Remember folks when you read this ...THERE WERE NEVER NEVER any WMDs!!!

[BlindBoo]

Just more fall out from the Bush inspired Iraq Civil War. As confirmed by your Huffington Post piece.

Actually, Huffing Glue confirms these are Sadam era WMD's - which the USA has known about the entire time. You know this, but chose to lie about it because you have no honor or integrity.

{The analysis from The Times draws on interviews with American soldiers and previously unreleased government documents to show that the U.S. government has been aware that chemical weapons, intact or partially damaged and then repurposed, have been circulating in Iraq -- and harming soldiers -- since 2003. The newspaper confirmed U.S. soldiers had come across mustard shells at Muthanna in 2008, and said three Times journalists saw old chemical stocks there in 2013.}

So again, Obama has known that Iraq had WMD's his entire term, and has lied continuously for partisan reasons.

More precisely, Raygun era WMD. Fact is the old stockpiles, lost, abandoned or hidden on purpose were not the WMD the Bush Administration was claiming Saddam was actively producing. No amount of lying or calling people childish names will ever change that.

Boo, I told ya you're one of the few libs I enjoy debating with because you always keep it respectful.

So let me point out the contradiction in your own statement. You say "well yeah this is WMD but not the WMD Bush...."

You just admitted there was WMD there regardless of who said what.

We always knew he had WMD because we helped him acquire them. The fact remains that the claims the Bush administration made were that Iraq was actively producing and stockpile large quantities of new weapons. They weren't, and the NYT article says no different.

Wow , you truly are Blind , as well deaf and definitely about as dumb as they come , most of the garbage you've been posted doesn't even warrant a reply and it is very apparent that you will never ever ever let the Truth interfere with your half baked opinions.

I came here for serious debate , not to watch some bongo playing thumbsucker - the village called and they don't want their idiot back - we don't want you either.

So tell me oh serious debater, what was the purpose of taking Iraq off the list of countries that support terrorist in 1982?

 

[healthmyths]

Please provide the quote where I said Iraq never had any WMD! .

You're kidding, right?

How about this pile of shit from the lying leftists at Mother Jones?

Lie by Lie A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mother Jones

Or how about the Communists at Salon?

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

I can do a thousand more.

The radical left and the corrupt press has insisted for over a decade that there were no WMD's - now you claim you knew they were there all along.

So why did you lie about it?

Well we know, party above all - always.

Sure sure pretend the left never claimed Raygun supplied Saddam with the ability to make advanced C\chemical and biological weapons.

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

Rumsfeld himself who, as President Reagan’s Middle East Envoy, had traveled to the Region to meet with Saddam Hussein in December 1983 to normalize, particularly, security relations.

At the time of the visit , Iraq had already been removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist countries in 1982; and in the previous month, November, President Reagan had approved National Security Decision Directive 114, on expansion of U.S.-Iraq relations generally. But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

SO???
There was a little thing called a "Cold War" on. Proxies like Iraq fought Iran instead of USA fighting Russia.
But of course people educated as obviously you were not in the "nuances" of the Cold war knew that JUST as that hero of Democrats FDR, slept with Stalin during WWII against Hitler and look what that brought?

Sure Reagan et.al. were dealing with the realities of the ME and Iraq at that time under Saddam was a partner!
Hell we always thought Democrats put our country first as well as the military but look what that got our naïveté regarding these Democrat traitors that
helped kill our troops in Iraq because the terrorists LOVED to repeat these quotes from the traitors...

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Do you think these were encouraging words to OUR military or to the terrorists?

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

With Americans like the above who needs terrorists as enemies???
So why do you people that are afforded the freedom of opinion as the above exercised are so dumb as the above to know
words have meaning! Meanings translate into deaths!
That's why the Harvard study shows when idiots like the above make the above traitor statements Americans were killed!
Thanks!!!

 

[BlindBoo]

Please provide the quote where I said Iraq never had any WMD! .

You're kidding, right?

How about this pile of shit from the lying leftists at Mother Jones?

Lie by Lie A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mother Jones

Or how about the Communists at Salon?

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

I can do a thousand more.

The radical left and the corrupt press has insisted for over a decade that there were no WMD's - now you claim you knew they were there all along.

So why did you lie about it?

Well we know, party above all - always.

Sure sure pretend the left never claimed Raygun supplied Saddam with the ability to make advanced C\chemical and biological weapons.

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

Rumsfeld himself who, as President Reagan’s Middle East Envoy, had traveled to the Region to meet with Saddam Hussein in December 1983 to normalize, particularly, security relations.

At the time of the visit , Iraq had already been removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist countries in 1982; and in the previous month, November, President Reagan had approved National Security Decision Directive 114, on expansion of U.S.-Iraq relations generally. But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

SO???
There was a little thing called a "Cold War" on. Proxies like Iraq fought Iran instead of USA fighting Russia.
But of course people educated as obviously you were not in the "nuances" of the Cold war knew that JUST as that hero of Democrats FDR, slept with Stalin during WWII against Hitler and look what that brought?

Sure Reagan et.al. were dealing with the realities of the ME and Iraq at that time under Saddam was a partner!
Hell we always thought Democrats put our country first as well as the military but look what that got our naïveté regarding these Democrat traitors that
helped kill our troops in Iraq because the terrorists LOVED to repeat these quotes from the traitors...

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Do you think these were encouraging words to OUR military or to the terrorists?

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

With Americans like the above who needs terrorists as enemies???
So why do you people that are afforded the freedom of opinion as the above exercised are so dumb as the above to know
words have meaning! Meanings translate into deaths!
That's why the Harvard study shows when idiots like the above make the above traitor statements Americans were killed!
Thanks!!!

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

 

[healthmyths]

Please provide the quote where I said Iraq never had any WMD! .

You're kidding, right?

How about this pile of shit from the lying leftists at Mother Jones?

Lie by Lie A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mother Jones

Or how about the Communists at Salon?

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

I can do a thousand more.

The radical left and the corrupt press has insisted for over a decade that there were no WMD's - now you claim you knew they were there all along.

So why did you lie about it?

Well we know, party above all - always.

Sure sure pretend the left never claimed Raygun supplied Saddam with the ability to make advanced C\chemical and biological weapons.

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

Rumsfeld himself who, as President Reagan’s Middle East Envoy, had traveled to the Region to meet with Saddam Hussein in December 1983 to normalize, particularly, security relations.

At the time of the visit , Iraq had already been removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist countries in 1982; and in the previous month, November, President Reagan had approved National Security Decision Directive 114, on expansion of U.S.-Iraq relations generally. But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

SO???
There was a little thing called a "Cold War" on. Proxies like Iraq fought Iran instead of USA fighting Russia.
But of course people educated as obviously you were not in the "nuances" of the Cold war knew that JUST as that hero of Democrats FDR, slept with Stalin during WWII against Hitler and look what that brought?

Sure Reagan et.al. were dealing with the realities of the ME and Iraq at that time under Saddam was a partner!
Hell we always thought Democrats put our country first as well as the military but look what that got our naïveté regarding these Democrat traitors that
helped kill our troops in Iraq because the terrorists LOVED to repeat these quotes from the traitors...

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Do you think these were encouraging words to OUR military or to the terrorists?

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

With Americans like the above who needs terrorists as enemies???
So why do you people that are afforded the freedom of opinion as the above exercised are so dumb as the above to know
words have meaning! Meanings translate into deaths!
That's why the Harvard study shows when idiots like the above make the above traitor statements Americans were killed!
Thanks!!!

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

Where is the lie? I am quoting them exactly....JUST as the terrorists would do to encourage more recruits.

Each of those idiots did it NOT out of concern for our military! They did it for political gain.
Why would ANY sane person want to give enemies words to use to encourage killing of our troops?
YES there are events that occur in war... BUT IDIOTS are the ones who don't understand the time and place and none of the above quotes are
appropriate! I mean terrorists LOVED to read Kerry saying our troops ALL our Troops ALL the time are terrorists!
Either way i.e. either the above are totally stupid in comprehending how their words are taking out of context so therefore DON"T SAY THEM! OR
They knew how these words would be taken and said them for POLITICAL GAIN ... to hell with how many Americans are killed!

 

[healthmyths]

No matter how you parse it.. when idiots make negative comments regardless of context... THEY will be used!
These words are seared in the terrorists brains as validation for their ACTIONS and idiots like the below SAID THEM regardless of how they used because it was political gain as far as they saw it!.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

 

[BlindBoo]

Please provide the quote where I said Iraq never had any WMD! .

You're kidding, right?

How about this pile of shit from the lying leftists at Mother Jones?

Lie by Lie A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mother Jones

Or how about the Communists at Salon?

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

I can do a thousand more.

The radical left and the corrupt press has insisted for over a decade that there were no WMD's - now you claim you knew they were there all along.

So why did you lie about it?

Well we know, party above all - always.

Sure sure pretend the left never claimed Raygun supplied Saddam with the ability to make advanced C\chemical and biological weapons.

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

Rumsfeld himself who, as President Reagan’s Middle East Envoy, had traveled to the Region to meet with Saddam Hussein in December 1983 to normalize, particularly, security relations.

At the time of the visit , Iraq had already been removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist countries in 1982; and in the previous month, November, President Reagan had approved National Security Decision Directive 114, on expansion of U.S.-Iraq relations generally. But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

SO???
There was a little thing called a "Cold War" on. Proxies like Iraq fought Iran instead of USA fighting Russia.
But of course people educated as obviously you were not in the "nuances" of the Cold war knew that JUST as that hero of Democrats FDR, slept with Stalin during WWII against Hitler and look what that brought?

Sure Reagan et.al. were dealing with the realities of the ME and Iraq at that time under Saddam was a partner!
Hell we always thought Democrats put our country first as well as the military but look what that got our naïveté regarding these Democrat traitors that
helped kill our troops in Iraq because the terrorists LOVED to repeat these quotes from the traitors...

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Do you think these were encouraging words to OUR military or to the terrorists?

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

With Americans like the above who needs terrorists as enemies???
So why do you people that are afforded the freedom of opinion as the above exercised are so dumb as the above to know
words have meaning! Meanings translate into deaths!
That's why the Harvard study shows when idiots like the above make the above traitor statements Americans were killed!
Thanks!!!

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

Where is the lie? I am quoting them exactly....JUST as the terrorists would do to encourage more recruits.

Each of those idiots did it NOT out of concern for our military! They did it for political gain.
Why would ANY sane person want to give enemies words to use to encourage killing of our troops?
YES there are events that occur in war... BUT IDIOTS are the ones who don't understand the time and place and none of the above quotes are
appropriate! I mean terrorists LOVED to read Kerry saying our troops ALL our Troops ALL the time are terrorists!
Either way i.e. either the above are totally stupid in comprehending how their words are taking out of context so therefore DON"T SAY THEM! OR
They knew how these words would be taken and said them for POLITICAL GAIN ... to hell with how many Americans are killed!

Why would any American want to give our enemies inaccurate quotes from our leaders and then take them out of context to boot? Are you trying to to use to encourage ouir enemies?

 

[healthmyths]

You know you Bush Bashers say Bush Lied People Died...
So what is the difference between Bush claiming WMDs based on these quotes...

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.


And these quotes:

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

Either Bush LIED or the below LIED. The BIG BIG difference is at least Bush Liberating Iraq saved 1.2 million kids from starvation that would have if Saddam
were still in power... and he continued to tell every one he had WMDs because HE WOULDN"T CERTIFY the WMDs were destroyed!
I mean I don't understand how it could be more clear to any compassionate person...
Saddam had the power to keep 576,000 kids from starving simply certifying the WMDs were destroyed.
HE didn't.
By removing Saddam 1.2 million kids are NOW alive but would have starved if Saddam would still be in power.!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

What about you, openly lying about WMD's in order to smear the hated opposition? You say you knew all along they were there, yet your party spent a decade lying about them....

 

[healthmyths]

You're kidding, right?

How about this pile of shit from the lying leftists at Mother Jones?

Lie by Lie A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mother Jones

Or how about the Communists at Salon?

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

I can do a thousand more.

The radical left and the corrupt press has insisted for over a decade that there were no WMD's - now you claim you knew they were there all along.

So why did you lie about it?

Well we know, party above all - always.

Sure sure pretend the left never claimed Raygun supplied Saddam with the ability to make advanced C\chemical and biological weapons.

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

Rumsfeld himself who, as President Reagan’s Middle East Envoy, had traveled to the Region to meet with Saddam Hussein in December 1983 to normalize, particularly, security relations.

At the time of the visit , Iraq had already been removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist countries in 1982; and in the previous month, November, President Reagan had approved National Security Decision Directive 114, on expansion of U.S.-Iraq relations generally. But it was Donald Rumsfeld’s trip to Baghdad which opened of the floodgates during 1985-90 for lucrative U.S. weapons exports–some $1.5 billion worth– including chemical/biological and nuclear weapons equipment and technology, along with critical components for missile delivery systems for all of the above. According to a 1994 GAO Letter Report (GAO/NSIAD-94-98) some 771 weapons export licenses for Iraq were approved during this six year period….not by our European allies, but by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

SO???
There was a little thing called a "Cold War" on. Proxies like Iraq fought Iran instead of USA fighting Russia.
But of course people educated as obviously you were not in the "nuances" of the Cold war knew that JUST as that hero of Democrats FDR, slept with Stalin during WWII against Hitler and look what that brought?

Sure Reagan et.al. were dealing with the realities of the ME and Iraq at that time under Saddam was a partner!
Hell we always thought Democrats put our country first as well as the military but look what that got our naïveté regarding these Democrat traitors that
helped kill our troops in Iraq because the terrorists LOVED to repeat these quotes from the traitors...

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Do you think these were encouraging words to OUR military or to the terrorists?

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

With Americans like the above who needs terrorists as enemies???
So why do you people that are afforded the freedom of opinion as the above exercised are so dumb as the above to know
words have meaning! Meanings translate into deaths!
That's why the Harvard study shows when idiots like the above make the above traitor statements Americans were killed!
Thanks!!!

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

Where is the lie? I am quoting them exactly....JUST as the terrorists would do to encourage more recruits.

Each of those idiots did it NOT out of concern for our military! They did it for political gain.
Why would ANY sane person want to give enemies words to use to encourage killing of our troops?
YES there are events that occur in war... BUT IDIOTS are the ones who don't understand the time and place and none of the above quotes are
appropriate! I mean terrorists LOVED to read Kerry saying our troops ALL our Troops ALL the time are terrorists!
Either way i.e. either the above are totally stupid in comprehending how their words are taking out of context so therefore DON"T SAY THEM! OR
They knew how these words would be taken and said them for POLITICAL GAIN ... to hell with how many Americans are killed!

Why would any American want to give our enemies inaccurate quotes from our leaders and then take them out of context to boot? Are you trying to to use to encourage ouir enemies?

They were NOT inaccurate quotes!
Those are their exact words. NO less no more.
Words like "killing civilians" are exact words... "killed innocent civilians in cold blood"... are exact words... "terrorizing kids and children"... are exact words.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Kondor, stop saying EVERYONE knew he had chemical weapons. You are double talking out of your ass right now.

You say chemical weapons are WMDs, and claim the left always knew he had those when the war started?

WRONG!!!!

For 15 years they claimed NOTHING was found. They did not limit it to NO NUCLEAR weapons. Are you really going to stick with that claim?

Chemical weapons ARE WMDS!

AND .... they only starting claiming that Sadaams Iraq had no WMDs AFTER it became fashionable as a means to attack George W.

Prior to that the Dems were right in line claimin Hussein had WMDs ... uh that's Sadam Hussein , not .. Barrack Hussein , he just has tools

Generally speaking, the Democrats were just as full of shit about Saddam, WMD's, etc., as the Republicans.

To the devil with partisan politics in this regard - what signifies is a false casus belli (nuclear weapons focus), and the price we paid as a result.

4000 of our kids are lying the ground because we got it wrong - or because we were lied to - take your pick - both perspectives may have some merit.

Lied to, bad intel OR he managed to hide them or destroy most of them b4 we got there ... he had plenty of warning.

But Nukes were never really a major part of the picture - it's just you tools trying to rewrite History again. It's a little more difficult when its Modern History isn't it ?

Excuse me?

Fool?

Rewriting history?

What the hell are you talking about?

Did the world not already know for years before the 2003 Iraq War, that Iraq had chemical weapons, and had not yet seen fit to go to war over those?

Did the world not already know for years before the 2003 Iraq War, that Iraq had biological weapons, and had not yet seen fit to go to war over those?

Nuclear weapons were the new factor in the calculation to go to war.

Nothing 'revisionist' about that.

Over 2000 tons of uranium waiting to be processed says it was a good possibly.

That uranium was not 'waiting to be processed' - it was under IAEA lock and seal and monitoring. You are fabricating a myth based on nothing.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yeah, with friends like you, lying about what was said, who need enemies.

What about you, openly lying about WMD's in order to smear the hated opposition? You say you knew all along they were there, yet your party spent a decade lying about them....

Poor Unhinged2008, you just can't help yourself can you?

Who Armed Iraq CounterPunch Tells the Facts Names the Names

 

[EconChick]

Actually, Huffing Glue confirms these are Sadam era WMD's - which the USA has known about the entire time. You know this, but chose to lie about it because you have no honor or integrity.

{The analysis from The Times draws on interviews with American soldiers and previously unreleased government documents to show that the U.S. government has been aware that chemical weapons, intact or partially damaged and then repurposed, have been circulating in Iraq -- and harming soldiers -- since 2003. The newspaper confirmed U.S. soldiers had come across mustard shells at Muthanna in 2008, and said three Times journalists saw old chemical stocks there in 2013.}

So again, Obama has known that Iraq had WMD's his entire term, and has lied continuously for partisan reasons.

More precisely, Raygun era WMD. Fact is the old stockpiles, lost, abandoned or hidden on purpose were not the WMD the Bush Administration was claiming Saddam was actively producing. No amount of lying or calling people childish names will ever change that.

Boo, I told ya you're one of the few libs I enjoy debating with because you always keep it respectful.

So let me point out the contradiction in your own statement. You say "well yeah this is WMD but not the WMD Bush...."

You just admitted there was WMD there regardless of who said what.

We always knew he had WMD because we helped him acquire them. The fact remains that the claims the Bush administration made were that Iraq was actively producing and stockpile large quantities of new weapons. They weren't, and the NYT article says no different.

Blindboo's quote: "We always knew he had WMD because..."


Which is why I've been pissed for years watching the fucking lying lib politicians (Hillary Clinton most of all) who knew the truth say NO WMD

NO WMD



NO WMD




NO WMD



Fucking lying, incompetent, useless POS Democrats.

It's funny that you're mad about that, but not at all mad that no WMD that President Bush claimed Iraq was actively producing was ever found.

A) Is it really that hard to imagine them being moved?

B) If they are sitting in another country, did Obama send an army into verify they're there or not there? No. Then how can you.....someone who's never had a clearance, but just using common sense.....how can you so confidently say they were not moved?

 

[EconChick]

the UN was LIED TO... or did you forget Colin Powell standing there with pretend yellowcake?

The UN was lied to by your filthy party. Powell laid out facts - as is now revealed. Iraq had and still has chemical and biological weapons.

You and the corrupt press have lied to the American people for a decade.

you might also want to use the google and look up the final report of hans blix, the UN inspector.

thanks.

You might want to use Gooogle and look up "caught red handed in a lie."

Because you have been - right before the midterms.

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.

In case after case, participants said, analysis of these warheads and shells reaffirmed intelligence failures. First, the American government did not find what it had been looking for at the war’s outset, then it failed to prepare its troops and medical corps for the aged weapons it did find.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=0[/QUOTE]

.

That's not the latest information. It can be found RIGHT OUT IN OPEN SOURCE that ISIS - whose had control of that area for sometime - has been able to use some of that older stuff in Syria. Not all of it could be used (those that were from Iran/Iraq war) but some of it could.

So much for saying all of it's too old.

I can't deny the possibility, however I believe that was mustard gas which could have come from a variety of places.

Nope. Also, remember the red line dumdum set for Syria? It was for Sarin gas....WMD. Just reminding you.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

EC 9984053 regarding BB 9984025, EC 9983805, CA 9983785, GB 9983212, RF 9983182

I haven't read most of the article other than the title....but as far as things being screwed up in Iraq.....of course many things got screwed up especially early on....and I was one of those firing off messages back to DC about things not right.......but after the surge the situation got turned around.

But that's more of a micro issue compared to the valid reasons Bush gave for going to Iraq that Dems AGREED WITH but have been conveniently denying after voting for those same reasons.

In other words, I'm pointing out yet one more reason why leaders in the Dem party are so bankrupt.

You admitted.you didn't read most of the NY Times report 'other than the title' . So you did not read this:

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

So you were running wide-eyed blind (uninformed) to the content of the report, yet here is what you wrote in your post 9983805, EconChick:

"I love it when someone as uninformed as you bumps up against someone like me that actually worked in the nerve center of the Pentagon. <> As I argued for months about the Iraq Status of Forces of Agreement that every liberal denied until Panetta, Gates, Ambassadors Crocker and Hill, and several generals came out and confirmed.....so it will be with what I said about both chemical and nuclear WMD. <> I didn't expect the NY Times to one of the first though. LMAO

So you have botched yet another one of your lame arguments when you wrote that you did not "expect the NY Times to {be} one of the first though."

Informed people do not cite reports that they do not read and then make an argument based solely on the title. It shows you have no integrity in what you think and use to judge reality.

 

[Contumacious]

The Secret Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons

From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule.

In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

1. MAY 2004 Two soldiers exposed to sarin from a shell near Baghdad’s Yarmouk neighborhood.
2. SUMMER 2006 Over 2,400 nerve-agent rockets found at this former Republican Guard compound.
3. JULY 2008 Six Marines exposed to mustard agent from an artillery shell at an abandoned bunker.
4. AUGUST 2008 Five American soldiers exposed to mustard agent while destroying a weapons cache.

Excuse me dingle berry, one Ronald Reagan supplied his buddy Saddam Hussein with the weapons the US wanted him to use against Iran.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Regarding posts EC 9984053, BB 9984025, EC 9983805, CA 9983785, GB 9983212, RF 9983182

For the record, EconChick could not bother herself to read this from the OP subject NY Times report either:

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.

In case after case, participants said, analysis of these warheads and shells reaffirmed intelligence failures. First, the American government did not find what it had been looking for at the war’s outset, then it failed to prepare its troops and medical corps for the aged weapons it did find.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

EC 9986308 regarding BB 9984424, EC 9983965, BB 9983945, UN 9983783, JL 9983210

A) Is it really that hard to imagine them being moved?

What part of "no evidence that Iraq produced chemical weapons after the 1991 Gulf War" do you fail to understand? Didn't you work with these same senior U.S. intelligence officials back in 2006? If you 'imagined' Iraq's entire 'active' WMD production and stockpiling operations were moved to Syria, whenever, why didn't the Bush Administration pursue that potential threat to our national security as soon as it became apparent that Iraq's arsenal of the most lethal weapons ever devised was no longer within the borders of Iraq?

Where were you back in 2006?

updated 6/22/2006 1046 PM ET
Officials: U.S. didn’t find WMDs, despite claims

NBC News and news services
WASHINGTON — Senior U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday they have no evidence that Iraq produced chemical weapons after the 1991 Gulf War, despite recent reports from media outlets and Republican lawmakers.

Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan on Wednesday pointed to a newly declassified report that says coalition forces have found 500 munitions in Iraq that contained degraded sarin or mustard nerve agents.

They cited the report in an attempt to counter criticism by Democrats who say the decision to go to war was a mistake.

But defense officials said Thursday that the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age, which they determined to be pre-1991.

Pentagon officials told NBC News that the munitions are the same kind of ordnance the U.S. military has been gathering in Iraq for the past several years, and "not the WMD we were looking for when we went in this time."

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the issue.

"We were able to determine that [the missile] is, in fact, degraded and ... is consistent with what we would expect from finding a munition that was dated back to pre-Gulf War," an intelligence official told NBC. "However, even in the degraded state, our assessment is that they could pose an up-to-lethal hazard if used in attacks against coalition forces."
Officials We haven t found WMDs - World news - Mideast N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq NBC News

 

[NotfooledbyW]

OW 9975384

It is funny to me how the liberals cannot go to the "Faux News" cliche. Since this is being reported by the NY Times.

Talk about a liberal conundrum.

What conundrum? That NYTimes report devastates the Decider's lone decision to invade Iraq instead of inspect Iraq to find an active WMD program and then cover up health issues of the very same troops he decided to send there to find and secure that active WMD program that did not exist.

Were you like EconChick and didn't read much further than the headline?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

GP 9975352

The big story here is NOT that Ds and libs believed lies. We were all lied to by our government.

When will Americans realize their government is nothing but lies?

I didn't believe Bush's lie that Iraq's regime was not cooperating with UN inspectors in March 2003. That was easy because all one had to do was read the UNSC updates on the inspection process. So I certainly don't see any reason to indict the entire US government just because Bush got away with that one. Most Americans in late February 2003 polls said they preferred that Bush give the inspectors more time. Bush was an idiot. That is not the whole government's fault.

 

[Vigilante]

Of course there was WMD all over Iraq.... The largest group was 550 METRIC TONS of yellowcake.... No matter how you shitheads try to spin it, yellowcake is considered WMD, and although it was a known location, once it was transmitted to the U.N. that we were going to start a war with Saddam, the U.N. inspectors, that had been guarding this stockpile left it UNGUARDED, and it was that way for MONTHS before U.S. forces were able to reestablish a guard on it. It was SO UNGUARDED that nearby towns people broke in, dumped the yellowcake, and were using the barrels to store water in!

Also from the link...."Earlier this year, the military withdrew four devices for controlled radiation exposure from the former nuclear complex. The lead-enclosed irradiation units, used to decontaminate food and other items, contain elements of high radioactivity that could potentially be used in a weapon, according to the official. Their Ottawa-based manufacturer, MDS Nordion, took them back for free, the official said."

U.S. removes yellowcake from Iraq - World news - Mideast N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq NBC News

WMD? Yellowcake? Hahaha. Not true unless you can get people to ingest it somehow cause it's not that radioactive.

Furthermore......

snopes.com Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq

ROTFLMFAO....Even here you have to be DISHONEST! The snopes question was , the removal of yellowcake from Iraq in 2008 proved that Saddam was trying to restart his nuclear program! We ALL KNOW that the yellowcake had been there and Saddam, whether he was going to try to restart it, will never be known, as he's DEAD and you just can't read a dead mans mind! This has NOTHING to do with it being nuclear material, in Iraq, and UNGUARDED!

And as my article from NBC states Yellowcake IS the seed material for HIGHER GRADE NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT, and could spread wide spread panic if incorporated in a blast! ....So there you have it, WMD in the form of yellowcake, 550 tons of the stuff was IN IRAQ prior and DURING the war, it is the essential part of nuclear enrichment, and IT WAS NOT GUARDED. Spin away!