I told you so...

[mixu]

I'm not disputing the fact that Saddam Hussein was an evil b**tard but the basis for war was his "WMDs" and the threat they posed...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3718150.stm

[Jenks]

then all he had to do was come out and tell the UN what happened to the stock piles of weapons he himself stated he had in 1991.

[toasty]

Re: I told you so...

The thing that is so telling about this whole WMD thing is the way that it has been spun and changed since the early days that going after Iraq was proposed.

Initially, we were going into Iraq because Saddam had WMDs.

It turned out that there weren't any actual WMDS, so the rhetoric changed slightly -- we went into Iraq b/c Saddam had weapons programs, even though he didn't have any weapons.

Once it was apparent that there were no weapons programs, either, it was switched to weapons-making capacity.

Now that it is apparent that there were no weapons, no serious weapons programs and a diminished weapons-making capacity, Bush is trumpeting about this report because it confirms that Saddam had the subjective intent to restart WMD programs in the future.

With subtle but significant changes in language, we've gradually moved from Saddam being able to launch an attack against the US with biological or chemical weapons within 45 minutes of the green light to Saddam having a desire to manufacture WMDs, a desire shared by many, many, many countries around the world. Does that justify taking our eye off of Osama bin Laden? I don't think it does...

[Jun_K]

Re: I told you so...

With subtle but significant changes in language, we've gradually moved from Saddam being able to launch an attack against the US with biological or chemical weapons within 45 minutes of the green light to Saddam having a desire to manufacture WMDs...

Just turn off the TV(for those that can)...and LIVE!
What can you do to fulfill that dream...NOT what the TV can do for you!

-Jun_K

[BSully828]

Re: I told you so...

Bush is a dumbass for backing himself into a corner about the WMD's - no question, but the fact remains that WMD's were 1 of a number of reasons the US and our allies felt we needed to get rid of Saddam. It wasn't the only reason, it wasn't the main reason, it was one of the reasons. Some blame the media for blowing that claim out of proportion, but had Bush not caved to constant badgering by reporters to pick 1 reason, he would have saved himself from all of this scrutiny. Saddam had weapons - can't argue that. Had the means to develop weapons - can't argue that either. Had shown a willingness to use those weapons - that's a fact too. And he supported terrorist acts against the allies of the US - fact #4.

Dubs should used these reasons to support the WMD claim from day one, instead he swung for the fences and thought Saddam was stupid enough to leave all his equipment lying around his house. Saddam is many things, tyrannical, brutal, sadistic, evil, psychotic, but he's not stupid. He toyed with the inspectors, challenged the UN and ignored international law all the while clearing out as much incriminating evidence as he could. Notice how all the reports state that Iraq had the capabilities to get their WMD operations back under way in no time, even though there were no "completed" weapons?

It's like when they spoof scenes from the Prohibition - cops would bust into a building only to find a bunch of people sitting around reading or something. As soon as the feds leave, they flip a switch and the whole room converts into a bar and the party starts raging again. I'm not trying to compare nuclear weapons research to a speakeasy, but you get my drift. The fact that Saddam had the capabilities to jumpstart the construction of WMDs at a moments notice is reason enough to feel the threat. Had Bush kept his cool and pressed with this type of data instead of going for broke, well I guess we'll never know what might have happened.

Fact remains that Saddam had to go, he was a very real threat for a number of reasons. People go on and on about how the whole reason for going into Iraq was just for WMDs, sorry folks - you're wrong. But on the other hand at least they finally got off the idea that he went in there for oil or to avenge his pops - that was just plain stupid.

[mixu]

Re: I told you so...

Is your memory that short?

Bush's war ultimatum speech from 17 March 2003:

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

Obviously bs

[Iraq] has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.

bs again

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,916542,00.html

The war was against international law and without the backing of the UN (I'm not defending the UN but it had the only legitimate backing for pre-meditated attack).



Toasty said it all... you can't spin a war. You can't kill 10,000+ Iraqis and then say, er, actually the war was about something else...

[Jenks]

^not going to disagree with what you just said about Bush...except...needing the backing of the UN. We don't need anything from the UN, especially permission.

[mixu]

^not going to disagree with what you just said about Bush...except...needing the backing of the UN. We don't need anything from the UN, especially permission.

OK, no-one's particularly enamoured with the UN... but as the international rules of war stand there is no legal precedent for a pre-emptive strike on a country that has not attacked or threatened you. Without any legal basis or international consensus there is nothing to stop a country like North Korea or Iran attacking the US and arguing that it was a threat to them. If the UN is abandoned then there needs to be a new body or some kind of reformation of the UN so that there can be international consensus...

My point being that countries can start attacking others and use the defence the 'coalition' in Iraq used.

[fluxus]

Re: I told you so...

Bush is a dumbass for backing himself into a corner about the WMD's - no question, but the fact remains that WMD's were 1 of a number of reasons the US and our allies felt we needed to get rid of Saddam. It wasn't the only reason, it wasn't the main reason, it was one of the reasons. Some blame the media for blowing that claim out of proportion, but had Bush not caved to constant badgering by reporters to pick 1 reason, he would have saved himself from all of this scrutiny. Saddam had weapons - can't argue that. Had the means to develop weapons - can't argue that either. Had shown a willingness to use those weapons - that's a fact too. And he supported terrorist acts against the allies of the US - fact #4.

Dubs should used these reasons to support the WMD claim from day one, instead he swung for the fences and thought Saddam was stupid enough to leave all his equipment lying around his house. Saddam is many things, tyrannical, brutal, sadistic, evil, psychotic, but he's not stupid. He toyed with the inspectors, challenged the UN and ignored international law all the while clearing out as much incriminating evidence as he could. Notice how all the reports state that Iraq had the capabilities to get their WMD operations back under way in no time, even though there were no "completed" weapons?

It's like when they spoof scenes from the Prohibition - cops would bust into a building only to find a bunch of people sitting around reading or something. As soon as the feds leave, they flip a switch and the whole room converts into a bar and the party starts raging again. I'm not trying to compare nuclear weapons research to a speakeasy, but you get my drift. The fact that Saddam had the capabilities to jumpstart the construction of WMDs at a moments notice is reason enough to feel the threat. Had Bush kept his cool and pressed with this type of data instead of going for broke, well I guess we'll never know what might have happened.

Fact remains that Saddam had to go, he was a very real threat for a number of reasons. People go on and on about how the whole reason for going into Iraq was just for WMDs, sorry folks - you're wrong. But on the other hand at least they finally got off the idea that he went in there for oil or to avenge his pops - that was just plain stupid.

Time to do some reading buddy...two words Dulfar Report. Google it and spend a half hour reading it. NO WMD's - No program and only speculation that he ever intended to pursue WMD. This is direct from the ISG report by the weapons inspectors.