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.
Originally posted by jackintheboxI don't mean to be beating a dead horse here, but what about the lucrative business deals involving sensitive technologies that continued right up to the point that the US finally turned on Iraq?
And most importantly of all, why didn't we hear a peep from the administration warning Saddam of the consequences if he were to invade. It seems that, given all the saber rattling and threats that come out of the White House, this might have been a good time to apply pressure and the threat of military force to induce a political settlement.
Originally posted by budski
reply to post by Conspiriology
Rather simplistic view of the relationship between bliar and shrub.
You know how people talk to their plants?
Yup, you got it...
Apart from the fecal matter question which is still unresolved...
You know - you remember the thread, surely...
Originally posted by mybigunit
Becky case is closed McCain admitted we are in Iraq cause of oil ....
Originally posted by Mojo Rysen
Long time lurker, First time Poster!
Didn't read whole thread so I apologise if someone (hopefully) brought this up but the Desert Storm (91) had NOTHING to do with what were mired in now!
Remember Colin Powell in front of the UN with his little vial of whatever? Remember UMD's that Iraq was hording by the tons? Remember how AL-Qaeda(SP?) was operating Hand-in-hand with the Baath Party?
That little bit of Comedy is WHY WE INVADED IRAQ!
Not so funny now.
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by jsobecky
I'm not trying to justify it, in fact I don't think it should have been allowed in the first place. If Bush Daddy had told Saddam, just once, not to invade Kuwait, then none of this would have ever happened.
And for that matter, I don't think that Lincoln should have invaded Virginia either.
Originally posted by Ramb0
I've met this guy face to face, big time racist.
He can burn.
Originally posted by Sublime620
No... because he still would have had those WMD's and been harboring those terrorists.
Why are we trying to act is if we invaded due to UN resolutions?
Appeasement? Did it work?
Because it was fait accompli.
And he could've left Kuwait anytime in the almost full year it took to build up forces in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.
In a Meet the Press interview with Tim Russert, Colin Powell says in retrospect the U.S. should not have invaded Iraq.
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, appearing on the June 10, 2007, edition of "Meet The Press," reiterated and expanded on his claim that he was misled by unknown forces in the intelligence community who failed to reveal vital information to him before his infamous February 5, 2003, speech before the United Nations proclaiming proof of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs.
You can see the entire June 10, 2007, edition of "Meet The Press" at: www.msnbc.msn.com...
The November 20, 2005, LA Times article quoting Colin Powell on this issue that I mention in my video is reprinted at: www.commondreams.org...]
As for the second war, it would've been nice if he had let inspectors in to verify the absence of said weapons when nearly the whole international community said he had them.