs found.

Maybe you have some hidden away in your closet?
.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
Do a bit of research Astroblade.
The CIA were unusually cautious over any intelligence that they provided to the White House, stressing it was old and that they had no up-to-date information. The CIA was also bypassed by the creation of the "Office Of Special Plans" set up within the Pentagon that had a direct reporting line to the White House. The sole purpose of this unit was to provide the "intelligence" needed to support war. This information went straight to the White House without oversight and has been discredited since due to it's sources.

Then we had the report supplied to the UN by Iraq on the weapons issue. That report was "censored" by the US before anyone else at the UN got to see it. Thousands of pages were missing from the submitted report and many others had been blanked out in whole or in part. The US had no right to do that but again, nobody questioned it.

Then there was the alleged link to 9/11. The 9/11 commission in their report debunked this too.
Terrorism? There was no terrorism or fundies operating or sheltered by Iraq before this war, they'd have been a threat to Saddam and their presence would not have been tolerated.

There is no question that we were lied to. No amount of spin or legalistic doubletalk can justify the lies. It's not conspiracy theory, it's fact.


Good post mate. Special plans was Cheney, Wolfovitz and Rumsfeld ie those behind the puppet.

It was all lies all along, spread by ECHELON hence 45 minutes (UK) & 45,000 WMD's (Oz).

Dodgy dossiers, technically-impossible mobile germ-warfare labs, shifting objectives, 'expendable' scientists, the similarities of the 'case' put by the liars on both sides of the Atlantic are staggering

When 10+ YO artillery shells / mortar bombs filled with Mustard Gas are deliberately confused with Nuclear-tipped GLBM you realise just how long this plan took to pull together.

I know these facts won't deflect Cole but then I feel nothing will. People obviously get the leaders they (we!) deserve


History will judge George Bush - very unkindly



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
For all the WMD debates, use this:

www.cia.gov...




new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join