GWB created ISIS?

[Paprika]

There are people who do not stick up for themselves. Maybe he even thought why bother? I have no idea why he didn't come out and just declassify the documents.

And? the left continuously said that there were no WMDs. We now know that there were still stockpiles and these stockpiles are still viable for things like dirty bombs.

I hardly care what your left says, only whether the casus belli was true, and it was not: there was no active stockpiling of WMDs: chemical, nuclear or biological. Both the sarin/mustard gas and the yellowcake dated before the Gulf War.

The casus belli was not merely that Iraq possessed chemical weapons (which would be massively ironical since US supplied it with many in the past).

As for yellowcake, because it is radioactive at such a high potency, it does not need to be enriched in order to be used as a small nuclear device. Again, especially in a dirty bomb. We are not talking about a mushroom cloud, but we are talking about the release of high quantities of radiation.

It could be. But it was not found in a bomb, hence it was not a weapon (let alone a WMD - which would require enriched weapons-grade uranium). That's like saying that "you have steel, therefore you have katanas because steel can be used to make katanas "

By that logic countries from Iran to Australia to Japan already possess WMDs because they have uranium that could potentially be used as a WMD.

[Jesse]

I hardly care what your left says, only whether the casus belli was true, and it was not: there was no active stockpiling of WMDs: chemical, nuclear or biological. Both the sarin/mustard gas and the yellowcake dated before the Gulf War.

The casus belli was not merely that Iraq possessed chemical weapons (which would be massively ironical since US supplied it with many in the past).

Refresh my memory. Did Bush say that Saddam was on the cusp of getting a nuclear bomb and was going to kill us all? Or did the Administration say they believed he was stockpiling WMDs? The latter of course was true.

It could be. But it was not found in a bomb, hence it was not a weapon (let alone a WMD - which would require enriched weapons-grade uranium). That's like saying that "you have steel, therefore you have katanas because steel can be used to make katanas "

By that logic countries from Iran to Australia to Japan already possess WMDs because they have uranium that could potentially be used as a WMD.

Indeed it could be. And it's the reason why we shipped off the yellowcake to Canada in secret. You seem to be hung up on not getting the term WMD correct. Sarin gas and other chemical weapons are WMDs, as the DOD reports. Yellowcake can be WMDs if it's in a dirty bomb. I never said yellowcake by itself is a WMD. You can choose to ignore the fact that chemical weapons are WMDs, but the DOD and rest of the international community disagrees.

[rogue06]

I hardly care what your left says, only whether the casus belli was true, and it was not: there was no active stockpiling of WMDs: chemical, nuclear or biological. Both the sarin/mustard gas and the yellowcake dated before the Gulf War.

The casus belli was not merely that Iraq possessed chemical weapons (which would be massively ironical since US supplied it with many in the past).



It could be. But it was not found in a bomb, hence it was not a weapon (let alone a WMD - which would require enriched weapons-grade uranium). That's like saying that "you have steel, therefore you have katanas because steel can be used to make katanas "

By that logic countries from Iran to Australia to Japan already possess WMDs because they have uranium that could potentially be used as a WMD.

Reports have surfaced that soldiers found over 5000 chemical warheads and bombs after the 2003 invasion of Iraq but this was kept secret at the time precisely because of how the U.S. turned a blind eye toward their development and use during the Iraq-Iran War.

[Jesse]

That's like saying that "you have steel, therefore you have katanas because steel can be used to make katanas "

Great comparison. It's not like one of those elements can destroy your organs just by standing next to it and the other can't.

[Bill the Cat]

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.

This statement alone shows how inept you are at this conversation. You know positively ZIP about military document classification and release (Something I have been dealing with directly for almost 30 years). This level of ignorance alone should exclude you from the discussion, but you are way too prideful to stop your diarrhea of the keyboard. So. please do continue. I am quite amused at your confident ignorance.

[Paprika]

Refresh my memory. Did Bush say that Saddam was on the cusp of getting a nuclear bomb and was going to kill us all? Or did the Administration say they believed he was stockpiling WMDs? The latter of course was true.

The latter, if I recall correctly, which was of course false.

Indeed it could be. And it's the reason why we shipped off the yellowcake to Canada in secret. You seem to be hung up on not getting the term WMD correct. Sarin gas and other chemical weapons are WMDs, as the DOD reports. Yellowcake can be WMDs if it's in a dirty bomb. I never said yellowcake by itself is a WMD.

Glad that we're agreed that possession of yellowcake is not possession of WMDs.

You can choose to ignore the fact that chemical weapons are WMDs, but the DOD and rest of the international community disagrees.

No one disputes that the US gave Iraq chemical weapons, or that Iraq held on to some of them.

Great comparison. It's not like one of those elements can destroy your organs just by standing next to it and the other can't.

Which is irrelevant to whether possessing uranium in the form of yellowcake equals possessing WMDs. Clearly it isn't, and I'm glad you agree, as above.

[Paprika]

This statement alone shows how inept you are at this conversation. You know positively ZIP about military document classification and release (Something I have been dealing with directly for almost 30 years). This level of ignorance alone should exclude you from the discussion, but you are way too prideful to stop your diarrhea of the keyboard. So. please do continue. I am quite amused at your confident ignorance.

What precisely does this credential-waving have to do with the facts or the argument? Nothing.

But go on, keep wriggling and trying to evade the facts.

[Paprika]

Reports have surfaced that soldiers found over 5000 chemical warheads and bombs after the 2003 invasion of Iraq but this was kept secret at the time precisely because of how the U.S. turned a blind eye toward their development and use during the Iraq-Iran War.

Pray tell what repeating what Jesse brought up accomplishes.

[Bill the Cat]

What precisely does this credential-waving have to do with the facts or the argument? Nothing.

When you are too ignorant to understand even the most basic points of document declassification, and still continue to act like you do, you deserve nothing more than ridicule.

But go on, keep wriggling and trying to evade the facts.

You know nothing of US Military policies outside of what you read about from Google (which is woefully insufficient). For you to think you know more than that is a flat out joke. My (and Yttrium's for that matter) experiences and expertise are far more relevant to the topic than your ignorant parroting.

[rogue06]

Pray tell what repeating what Jesse brought up accomplishes.

What are you talking about? I looked at what he said after you made the post that I responded to and I don't see any mention of anything that I brought up,

[seanD]

Refresh my memory. Did Bush say that Saddam was on the cusp of getting a nuclear bomb and was going to kill us all? Or did the Administration say they believed he was stockpiling WMDs? The latter of course was true.

No, he said both...

There is a reason. We have experienced the horror of September 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing -- in fact they would be eager -- to use a biological, or chemical, or a nuclear weapon.

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.

As President Kennedy said in October of 1962: "Neither the United States of America nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nation's security to constitute maximum peril."

Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst, and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring.

[Jesse]

The latter, if I recall correctly, which was of course false.

Then we both remember the same thing. And it was indeed true. This is not new information. We have known for awhile now that Saddam lied about still having stockpiles of WMDs.

Glad that we're agreed that possession of yellowcake is not possession of WMDs.

We do. Yellowcake are possible WMDs.

No one disputes that the US gave Iraq chemical weapons, or that Iraq held on to some of them.

Good. Then we agree Iraq has WMDs. Yet it's still claimed that they do/did not by the left.

Which is irrelevant to whether possessing uranium in the form of yellowcake equals possessing WMDs. Clearly it isn't, and I'm glad you agree, as above.

Which doesn't make the comparison you made less dumb. Possession of yellowcake uranium is not the same as being in possession of steel.

[Jesse]

No, he said both...

I do not see a problem with any of those quotes. Our enemies would indeed use biological, chemical, or a nuclear weapon against us if they get the chance.

Things that could happen is a far cry from what actually happened, as Paprika told me. No one said Saddam had a nuclear weapon and was preparing to use it.

Saddam did indeed deceive the rest of the world. Claiming he no longer had stockpiles of WMDs when in fact he did.

[Paprika]

Then we both remember the same thing. And it was indeed true. This is not new information. We have known for awhile now that Saddam lied about still having stockpiles of WMDs.

He had old weapons at least a decade old that were left to rust and degrade; he was not actively stockpiling chemical WMDs as claimed.

Which doesn't make the comparison you made less dumb. Possession of yellowcake uranium is not the same as being in possession of steel.

No, you imbecile. Possession of the raw material is not possession of the weapon. That's the point of the analogy which is not nullified by going "but but but uranium is radioactive "

[Paprika]

What are you talking about? I looked at what he said after you made the post that I responded to and I don't see any mention of anything that I brought up,

Well, since you used two left-wing outfits for your response, allow me to use a right-wing one as a nice rebuttal:

Source: National Review

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.

© Copyright Original Source

Reports have surfaced that soldiers found over 5000 chemical warheads and bombs after the 2003 invasion of Iraq but this was kept secret at the time precisely because of how the U.S. turned a blind eye toward their development and use during the Iraq-Iran War.

Bolding added, since you can't otherwise see it.