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.

 

Where are the WMDs then?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Your are right, but you are also wrong.
Id put Cheney at a higher level of evil than Bush.

congratulations for seeing the bloody obvious though, a gold sticker for you.

What gave it away?

too many co-incidences

where its clearly stated how Iraq was in GW's mind LONG before 911?

Harsh Reality of War

Maybe it was in the Harsh Reality? seeing pools of blood, mangled childeren or the american coffin shoved in your face 3700 times got me angry?

Maybe its my cant deny thread?

Cant Deny Bush KNEW

Where it details over and over how bush was WELL AWARE of 911 coming..

No No No.. its gotta be the congress thread

Congress are passing a law...

That details how the Bush admin has brought in laws which will effectivley make you a police state?

congratulations, you must of really worked hard to figure out my hatred for GW bush.

If the slaughter of hundereds of thousands of people who DIDNT DESERVE IT doesnt anger you
OR the fact that the government allwed 3000+ of your own citizens to PERISH for their own CORPORATE GREED doesnt stifle you
Youd honstly HOPE that BUSH stating LONG before 911 how badly he wanted iraq would make you raise questions ATLEAST....

But no...

your one of those people, who still... are unable to see the reality.
Your the sort of person, id be very very happy to send to Iraq.
because you'd be captured, and beheaded rather quickly, thankfully.

The genepool has no room for people like yourself, who criticise people for standing up for the basic principal of HUMAN BLOODY LIFE!

honestly IT guy, be honest here.

Your telling me, you can look at the following photos






and not feel:

utter HATE?
DISGUST?
SO MUCH PAIN IN YOUR HEART KNOWING FULL WELL THE FOLLOWING:

















DIDNT HAVE TO HAPPEN?????????????????????????????????????

IT WOULDNT OF OCCURED had we of had a moral-istic man in the whitehouse, who's priorities were not CORPORATE GREED, but the people and the childeren of this planet?

If you can look at those photos, and still feel Iraq was nessecary and GW Bush is righteous, you make me sick.

Im ashamed to be a member of the same race, that feels those peoples misery is worthy, so long as money rolls in.

If you were hear, i would spit at your face... and do what ever was nessecary to defend myself against you.. because you do not deserve any better.

close minded?

YOU GOD DAMN BET I AM.

Iraq had no WMD's, even the lying piece of crap BUSH stated as such.
Blair said as much
Blix said as much
The UN Said so
Iraq says soo..

so how do you even comprehend them all being wrong?
Is there one iraqi sitting in a desert on a cache over x amount of acres big saying
'' lucky they havent found me yet, cant have people knowing the bush admin wasnt lying after all " ?

[edit on 31-7-2007 by Agit8dChop]




posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Agit8dChop –

I guess you don’t like it when someone challenges your pervasive liberal screed. I found it interesting that you punctuated your lengthy diatribe about peace and saving innocent lives with wishes for my demise. No matter.

You may be even more upset to know that I have a signed picture of George W. Bush on my wall. His staff sent it to me for donating money to both of his Presidential campaigns. I have never met President Bush in person, but I have met and shook hands with Dick Cheney. I grew up in Wyoming and my older sister still lives there. She attends the same church that he does and sees him occasionally when he is in town. I can tell you from personal experience that he is not a monster nor is he evil incarnate. He is a patriotic American who has served his country for many years. He is a person who understands when it is necessary to defend one’s country and way of life even if it is ugly. On what do you base your opinion of him? Would that be on third or sixth hand news reports from biased news media that hates everything or everyone that isn’t a flaming liberal? Exactly where do you get all of your incontrovertible facts?

You were also kind enough to include pictures of dead, dying or injured Iraqis in your post. You seem to have neglected to include any pictures of dead, dying or injured American, British, Israeli or Australian terror victims. Do you not care about casualties among your own countrymen or allies? I guess it would be difficult to show any pictures of the dead Americans from New York on 9/11 because they were all pulverized into powder by the collapsing buildings. Do you mourn for them as much as you do for those who cheer and pass out candy to children as they dance around the body of a dead American soldier?

So my friend, I do not wish for your demise as you do for mine. Rather, I hope you have a long, happy, safe life in your quiet corner of Australia. I hope you live long enough to finally realize that reality trumps idealism and peace comes through strength – not weakness. If you ever travel to Colorado I hope you will stop by and let me buy you lunch or a drink. That is, of course, if I haven’t been vaporized by a WMD terrorist attack that you seem to think is only a neocon fantasy. That would be an attack using the WMD that Iraq never had and Iran is not trying feverishly to build.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   


You seem to have neglected to include any pictures of dead, dying or injured American, British, Israeli or Australian terror victims.


How many of those terror victims were killed by Iraqis?

How many were killed by the mythical Iraqi WMD's?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex



You seem to have neglected to include any pictures of dead, dying or injured American, British, Israeli or Australian terror victims.


How many of those terror victims were killed by Iraqis?


I’m sure that none of the Iraqis in the pictures were directly involved with 9/11. Likewise, none of the Americans who died on 9/11 were in any way responsible for the anger that the terrorists have for us. Where is your outrage over their deaths? In any case, I wasn’t trying to reopen the interminable debate about whether Iraq was or was not involved with Al-Qaida and 9/11. I simply wanted to know why so many people who lament every Iraqi or Palestinian or Afghani death have no time to mourn the dead Americans, Brits, Spanish, Israelis, Africans or anyone else who is no less innocent?



How many were killed by the mythical Iraqi WMD's?


Well, I would say that none were killed by the "mythical" Iraqi WMDs. You may want to look into the thousands of Iranians and Kurds who were killed by ACTUAL Iraqi WMDs - or did you forget that part?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by itguysrule
Do you not care about casualties among your own countrymen or allies? I guess it would be difficult to show any pictures of the dead Americans from New York on 9/11 because they were all pulverized into powder by the collapsing buildings. Do you mourn for them as much as you do for those who cheer and pass out candy to children as they dance around the body of a dead American soldier?


do I mourn for the fallen soliders in Iraq?
No, do I feel heartache for their familes and loved ones.. Yes.

youve got to understand, that Iraq, is for Iraqi's.
And foreign soliders occupying Iraq, no matter how you want to spin it, is not just.
iraqi's deserve the right to defend their nation, and their lands against a foreign occupier.
We have no right to BE in Iraq, likewise we have NO right to be telling Iraqi's to let us occupy them.
Ill say it again, WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE IN IRAQ
Look at it like this, should china invade your country..would you take up armed resistance and kill the foreign occupier?

I mourn for the 911 victims, specifically because that was an event that COULD OF BEEN STOPPED had your government not felt it was beneficial to allow.

Do you understand this?

Bush and cheney LET 911 occur, because they knew congress and the people would follow them to Iraq.
they probably didnt expect it to be as big as it was, but they had mountains of evidence telling them what was coming.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dan5647
So we went into Iraq in 2003 and claimed there were WMDs there. That is what Colin Powell said at least. However we never found any WMDs there.
------------------------------------
It should be noted that the question of WMD was just a diversion to invade Iraq, because the plot to invade Iraq was decided long before the 9/11 trigger. The relevant question that should be investigated is, what was Rumsteak doing in Iraq with his Dictator Saddam, they were supplying him with deadly weapons to wage the 8 year War with Iran. At that time, Saddam was a Good Dictator for the CIA job and they even gave him the green-light to invade Kuwait, because during the Iraq-Iran War, Kuwait was plugging their Oil Pipelines into Iraq's oilfields to extract Oil and Saddam "bit-the-bait" to invade Kuwait, so Daddy Bush saw his opportunity to get his Allies and punish his mate, Saddam. Now Dubya Bush is trying to finish, what Daddy could not complete, to loot the Oil from Iraq, therefore the Illegal Invasion, Resistance and the Quagmire.

The Empire is now a Wounded Horse.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   
ITguys, how can they be terror victims?
Seriously.
You cannot label fallen soliders in Iraq TERROR victims.
the soliders are the ones who are the TERRORISTS.
The iraqi's, are killing the soliders because they are occupying their lands.

For you to label the fallen soliders of the coalition of the willing 'terror victims' just goes to show your level of understanding about this whole matter.

Do you study fox and cnn for knowledge?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
ITguys, how can they be terror victims?
Seriously.
You cannot label fallen soliders in Iraq TERROR victims.
the soliders are the ones who are the TERRORISTS.
The iraqi's, are killing the soliders because they are occupying their lands.

For you to label the fallen soliders of the coalition of the willing 'terror victims' just goes to show your level of understanding about this whole matter.

Do you study fox and cnn for knowledge?


Ahem......I hesitate to respond for another, but I believe that ITguy was referring to American, British, Israeli, Australian, (and many other, Spanish, German, Chechen, Russian, Phillipino, IRAQI, EGYPTIAN, JORDANIAN, SAUDI ARABIAN, etc.) civilians who have died in skyscrapers, airplanes, trains and train stations, nightclubs, restaurants etc. at the hands of muslim "freedom fighters" all over the world.

Your incapacity to grasp the clear meaning of written words just goes to show your level of intellect.


[edit on 7/31/2007 by darkbluesky]



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 09:40 PM
link   
WMD's have been claimed by Iraqi's themselves that they were moved to Syria prior to the war. UN inspectors have uncovered all sorts of documents and infrastructure pointing towards weapons programs in Iraq. What (AGAIN) is the question here???



posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Princeofpeace is not a fitting name for one who uses words like yourself here.There is nothing regal about any of your posts and the peace part must be about blowing people to pieces.You might be a decent chap off line but you come across as a liar on this subject of WMD.
It realy does you no favours to do the Syria link

We all know there were not any WMD aimed at us in Iraq,and they were not shipped to other nations too!Perhaps he gave them to Iran,i have a feeling that if the yanks go there the whole world will turn their back on you

I shouldnt give a toss realy,life is good over here in blighty and even the sun has at last come out-but i cant let that WMD comment lie dormant

To my brothers over the pond,you can say that Saddam was part of your hit list for this war,and WMD's were second fiddle-I can agree with the saddam part as bush brought that up(wrongly,as he had no right to invade just to otherthrow him!-but give the draft dodging cowardly jesus loving drug taking pretzel fearing monkey credit for actualy saying that)

Trouble is good old Tony Blair said Saddam could stay in power but must hand over his WMD-Us brits where lied too,the WMD was hinted as a mushroom cloud over our country within 45 mins!The media ran the story front page and the dispicable labour party allowed them too without correcting them

Afgan and Iraq are the result of black ops jobs on 9/11.It is shamefull the world has turned its back on this crime and allowed it to keep going on day after day,body after body.We should rise up and punish every one who has spread lies,starting with the top dogs and making our way through to the small time vermin.Its time to take the rubbish out



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:59 AM
link   
I believe the current administration is unwilling to confront the Russians publicly about the Pre-war movement of materials across the Syrian border. Ample evidence and testimony from former Iraqi military and intelligence personnel and US military satellite surveillance support this conclusion.

We gave them plenty of notice, there was a year of preparation work before we invaded. Not long after this Syrians made a real sweet deal for Russian military support and equipment, including medium range missiles. All for no-money down, which is practically unheard of when dealing with cash-strapped Russians.

Things that make go, HUM ???

[edit on 2-8-2007 by sharkman]



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Geez.. You guys are still asking this question? It doesnt matter, we are there now, our guys and a lot of Iraqi's are dying and I for one regret that we ever entered Iraq.
For the record, I did not then and do not now believe that Iraq had anything at all to do with 911 but I did believe he still had biological and chemical weapons. Why that mattered in 03 I dont know, since we were fully supporting Saddam in the 80s war with Iran and turned the other way when he gassed kurds in the north and shia in the south.
Sooo imo, we had no business going there but Im sure KBR/Haliburton would strongly disagree.

to Agit8dChop: good post. I may not totally agree with all that you said or the way you went about it but I do enjoy reading a lot of your posts


[edit on 8/2/2007 by Kr0n0s]



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:28 PM
link   
By the way, Princeofpeace= another name for anti-christ so dont get any panties in a wad.

And yes the IRAQI officials themselves have admitted to transferring the weapons to Syria. AGian, i ask, what is the question???



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Agit8dChop –

I guess plain words in English have different meaning in the nowhere, who cares, back corner of Australia where you live. That is the only way I can explain how you can’t understand the point I am trying to make. So let me try in really simple words:

There is no way you can conclusively say (over and over again – sometimes in all CAPS) that there were NO WMDs in Iraq in 2003. In order to do this you, or someone else with greater intellect than the rest of us would have to:

1. Produce verifiable inventories of every Iraqi weapon ever built or purchased
2. Produce verifiable documentation showing how each individual weapon was destroyed.

Nobody in Iraq or the UN or the IAEA or the CIA or the NSA can produce such documentation so where do you get your exclusive information? Since you don’t like CNN or FOX you must be reading only dailykos.com and MoveOn.org. I bet you even have an “Al Gore Mood Ring.”

As for your comment that you do not mourn for the fallen soldiers in Iraq – you are despicable. If you do not mourn their loss then it must make you happy – is that what you are saying? Do you dance and pass out candy to strangers when you read reports of more dead soldiers? You seem to fancy yourself as some kind of righteous humanitarian but your words and actions tell a different story. A true humanitarian cares for ALL people, not just those who see the world the same way you do. (FLASHBACK – It was you who wished for someone to cut my head off.)

To KrOnOs, darkbluesky, princeofpeace and sharkman – Thank you. It is nice to see there are still people in the world with some common sense and decency.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
By the way, Princeofpeace= another name for anti-christ so dont get any panties in a wad.

And yes the IRAQI officials themselves have admitted to transferring the weapons to Syria. AGian, i ask, what is the question???


lol i coulndt care the slightest about you sunshine so dont come up with the pantie rubbish i was rightly refering to your lies about WMD-And the ironic name you use here

Were those Iraqi officals who mentioned WMDs getting anything in return from the US?Were they Kurds?The amount of lies these so called Iraq experts have come up with is not surprising since they say what their bullying masters tell them too from the west

there were no WMDs,you support an ilegal war over your wmd lies and many muslims are being killed by racist christians who love it.

so go on then tell me what Iraqi offical are we talking about then-i have an feeling i know who as his name is always bought up by warmongers online



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 01:36 AM
link   
common sense and decency!!

You my warmongering friend are a minority in this world sunshine,so dont say you small lot have common sense and decency

open you eyes It man



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 02:58 AM
link   
I was really, really resisting coming back to this thread, specifically because it turned into another, braindead moronic debate about fantasy wmd's, I really couldnt give a flying finger about weather they even ARE in syria, they arent but thats not the point.

This administration had no intentions of invading, occupying then leaving.
Just look at the base we are building?

And your quite short of a full stack if you actually believe, your government send 150,000 + troops running into an active biological and Chemical battlefield.
They jsut wouldnt even risk that sort of public backlash.

We had sat photos and maps of suspected chemical and biological depots in Iraq, conveniently labeled and displayed to the world. If indeed they loaded up truck loads of wmd's, we wouldnt have photos of depots, we'd have photos of depots with trucks, depots with mass activitiy and large barrels/missiles being loaded onto truck.

Why would Syria even take these weapons?
Saddam KNEW FULL WELL once this war started his army was going to crumble. HE knew full well he had no hope of lasting his days in hiding.
So why would he bother removing them?
It wasnt as if Saddam thought
'' The States wont kill me if they dont find wmd's ''

Why would Saddam even want WMD's?
He saw from the first gulf war how easily the west could topple his army..
Saddam having WMD's was pointless, why would he even need them any more? All he cared about was living in his lavish palaces and holding onto power as long as he could.
He wasnt about to launch a war against his neighbours, he wasnt going to give his 'supposid' wmd's to terrorists to hit the US, they'd be immediately identified back to him, then it'll be glass city

Its totally moronic to actually think Saddam was a threat to the USA.
There's thousands more people out there, whom pose 100x more of a threat to the United states...

Saddam was CHOSEN to be ousted simply because of his geographical position, because of his natural resources and because the neo-cons knew FULL WELL his army was severly depleted and against him.

I mean, The only WMD's saddam REALLY had, were the ones we sold him.
Our ingredients were used against the Kurds.
Anything he had from the 80's would be degraded and useless in 2003.

Your saying he shipped his wmd's over to syria, how did he make useable wmd's? we found NO ability for him to make them?
Its not as if we were selling him the ingredients during the late 90's?

Cant people really see, that Iraq was chosen for factors totally obscure to WMD's and terrorism?

If we were REALLY, launching a war to fight of terrorism, we should of taken out Saudi Arabia.
If we were REALLY launching a war, to remove wmd's we should of been striking North Korea.

But to claim Saddam, was both a terrorist nation involved in 911, and also that he was building WMD's to use against the west, while maintaining vast stock piles, is totally un-realistic.

Your argument is that Saddam shipped his weapons to Syria.
You have nothing but here-say, rumour and suggestion from the government, and Iraqi's who are occupied by the American government.

Where on the other hand of NO wmd's

We have the UN, Tony Blair, The Iraqi Government, Iraqi's and any stable individual who's not so blinded by his own patriotism that he really cant grasp the reality, that the US Government is capable of lying to its people for its own interests.

Does, Pearl Harbour, Vietnam, 911, Jfk not provide some insight into the realibility of honesty from within the walls of the whitehouse?



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Why would Syria even take these weapons?

1. Syria is Iraq's neighbor
2. Syria is an ally of Iraq
3. Both countries support terrorism

Do I need to say more?


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
So why would he bother removing them?
It wasnt as if Saddam thought
'' The States wont kill me if they dont find wmd's ''

Wouldn't you think Saddam would be angry at the U.S. for defeating Iraq in the first Gulf War? He would do everything he can to help harm the U.S. in any way.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Why would Saddam even want WMD's?

Are you joking?
Saddam was a genocidal Hitler who hated America as much as we hated him.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
He saw from the first gulf war how easily the west could topple his army..
Saddam having WMD's was pointless, why would he even need them any more? All he cared about was living in his lavish palaces and holding onto power as long as he could.

Wouldn't you think Saddam would do everything he can to keep his palaces and assets. Also, by the look what he did during the First Gulf War (invading Kuwait) he was very aggressive.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
He wasnt about to launch a war against his neighbours, he wasnt going to give his 'supposid' wmd's to terrorists to hit the US, they'd be immediately identified back to him, then it'll be glass city

What did you work for the Iraqi government or something?


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Its totally moronic to actually think Saddam was a threat to the USA.

How is it moronic? Saddam hated the U.S.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Saddam was CHOSEN to be ousted simply because of his geographical position, because of his natural resources and because the neo-cons knew FULL WELL his army was severly depleted and against him.

Its absurd to think that our own government invaded just for power. Sadly many people blame Bush because they have no one else to blame.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Anything he had from the 80's would be degraded and useless in 2003.

How would they be degraded and useless. If they were smart enough, they probably hid the WMDs in a cache underground. That's where they like to hide things in the Middle East.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Your saying he shipped his wmd's over to syria, how did he make useable wmd's? we found NO ability for him to make them?
Its not as if we were selling him the ingredients during the late 90's?

He probably didn't make the WMDs. He probably got them from us in the 80s or from some other country like Russia.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Cant people really see, that Iraq was chosen for factors totally obscure to WMD's and terrorism?

Terrorism is the main reason why we entered Iraq and why we are still there. After 9/11, the WMD situation further persuaded us to invade.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
If we were REALLY, launching a war to fight of terrorism, we should of taken out Saudi Arabia.

What did Saudi Arabia do? Saudi Arabia is an ally of the U.S., unlike Iraq.


Originally posted by Agit8dChop
But to claim Saddam, was both a terrorist nation involved in 911, and also that he was building WMD's to use against the west, while maintaining vast stock piles, is totally un-realistic.

He wasn't involved in 9/11. The main point is that he supported terrorism. Countries that support terrorism are actually our ENEMIES. That's why it is called the War on Terrorism.

[edit on 3-8-2007 by Dan5647]

[edit on 3-8-2007 by Dan5647]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Oh boy, where do I start.



2. Syria is an ally of Iraq


Syria is an ally of Iran - Saddam's primary enemy. Syria was never an ally of Iraq, in fact Syria fought with the coalition against Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War.



Saddam was a genocidal Hitler who hated America as much as we hated him.


Saddam was a brutal dictator, but "genocidal" is pushing it.
He was a lot more like Stalin (his idol) than Hitler.
He killed a lot of people, but there were no death camps, etc...



How is it moronic? Saddam hated the U.S.


Beside the point - he hated Iran a lot more, but never had the means to attack the US, and never tried.



How would they be degraded and useless.


Most chemical weapons have a shelf-life, they degrade over time.



Terrorism is the main reason why we entered Iraq and why we are still there.


It is?
Funny, most of the terrorists and most of their material support were coming from our ally, Saudi Arabia. While Saddam's government tried to curry favor among Palestinian groups, the Islamist terrorist groups that are our primary concern considered Saddam's secular regime an enemy, and likewise Saddam considered them enemies.



What did Saudi Arabia do? Saudi Arabia is an ally of the U.S., unlike Iraq.


An "ally" that was home to most of the 9/11 terrorists.
An "ally" that promotes the Wahabbi ideology they subscribe to.



The main point is that he supported terrorism. Countries that support terrorism are actually our ENEMIES. That's why it is called the War on Terrorism.


We're going to have to bomb ourselves then.
We supported terrorists (well we called them "freedom fighters" at the time, but they were terrorists) all through the Cold War, including the Contras in Nicaragua, the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and many more.

Today we're supporting terrorist groups like the MEK in Iran.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Since Saddam had the potential to recruit terrorists in his country and send them over here with WMDs, it became a major threat to the U.S. That is the main reason we invaded Iraq. We didn't go there for oil or imperialistic power, which many people choose to believe.

I guess my point is is that Saddam was an evil man and removing him from power and removing the WMD/terror threat was the first step towards fighting terrorism in the Middle East after 9/11.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join