A New War You Can't Blame On Bush! Or Can You?

I really don't understand the distinction either. Blowing up civilians by dropping bombs or going into a crowed and shooting everyone is a lesser offense than using those same bombs to drop chemical weapons.

I spoke with my husband about this and his reasoning is that is worse because it has the chance to kill more people (depending on the weapons used) and people are unaware/unable to fight back or get away. It is also a painful as hell way to die closer to torture, but then so can "normal" methods be.

Using chemical or biological weapons on people is a problem, but I think bombing the hell out of them is a problem too. Anyways, it does seem like a re-run, especially aince the UN report won't be ready until next week at the earliest.


Syria crisis: US prepares for military action without Britain - live updates
• British MPs vote against UK involvement in Syria strike
• US preparing to act without key European ally
• UN weapons inspectors begin last full day in Syria

It's also pretty easy to make with pretty common ingrediants and basic chemistry knowledge, if they couldn't find someone to purchase it from.

Deadly Sarin 'easily available in UK'

We went to war not because of possible wmd's (because they have found some from the 80's and 90's) but because everyone said he was starting up a wmd program again. He wasn't and Bush later admitted they hadn't found anything like that.

Edit: sorry for so many back to back replies. Back reading is bad

It means that your trolling attempt failed badly.

Also, MSN is THE place for hate baiting the public (you know, throwing random ***out there to create a reaction to the public, mainly for their own financial gain).

Wait, you condemn people for having an opinion by doing the very thing you condemn people doing?

Plus, it's called a debate. Everyone has their own opinions at every topic, and it is good for everyone to share it and discuss their opinions. It all makes us better people if we all listen to others. Too bad a certain group of people ignore any opposing opinion....

Another thing, yes, America will fall eventually. We are probably falling now. Either way, that won't stop us from doing what we do best.

We both remember history a lot differently then...

Or what we were told at the time was different. Our news sources are different.

Also, yeah, back to back replies for me too -.-

Presiden Bush state of the union 2002

CIA: Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program october 2002 (pdf)
P.1

Edit: I could have worded my first statement better. We invaded Iraq because he supposedly broke UN restrictions on developing a new wmd program and continued on a path to create a nuclear weapon. Wmd's were apart of the reason (obviously) but the new program was the main reason because he was supposedly breaking UN sanctions.

And given all of that, wouldn't you say the invasion was justified?

Not including intelligence after the fact, given what we knew at the moment we invaded, wouldn't you agree that our fears were real and we were just acting to prevent a possible nuclear holocaust?

No. UN inspectors said that it did not look like Saddam had restarted the program and they would need more time inspecting. Instead of listening to this we ignored their data and went in, only to find out the inspectors were correct.

I didn't know we were rehashing this, I was just making the point it wasn't about wmd's but the restart of the wmd program.

I know how it went down in the books, I'm saying that when the regime was toppled, Saddam's boys weren't all magically vanquished, nor did they retire to dubui to live out the rest of thier lives in peace.

what happened was: they buried their RPG's & ak-47's in the sand, & went back to town. that is why our "invasion" lasted 4-6 months or w/e but the occupation had to last 10 years. this reality leads me to wonder what else got buried in the sand. I know he never had true "WMD's" but to say there was / is definately no chemical weapons there, I think, would be founded in wishful thinking.

that's silly. if we were really interested in preventing nuclear holocaust, we'd all be talking about the indian sub-continent, & not the middle east.

They did find chemical weapons buried, but they were seriously old (from previous wars). There is no evidence that Saddam was bypassing UN sanctions and restarting his wmd weapons program, which is what the CIA and other intelligence people said.

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918

that's interesting, I did not know that.

I'm not argueing that Bush was right, or that the invasion was justified, all I'm saying is there is a lot of sand over there, and no one can know 100% what all he had his fingers into.

The Iraq invasion was a farce. The way the administration spun the justification for the attack made it seem like Saddam was actively plotting against the US by desiring to hand off WMDs to terrorists that would then presumably use them on the West. This was sold as an imminent threat and somehow Saddam had acquired/was building nuclear weapons that he was itching to pass off to Al Qaeda even though he's an enemy of what AQ stands for.

All the talk about yellowcake uranium, WMD stockpiles, mobile laboratories and weapons sites they sent Colin Powell to hoodwink the UN with were lies and fabrications along with the seriously flawed reports they put out on the topic. The people who vouched for the US were enemies of Saddam who would of course lie if it meant the US would go in and topple their hated dictator.

The yellowcake uranium purchases were forgeries.
Iraq was cooperating with UN inspectors.
The mobile laboratories were actually used to create hydrogen gas.
Saddam had abandoned his ambitions for WMDs after the Gulf War.

At the end of the day we went into Iraq because we were still shaking in our boots after 9/11 and the politicians fell in line as the neocons and hawks led us right into a mess.

Nice Tinfoil hat there.

Except the fact that everything you wrote contradicts reality, that is a great conspiracy theory post you got there.

What is reality then?

He stated correct facts that the Bush administration admitted.


1. Yellowcake uranium forgeries:
President Delivers "State of the Union" 2003
Tenet admits error in approving Bush speech, December 2003

2. Iraq was cooperating with UN inspectors: (it's wiki but there are many articles this is just comprehensive)
United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission

3. Mobile germ warfare labs:
Iraqi mobile labs nothing to do with germ warfare, report finds

4. Saddam abandoned his wmd program after gulf war:
Iraq Survey Group Final Report

Correct information after the fact.

Incorrect information before we found out otherwise.

The discussion was about justification of invading Iraq during the time we actually invaded

Of course I know that the WMD we feared didn't exist (or wasn't found). But I was referring to during the time we actually invaded.

They relied on bad intelligence and bad methods of gaining intelligence. This was not evidence fabricated by the administration. We have a nice opportunity here to not repeat mistakes.

People want to have their yellow cake and eat it too. On one hand they believe Bush was a simple dolt; on the other he outsmarts the entire world and fools them into believing Iraq was going nuclear.

All of the "justification" and "evidence" that was used to invade Iraq was incorrect. That's pretty impresive, in a really bad way.

The US and its allies deliberately chose to disregard data from anyone else, even independent parties. All of this information was available before the invasion and it was ignored or dismissed.

an emotionally charged dash to action based on shaky information?

I think Niko hit it on the head, this story has all played out before.

Hindsight is 20/20 huh?

How come I didn't hear anyone complaining during that time saying that the information is false? Oh, and I wasn't watching Fox News when I got that information either, I was watching the same channels that everyone else (in America) was watching. So the excuse that MSM was screaming and I wasn't paying attention has been nullified before it has been made.

It is easy to rewrite history after is has been made. Didn't you know that?

That is what the liberal base has accused those they don't agree with all along.

Also, developing news:

SOS Kerry very specific on the number of deaths by chemical weapons

I wonder how much of that is true?

Also, I wonder how much of that was done by Assad or the rebels, or if they even figured it out yet.

I have no idea what to say to you then, maybe you shouldn't watch the news? Reading direct UN documents, white papers and other publications might keep you more informed rather than watching any of those "news" channels.

The information was available. One of the UN inspectors went on numerous TV programs and wrote articles about how the Iraq wmd program did not exist. Many informants came forward and said that the mobile labs were not producing germ warfare.

Couple years from now Kara will tell us what we should have done in Syria. Can't wait.

I love how you claim I'm conspiratarding here then backpedal once you're confronted with the evidence.

"Oh that's hindsight"

No, no it isn't. Sources were calling *** on the entire reasoning behind Iraq and it was silenced by a post-9/11 aura of fear and blind patriotism that got our men and women into a war that resulted in the loss of American lives that need not have been thrown away so carelessly.

But yes, continue to spout off about it was bad intelligence or that we couldn't have known. Wolfowitz and the neocon pack had been pushing for Iraq since 1999 through organizations like the Project for the New American Century who had been fishing for this war as far back as the Clinton administration. Many of those same faces would go on to grace the Bush administration in key positions and papers had been drawn up about how to invade Iraq long before Powell went to the UN with his shoop da whooped PowerPoint presentation.

Written in 1998 by the Project for the New American Century:


9/11 was merely the impetus for us to get in there. It was seen as an opportunity to get the war started and we took the bait. The body count and stunning failure to accomplish the objectives of that war (besides killing Hussain) are what we're left holding. So no, there was no conspiracy here, merely a plan being executed that is well documented for anyone who gives a ***.

And you can hold me to saying Syria is a bad idea right now because it's a bad idea like Iraq was a bad idea and no amount of "God Bless America" is going to change my position given the facts presented thus far.

I'm considering reading this thread then I saw the two people posting... carry on.

Doesn't count when thousands of people are saying the same thing you are saying.

When you are the only one who says that Syria is a bad idea and it turns out you were correct, then we would listen to you when the next Syria comes out...