The WMD Cult

i hope you understand what "opinion" is.

so the war was illegal... i dont think legality is important in such a situation.

you're basically saying my opinion is wrong.

Originally posted by GeniusSage
i hope you understand what "opinion" is.

so the war was illegal... i dont think legality is important in such a situation.

you're basically saying my opinion is wrong.

It is

Yes, based on all the evidence available to do with the welfare of the Iraqi people, solutions to the problems of potential radical Islamist terrorism, the long range economic future of the US, and stability in the middle east region, the war in Iraq brought about by the Bush admin is most definitely wrong.

Anyone who continues to claim there are/were no WMDs and that the LIBERATION of Iraq was illegal needs help to GET OUT of the CULT of ANT HUMANISM OR needs to don a TURBIN and go live in a CAVE with Saddam and Osama.

m...

[Edited on 12-8-2003 by Springer]

im sure alot of the anti-war people are racist #s who dont give a # about anyone but their own country.

Originally posted by GeniusSage
im sure alot of the anti-war people are racist #s who dont give a # about anyone but their own country.

Its funny how you couldn't be more wrong

I care about the stability of this planet. I care about corrupt Presidents marching around the world invading peoples countries for their own interest and claiming that they are benefiting the world. they are not. They are breeding Islamic extremists. I don't want people to die. I don't want people t owant to blow themselves up anymore no matter what race, religion or colour. The war in Iraq is not helping this. I agree that it is a good thing that Saddam is gone but that is irrelevant when the war itslef was not for this purpose. It's lies. It is not helping world peace if the Bush administration marches around the middle east like they own the world. That was the most stupid, ignorant comment. I despise racism

"I don't want people to die. I don't want people t owant to blow themselves up anymore no matter what race, religion or colour."

yeah, its nice to dream....

Originally posted by Springer
Anyone who continues to claim there are/were no WMDs and that the LIBERATION of Iraq was illegal needs help to GET OUT of the CULT of ANT HUMANISM OR needs to don a TURBIN and go live in a CAVE with Saddam and Osama.

m...

[Edited on 12-8-2003 by Springer]

There were no WMDs of the deployable type described in detail by Rice and Powell and Rumsfeld - at all - when the illegal invasion took place, that's well established.

And you'll find it tough to get more than a handful of Iraqis to tell you they have been "liberated". What a joke.

Turbans don't suit me much, but I know of a few cave dwellers at ATS! Keep it up!

I want to start a new thread on the new cult of ANT HUMANISM. Fascinating! Also, it's interesting for non-humanists (esp the religious right) to learn what humanism actually is.

All good stuff.

"And you'll find it tough to get more than a handful of Iraqis to tell you they have been "liberated". What a joke."

what a load of BS.

Originally posted by GeniusSage
"And you'll find it tough to get more than a handful of Iraqis to tell you they have been "liberated". What a joke."

what a load of BS.

That doesn't sound very sagelike somehow!

Please, go find them, find the grateful Iraqis. Put up a list of quotes conveying all the gratitude of the newly "liberated" people.

And try to back up your opinion with some reasoning. If there were no deployable WMDs at all creating imminent danger for the US (let's say, "hypothetically", there were none, ;0 ), then exactly why was it necessary to invade Iraq, and why was it the right thing to do?

Practise what you preach, man, if you can, and don't post on a thread unless you have something to say that adds to what has gone before...

im sure the majority of iraqis are pleased saddams been overthrown but want the americans out as soon as possible.

i think the way people demonstrate against the liberation of iraq is sickening. they take democracy for granted and their freedom to protest is seen as a "normal" thing. in iraq, these people didnt have such freedom.

[edit] (didnt make any sense ^_^)

i suppose its like cancer. with america as the chemotherapy.

[Edited on 8-12-2003 by GeniusSage]

You know George W. Bush is in big trouble when even George Will, who backed the Iraq war and has toed the neocon line pretty faithfully, sharply questions the rationale for war. The complete absence of any evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction presents the administration with a major problem:

As some here may recall, I was exactly like Mr. George Will. I too backed the war, etc. (though I criticized the way it was done), but lost a lot of faith when the WMD myth was busted wide open... I still believe it was necessary (from an economic, euro vs. dollar perspective) economically, but these kinds of wars should be waged under cover of darkness, not in broad daylight with your undies around your ankles.....

Iraq was a "clear and present danger", and here's why. I'll bet it's not the reason you expected.

March 13, 2002
Bush's State of the Union message focused attention on WMD and turned up the heat on certain countries which National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said "are a clear and present danger" to the United States and the rest of the civilized world. Why? "Because the Iranians, who spread and support terror around the world, the North Koreans, who proliferate these weapons, and the Iraqis, who make a region of great importance to us unstable, clearly are a clear and present threat to America, America's interests, and America's allies."

Rumsfeld said the terrorist list includes a number of countries that "are active, developing weapons of mass destruction, and ... have relations with terrorist networks. And we must not sit idly by as a country, as a world, and accept that outcome -- that eventually, if we wait long enough, eventually it's reasonable to expect that terrorist nations will provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorist networks."
usembassy.state.gov...

Saddam Hussein himself has emerged from a rather reclusive lifsetyle of late.

He said there are no Weapons of Mass Destruction. He said he didn't want UN inspectors in his palaces out of respect for privacy.

Surprise surprise.

The story of the WMD fiasco and all the lies and retractions of the corrupt and imbecilic Bush admin (good job Jezebel!) is now just entering Chapter 3...

Saddam can claim "privacy and invasion of privacy" all day, if he so chooses......but being that he still has many "unaccounted for" stocks of WMD, those privacy rights went out the window after 12+ years.
Warrants were issued and he was summoned to appear. Saddam, to this day, still has produced or given the UN/UNSCOM no documentation showing nor saying that he disposed, destroyed, etc. any of those UN/UNSCOM documented "unaccounted for" WMD....
Privacy.....
The man admits to having WMD in the first place, matters not to me that he claims he don't now....hell, put yourself in his position right now.....you'd be claiming you didn't have them either, among other things he has claimed he had no responsibility for.....
Ask France, Germany, and Russia, with the capture of Saddam, if they are not quaking in their respective boots about now, hoping he doesn't reveal to much.......


regards
seekerof

Seekerof

Understand irony.

I think Saddam was being completely sarcastic to his captors with his privacy comment.

He is mucking the US around as always, and inciting Iraqi loyal nationalists to get rid of them.

There are no truths on either side. The American (Bush admin) lies may be worse in terms of their intentionality. PNAC. Lies lies lies, OSP set up to manufacture lies. Misuse intelligence. Commit crimes.

Two months later, same old same old?

Not quite.

No WMD Cult deprogrammer should be without this tool of trade, kindly provided by SkepticOverlord:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Turbans don't suit me much, but I know of a few cave dwellers at ATS! Keep it up!

I want to start a new thread on the new cult of ANT HUMANISM. Fascinating! Also, it's interesting for non-humanists (esp the religious right) to learn what humanism actually is.

All good stuff.

ant humanism! turbans! cavedwelling!
OH MAN!, that's rich stuff! LMAO.
the truth is like silly putty these days. anything is 'justified'.
general havoc was recently qouted as saying, 'well, ...uh, ....we just had to nuke that old lady, .... she, ummm, ...she was a clear and present danger. she had wee pee on her mass depends.'

What justifies a war? Where is the rule book? Is everyone following the same rules?

Cultists can move en masse from gathering to gathering. In my case I find it efficacious to inspire their rallying cause with a statement that incriminates the incumbent admin, and anticipates the criminal trial. Then just watch, listen, learn, and discuss the loose reasoning that is in evidence, in different circles later.

I strongly recommend gaining some insight into the thinking of the cultists who are arguing against the 2002 intelligence reports that concluded very low probability of WMD presence in the invasion target... as kindly provided by SkepticOverlord in his ATSNN linked story above. There are several leaps to the defence there, but the moral character is coming apart at the seams totally, replaced by the obfuscation that accompanies more and greater dissonance.

billybob, I promised ANT HUMANISM, and I will deliver on it when I figure out what it is.

*returns to cave*