It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
This leads me to one natural conclusion; that the WMD’s never existed
Next are the terrorist insurgents in Iraq and their inexplicably convenient ties to Al-Qaeda. These “terrorist insurgents” seemed to follow right in the footsteps of the realization that there were no WMD’s in Iraq, yet I’m sure they were there all along. My contention with all of this is that these men were probably in fact just Iraqi citizens that felt like they had a patriotic duty to protect their own country from invasion by an outside force, not terrorists.
It’s now a game of drawing all of the terrorists into one location, to keep the heat off of the rest of the world, namely the US. And we're drawing terrorists to Iraq every day
What bothers me about this is why did we go there? Who was hurting us over there before we went in?
I use our own history as the perfect example of what will happen when the People really want change. I believe in my heart, that if they want freedom, that they will act on it when/if they want it
They too were a US ally once, back during the 1980s
It is hereby my contention that this war is based on a lie perpetrated by the current Bush administration, to serve some as yet undetermined purpose. Time will tell what that purpose is
The issue of WMD’s, in my opinion, will remain a minor issue in regards to the war we are now engaged in.
It is a fact that UN Weapons Inspectors Duelfer and Kay both reported that a clandestine network of laboratories and safe-houses were discovered that contained Uranium Enrichment Equipment and materials for the production of Chemical and Biological Weapons.
Our very own soldiers discovered massive stockpiles of “Organophosphate” and other equally significant chemicals reported by the Iraqi’s to be for “Insecticide” use.
Second, I would enjoy hearing your explanation of why foreign individuals would find it compelling to enter another country, not their own, then behead noncombatants and kill women and children all because that “other” country, again not their own, was involved in a conflict with a foreign country?
The reason I use this argument for the introduction is because it’s the one that was used to get the People behind it. Without this argument, we never would have invaded. Well, if we had, it would have been against the will of the People.
Again, I ask you, what purpose does this war serve?
Well, according to CNN, as of June 26th, 2003, the only things found were the components of some Uranium Enrichment equipment. I haven’t heard anything about any grand underground network of Nuclear facilities that were in the process of making Nuclear Weapons. If you could provide any evidence to this, I would be very interested.
The problem with this is that, while there may have been a stash of chemicals there, they were first of all in separate components, and secondly, they were also made prior to the invasion in 2003.
Even more damning evidence has come from the Pentagon in relation to this discovery. According to the Pentagon, there have been discoveries of some 500 weapons munitions which have been classified as chemical weapons. These were all made before 1991, and they are all near inert now, according to the Pentagon official. This leads one to ask the very real question: Do we classify these as WMD’s still, even though they are harmless?
Next, we take the debate onto the subject of the insurgents and their affiliations with Al-Qaeda. When I said that the people attacking the US forces when we first arrived in Iraq may have been simple citizens responding to the invasion, I never meant to affiliate them with the terrorists. My point of contention was that the first ones to respond may have been the people of Iraq, and that the insurgents came in later, as they saw an opportunity to force the American military into a protracted war that they felt they would win. The terrorists seem to have paid very close attention to the Tet Offensive of the Vietnam War. They have figured out what works best in their environment, and they are using it to try to force us out. The way they prefer to beat us is by turning public opinion against the US military, in the hopes that either the US will withdraw, or that the world will force the US to withdraw.
give the country back to those we took it from.
With that in mind, we should have been out of there at least a year ago. How much time should we give them to come to grips with the new reality of freedom? We can’t stay there forever. I feel as though we’ve forced ourselves into a situation where we’ve become the surrogate parents of another nation. And that line of thinking leads me to a subject for another debate, imperialism.
I would have no problem with stationing a few troops there, but not the 100,000+
I remember a time shortly after 9-11 when the American public was “behind” any and all actions that related either directly or indirectly, to engaging an unseen enemy anywhere except here in the states. I remember cheers in the common room I was in when I heard the Presidents speech, cheers of motivation and support for the destruction of the enemy on any and all battlefields.
To believe that Saddam was NOT supporting the terrorists is ridiculous and not worthy of any further comment.
Supporting the troops, but not supporting what they are doing, or accomplishing, is comparable to supporting your favorite football team, but not wanting them to win the game; equally comparable to supporting them and not being proud of their record, or that they made the playoffs…
…They do not just want you to support them; they want and need the support for what they do. How silly is it to think otherwise.
That we are not going to just roll over and allow our country to be dominated by a religious cult of extremists. That we value our freedoms and the rights we enjoy and that we will fight to preserve them.
If one moves away from the liberal mainstream media outlets, such as CNN, one finds a lot of information on such subjects that CNN, MSNBC and other liberal news outlets routinely “decide” the public does not need to know.
We currently have Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles in use made in the 1960’s, are they less deadly for their manufacture date? I think not.
I will not address the Illegal Immigration issue here as that is an entirely different subject for another debate. Suffice it to say it was not Mexicans that flew planes into our buildings in an unprovoked and cowardly act. It was Muslim, Islamic Extremists.
The American public was pulled into a protracted war, with no idea how long it would last.
as well as making an example out of them to the rest of the world.
I’m only asking for a good reason as to why the administration lied to us prior to our entry to Iraq. Even after entering, they maintained that they had WMDs there, when in fact none of any considerable nature were ever found.
However, if you meant that the way it was typed, then I must assume that you think that Iraq is our country.
…the anti-war zealots are conveniently forgetting the wording of the speeches and papers that were presented at the initiation of the conflict.
At the current rate of training and equipment development in Iraq, the Iraqi Government, with “foreign assistance in obtaining fissionable material” would have a “crude nuclear weapon within one year.”
The same reports states clearly that, “Saddam is contemplating the use of terrorism in and beyond the region” using sabotage, subversive activities and military strikes.
Let us remember that we went to Afghanistan to pursue the perpetrators of 9/11, we went to Iraq to combat world wide terror and to free an oppressed people.
That the United States is not going to sit by while terrorist run amok; that the U. S. will combat oppression and tyrannical leaders wherever we find them. That Iraq is only the first step in a global war on terror that is necessary and a long time in coming.
The entire congress was privy to the same intelligence as the President and as stated previously, voted almost unanimously in favor of the resolution.
The fact that Saddam had at his disposal the necessary chemicals to create massive amounts of chemical weapons in a matter of hours is significant to me.
The fact that he maintained portable laboratories next to the chemical precursors is to me, probable cause enough to act.
The fact that he did not have great quantities actually mixed is of little relevance to his ability to produce and use them.
The fact that he was procuring the necessary materials to produce a nuclear device, significant, combined with the intelligence community’s assessment of his ability to produce that weapon within a year, significant.
The fact that no ICBM’s were found in the place safe, irrelevant.
Are we to sit by while Muslim extremists dominate country after country and those same countries kneel to morning prayers everyday because someone is telling them how to worship, what to wear and not to educate their women?
Are we simply to leave the Iraqi people to the control of the extremists?
This whole mess could have been avoided had Bush 2 made the statement going in that this was in response to the list of breaches of the UN treaty that they signed. Had he done that, this whole war would most likely have turned out differently, but it didn’t.
If, like I suggested in my introduction, President Bush had came out and said that we were going there in response to UN Treaty violations, we wouldn’t be having this debate right now, as the whole thing would have been justified. To me, and a majority of the American Population, this excuse has single-handedly ruined any proper justification for our presence there.