Trying to tie GW to something that happend 20 years ago is extremely weak crabs. But if that's all you have, that's all you have. You can certainly fall for it and believe it all you want. Nothing get's in your way for your hatred of the President.
Yes we are suckers, along with the U.N. and every other country that believed he had WMDs.
of course he had 'em....we sold them to him!
the U.N. believed that they were destroyed, but of course the ones we gave him to attack Iran with (and if a few hundred thousand Kurds get in the way, oh well) got used...killing hundreds of thousands and filling mass graves.
but to attack someone for having something that we sold to them...what a sucker's ploy.
the hypocrisy and pure political motives of liberals is evident by their opposition in Iraq. Saddam was killing people but liberals didn't want to send in the military. But in the 1990's liberals were all for sending US troops into the Balkans where Milosevic was killing people. The only difference-the party in control of the White House.
don't you know when Saddam gassed all those Kurds?
not surprised that the ones who say he's this evil guy don't seem to know when he did all these bad things.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in 1983 and 1984, visited Baghdad to meet several times with Saddam Hussein.
In 1984, the State Department arranged for the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. Four years later The Los Angeles Times reported that "American-built helicopters" were used to gas Kurdish civilians. In March 1988 up to 6,800 Kurds were gassed to death in Halabja by Hussein's troops. In response the U.S. State Department attempted, according to a recent report in The International Herald Tribune, to place blame for the gassing also on the Iranians despite no evidence of Iranian involvement. When the UN Security Council passed a resolution to censure the Halabja attack it called on "both sides to refrain from the future use of chemical weapons."
In July 1990, days before Iraq invaded Kuwait, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein and gave him what many believe to be a green light for invading Kuwait.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in 1983 and 1984, visited Baghdad to meet several times with Saddam Hussein.
Wasn't this before he gassed the Kurds?
In July 1990, days before Iraq invaded Kuwait, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein and gave him what many believe to be a green light for invading Kuwait.
and many do not believe it. I am sure the many you refer to are the extreme left wingers and Saddam apologists.
you are missing the point. He was over there to sell the gas and make sure it got used.
In March of 1984, with the Iran-Iraq war growing more brutal by the day, Rumsfeld was back in Baghdad for meetings with then-Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz. On the day of his visit, March 24th, UPI reported from the United Nations: “Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers in the 43-month Persian Gulf War between Iran and Iraq, a team of U.N. experts has concluded... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, U.S. presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with Foreign Minister Tarek Aziz (sic) on the Gulf war before leaving for an unspecified destination.”
where did he get the nerve gas?
Saddam: hiya Rummy...did you see the papers today, I used that nerve gas you told us to try out for you
Rumsfeld: okay...now...Kuwait. Can we get a war going with Kuwait? This Iran thing is just about all played out and besides, I think Congress is catching on to the arms for hostages deals we do out of the basement. We need a NEW WAR, buddy...and Saddam...I know that you are our man in the middle east when it comes to makin' trouble for us....now excuse me, 'cause I have to go see about a private sector job where I can make some money off of all this war we are making.
A 1994 congressional inquiry also found that dozens of biological agents, including various strains of anthrax, had been shipped to Iraq by US companies, under licence from the commerce department.
and remember that little anthrax deal we had where someone was sending it to Senators and such? what was that all about? turns out it's homegrown...but of course that doesn't stop us from saying that those Iraqi who have anthrax, because we got the reciepts right here.
London’s Sun says bosses at the BBC have told their reporters not to refer to Saddam Hussein as a ‘dictator’ because to do so would compromise its neutrality.
Staff have been informed that they are instead to refer to him as “the deposed former president.”
The Beeb sent out the instructions to reporters on its website. A spokeswoman said it was merely a reminder “of the need to use neutral language.”
Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden will issue the next of his video messages after a massive attack on US territory, Saudi weekly Al-Majallah quotes an official of the terror network as saying, in its next edition.
Quoting an e-mail received from a man who goes by the name of Abu Mohammed al-Ablaj, the weekly reports that "an emissary of bin Laden has informed me that the al-Qaeda chief's (next) appearance (on video cassette) will come after a deadly, far-reaching operation on American territory.
"In the video, bin Laden will evoke the success of his backers in once again striking the United States to the core and America's failure (in its anti-terrorist campaign) both outside and inside the country," the al-Qaeda official was reported as saying in the e-mail.
"Bin Laden will also reaffirm al-Qaeda's determination to continue its war against America, until its defeat," said the message from Ablaj, who last February announced to the Saudi weekly that bin Laden would release a video statement after the US-led war in Iraq.
The most recent message alleged to be from bin Laden was an audiotape broadcast last week by Dubai-based Al-Arabiya satellite channel, but its Qatar-based rival Al-Jazeera said the tape was the same one it had aired more extensively on October 18.
Both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, the leading Arab news channels, have been accused by US officials of inciting violence by airing such tapes of al-Qaeda leaders as well as those of deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein before he was captured by US forces on December 13. They have denied the charge.
A day before the alleged bin Laden tape was aired, Al-Jazeera broadcast a tape purported to be from bin Laden's right-hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri, in which he said the Americans were beginning to stagger under the blows of al-Qaeda.
A US intelligence official said in Washington that CIA analysts had concluded that the Zawahiri tape was "most likely" authentic.
The report in the Saudi weekly came as Americans celebrated a nervous Christmas under heightened terrorist alerts and tight security nationwide.
The following is an email message sent to all First Marine Air Wing and Marine Wing Support Squadron 171 from LtCol Scot S. Seitz, Commanding Officer, on Monday, December 1, 2003. It's worth reading and sharing.
Marines and Sailors,
As we approach the end of the year, I think it is important to share a few thoughts about what you've accomplished directly, in some cases, and indirectly in many others. I am speaking about what the Bush Administration and each of you has contributed by wearing the uniform, because the fact that you wear the uniform contributes 100% to the capability of the nation to send a few onto the field to execute national policy. As you read about these achievements you are a part of, I would call your attention to two things:
1. This is good news that hasn't been fit to print or report on TV. 2. It is much easier to point out the errors a man makes when he makes the tough decisions, rarely is the positive as aggressively pursued.
Since President Bush declared an end to major combat on May 1. . . .. . . the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty.... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens.
.. . . nearly all of Iraq's 400 courts are functioning. .. . . the Iraqi judiciary is fully independent. .. . . on Monday, October 6, power generation hit 4,518 megawatts-exceeding the prewar average. .. . . all 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open, as are nearly all primary and secondary schools.
.. . . by October 1, Coalition forces had rehab-ed over 1,500 schools-500 more than scheduled. .. . . teachers earn from 12 to 25 times their former salaries. .. . . all 240 hospitals and more than 1,200 clinics are open. .. . . doctors salaries are at least eight times what they were under Saddam.
.. . . pharmaceutical distribution has gone from essentially nothing to 700 tons in May to a current total of 12,000 tons.
.. . . the Coalition has helped administer over 22 million vaccinations to Iraq's children. .. . . a Coalition program has cleared over 14,000 kilometers of Iraq's 27,000 kilometers of weed-choked canals which now irrigate tens of thousands of farms. This project has created jobs for more than 100,000 Iraqi men and
women. .. . . we have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and over two-thirds of the potable water production.
.. . . there are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000 by year-end. .. . . the wheels of commerce are turning. From bicycles to satellite dishes to cars and trucks, businesses are coming to life in all major cities and towns.
.. . . 95 percent of all prewar bank customers have service and first-time customers are opening accounts daily. .. . . Iraqi banks are making loans to finance businesses. .. . . the central bank is fully independent. .. . . Iraq has one of the world's most growth-oriented investment and banking laws. .. . . Iraq has a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years. .. . . satellite TV dishes are legal. .. . . foreign journalists aren't on 10-day visas paying mandatory and extortionate fees to the Ministry of Information for "minders" and other government spies.
.. . . there is no Ministry of Information. .. . . there are more than 170 newspapers. .. . . you can buy satellite dishes on what seems like every street corner. .. . . foreign journalists (and everyone else) are free to come and go. .. . . a nation that had not one single element-legislative, judicial or executive-of a representative government, now does.
.. . . in Baghdad alone, residents have selected 88 advisory councils. Baghdad's first democratic transfer of power in 35 years happened when the city council elected its new chairman.
.. . . today in Iraq, chambers of commerce, business, school and professional organizations are electing their leaders all over the country.
.. . . 25 ministers, selected by the most representative governing body in Iraq's history, run the day-to-day business of government.
.. . . the Iraqi government regularly participates in international events. Since July, the Iraqi government has been represented in over two dozen international meetings, including those of the UN General Assembly, the Arab
League, the World Bank and IMF and, today, the Islamic Conference Summit. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs today announced that it is reopening over 30 Iraqi embassies around the world.
.. . . Shia religious festivals that were all but banned, aren't. .. . . for the first time in 35 years, in Karbala thousands of Shiites celebrate the pilgrimage of the 12th Imam. .. . . the Coalition has completed over 13,000 reconstruction projects, large and small, as part of a strategic plan for the reconstruction of Iraq.
.. . . Uday and Qusay are dead-and no longer feeding innocent Iraqis to the zoo lions, raping the young daughters of local leaders to force cooperation, torturing Iraq's soccer players for losing games, or murdering critics.
.. . . children aren't imprisoned or murdered when their parents disagree with the government. .. . . political opponents aren't imprisoned, tortured, executed, maimed, or are forced to watch their families die for disagreeing with Saddam.
.. . . millions of longsuffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror. .. . . Saudis will hold municipal elections. .. . . Qatar is reforming education to give more choices to parents. .. . . Jordan is accelerating market economic reforms. .. . . the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian-a Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace.
.. . . Saddam is gone. .. . . Iraq is free. .. . . President Bush has not faltered or failed. .. . . Yet, little or none of this information has been published by the Press corps that prides itself on bringing you all the news that's important.
Iraq under US-led control has come further in six months than Germany did in seven years or Japan did in nine years following WWII. Military deaths from fanatic Nazi's and Japanese numbered in the thousands and continued
for over three years after WWII victory was declared. It took the US over four months to clear away the twin tower debris, let alone attempt to build something else in its place.
Now, take into account that almost every Democrat leader in the House and Senate has fought President Bush on every aspect of his handling of this country's war and the post-war reconstruction, and that they continue to claim on a daily basis on national TV that this conflict has been a failure. Taking everything into consideration, event the unfortunate loss of our brothers and sisters in this conflict, do you think anyone else in the world could have accomplished as much as the United States and the Bush administration in so short a period of time?
These are things worth writing about. Get the word out. Write to someone you think may be able to influence our Congress or the press to tell the story. Above all, be proud that you are a part of this historical precedent.
Special report by DEBKAfile`s intelligence sources January 8, 2004, 5:58 PM (GMT+02:00)
A street that changed its name Iran announced prematurely this week that it had renewed full diplomatic relations with Egypt. It added, as a sweetener, that a street in Tehran had been renamed Intifada street from Khaled Islambuli street, after the Egyptian who assassinated Anwar Sadat in 1981. Egypt denied that ties had yet been resumed, but agreed that contacts between the two countries were continuing. DEBKAfile reports on these contacts, which hinge on the extradition of the Egyptian terrorists that Iran says it is holding. In May 2003, a month after the fall of Baghdad, Iran requested that an Egyptian delegation should come to Tehran to discuss renewing relations. The delegation went, and since then three or four senior Egyptian diplomats and intelligence people have been stationed in Tehran. The Iranians, as a gesture of goodwill, told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal, a senior operative of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda, who was responsible for organizing the May 12 2003 attack on Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital, was in Iran. They later said that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the head of Islamic Jihad and Osama’s bin Laden’s deputy, was also in Iran. They also named Showqi Islambuli , the brother of President Sadat’s assassin, and gave Egypt a list of some 60 Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives. The Egyptians want some of these men extradited, and Iran appeared to be carrying out similar negotiations with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and the US. Jordan wants the extradition of Abu Mus’ab Lal-Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative whom the Turks accuse of being responsible for attacks on Jewish and British buildings in Istanbul in November 2003. Iran apparently agreed that the named men should be extradited to their country of citizenship. But what is totally unclear is whether all or any of these men are actually detained by the Iranian authorities or are just known to have passed through Iranian territory. Their presence is said to be known to the Iranian authorities and they appear to have been, or are being, kept under surveillance. But does it go beyond this? In fact, the muddle goes even deeper. The Iranians eventually told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal , who had presented an Egyptian passport, was now presenting a Kuwaiti one. Even more confusingly, they said that al-Zawahiri’s name was on the list by mistake. It appeared that forged passports, perhaps originating in Bahrain, were around the place. Kuwait and Bahrain then told Iran that they had no such citizens and were not interested in extradition. On July 22 2003 Egypt made its position clear. General Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence minister, arrived on a secret visit toTehran with a message from President Hosni Mubarak to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei : “ Either you extradite the Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives that you have said you have or diplomatic ties will not be resumed.” DEBKAfile sources report that Suleiman waited all August in Tehran without getting a clear answer from Iran, and eventually returned empty-handed. This remains Egypt’s position. The latest twist in the story was reported by DEBKA-Net-Weekly on January 2 2004. To subscribe to DEBKA-Net-Weekly click HERE . On December 29 Iran surprised Egypt and the US by saying it had arrested Ahmad Khasan al-Nadush Khayer (nom de guerre Siyasiya), the operation chief of Islamic Jihad’s and al-Qaeda’s special forces. Khayer, an Egyptian whose real name is Abdullah Muhammad Ragab, is a close associate of al-Zawahiri. A senior official told DEBKAfile that US counter-terrorist authorities would like nothing better than to speak with Khayer: “If anyone in al-Qaeda knows when and where the fundamentalist terrorists mean to strike in the coming days or hours, Siyasiya is that man. But we have to be realistic. After all, we are dealing with the Iranians and aside from their claim to have arrested him. We may not hear a word of him ever again.” The very fact that Iran reported that it was holding Khayer shows that it is renewing its efforts to achieve ties with Egypt. But the history of evasions and contradictions makes Egypt ultra-cautious. Egypt’s foreign minister, Ahmed Maher, said on January 7th that the two countries are discussing the possibility of renewing their relations. This, in effect, is a repetition of Omar Suleiman’s message last summer: ”Extradite wanted Egyptian terrorists and we will resume diplomatic relations. Otherwise not.”
Former US president Bill Clinton said in October during a visit to Portugal that he was convinced Iraq had weapons of mass destruction up until the fall of Saddam Hussein, Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso said...
Danish and Icelandic troops have uncovered a cache of 36 shells buried in the Iraqi desert, and preliminary tests showed they contained a liquid blister agent, the Danish military said Saturday.
The 120mm mortar shells were thought to be leftovers from the eight-year war between Iraq and neighboring Iran, which ended in 1988, said U.S. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt.
The shells were found by Danish engineering troops and Icelandic de-miners near Al Quarnah, north of the city of Basra where Denmark's 410 troops are based, the Danish Army Operational Command said in a written statement.
The shells were wrapped in plastic but had been damaged, and they appeared to have been buried for at least 10 years, the statement said.
It said British experts did a preliminary test and said the shells contained "blister gas," but did not elaborate.
Before the war, the United States alleged Iraq still had stockpiles of mustard gas, a World War I-era blister agent that is stored in liquid form. U.S. intelligence officials also claimed Iraq had sarin, cyclosarin and VX, which are extremely deadly nerve agents.
"We're doing some preliminary tests to ensure that if they do contain any kind of blister agent that we can dispose of them properly," Kimmitt said.
The Danish military emphasized that the tests were not definitive. In the weeks after the Iraq war, the U.S.-led coalition found several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals.
Other discoveries turned out to be old caches that had already been tagged by United Nations inspectors and were scheduled for destruction.
Saddam Hussein's regime used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during that war and killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians in a chemical attack on the northern city of Halabja in 1988.
President Bush said the United States was going to war to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, but a nine-month search by a succession of U.S. teams has failed to find any current stockpiles of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal.
In October, Dutch marines found several dozen artillery shells from the 1991 Gulf War in the southern Iraqi town of Samawah, but the shells contained no biological or chemical agents. Samawah is 100 miles west of the southern region where the Danes discovered shells Saturday
Thx, if 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles would have been found armed in any way, Taraka would have found a way around it. It makes no difference.
Thx, if 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles would have been found armed in any way, Taraka would have found a way around it. It makes no difference.
I don't doubt it. There are some here that freely admit that Saddam had WMD's, then twist it the other way and simply blame the US for having them.
Now, it may be true that Saddam got them from US companies, but you can't have it both ways. You can't use it as a plus in one argument, then turn around and use it as a minus in another.
Might surprise you to learn this: I agree with you.
My issue about the war is this: What's the reason for going to war? If the reason was to remove a war criminal, then why not say so and make a case for it and build an international coalition to do it? Why not pursue an indictment in The Hague and put together a truly international force to remove him?
People who CANNOT NOW defend the premises given by Bush: nuclear weapons, WMDs, ties to al-queda, ties to 9/11, want to latch onto a default reason for going to war that was never a part of the arguments for war. Was there any discussion of removing dictatorships and replacing them with democracies? NO! Of course not!
But it isn't just the reasons given for going to war that energizes my opposition to it, but the DOCTRINE enacted in pursuit of it. Bush falsified the reasons for going to war, and did so in order to articulate a doctrine that embraces international anarchy and pre-emptive warfare, two ideas EXPRESSLY denounced during the Nuremburg trials and in the UN Charter. WHY? Because that doctrine was the doctrine of Adolph Hitler and his Axis Allies, THAT'S WHY!
Bush has used the "war on terror" to push for an imperialist war against Iraq (whtever other excuses were used to justify it, true or not) and articulate an american imperial doctrine that ends multilateral security and places a global war in the future of mankind. For THAT, I oppose him, and I oppose this war.
My issue about the war is this: What's the reason for going to war? If the reason was to remove a war criminal, then why not say so and make a case for it and build an international coalition to do it? Why not pursue an indictment in The Hague and put together a truly international force to remove him?
WMD's were not the only reason given for going to war in Iraq, it's simply the one that the liberal extremists have latched onto.
We tried it your way for 12 years using the UN and got no where.
People who CANNOT NOW defend the premises given by Bush: nuclear weapons, WMDs, ties to al-queda, ties to 9/11, want to latch onto a default reason for going to war that was never a part of the arguments for war. Was there any discussion of removing dictatorships and replacing them with democracies? NO! Of course not!
I simply don't care what reason was presented and haven't from the beginning. If you go back and read what I've posted, I've always said I don't care. Besides, I still think there are WMD's out there and we just haven't found them. Even Clinton has admitted that he believed and believes that there are WMD's in Iraq.
But it isn't just the reasons given for going to war that energizes my opposition to it, but the DOCTRINE enacted in pursuit of it. Bush falsified the reasons for going to war, and did so in order to articulate a doctrine that embraces international anarchy and pre-emptive warfare, two ideas EXPRESSLY denounced during the Nuremburg trials and in the UN Charter. WHY? Because that doctrine was the doctrine of Adolph Hitler and his Axis Allies, THAT'S WHY!
It's still to be seen if Dubya falsified anyting. If it does come to be true, I'll be on your side on this.
Bush has used the "war on terror" to push for an imperialist war against Iraq (whtever other excuses were used to justify it, true or not) and articulate an american imperial doctrine that ends multilateral security and places a global war in the future of mankind. For THAT, I oppose him, and I oppose this war.
Well, you lost me when you spewed "imperialist". I'm surprised you didn't say "no blood for oil" as well.
Three specific reasons were given by Bush, in the official letter he sent to Congress, for going to war against Iraq.
One: an imminent threat to the security of the US from Iraq in regard to WMDs. Two: The failure (he claims) of multilateral security (UN) to deal with that threat. Three: Iraq (he claims) was one of those nations who aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on 9/11.
As for number one: IF WMDs are found, it is HIGHLY unlikely that they will be found in the quantity and readiness that was claimed by Bush and Blair and Powell and Cheney and others. Thus, the claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat so great that addressing it required an exception to the UN Charter is HIGHLY unlikely.
As for number two: The sorry state of Iraq's infrastructure and military prior to the war are a testament against the idea that multilateral security failed to contain the threat.
As for number three: Bush himself admitted this was not true in September 2003, yet he lied and said that it was never asserted by him or his administration. His official letter to Congress proves that he lied, either in that letter or afterwards. Since I can't imagine why he would lie and say that Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attacks if in fact they were, I conclude that he lied to Congress.
I simply don't care what reason was presented
So any reason to go to war is ok with you? If so, then you have embraced international anarchy, the worldview of Hitler. That isn't your worldview, is it?
Even Clinton has admitted that he believed and believes that there are WMD's in Iraq.
I haven't seen a direct quote from Clinton on that.
It's still to be seen if Dubya falsified anyting.
I refer you to the statement I made about Bush's official statement that the US went to war against Iraq because of it's alleged ties to 9/11.
you lost me when you spewed "imperialist"
Maybe you have a different name for a hegemonic power that seeks to suspend international law and dominate the world for the sake of material gain.
Three specific reasons were given by Bush, in the official letter he sent to Congress, for going to war against Iraq.
One: an imminent threat to the security of the US from Iraq in regard to WMDs.
This is why I do not believe anything the left says. Bush specifically said there was not an imminent threat. The truth does not seem to deter the left from saying other wise.
Three: Iraq (he claims) was one of those nations who aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on 9/11.
You would have to show me this one because I do not recall that Bush made sucha direct link. See above why I have my doubts about your allegations.
it's a con game...and you are suckers for believing it.
Yes we are suckers, along with the U.N. and every other country that believed he had WMDs.
Trying to tie GW to something that happend 20 years ago is extremely weak crabs. But if that's all you have, that's all you have. You can certainly fall for it and believe it all you want. Nothing get's in your way for your hatred of the President.
Dean and crabs have both removed all doubt.
crabs has now stated many times that the U.S. sold saddam WMD's.
Well isn't that the proof that saddam had them?
There's the justification the liberals said we didn't have.
Doesn't matter how he got them. He had them.
of course he had 'em....we sold them to him!
the U.N. believed that they were destroyed, but of course the ones we gave him to attack Iran with (and if a few hundred thousand Kurds get in the way, oh well) got used...killing hundreds of thousands and filling mass graves.
but to attack someone for having something that we sold to them...what a sucker's ploy.
so, those who finance terrorists and sell them WoMD don't matter?
really?
"had" is past tense.
if possession of these things warrents being invaded and if we can't keep track of them, WTF are we doing selling the shit in the first place?
it's war profiteering, that's what.
it's a scam.
and they are playing it like a violin.
Come on Torp, stab me with that spoon already!
the hypocrisy and pure political motives of liberals is evident by their opposition in Iraq. Saddam was killing people but liberals didn't want to send in the military. But in the 1990's liberals were all for sending US troops into the Balkans where Milosevic was killing people. The only difference-the party in control of the White House.
Saddam was killing people when Bush was sending Cheney over to sell them more WoMD.
The U.N. "believed" blah...blah...blah.
Ok crabs. If you want to base your case on that, that's fine.
I'm looking for the spoon JT.
I'll take that as you not having any actual response to what was said
As usual, you have very little to respond to.
exactly
Saddam was killing people when Bush was sending Cheney over to sell them more WoMD.
and when was that?
don't you know when Saddam gassed all those Kurds?
not surprised that the ones who say he's this evil guy don't seem to know when he did all these bad things.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in 1983 and 1984, visited Baghdad to meet several times with Saddam Hussein.
Wasn't this before he gassed the Kurds?
In July 1990, days before Iraq invaded Kuwait, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein and gave him what many believe to be a green light for invading Kuwait.
and many do not believe it. I am sure the many you refer to are the extreme left wingers and Saddam apologists.
it war profiteering
you are being duped
War? What war? We're at war? Damn, I need a shower.
before...during...after.
you are missing the point. He was over there to sell the gas and make sure it got used.
where did he get the nerve gas?
Saddam: hiya Rummy...did you see the papers today, I used that nerve gas you told us to try out for you
Rumsfeld: okay...now...Kuwait. Can we get a war going with Kuwait? This Iran thing is just about all played out and besides, I think Congress is catching on to the arms for hostages deals we do out of the basement. We need a NEW WAR, buddy...and Saddam...I know that you are our man in the middle east when it comes to makin' trouble for us....now excuse me, 'cause I have to go see about a private sector job where I can make some money off of all this war we are making.
you are being duped
No you have not yet succeeded. I know you will keep trying.
Duuude. I always miss the point. Psssst, can you give me a hint?
and remember that little anthrax deal we had where someone was sending it to Senators and such? what was that all about? turns out it's homegrown...but of course that doesn't stop us from saying that those Iraqi who have anthrax, because we got the reciepts right here.
That's a better pic crabs. I can see you more clearly now.
Hey Scribey, What war? JT should let you come here more often. WE will keep you informed.
London’s Sun says bosses at the BBC have told their reporters not to refer to Saddam Hussein as a ‘dictator’ because to do so would compromise its neutrality.
Staff have been informed that they are instead to refer to him as “the deposed former president.”
The Beeb sent out the instructions to reporters on its website. A spokeswoman said it was merely a reminder “of the need to use neutral language.”
Al-Qaeda issues fresh threat
December 26, 2003 - 8:05AM
Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden will issue the next of his video messages after a massive attack on US territory, Saudi weekly Al-Majallah quotes an official of the terror network as saying, in its next edition.
Quoting an e-mail received from a man who goes by the name of Abu Mohammed al-Ablaj, the weekly reports that "an emissary of bin Laden has informed me that the al-Qaeda chief's (next) appearance (on video cassette) will come after a deadly, far-reaching operation on American territory.
"In the video, bin Laden will evoke the success of his backers in once again striking the United States to the core and America's failure (in its anti-terrorist campaign) both outside and inside the country," the al-Qaeda official was reported as saying in the e-mail.
"Bin Laden will also reaffirm al-Qaeda's determination to continue its war against America, until its defeat," said the message from Ablaj, who last February announced to the Saudi weekly that bin Laden would release a video statement after the US-led war in Iraq.
The most recent message alleged to be from bin Laden was an audiotape broadcast last week by Dubai-based Al-Arabiya satellite channel, but its Qatar-based rival Al-Jazeera said the tape was the same one it had aired more extensively on October 18.
Both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, the leading Arab news channels, have been accused by US officials of inciting violence by airing such tapes of al-Qaeda leaders as well as those of deposed Iraqi president Saddam Hussein before he was captured by US forces on December 13. They have denied the charge.
A day before the alleged bin Laden tape was aired, Al-Jazeera broadcast a tape purported to be from bin Laden's right-hand man Ayman al-Zawahiri, in which he said the Americans were beginning to stagger under the blows of al-Qaeda.
A US intelligence official said in Washington that CIA analysts had concluded that the Zawahiri tape was "most likely" authentic.
The report in the Saudi weekly came as Americans celebrated a nervous Christmas under heightened terrorist alerts and tight security nationwide.
This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/26/1072308655425.html
The following is an email message sent to all First Marine Air Wing and
Marine Wing Support Squadron 171 from LtCol Scot S. Seitz, Commanding
Officer, on Monday, December 1, 2003. It's worth reading and sharing.
Marines and Sailors,
As we approach the end of the year, I think it is important to share a few
thoughts about what you've accomplished directly, in some cases, and
indirectly in many others. I am speaking about what the Bush Administration
and each of you has contributed by wearing the uniform, because the fact
that you wear the uniform contributes 100% to the capability of the nation
to send a few onto the field to execute national policy. As you read about
these achievements you are a part of, I would call your attention to two
things:
1. This is good news that hasn't been fit to print or report on TV.
2. It is much easier to point out the errors a man makes when he makes the
tough decisions, rarely is the positive as aggressively pursued.
Since President Bush declared an end to major combat on May 1. . .
.. . . the first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on
active duty.... over 60,000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow
citizens.
.. . . nearly all of Iraq's 400 courts are functioning.
.. . . the Iraqi judiciary is fully independent.
.. . . on Monday, October 6, power generation hit 4,518 megawatts-exceeding
the prewar average.
.. . . all 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open,
as are nearly all primary and secondary schools.
.. . . by October 1, Coalition forces had rehab-ed over 1,500 schools-500
more than scheduled.
.. . . teachers earn from 12 to 25 times their former salaries.
.. . . all 240 hospitals and more than 1,200 clinics are open.
.. . . doctors salaries are at least eight times what they were under Saddam.
.. . . pharmaceutical distribution has gone from essentially nothing to 700
tons in May to a current total of 12,000 tons.
.. . . the Coalition has helped administer over 22 million vaccinations to
Iraq's children.
.. . . a Coalition program has cleared over 14,000 kilometers of Iraq's
27,000 kilometers of weed-choked canals which now irrigate tens of thousands
of farms. This project has created jobs for more than 100,000 Iraqi men and
women.
.. . . we have restored over three-quarters of prewar telephone services and
over two-thirds of the potable water production.
.. . . there are 4,900 full-service telephone connections. We expect 50,000
by year-end.
.. . . the wheels of commerce are turning. From bicycles to satellite dishes
to cars and trucks, businesses are coming to life in all major cities and
towns.
.. . . 95 percent of all prewar bank customers have service and first-time
customers are opening accounts daily.
.. . . Iraqi banks are making loans to finance businesses.
.. . . the central bank is fully independent.
.. . . Iraq has one of the world's most growth-oriented investment and
banking laws.
.. . . Iraq has a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years.
.. . . satellite TV dishes are legal.
.. . . foreign journalists aren't on 10-day visas paying mandatory and
extortionate fees to the Ministry of Information for "minders" and other
government spies.
.. . . there is no Ministry of Information.
.. . . there are more than 170 newspapers.
.. . . you can buy satellite dishes on what seems like every street corner.
.. . . foreign journalists (and everyone else) are free to come and go.
.. . . a nation that had not one single element-legislative, judicial or
executive-of a representative government, now does.
.. . . in Baghdad alone, residents have selected 88 advisory councils.
Baghdad's first democratic transfer of power in 35 years happened when the
city council elected its new chairman.
.. . . today in Iraq, chambers of commerce, business, school and professional
organizations are electing their leaders all over the country.
.. . . 25 ministers, selected by the most representative governing body in
Iraq's history, run the day-to-day business of government.
.. . . the Iraqi government regularly participates in international events.
Since July, the Iraqi government has been represented in over two dozen
international meetings, including those of the UN General Assembly, the Arab
League, the World Bank and IMF and, today, the Islamic Conference Summit.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs today announced that it is reopening over 30
Iraqi embassies around the world.
.. . . Shia religious festivals that were all but banned, aren't.
.. . . for the first time in 35 years, in Karbala thousands of Shiites
celebrate the pilgrimage of the 12th Imam.
.. . . the Coalition has completed over 13,000 reconstruction projects, large
and small, as part of a strategic plan for the reconstruction of Iraq.
.. . . Uday and Qusay are dead-and no longer feeding innocent Iraqis to the
zoo lions, raping the young daughters of local leaders to force cooperation,
torturing Iraq's soccer players for losing games, or murdering critics.
.. . . children aren't imprisoned or murdered when their parents disagree
with the government.
.. . . political opponents aren't imprisoned, tortured, executed, maimed, or
are forced to watch their families die for disagreeing with Saddam.
.. . . millions of longsuffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror.
.. . . Saudis will hold municipal elections.
.. . . Qatar is reforming education to give more choices to parents.
.. . . Jordan is accelerating market economic reforms.
.. . . the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian-a
Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and
for peace.
.. . . Saddam is gone.
.. . . Iraq is free.
.. . . President Bush has not faltered or failed.
.. . . Yet, little or none of this information has been published by the
Press corps that prides itself on bringing you all the news that's
important.
Iraq under US-led control has come further in six months than Germany did in
seven years or Japan did in nine years following WWII. Military deaths from
fanatic Nazi's and Japanese numbered in the thousands and continued
for over three years after WWII victory was declared. It took the US over
four months to clear away the twin tower debris, let alone attempt to build
something else in its place.
Now, take into account that almost every Democrat leader in the House and
Senate has fought President Bush on every aspect of his handling of this
country's war and the post-war reconstruction, and that they continue to
claim on a daily basis on national TV that this conflict has been a failure.
Taking everything into consideration, event the unfortunate loss of our
brothers and sisters in this conflict, do you think anyone else in the world
could have accomplished as much as the United States and the Bush
administration in so short a period of time?
These are things worth writing about. Get the word out. Write to someone you
think may be able to influence our Congress or the press to tell the story.
Above all, be proud that you are a part of this historical precedent.
God bless you all. Have a great Holiday.
Semper Fidelis,
LtCol Scot S Seitz
Too bad the media nor liberals will ever acknowledge the above.
Jpeg-rumble! I love it!
Jpeg-rumble! I love it!
That was an assignment in computer Illustrator class last quarter I got an A.
Iran`s al-Qaeda confusion
Special report by DEBKAfile`s intelligence sources
January 8, 2004, 5:58 PM (GMT+02:00)
A street that changed its name
Iran announced prematurely this week that it had renewed full diplomatic relations with Egypt. It added, as a sweetener, that a street in Tehran had been renamed Intifada street from Khaled Islambuli street, after the Egyptian who assassinated Anwar Sadat in 1981. Egypt denied that ties had yet been resumed, but agreed that contacts between the two countries were continuing. DEBKAfile reports on these contacts, which hinge on the extradition of the Egyptian terrorists that Iran says it is holding.
In May 2003, a month after the fall of Baghdad, Iran requested that an Egyptian delegation should come to Tehran to discuss renewing relations. The delegation went, and since then three or four senior Egyptian diplomats and intelligence people have been stationed in Tehran.
The Iranians, as a gesture of goodwill, told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal, a senior operative of Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda, who was responsible for organizing the May 12 2003 attack on Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital, was in Iran. They later said that Ayman al-Zawahiri, the head of Islamic Jihad and Osama’s bin Laden’s deputy, was also in Iran. They also named Showqi Islambuli , the brother of President Sadat’s assassin, and gave Egypt a list of some 60 Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives.
The Egyptians want some of these men extradited, and Iran appeared to be carrying out similar negotiations with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and the US. Jordan wants the extradition of Abu Mus’ab Lal-Zarqawi, an al-Qaeda operative whom the Turks accuse of being responsible for attacks on Jewish and British buildings in Istanbul in November 2003. Iran apparently agreed that the named men should be extradited to their country of citizenship.
But what is totally unclear is whether all or any of these men are actually detained by the Iranian authorities or are just known to have passed through Iranian territory. Their presence is said to be known to the Iranian authorities and they appear to have been, or are being, kept under surveillance. But does it go beyond this? In fact, the muddle goes even deeper.
The Iranians eventually told the Egyptians that Sayef al-Adal , who had presented an Egyptian passport, was now presenting a Kuwaiti one. Even more confusingly, they said that al-Zawahiri’s name was on the list by mistake. It appeared that forged passports, perhaps originating in Bahrain, were around the place. Kuwait and Bahrain then told Iran that they had no such citizens and were not interested in extradition.
On July 22 2003 Egypt made its position clear. General Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s intelligence minister, arrived on a secret visit toTehran with a message from President Hosni Mubarak to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei : “ Either you extradite the Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda operatives that you have said you have or diplomatic ties will not be resumed.” DEBKAfile sources report that Suleiman waited all August in Tehran without getting a clear answer from Iran, and eventually returned empty-handed. This remains Egypt’s position.
The latest twist in the story was reported by DEBKA-Net-Weekly on January 2 2004. To subscribe to DEBKA-Net-Weekly click HERE .
On December 29 Iran surprised Egypt and the US by saying it had arrested Ahmad Khasan al-Nadush Khayer (nom de guerre Siyasiya), the operation chief of Islamic Jihad’s and al-Qaeda’s special forces. Khayer, an Egyptian whose real name is Abdullah Muhammad Ragab, is a close associate of al-Zawahiri.
A senior official told DEBKAfile that US counter-terrorist authorities would like nothing better than to speak with Khayer: “If anyone in al-Qaeda knows when and where the fundamentalist terrorists mean to strike in the coming days or hours, Siyasiya is that man. But we have to be realistic. After all, we are dealing with the Iranians and aside from their claim to have arrested him. We may not hear a word of him ever again.”
The very fact that Iran reported that it was holding Khayer shows that it is renewing its efforts to achieve ties with Egypt. But the history of evasions and contradictions makes Egypt ultra-cautious. Egypt’s foreign minister, Ahmed Maher, said on January 7th that the two countries are discussing the possibility of renewing their relations. This, in effect, is a repetition of Omar Suleiman’s message last summer: ”Extradite wanted Egyptian terrorists and we will resume diplomatic relations. Otherwise not.”
Clinton believes Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: Portugal PM
Former US president Bill Clinton said in October during a visit to Portugal that he was convinced Iraq had weapons of mass destruction up until the fall of Saddam Hussein, Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso said...
Danish soldiers in Iraq find mortar shells dating from Iran-Iraq war; tests show they contain blister agent
ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writer Saturday, January 10, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(01-10) 17:33 PST BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) --
Danish and Icelandic troops have uncovered a cache of 36 shells buried in the Iraqi desert, and preliminary tests showed they contained a liquid blister agent, the Danish military said Saturday.
The 120mm mortar shells were thought to be leftovers from the eight-year war between Iraq and neighboring Iran, which ended in 1988, said U.S. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt.
The shells were found by Danish engineering troops and Icelandic de-miners near Al Quarnah, north of the city of Basra where Denmark's 410 troops are based, the Danish Army Operational Command said in a written statement.
The shells were wrapped in plastic but had been damaged, and they appeared to have been buried for at least 10 years, the statement said.
It said British experts did a preliminary test and said the shells contained "blister gas," but did not elaborate.
Before the war, the United States alleged Iraq still had stockpiles of mustard gas, a World War I-era blister agent that is stored in liquid form. U.S. intelligence officials also claimed Iraq had sarin, cyclosarin and VX, which are extremely deadly nerve agents.
"We're doing some preliminary tests to ensure that if they do contain any kind of blister agent that we can dispose of them properly," Kimmitt said.
The Danish military emphasized that the tests were not definitive. In the weeks after the Iraq war, the U.S.-led coalition found several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals.
Other discoveries turned out to be old caches that had already been tagged by United Nations inspectors and were scheduled for destruction.
Saddam Hussein's regime used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during that war and killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians in a chemical attack on the northern city of Halabja in 1988.
President Bush said the United States was going to war to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, but a nine-month search by a succession of U.S. teams has failed to find any current stockpiles of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal.
In October, Dutch marines found several dozen artillery shells from the 1991 Gulf War in the southern Iraqi town of Samawah, but the shells contained no biological or chemical agents. Samawah is 100 miles west of the southern region where the Danes discovered shells Saturday
Article found at: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/01/10/international2033EST0606.DTL
Danish and Icelandic troops have uncovered a cache of 36 shells buried in the Iraqi desert...
Obviously a hoax since we are told repeatedly that we are there unilaterally.
Other discoveries turned out to be old caches that had already been tagged by United Nations inspectors and were scheduled for destruction...
But were not yet destroyed and Iraq still had access to them.
You can hardly call 36 shells buried for the last ten years an imminent threat to the security of the United States.
You're probably right.
I'll have them mail em to you and let you take care of them then.
return to sender?
return to sender?
It's irrelevant.
why is it irrelevant?
you think it's okay to arm a country and then invade them because the have arms?
You bet, if those arms become a threat to you.
MWD's are irrelevant in my mind.
Saddam needed to be taken out with or without WMD's.
300,000 dead in mass graves is a good enough reason for me.
Thx, if 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles would have been found armed in any way, Taraka would have found a way around it. It makes no difference.
Thx, if 36 intercontinental ballistic missiles would have been found armed in any way, Taraka would have found a way around it. It makes no difference.
I don't doubt it. There are some here that freely admit that Saddam had WMD's, then twist it the other way and simply blame the US for having them.
Now, it may be true that Saddam got them from US companies, but you can't have it both ways. You can't use it as a plus in one argument, then turn around and use it as a minus in another.
THX 1138 1/11/04 8:39am
Might surprise you to learn this: I agree with you.
My issue about the war is this: What's the reason for going to war?
If the reason was to remove a war criminal, then why not say so and make a case for it and build an international coalition to do it? Why not pursue an indictment in The Hague and put together a truly international force to remove him?
People who CANNOT NOW defend the premises given by Bush: nuclear weapons, WMDs, ties to al-queda, ties to 9/11, want to latch onto a default reason for going to war that was never a part of the arguments for war. Was there any discussion of removing dictatorships and replacing them with democracies? NO! Of course not!
But it isn't just the reasons given for going to war that energizes my opposition to it, but the DOCTRINE enacted in pursuit of it. Bush falsified the reasons for going to war, and did so in order to articulate a doctrine that embraces international anarchy and pre-emptive warfare, two ideas EXPRESSLY denounced during the Nuremburg trials and in the UN Charter. WHY? Because that doctrine was the doctrine of Adolph Hitler and his Axis Allies, THAT'S WHY!
Bush has used the "war on terror" to push for an imperialist war against Iraq (whtever other excuses were used to justify it, true or not) and articulate an american imperial doctrine that ends multilateral security and places a global war in the future of mankind. For THAT, I oppose him, and I oppose this war.
My issue about the war is this: What's the reason for going to war? If the reason was to remove a war criminal, then why not say so and make a case for it and build an international coalition to do it? Why not pursue an indictment in The Hague and put together a truly international force to remove him?
WMD's were not the only reason given for going to war in Iraq, it's simply the one that the liberal extremists have latched onto.
We tried it your way for 12 years using the UN and got no where.
People who CANNOT NOW defend the premises given by Bush: nuclear weapons, WMDs, ties to al-queda, ties to 9/11, want to latch onto a default reason for going to war that was never a part of the arguments for war. Was there any discussion of removing dictatorships and replacing them with democracies? NO! Of course not!
I simply don't care what reason was presented and haven't from the beginning. If you go back and read what I've posted, I've always said I don't care. Besides, I still think there are WMD's out there and we just haven't found them. Even Clinton has admitted that he believed and believes that there are WMD's in Iraq.
But it isn't just the reasons given for going to war that energizes my opposition to it, but the DOCTRINE enacted in pursuit of it. Bush falsified the reasons for going to war, and did so in order to articulate a doctrine that embraces international anarchy and pre-emptive warfare, two ideas EXPRESSLY denounced during the Nuremburg trials and in the UN Charter. WHY? Because that doctrine was the doctrine of Adolph Hitler and his Axis Allies, THAT'S WHY!
It's still to be seen if Dubya falsified anyting. If it does come to be true, I'll be on your side on this.
Bush has used the "war on terror" to push for an imperialist war against Iraq (whtever other excuses were used to justify it, true or not) and articulate an american imperial doctrine that ends multilateral security and places a global war in the future of mankind. For THAT, I oppose him, and I oppose this war.
Well, you lost me when you spewed "imperialist". I'm surprised you didn't say "no blood for oil" as well.
THX 1138 1/12/04 5:47am
Three specific reasons were given by Bush, in the official letter he sent to Congress, for going to war against Iraq.
One: an imminent threat to the security of the US from Iraq in regard to WMDs.
Two: The failure (he claims) of multilateral security (UN) to deal with that threat.
Three: Iraq (he claims) was one of those nations who aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on 9/11.
As for number one: IF WMDs are found, it is HIGHLY unlikely that they will be found in the quantity and readiness that was claimed by Bush and Blair and Powell and Cheney and others. Thus, the claim that Iraq posed an imminent threat so great that addressing it required an exception to the UN Charter is HIGHLY unlikely.
As for number two: The sorry state of Iraq's infrastructure and military prior to the war are a testament against the idea that multilateral security failed to contain the threat.
As for number three: Bush himself admitted this was not true in September 2003, yet he lied and said that it was never asserted by him or his administration. His official letter to Congress proves that he lied, either in that letter or afterwards. Since I can't imagine why he would lie and say that Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attacks if in fact they were, I conclude that he lied to Congress.
So any reason to go to war is ok with you? If so, then you have embraced international anarchy, the worldview of Hitler. That isn't your worldview, is it?
I haven't seen a direct quote from Clinton on that.
I refer you to the statement I made about Bush's official statement that the US went to war against Iraq because of it's alleged ties to 9/11.
Maybe you have a different name for a hegemonic power that seeks to suspend international law and dominate the world for the sake of material gain.
Three specific reasons were given by Bush, in the official letter he sent to Congress, for going to war against Iraq.
One: an imminent threat to the security of the US from Iraq in regard to WMDs.
This is why I do not believe anything the left says. Bush specifically said there was not an imminent threat. The truth does not seem to deter the left from saying other wise.
Three: Iraq (he claims) was one of those nations who aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on 9/11.
You would have to show me this one because I do not recall that Bush made sucha direct link. See above why I have my doubts about your allegations.