Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

[Yao]

Well, let's see how the stats are on this board. Please be honest though...Decided to leave out option 4 (I believe Yao masterminded this all and is after world domination) to keep the score clean

[davetlv]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

Yao, you're asking two very different question in one here. . . . maybe add options reading:

I believe Iraq was connected to 9/11 but had no WMD's . . . .and

I beleive Iraq had WMD's but was not connected to 9/11

What d'ya think?

[Balanc3]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

I believe that saddam funded and housed terrorists for some time. He definately encouraged attacks against the U.S. and other parts of the world.

Did he have nukes - NO.
Did he have WMDs - YES.

[runningman]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

yes to both.. and if they didn't it was a start.

[superdave]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

Most people who follow the news agreed that Iraq wasn't responsible for 9/11. I remember thinking after 9/11, why Iraq? Afghanistan and terrorist groups should be the targets.

Then came the false propaganda that Iraq had WMDs and would ally itself with terrorists that would attack us again. I did however believe that Iraq had WMDs because of the following. First, the CIA and other foreign intelligence agencies agreed Iraq was making or had WMDs. CIA director, Tenet, said himself it was a slam dunk. Second, Saddam himself wouldn't allow the weapons inspectors to do their jobs.

So, I blame Bush and Tenet for the poor intelligence and I blame Saddam for not allowing the weapons inspectors to do their job.

[thesightless]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

i am sure that he had some WMD if you mean chemical weapons with short range, heck, he already used em. we all know that. a guy called checmial ali can prove that.
]
did this have anything to do with 9/11, no...

[mixu]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

Did Iraq have anything to do with 9/11? Absolutely not.

Did Iraq have WMDs? Hmm, possibly at some point but who really knows?

Like Dave says, it's two questions.

[Yao]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

Lemme add those options...need to check my subscription settings too, cos i'm not getting any notifications of replies at the moment...

Anyhow, my answer was no to both. I've read and also heard from the Dutch chairman of the Iraq commission that they already knew he didn't have them or only short range WMD's, he was more waiting for the sanctions to be lifted to restart his programme though. So even if he didn't have them, there was no way he could have been trusted. The man was actually fascinated with chemical weapons at a very young age, too...

He did use them against the Kurds, but that was somewhere in the 90's as far as I know...it's not like he was able to do that right until the US and UK invaded Iraq. So that's a non-argument to me. And like I've said before: Saddam should have been kicked to shit by the UN for fucking around with it for 10 years, but it took an overzealous and triggerhappy US president to do what the fucking UN should have done. No, I still don't like Bush's motives at all, but I sure as hell don't like the way the UN is going about what it says are it's tasks (like peacekeeping and such).

Both are a fucking joke IMO.

[Yao]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not?

yes to both.. and if they didn't it was a start.

The US govt admitted there was no connection with 9/11 later, and it was even known that Saddam actually despised Al-Qu'aida. I think he did help fund Palestinian su?cide bombers though, which could be logical given his hate against Israel and the US.

Saddam was a despot out for power and wealth, he did not operate on religious grounds.

[runningman]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

Iraq was just the beginning of the west slowly infiltrating the muslim world.. Then Syria, then Iran..

[toasty]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

I've already voted before the poll changed, but if I had the opportunity to change it, I would vote that I didn't think Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 but did think they were trying to acquire WMDs at the time. I actually vividly recall a conversation I had with a friend in my office right before we went into Iraq, and we both agreed that: (1) Iraq needed to be taken care of, but that (2) it was not an imminent threat and that we ought to focus upon getting bin Laden, the guy responsible for 9/11 first, followed by doing something (diplomatically, militiarily, something) with a hostile country we knew had nukes, North Korea, before going into Iraq.

[missdigital]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

they lied about weapons of mass destruction, they lied about the connection

[Balanc3]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

^impressive second post. I hope this scares you...



He DID have WMD's leftover from the 90's, at least 2 or 3 ended up in the hands of insurgents who tried to detonate on our troops. Anyone remember those troops that were tested for sarin exposure? Also (and this may have been a hoax by the media) someone was caught trying to smuggle weapons grade uranium (developed in germany) through Turkey into N. Iraq. It was found in a car near the boarder. I had posted pics last year.

And Saddam DID have a connection to terrorism... Al Qaeda or not, he had no business giving money to the families of palistinian suicide bombers who attacked Israel.

This is irrelevent, but didn't Sasha say in an interview that he was almost caught up in a suicide bombing? Tell me that wouldn't have hit home.

[Yao]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

What were those leftovers Balanc3? The ONLY thing I've ever seen or heard about were those overdue sarin gas containers, and that wasn't even a big load. Apart from that: leftovers aren't really what you expect when a country is running a foll blown research and production facility for that stuff, are they?

The fact is, that what HAS been found does not in any way nearly add up to what we were told was in Iraq. Of course you'll be bound to find something..."they weren't there" doesn't mean 0% in the literal sense of the word of course. But that is what some people seem to think.

As for the uranium find: that doesn't really surprise me, although Saddam could've made little use of it other than build a dirty bomb.

[Balanc3]

Re: Did you link SH to Al Q'uaida and WMD's or not? [updated]

Yea, leftovers. Regardless, this was a shell that was supposedly destroyed before 1991. Some contained mustard gas as well, here's an article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722255.stm

We now know they did not have an active WMD program, but at the time we had a whole list of reasons to invade Iraq... recorded conversations, satellite photos, documents uncovered from scientists, way to much for me to cover in this post. We were skeptical of Iraq because they always seemed to be one step ahead of the weapons inspectors, and possibly moving equipment before arrival. Some of the facts were pretty convincing although Colin Powell now admits the intelligence was inacurate. If you find the time, I would read a transcript of Powell's presentation. There was a lot more to the story - it wasn't just "oh we said they had WMDs and they lied"... no, no it was much more complicated. And when you have someone like Saddam intentionally playing cat and mouse, you can only rely on instinct and the intelligence that you have at the time.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030205-1.html

I highly doubt that Saddam would have uranium smuggled into his own country, most likely militants. Goes to show that it is possible for terror groups to obtain uranium.