Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Syria's Chemical Weapons Came From Saddam's Iraq

page: 2
32
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Whoa, I don't feel safe with them possibly having a WMD. Let's not have the past dictate our future. I have a good feeling they're real, this time.

Let's start another Muslim slaughter.




posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Certainly it was Bill Clinton & his friends that knew there really were WMD's in Iraq.

WMD Quotes from Bill Clinton's Crowd

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


so, the US is innocent? not a chance in hell!




July, 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. [19





March, 1986. The United States with Great Britain block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the US becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons. [10]

May, 1986. The US Department of Commerce licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. [3]

May, 1986. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq. [7]

March, 1987. President Reagan bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. [17]

Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq. [1]






July, 1991 The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. [11]


www.iranchamber.com...

but great deflection from the obvious truth...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by fnpmitchreturns
 


So?

Evil Us but the delivery systems came from Russia but the only country to ever catch any crap is the US?

Talk about being disingenius.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Why would Bush be vindicated? The WMDs changed hands completely under his watch. Bush was a complete and utter failure to world security.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


no, I fault both sides ..

and some of the delivery systems used were bombs dropped from Phantom jets....

while Saddam was supplied with Russian arms it was US intel reports used during the attacks. It was Americans that trained the Iraqis not Russian!.

but Iraq was the US ally while Iran was supported by USSR....


today all of these republican apologists keep talking about WMD ..

I believe that Bush was told by the neocons to shut up about the WMDs because the US has such dirty hands and it would hamper neocon plans if the WMD were linked to several republican administrations



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

I'm with ya on that Slayer, and I am not one to think it's all our fault, so I retract my generalizing tone. I just think using these weapons is archaic and brutal, and then there is all the dictator set up shenanigans for varied interests. So when someone expresses angst about Saddam using those weapons, I think it is fair to step back and take the whole picture into account.
No folks, I am not a hater of America either

I think chem weapons, like cluster bombs are uncalled for, especially for some type of beneficial profits or just 'clearing out' the inventory.
edit on 23-7-2012 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



Want to try agian?

For you, not really, but for sake of discussion, I would suggest following up on the links after googling the subject, you may find we are both right.

ETA: for your other comment, quit thinking people that criticize our country's actions or more specifically, some of it's leader's actions, as in industrial military complex war profiteers, hate the US, that is bull# man!!

So Russia sends one part and we send another, does that free us from all responsibility dude?
edit on 23-7-2012 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by tide88
Bush could be vindicated soon when it comes to light that many of the chemical weapons Syria holds are actually from Saddam's Iraq. Of course if this comes to light, it could call into question many conspiracy threads posted here, such as all the 9/11 threads and many of the false flag thread.


None of these comments make any sense whatsoever. How does any of this vindicate Bush and what does it have to do with 9/11?

Syria and Iraq were bitter enemies. Syria supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, and also supported the coalition in the Gulf war. The Syrian government is Shia, Iraqi government was Sunni. Assad's father and Saddam both represented the two factions of the Pan Arab Ba'ath party, which had been involved in intense rivalry since their split in the 1960s.

Saddam did not have any WMD in a usable condition, and had no WMD programs at the time of the invasion. If Syria has Iraqi WMD (seems like blatant propaganda to me) then they stole them a long time ago and kept them in good condition. There is no way Saddam would have supplied his mortal enemy.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
While I fell for the whole WMD Iraq deal and also suspected that whatever usable material was smuggled into Syria..

I can't help but think that this is just round 2 of the setup...

It somewhat worked the first time.. at least from my point of view..

Very timely article wouldn't you say?

What's next? What happened the last time this type threat was introduced?

This is and always has been above Bush's paygrade, so blaming him then, and trying to vindicate him now, is missing the whole picture.. IMO...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Who knows if Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction were transferred to Syria before the invasion of Iraq? Right now, that claim remains to be seen. I will wait until there is physical verification. However, it would be one swift kick to the nether regions for those that groveled about lies and deceit being the sole driving force behind the Iraq War.

No use mulling over it, because the opposition will never admit to being wrong about anything. Expect a heck of lot reinterpretation and spin to save face. No such thing as hypocrites on the side of the opposition. The only hypocrites are Bush, his ilk, and supporters. If this is true, I think history will judge the Iraq War far differently than the critics. I expect when and if this information is verified? Those on the side of the opposition will toss this issue around like a hot potato, and avoid it like the plague. Just have to wait and see how it plays out?
edit on 23-7-2012 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 


It's that debate that they want...

they don't want folks to see what is really happening...

If folks start arguing about the past, they get to go forth with their plans... effortlessly.. whilst we argue the past...

I may be off the beaten path in my view of the whole situation beginning in Tunisia, but all I see is a very calculated effort to destabilize the entire region, and I don't think that Syria will be the end...

A few more dominoes are in the future..

As I said I may be off the beaten path, but for me.. I may be wrong, but somethings not right if you know what I am saying...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
6 days after Hussein was captured Muammar Gaddafi turned his WMDs over to the Brits and Americans. That's when we got Sadam's weapons. Bush was already "vindicated"; the public wasn't told because Washington feared that with the weapons found the American people would have demanded an immediate end to the operations in Iraq and to bring the boys back home. Alas, our military machine wasn't done building our bases and arming our missiles for the war we knew was coming...you know, the one unfolding right now...so they couldn't risk providing yet another excuse for us to withdrawal at that point.

Look it up, there's tons of articles about it. Just look up the day Hussein was captured on google news, then do a search filtering between dates the following week for Gaddafi. Surprised that escaped ATS members. I had thought everyone knew this...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


Yeah, I can see your point. Perhaps, if WMD issue was we reignited, it could be one good smoke screen to obscure the current situation in the Middle East. Still, I would be open to finding out if Assad's alleged chemical weapons can be traced back to Iraq. Wouldn't you want to know? A lot of money, manpower, and equipment went into that war. Over three thousand or so military personnel lost their lives, and countless Iraqi's perished as well. As I stated in my first post, lets wait until these claims can be independently verified. Right now we are going off of speculation, and he said she said material.

No I don't think you are off the beaten path, and I would wager that a lot of other people view the situation in the Middle East with intrigue. Countries that have been stable for years are dropping like flies. I would like to know how civil unrest can afflict an entire region? That is a conspiracy to me. It is like one big domino affect. Syria seems to be reaching its finale, and we all have a good Idea what is coming next. Syria is not the end of it at all. Thanks for the comment! Very interesting take on the situation.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I'm quite shocked.....not. Right again,I do believe I agreed with Gen. MacInerney years ago.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Canada inc, United States inc, and Soviet Russia inc. Hold and develope the worlds WMD's, they have the money and support, plus the scientist and work space in order to pull off such operations.

The people that are trying to stop coc aine are the once that make it, the people that are trying to stop terrorist and WMD's from landing into the wrong hands, are the ones that make them, get it?

Now Canada Inc, manufactures most of United States artillery and weaponary, but they dont just sell it to them, they sell it to whoever is willing to pay. Now if i were the man in charge of the president, i would hire a man to pretend to be a dictator, give him a nuclear bomb, then invade the country he/she was posted in, and sell my goods to both sides, now in order for buisness to be good, i have to make up some bad guy once in a while, to keep things going.

so think about it, some man in a suit u have never seen in ur life, told u a big fat lie just in order to make a profit, a bunch of jarheads listened to him and spilt blood to protect their mother land, once they get there after commiting horrific crimes, there are no WMD's? for a multi billion corporation, how in the world do they make a mistake like that? caused thousands of deaths, and not to mention the troops they send their are dying, and they were wrong?


when a men walks into a strangers house and shoots everyone in it, he goes to jail. The same man walks into a strangers house, shoots everyone in it, and he gets a medal because he has a uniform on?

I hope u guys can at least look, and see that the men responsible for these terrorists acts are right in our backyards.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenerationGap
6 days after Hussein was captured Muammar Gaddafi turned his WMDs over to the Brits and Americans. That's when we got Sadam's weapons. Bush was already "vindicated"; the public wasn't told because Washington feared that with the weapons found the American people would have demanded an immediate end to the operations in Iraq and to bring the boys back home. Alas, our military machine wasn't done building our bases and arming our missiles for the war we knew was coming...you know, the one unfolding right now...so they couldn't risk providing yet another excuse for us to withdrawal at that point.

Look it up, there's tons of articles about it. Just look up the day Hussein was captured on google news, then do a search filtering between dates the following week for Gaddafi. Surprised that escaped ATS members. I had thought everyone knew this...


I doubt anyone here will actually seek the truth on their own, fine I'll spoon feed ATS:




Following his capture on 13 December 2003, the trial of Saddam took place under the Iraqi interim government.


en.wikipedia.org...



On December 19, 2003, long-time Libyan President Moammar Gaddafi stunned much of the world by renouncing Tripoli’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs and welcoming international inspectors to verify that Tripoli would follow through on its commitment.


www.armscontrol.org...

If it isn't blatantly obvious to you that when we captured Sadam he told us he shipped them to Libya you're hopeless. We told Gaddafi to turn them over or he was next. We didn't lie about that, Mubarack as it unfolded was next...

The biggest lie Bush ever told wasn't that Sadam had WMDs, it was the fact that we found them and we covered it up so we could stay in Iraq for a decade...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GenerationGap
 


On a lighter note, what's Saddam in a mirror:

mabbaS

Hmmm, I seem to remember a Nostradamus quatrain about a Mabbas or Mabbus, something about his death being the harbinger of a tumultuous world war that would result in 5000 years of peace...mainly because man would become a man eater and pretty much we'd all be dead.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 


As far as whether it is proven that the WMD's were in Iraq and moved to Syria is history.. I am looking at the here and now, and what I perceive to be happening in that entire region..

We had Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, the splitting of the Sudan, those are the one's who are in a flux state as far as I am concerned, they threw shoes and tomatoes at the US Sec State in Egypt a couple of weeks ago..

Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia & Syria had much of the same Arab Spring type uprising, not to mention the Iran uprising in 09 that preceded them all..

Now Syria is on point... Syria.. Russia & China backed Syria.. yet as this unfolds, Syria & Russia's strongest opposition isn't to back the regime, nope they just vote against sanctions in the UN...

In my off the wall mind, I see this as a shell game, The US pulling out of Afghanistan is just opening a door to Russia and China to exploit the trillion dollar resource discovered there.. in exchange for more destabilization in the nations around Israel..

A new unstable Syria = a more tense Israel, they already have lost the Egypt buffer... with Syria going to a new more democratic approach only increases instability..

Add that pressure to the already intense pressure of the Iran deal and what do you have?

A region, ripe for conflict... IMO..

Add in the US's sudden commitment to find KONY in Africa, and it just get's mind boggling..

Like a combo Energy / Mil Ind Complex smorgasbord..

Yet they want us to argue if Bush was right about the WMDs in Syria?

Have I lost the script here..



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by speculativeoptimist
reply to post by tide88
 

Bush vindicated huh? Well who do you think designed and sold those chemical weapons to Saddam? Bush senior and Reagan admins, which unfortunately means, we did.


Just to be clear, when you say "we," you must mean the higher ups in Washington. Nobody on the civilian level has the authority to make that call. Those in DC would probably be scared to let the general population vote on matters such as the war, because they might discover more than half are against it. The other half just kisses butt to the rich fellas so they feel like they're not at the very bottom (but of course, they really are).

I do this all the time...to try to make sure the people responsible are the people responsible. I have probably made the same mistake myself. nothing personal.





new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join