AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: WMD Found In Iraq?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
You know what impresses me about this report? How utterly out of his depth GW Bush is. Someone ring up our POTUS and tell him the lack of this stuff was a sore point with lots of folks after we were advised they had them.


http//www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
Not accurate apparently

http//thinkprogress.org/2006/06/21/dod-disavows-santorum/
Even if there were WMDs, they probably weren't dangerous enough to warrant an invasion.
So there is a such thing as non lethal sarin nerve gas. So anon would you touch the liquid inside if it was handed to you since its not dangerous?
For accuracy sake,the DoD is stating emphatically that all these shells are PRE 1991 shells and this was not what Bush meant when he warned of WMD. This would explain why Bush has kept silent.
DemocratsforBush, the key phrase is 'dangerous enough'. Sarin gas, while dangerous, certainly didn't warrant an invasion. If he even did have sarin gas, which isn't itself certain.
It is read the report. Who cares what year and if those were the ones Bush mentioned. What matters is Saddam Hussein dictator of Iraq and sponsor of terror had sarin nerve gas which could be used to poison our water and food supply. Anon if you drank a glass of water with sarin and it caused serious damage and whiped out your family, would your response be well atleast it was pre 91?
Okay, but how was Saddam going to poison our water supply with his (alleged) supply of sarin nerve gas(wasn't this report invalidated)?
No the report was not invalidated. They have found 500 chemical weapons. The ones degenerated were the explosives. The chemicals themselves are lethal its the explosive thats degenerated. Thats why I said emptying the chemical into the food or water supply wasstill optional and dangerous for us.
Anon,

I'm not positive what all the thought processes of the democrats were who voted for war in Iraq,but they do seem to be claiming that it was WMD alone.

This is their mantra,"Bush lied,people died".

So,while you say WMD was not enough to go to war over with Iraq,your party disagreed with you.

The Halabja massacres involved a single digit handful of these shells to give you a frame of reference for how awful they would be in the hands of terrorists with access to the states.

Check this out(page down to bomb danger) to imagine the power of these reasonable new arty shells

http//www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/south/series9/week_four.shtml
Please note that Colmes did not refute the documentation - and did not come up with a legitimate source - just an unnamed "Department of Defense" source. Much more will come. Please do not jump to conclusions too easily.
The salient POLITICAL point is these shells are old and we who support the war effort cannot claim it is what Bush claimed. There is no sense discussing they were.

Bush was given entirely bogus information about various WMD programs from a German intelligence source code named Curveball whom everyone now knows was a monolithic mentally ill but wily LIAR from Baghdad, Iraq.

Myself,I understand why we bought it based on past history,but it was all a fabrication. There is not 1 man in America who is going to believe this is something we did not know from the early 1990s case and that is NOT what Bush told us about.

Simply put,Iraq did NOT have an active production program for any WMD. Period.

That's why Bush told us we must go to war. He made a critical error of basing too much of the justification on Curveball's bs and it has cost the USA immeasurably in credibility such that Iran might just be within 1 day of nuking up and who among the nations would trust the USA to KNOW IT?
Please reconsider your sources of information based on several incontrovertible starting points: prior to 2000 and the Bush late inauguration, we had no Intel agencies worth their names. No Humint in the continent of Africa at all. No contract agents. All intell came from coalition partners, electronic intercepts, or satellite surveillance. Ron Brown and Loral gave away our satellite codes to the PRC in exchange for brown paper bags full of illegal fundraising money from the Riaddy's and the PRC directly. Leaky Leahy gave away our electronic intercept capability, and what scant intell we received was brought in to Embassy receptionists at Middle East Embassies and left untranslated due to there only being one translator in Counter Intell - and most of the "intell" was not useful when it was translated.

When you say with certainty that such and such is so, you are accepting limited information leaked out of the Intell community with no guarantee of accuracy, or partial statements made without bothering to study follow-up info from Scott Ritter, David Kay, Duelffer, and UN Nuclear Inspector ElBaradei. Please recall that Hoekstra did interview David Kay, and Kay said that he did not think more than a dozen or so instances of WMD were findable. He said if there were 500 - then he would be shocked. Shocked and proven incompetent. But we always knew the inspectors never searched the most hotly indicated caches.

I say wait and see, because there is more info to be declassified that may shed more light on the enormity of what was found.

George Tenet explained that the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002 never said there was an ?imminent? threat. Rather, it painted an objective assessment for our policymakers of a brutal dictator who was continuing his efforts to deceive and build programs that might constantly surprise us and threaten our interests. This Estimate asked if Iraq had chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. We concluded that in some of these categories, Iraq had weapons. And that in others - where it did not have them - it was trying to develop them. The Butler report and every single coalition partner with Intell assets where we had none, all agreed - and confirmed the information as late as this year.

We know Saddam had contacted Niger and several other Yellowcake suppliers. We know that Joe Wilson lied about that and the Bush administration told the truth. We did locate innumerable tons of the high accelerant explosives necessary for many WMD delivery systems, including nuclear. We discovered tons of Yellowcake and its residue. Now a classified document was dragged out of the Intell snake pit by the House and Senate oversight committees working together, and the most senior chairman and experts in their committees say one thing, and you say another, by citing politically invested "unnamed sources."
William,

You're whistling dixie if you think the CIA is better today than 1999. Bush himself realized what a disaster his previous appointment was in Porter and had to remove him.

Men fired by Porter already have been rehired.

We don't have evidence of production in Iraq since the mid 1990s,when we do,we'll be told. Until then,I'll continue to think the CIA was and is useless and a waste of cash. FBI as well.

Maybe you ought to read of the lady in Montana whom the CIA and FBI rely on to do their work,they sure can't do much on their own

http//www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=XGXXRRMVEXYV3QFIQMGCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2006/06/26/wross26.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/26/ixnews.html
Palladin, now you are getting silly. You don't (and didn't) have the "need to know".
W did................. and he acted.

Monday morning quarterbacking does get old, you know?
Ken
palladin, I guess you didn't read my post or if you did, understand what I wrote. The U.S. Intelligence community has been under attack since the Vietnam War and Watergate. It was Admiral Stansfield Turner, under Carter, who started the death knell by firing almost the entire Humint cadre of agents. Almost forty years of Democrat hatred of Intel did much to destroy it - but as in most things, one abuses the lowly shepherd boy until the wolves come to prowl.

Reagan and Bush 41 did yeoman's work in an attempt to kick start the Intel community and did much to help, but just began an uphill battle that only lasted until Clinton's executive orders. One EO ordered Humint to be the lowest priority, establishing electronic intercepts and satellite surveillance as the new mainstay of all espionage data collection. Another EO outlawed hiring contract operatives. The third was the Gorelick Memo that put the firewall up between the FBI and the CIA. Espionage information was not allowed to be shared with law enforcement. This did Clinton the favor of saving him from prison. His illegal fundraising could not be linked to the Chinese technology transfer.

Another reason why Starr went the blue dress route rather than prove treason. When Bush 43 inherited the cuckolded Intel Community, there was one translator in all of Counter Intel - and Tenet testified there was only one agent handler in training. Before 9-11 many Clinton travesties had been remedied, but most former purposeful attacks against Intel were so thoroughly ingrained by prior vengeful appointments, that the Clinton holdovers fought all attempts to improve.

Changes were made. Before Tenet left, he said there were now over 100 agent handlers being trained - but that it would take at least a decade to make the CIA functional again.

Please do not make Bush's efforts to restore credibility and function to the CIA, NSA, FBI, DOE, and other agencies more difficult than it already is. Some of the few things we could do well with the assets available to us was to gather information via cellphone technology and banking transactions. Now the new York Times has done all it could to stop that as well.
William,

I am with you on the fact the intell community has been under assault since the mid 1970s. Problem is,it is near worthless and where is any evidence it has been enhanced since 2001?

Bush appointed Porter and they're rehiring the guys he fired already. He kept Tenet for quite some time after both the 9-11 and the WMD failures.

These people hadn't a clue the USSR was collapsing. I have no confidence in them and I have none in Bush,he is an amateurish man who believes his own propaganda. IMO. I'm a conservative,William,I do not prefer to berate alleged conservative Republicans.

Here we are in mid 2006 and we're still fighting an extended war(according to Bush's own words) with the same exact sized peacetime Army we're KILLING.

We've argued before,but dadgummit,answer me,how many 1 year tours of duty does this man think each infantry soldier needs to do???? 12000???? How large do you think our Navy will be 5 years from now after 1/2 of our sailors have been forced to do infantry service in Iraq and/or Afghanistan??? Where the HELL is the 99.8% of this nation while these people are being used like whores and mules?

The Air Force has been forcing airmen to do infantry service for quite some time now,yet Bush has not the moral certitude to speak the truth,we need a draft desperately. And you get upset with me for questioning Bush's leadership?

Ken,

Well,you may feel that way,but I think a mother in remote Montana getting on her PC and leading jihadists to demise is great,only it isn't her job,these are the things the FBI and CIA are paid billions for.

It's embarrassing and she says it herself,our government is so dimwitted she had to do it she says. She couldn't allow them free reign like those people and GW Bush do. Your hero GW Bush.

Here Ken,you can enjoy this mediocrity worrying about Russians while he is silent about his own soldier's massacre. Same circusmtances,same place,Bush speaks to the Russki people

http//gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/

Tuesday June 27. Enjoy.