There's a difference between nuclear and chemical weapons. It seems that both can be referred to as WMDs, but I imagine many people only understood WMDs in the context of the justification for war as referring to nuclear weapons, which Saddam did not have and was not actively and effectively pursuing (though he wanted it to look like he was).
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
GWB created ISIS?
Collapse
X
-
It was known by the Bush administration that Saddam had chemical weapons, because Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld had supplied Saddam with them, to help him fight Iran in the 80s. Saddam used those weapons repeatedly in the 80s to kill Iranians.
The lies told by the Bush administration were that Iraq was getting nuclear weapons, and that once Iraq got such weapons they would use them on the US or the US's allies."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Posthttp://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/05...-bush-isis.cnn
And they act like they are so intelligent, and she can't even pronounce pedantic. It's not pendantic, you clod..."Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostIt was known by the Bush administration that Saddam had chemical weapons, because Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld had supplied Saddam with them, to help him fight Iran in the 80s. Saddam used those weapons repeatedly in the 80s to kill Iranians.
The lies told by the Bush administration were that Iraq was getting nuclear weapons, and that once Iraq got such weapons they would use them on the US or the US's allies.
Even Democrats were citing WMD (including a nuke program) as reason for Bush to act.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostEven Democrats were citing WMD (including a nuke program) as reason for Bush to act.
And sadly Hillary seems keen to get involved in every single war possible. She is widely disliked by progressives for that reason, amongst others."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostTwo Democrats is not really the same thing as Democrats in general.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostNice genetic fallacy.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostWell, the genetic shoe fits nicely...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
The extent to which the Senate (and the relevant committees) were in on the con of the Iraq War will probably be lost to history. But that the White House was (or should have been) aware that they were selling a con in selling the Iraq War as at all necessary is not. Paul Krugman collected a few recent articles looking back and Josh Marshall's lays the case out pretty cleanly:
A whole lot of people who relied on accurate information coming from the top were duped. A lot of people at the top, including numerous senators, did or should have known better. But the top-level folk in the administration, most notably Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and G.W. Bush, take the lion's share of blame. Not only did they rely on what they probably knew well to be be false information but they so negligently undersold the true likely cost of the war, in terms of time, money and lives, that there can be no excusing it.
Any presidential candidate who doesn't look back and admit that the Iraq War was not only a giant ... mess up, to be polite ... but a catastrophic failure of moral character by top members of the administration doesn't deserve to take the job. Same goes for the torture program that went hand-in-hand with the cavalierness of selling the war."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostThe extent to which the Senate (and the relevant committees) were in on the con of the Iraq War will probably be lost to history. But that the White House was (or should have been) aware that they were selling a con in selling the Iraq War as at all necessary is not. Paul Krugman collected a few recent articles looking back and Josh Marshall's lays the case out pretty cleanly:
A whole lot of people who relied on accurate information coming from the top were duped. A lot of people at the top, including numerous senators, did or should have known better. But the top-level folk in the administration, most notably Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and G.W. Bush, take the lion's share of blame. Not only did they rely on what they probably knew well to be be false information but they so negligently undersold the true likely cost of the war, in terms of time, money and lives, that there can be no excusing it.
Any presidential candidate who doesn't look back and admit that the Iraq War was not only a giant ... mess up, to be polite ... but a catastrophic failure of moral character by top members of the administration doesn't deserve to take the job. Same goes for the torture program that went hand-in-hand with the cavalierness of selling the war.
Well, since you used two left-wing outfits for your response, allow me to use a right-wing one as a nice rebuttal:
And let's not forget that the Department of Defense did call these WMDs in 2006.
So did Saddam Hussein have WMDs? Yes. I will leave it up to others to decide if these were worth going to war over."Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jesse View PostWell, since you used two left-wing outfits for your response, allow me to use a right-wing one as a nice rebuttal
So: on the issue that Bush was probably the most heavily criticised and would likely have the greatest impact of the legacy, he had the evidence to disprove the criticism but chose not to.
In this story’s first outrage, it now transpires that Hussein had some 5,000 tank shells filled with sarin nerve gas, mustard gas, and other lethal agents. This is roughly ten times the arsenal that I reported that he possessed. Had I access to more accurate information back then, my pieces would have reflected the depth of Hussein’s supplies of these munitions.The sarin and mustard are old and dated from before theGulf War, much likely supplied by the US, and do not form the active stockpiling of chemical weapons that was alleged and used as an excuse to invade.“Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent,” states a June 21 declassified summary of a report from the National Ground Intelligence Center. “Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.”
And yet, as those tea-party types at CBS News reported, Hussein HAD yellowcake, and the Bush administration whisked 1,212,542 pounds of it out of Iraq in July 2008. Rather than bus the entire international press corps from Baghdad to Basra to watch this vessel give proof of Hussein’s atomic ambitions, Team Bush stayed as quiet as sleeping puppies about all of this. Meanwhile, Bush and his defenders melted in a rotisserie of liberal hatred over their “lies.”
Let us also not forget that uranium in itself does not make a WMD.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by PaprikaSo: on the issue that Bush was probably the most heavily criticised and would likely have the greatest impact of the legacy, he had the evidence to disprove the criticism but chose not to.
Originally posted by PaprikaThe sarin and mustard are old and dated from before theGulf War, much likely supplied by the US, and do not form the active stockpiling of chemical weapons that was alleged and used as an excuse to invade.
Originally posted by PaprikaLet us also not forget that uranium in itself does not make a WMD.
Wikileaks showed that for years after the war, there were still chemical weapons labs being found and possibly used by insurgents.
Again, I don't care whether anyone believes the war was correct or not. To say that there were no WMDs in Iraq is a lie."Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:33 AM
|
8 responses
65 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 03:41 PM
|
||
Started by whag, Yesterday, 10:43 PM
|
51 responses
269 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 04:42 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
83 responses
354 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 04-14-2024, 02:07 PM
|
57 responses
352 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 03:46 PM
|
Comment