Talking about a slap in the face

ND13

I heard on the news, this morning, that Iraqi officials are contemplating granting, insurgents, amnesty for their attacks upon US and Alliance troops. The **** up thing is, the insurgents that attack Iraqis will be tried. WTF!!!:mad: :mad:

Double-standard, huh????

It's okay for them to blow up the people that freed their sorry asses, but ..........

PolkThug

Its been a week now since that info was released, did Bush ever respond?

jdhdiggs

I'm still wondering why this was never published:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

ND13

PolkThug wrote:

Its been a week now since that info was released, did Bush ever respond?

The Iraqis denied it then, but the rumors re-emerged today.

ND13

jdhdiggs wrote:

I'm still wondering why this was never published:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

That was on the same channel, but I didn't get to hear the story so I wanted to wait before bringing it up.

PolkThug

jdhdiggs wrote:

I'm still wondering why this was never published:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

Why the hell have they been sitting on this? The only thing I can think of is that the munitions are so degraded that they are inert or they are so inoperable they couldn't be fired, since it looks like they were built pre-1991.

ohskigod

PolkThug wrote:

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

Why the hell have they been sitting on this? The only thing I can think of is that the munitions are so degraded that they are inert or they are so inoperable they couldn't be fired, since it looks like they were built pre-1991.

probably cant be fired, but sarin, mustard gas and what not has many other uses.

I wouldnt want to have it anywhere near me, inert or not

cheddar

Could be that they are giving liberals enough rope to hang themselves. Everytime they go on the record with Bush lied, blah, blah, blah they'll look like the idiots they are if they unearth a bunch of centrifuges or something. I'm just afraid the good stuff is sitting in Syria, or worse, Iran. Saddam did fly his MIGs over there in the first gulf war.

aaharvel

if that story is true then the rest of the boat will catch on.

Demiurge

Wait, I want to hear more about Fox News.

aaharvel

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

~Senior Defense Dept. Official to the White House

take that for what it's worth. From the title of the story, Fox might be misleading the reader to get his/her attention. But if they actually read the entire story, it's still ify.

Still, if it's solid enough to solidify our case, then I'm down with it.

ND13

I really don't care when they were made or when the build up occurred. They still had them when they weren't supposed to.

The point of this thread isn't the WMDs, but that the Iraqi officials want to let their fellow Muslim insurgents slide when they kill Americans, but if they kill Muslims, then they want to behead them or whatever their barbaric laws call for.

aaharvel

ND13 wrote:

I really don't care when they were made or when the build up occurred. They still had them when they weren't supposed to.

and we boongangoed the **** in '91 as a direct result.

ND13

aaharvel wrote:

and we boongangoed the **** in '91 as a direct result.

Oh, we most definitely **** it up in 1991. We had that SOB right there in our grasp and Schwartzkopf(sp?) just reached out and shook his **** hand. He should have put a gun to his temple and ended it right then and there.

Skynut

At this point I think they are expecting to find more, just like they always have.

When you are looking for something and do not find it you keep looking but when you are the president if you do not find it fast enough then everyone just says you are lying.

It will all come out around debate time 2008. (my guess)

aaharvel

ND13 wrote:

Oh, we most definitely **** it up in 1991. We had that SOB right there in our grasp and Schwartzkopf(sp?) just reached out and shook his **** hand. He should have put a gun to his temple and ended it right then and there.

actually I was thinking that Bush Sr's '91 escapade was somewhat of a success if you're talking from an economic standpoint. Iraq were left with zero resources (allegedly) which is why that report on Fox News has the Defense Administrator saying these weapons do not reflect anything after 1991.

I don't think the President lied. Personally mislead? Maybe. Mislead by his advisors? Definitely.

ND13

ND13 wrote:

Oh, we most definitely **** it up in 1991. We had that SOB right there in our grasp and Schwartzkopf(sp?) just reached out and shook his **** hand. He should have put a gun to his temple and ended it right then and there.

The same could be said about the Soviets at the end of WWII. If we would have listened to Patton and a couple others, we most likely could have ended the Cold War before it ever started. At that moment in time, the Soviets were practically done in from years of battling the Germans. We(us and the Brits) could have taken them while they were down.

But that's another story.

What it shows, though, is that we let politics get in the way of finishing the job or doing what needs to be done to do it right the first time.

MacLeod

aaharvel wrote:

actually I was thinking that Bush Sr's '91 escapade was somewhat of a success if you're talking from an economic standpoint. Iraq were left with zero resources (allegedly) which is why that report on Fox News has the Defense Administrator saying these weapons do not reflect anything after 1991.

I don't think the President lied. Personally mislead? Maybe. Mislead by his advisors? Definitely.

So who was Clinton, John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy misled by in the late 90's when they were saying the same things Bush has been saying? Did Bush's advisors mislead Englan? Theyre still standing by their assertion that saddam had WMD's. Nobody lied, nobody milsed.

When we kicked his **** in 91, the terms of his surrender, and in return for us not marching into Iraq and taking him out completely was that he disarm and submit to UN inspections to prove that he had complied. The burdon of proof was on him.

So after 14 years on non-compliance the UN finally agreed to RESUME hostilities against him. This was not a "pre-emtive" war, this was a resumption of action.

And personally, I dont care if he had nothing but pump action pea shooters in his arsenal, he was a tumor, terrorist, murderer and Im glad he's no longer in power. Im only sad he's still alive.

aaharvel

MacLeod wrote:

So who was Clinton, John Kerry, Dick Gephardt, Tom Daschle, Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy misled by in the late 90's when they were saying the same things Bush has been saying?

excellent point and I have no excuse for that. All I can say is they didn't invade and occupy a soverign country while in power. And I'm not suggesting that as sarcasm necessarily, it all depends on where this "weapons of mass destruction" thing is heading. All I know is as of now, and since the commission some 3-odd years ago, none have been found as it relates to post-91, and that was our only reason for war.

I understand your frustration about the whole lying bit. I don't believe that, and maybe 'misled' is a poor term of reference. But it doesn't really change anything now does it? Out troops are over there, and they should come home, BUT not in the sense that we cut and run. So in hindsight, there's really no solution as of now. Stick it out, show support for our troops, but don't necessarily swallow everything the administration feeds us. If anything's for sure about this mess, it's that nothing's for sure.

MacLeod

The troops should come home but not til the job is done. And as for invading a sovereign country, remember, if Saddam hadnt invaded Kuwait and started this whole thing he would still be in power today.

Also, the burden of proof was on HIM, not us. Those were the terms of us not turning Iraq into a parking lot back in 91. Those were the terms set by the UN and agreed to by Saddam.

Also (again), he had plenty of time to get rid of those WMD's. I truly believe most went to Syria and that Iran got some too. Seems like too much of a coincidence that now all of a sudden theyve got nukes.

Plus we've to date found those mobile chem weapons laboratories Colin Powell was talking about. We've found nuclear centrifuges buried underground with parts of one buried in a scientists back yard. We've got testimony from Saddams scientists that they were indeed making chem weapons and trying to make nukes. And finally we've got Saddam using chem weapons on his own people several years ago!!!

He had em, no doubt about it and it. And he was the one that kicked the inspectors out. If he wouldve only allowed the inspectors back in to do the job HE agreed to 14 years prior, he would still be there today.

This war is HIS fault. The blame does not belong to anybody over here.

Skynut

MacLeod wrote:

When we kicked his **** in 91, the terms of his surrender, and in return for us not marching into Iraq and taking him out completely was that he disarm and submit to UN inspections to prove that he had complied. The burdon of proof was on him.

So after 14 years on non-compliance the UN finally agreed to RESUME hostilities against him. This was not a "pre-emtive" war, this was a resumption of action.

This is such a huge issue.

He did not comply and we had a right to go back in.

Many people I know who are against the war try to fight me on this issue.
He blew it, and we did what we said we would do, this was the condition of the last cease-fire.

As for not getting him back when Bush sr. was in office, if we had, there would have been a huge uproar back then because our only job legally was to get him and his men out of Kuwait.

I think we should have targeted him from the start of the Kuwait invasion and by now we would be seeing Iraqi car comercials.

Skynut

We also need to remember that sadam was postulating that he had weapons.
He tried to make everyone believe that his country was more powerful than it was.
He wanted his neighbors to think he still could defend his country and this was part of the reason we thought he still had weapons.

I also believe that when all is said and done we will find out that sadam gave away anthing that would get him into trouble. His weapons went to syria or iran or wherever he could send them to keep us from finding them.

It will be intersting to see what the real story is. (10 or 20 years from now).

cheddar

aaharvel wrote:

Out troops are over there, and they should come home, BUT not in the sense that we cut and run. So in hindsight, there's really no solution as of now. Stick it out, show support for our troops, but don't necessarily swallow everything the administration feeds us. If anything's for sure about this mess, it's that nothing's for sure.

Muslims from so called 'friendly' states from Egypt to Saudi Arabia hate us enough to kill us. It started way before the first gulf war and will last whether we take our troops out of Iraq or not. The US didn't have any troops in Iraq when a bunch of Saudi al-Queda terrorists brought the towers down. That's for sure.

Now we do things our way and on our terms. That's the only way to keep them down. That's for sure.

aaharvel

I prefer Muenster cheese myself.

have a good weekend guys. Off to Boone, NC!

cheddar

aaharvel wrote:

I prefer Muenster cheese myself.

have a good weekend guys. Off to Boone, NC!

Was wondering when someone would get around to grilling cheddar...;)

Have fun in NC. Is it hot there? We've been over 100F here and the fire season is off to a blistering start...

Skynut

1. Muslims do not recognize Jews as God's chosen people.

2. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

3. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the Christian
World.

4. Baptists do not recognize each other at Hooters.

ND13

aaharvel wrote:

I prefer Muenster cheese myself.

+1:)

jdhdiggs

Fun video, may be blocked for some at work:

http://www.break.com/index/startswiththekids.html

limashaynut

That video says all you need to know.

MacLeod

Skynut wrote:

1. Muslims do not recognize Jews as God's chosen people.

2. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

3. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the Christian
World.

4. Baptists do not recognize each other at Hooters.

My favorite religious truth:

"Those who want to share their religious views with you seldom want you to share yours with them"

ND13

jdhdiggs wrote:

Fun video, may be blocked for some at work:

http://www.break.com/index/startswiththekids.html

Damn and all my kids want to do is play baseball and video games.:rolleyes: