NEWS: U.S. Officals were told before the war that WMD's would not be found., page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 14-2-2004 @ 07:12 AM by John Nada
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Originally posted by heelstone
The onus of proof lies on the poeple making the claims that Saddam did in fact have WMD. Which was our republican executive administration that sanctioned this military action.

Those of us that believe otherwise are validated by the simple fact that the reasons for the invasion have not panned out in the least. Theres our evidence right there.


I totally agree that there are no WMD, as of yet, in Iraq, and I am becoming wary that we will not find them.

The proof I ask for, is what makes it proven that "lies" occured. Is it not possible that out of all the Intellegence, which you and I are not privy to, the most reasonable conclusion would be in favor of Iraq having them pre-war? Of course it is.

WMD is not the only reason for the war, but rather a selling point, which of course is used for any war or military action. It's the politics of running a country with hundreds of millions of people to rally.

Again, seeker posted about the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 signed by Bill Clinton.

Read Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 here

Although it states in section 8 that this act does not prescribe military action, it was pre-9/11 which marked a drastic shift in U.S. tolerance for nations of potential threat.

Being wrong does not mean telling a lie.


You believe that WMD will most likely not be found. Yet you don't believe that the government are liars. I could understand where you are coming from if this didn't generate some of the biggest protests BEFORE the war began.
Millions said before the war this evidence was crap, and that no WMD were out there. They said the government were liars. The government said this weren't true, and that they had the evidence and went to war anyway.
Now that it's too late we know that the evidence was suspect, and everyones pointing fingers at everyone else. Do you think all the millions who protested before the start were somehow psychic?
If the government were so sure all these millions of people were wrong don't you think they would've made sure the evidence was concrete first?
This isn't like something were everyone supported it and then afterwards the government realised they'd made a mistake. Most people knew it was BS, yet the government stone-walled them and did their dirty deeds anyway. They didn't even try to prove to the millions that it was a just war, because they knew it wasn't.
How can this not look like anything else but lies?


reply posted on 14-2-2004 @ 10:26 AM by KrazyJethro
What you say about the millions in protest before the war is true enough, but for the most part I can say that they were numbskulls hopping on the bandwagon.

There were legitimate protesters out there, but I am saying a large percentage were self-servers.

Here's the lineage of the Anti-War lemming.

-Vote for Gore.

-Get pissed after election is decided against you.

-Ignore possibility (note possibility) that Bush did NOT rig election and develop an inescapable hatred of Bush seeking to demonize everything he does (this is the big one)
-Bush makes policy to invade Iraq on "selling point" of the WMD.
-Protest the war, not because people think there are no WMD, but because "It's all about the Oil" or some other oversimplified catch-phrase. Thank communists for throwing another great rally for "peace"
-WMD info may be wrong. Automatically assume it is all a bunch of lies. Ignore any information from the Clinton era or from other Intelligence sources.
-Think that since another point to the war would be economic security, that it must be so the fat cats can line their pockets. Not that that will not happen, but come on, when has it not. It's basically a moot point.

I have no problem with honest dissention, but I loath these cookie cutter anti-war "protesters" who mimic every ultra-liberal who spews the unsubstantial arguments they take as fact.

Don't worry though, we have plenty of sycophants on out side too and they make me sick.

Here are some idiot lines from Conservatives that show the speaker is an utter moron (in the effort of fairness).

-You are Un-American - This is about as bogus as it gets. A true ignoramus uses this line.
-Saddam was a WMD - I am truly about to barf. Even if he was, it's just so trite and stupid to say that it boarders on retarded.
-You should support the president - Spoken like a true idiot. No one SHOULD support the president. It's a choice lined out in the Bill of Rights, and by the way, the founding fathers were fond of dissent. Those damn traitors.

There's more to be sure, but to continue would make my head hurt.


reply posted on 14-2-2004 @ 11:46 AM by John Nada
Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What you say about the millions in protest before the war is true enough, but for the most part I can say that they were numbskulls hopping on the bandwagon.

There were legitimate protesters out there, but I am saying a large percentage were self-servers.

Here's the lineage of the Anti-War lemming.

-Vote for Gore.

-Get pissed after election is decided against you.

-Ignore possibility (note possibility) that Bush did NOT rig election and develop an inescapable hatred of Bush seeking to demonize everything he does (this is the big one)
-Bush makes policy to invade Iraq on "selling point" of the WMD.
-Protest the war, not because people think there are no WMD, but because "It's all about the Oil" or some other oversimplified catch-phrase. Thank communists for throwing another great rally for "peace"
-WMD info may be wrong. Automatically assume it is all a bunch of lies. Ignore any information from the Clinton era or from other Intelligence sources.
-Think that since another point to the war would be economic security, that it must be so the fat cats can line their pockets. Not that that will not happen, but come on, when has it not. It's basically a moot point.

I have no problem with honest dissention, but I loath these cookie cutter anti-war "protesters" who mimic every ultra-liberal who spews the unsubstantial arguments they take as fact.

Don't worry though, we have plenty of sycophants on out side too and they make me sick.

Here are some idiot lines from Conservatives that show the speaker is an utter moron (in the effort of fairness).

-You are Un-American - This is about as bogus as it gets. A true ignoramus uses this line.
-Saddam was a WMD - I am truly about to barf. Even if he was, it's just so trite and stupid to say that it boarders on retarded.
-You should support the president - Spoken like a true idiot. No one SHOULD support the president. It's a choice lined out in the Bill of Rights, and by the way, the founding fathers were fond of dissent. Those damn traitors.

There's more to be sure, but to continue would make my head hurt.


In the interest of fairness I have to show respect for you showing both sides of the coin here, you haven't flocked along with the rest of the sheep and actually thought about it.
I can't argue with someone who is aware of the facts on both sides and then makes his decision, that is all I ask of anyone, rather than people who just blindly follow something because they have been raised to do that, or are just plain ignorant.
By opening up both sides of the argument you have shown respect for me, and as a result I will show respect for you by voting you for the TWATS award.
Thanks.


reply posted on 16-2-2004 @ 10:32 AM by Jakomo
KrazyJethro: "What you say about the millions in protest before the war is true enough, but for the most part I can say that they were numbskulls hopping on the bandwagon.

There were legitimate protesters out there, but I am saying a large percentage were self-servers."


You say this because you were there?

I was at 3 Montreal anti-war protests before the Invasion of Iraq. The first one had 150,000 marching through downtown Montreal in -15 weather, carrying signs like "No War For Oil", "War is an Act of Terrorism", "Not Without UN Mandate", "Bush and Saddam, Brothers in Arms".

Self-serving? I really don't understand that. How exactly is it self-serving to get out on the streets and yell that you're mad and you're not gonna take it anymore. How is it self-serving to voice your opinion in your own democratic country to let your politicians know that THIS is what you want.

MILLIONS of people protested worldwide. Maybe a small amount of those were doing it for there own purposes (as in, to get some time of work), but the majority were there because they BELIEVED what they were protesting about. You don't march 3 miles to be "self-serving".


As for the WMD fiasco:

The US public was lied to. Told that "YES WE KNOW HE HAS WMDs". Powell went before the United Nations to state the case ("based on strong intelligence" haha) before the rest of the world.

Of course, the rest of the world didn't buy it. They still voted down the resolution to invade Iraq (1441 never sanctioned military invasion).

How do you PROVE that Saddam had no WMD? Simple.

You look around, and if you don't find any, chances are high that he didn't have them. You can't hide complicated biological and chemical weapons in an A-Team lunchbox. You need sophisticated machinery and electronics just to make sure nothing leaks or goes bad.

But after nearly a YEAR of searching, they have not found one iota of evidence.

Let me give an example.

The cops bust down your door one night. "WE'RE SURE YOU HAVE GUNS IN THIS HOUSE, WE HAVE INFO THAT YOU DO."

So they arrest you, rough up some of your family and arrest some of them too. They take over your house and act like it's theirs.

Meanwhile, they find no guns. But they continue to look. And WHILE they continue to look, you're still in jail, your house is still under their control, and your family is in danger.

They tell you "Well we're sure there WERE guns in here, but now that we're here, we realize you're a bad person and had it coming anyway. So we're staying."


Obviously not totally spot-on as an analogy (you would have to have a few mass graves in your basement, and the cops would have to have sold you some guns), but it's similar. Trying to prove a negative is a tough sell.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags