So now, BUSH caused ISIS?

[NotfooledbyW]

Boss 11658567

UN1441 made no provision for the US CIA to have to come in and show them any damn thing.

Of course. That is why the offer by SH was an act of immediate proactive cooperation on substance that went along with the immediate active cooperation on process and granting access to all sites.

 

[flacaltenn]

This Democracy stuff doesn't WORK there. Most of the neo-cons are starting to realize that. There would be far less death and destruction there NOW -- if we had not attempted to forcefeed democracy on them.

Democracy in the USA means that about 49% of the electorate is severely pissed off til the next election.. Over there, it means the winners are free to dole out justice and jobs on a sectarian basis and the other sides continues to attempt to blow them up..

Did you ever believe that Democracy would spread in the Middle East?
Take your "letter to Iraqis" and just substitute "inept secular shills" for "Pan Arab secularism" and that's about what we brought about.

There is no more Iraq. We cant fight and hold territory for an imaginary "democratic Iraq".. Not gonna happen..

*Sigh* You seem to be so bright sometimes, then you say something totally stupid. "Force feed democracy" is a liberal and radical terrorist MEME! Have you ever known a human being who did not want to be FREE from tyrannical rule? I find it difficult to believe ANY rational sane person would PREFER to be governed by a dictatorship as opposed to self-governing.

The ONLY people in Iraq who don't want democracy are radical terrorists and Pan-Arab Socialists... both of which we and the Iraqis need to kill and be done with. Yes, democracy takes a while to develop in a country that has never had it before... that's to be expected. They are going to have setbacks, the people are going to have to learn who they can trust and who has integrity to lead. Doesn't happen overnight, it takes years. It took us about 15 years to iron out our own democracy when we broke from Britain.

Again, the idea was debated back in 1998 under President Clinton and signed into law as the 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act. The thinking was, establishing a democracy will stabilize the region eventually... not instantly... not the next month or two... but eventually. We plant the seeds, we let them grow and nurture them... THEN, one day in the future... the radical elements in surrounding countries begin to realize how much better off the people of Iraq are with a democracy. They want to emulate that, and the whole radical Islamic house of cards begins to fall. You defeat an ideology with a better ideology because you cannot defeat the ideology with guns and bombs.

Dictators that make the trains run on time, prevent daily car bombings and provide adequate jobs are really really popular. Just like Mussolini/Hitler were rock stars in some American media before the war..

This democracy thing is highly overrated when you DEPEND on the central govt for every need anyway.. (Let that be a warning for the US).
And that IS THE CASE in most of these strongman govts.

They don't want to have to innovate, invent, and commercialize their countries. They don't value commerce, industry and infrastructure like we do --- because it's all PROVIDED for them. THEY DIDN'T BUILD IT....

Sound familar???????? You Free Willy and all Willy does is try to flag down a boat home...

Again, I respectfully disagree with you. People fundamentally want freedom. You'll never convince me otherwise. Of course, people who were loyal to Saddam, his cronies and henchmen, had plenty of freedom under Saddam, they didn't want anything to mess up their arrangement so yeah, they were pissed about us coming in and toppling their golden goose. All the rest of Iraq was grateful we got rid of the "Butcher of Baghdad" and they let that be known at the time. When the first democratic elections were held, 80% of the country defied death threats to vote... doesn't sound like they were rebuking democracy to me!

No wonder you are confused. You equate freedom to being the favorite lacky of a dictator.

Doesn't matter that they voted. Matters whether that democracy represents them and is worth dying to defend. Obviously, when their skin is in the game -- democracy is suddenly not on their top 10 list. Took us over 200 years to become a corruptocracy. They got there in 6...

 

[Faun]

Fuck you. You put a fake Blix comment in quotes and ascribed it to him in March, 2003. Called on it, you're now forced to admit he didn't say that nor did he say it in March, 2003.

When do you stop making shit up? You know, you wouldn't have to if facts and the truth was on your side, right?

Hooray to the fucking clown jerk for scoring a technical point!

What you call a "technical point," is in fact, highlighting what a lying fucktard rightie you are. First you make up a quote and attribute it to the wrong report .... then, when you correct that, you post half a quote out of context.

You quote Blix as reporting...

"...the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. "​

But in context, he actually said:

"In paragraph 11, we note that the long list of proscribed items unaccounted for has not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation. It was the task of the Iraqi side to present items unaccounted for, if they existed, or to present evidence – records, documents or other – convincing the inspectors that the items do not exist. If – for whatever reason – this is not done, the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. However, an effective presence of international inspectors will serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction.

Although during the last month and a half of our inspections, the Iraqi side made considerable efforts to provide explanations, to begin inquiries and to undertake exploration and excavations, these efforts did not bring the answers needed before we withdrew. We did not have time to interview more than a handful of the large number of persons who were said by Iraq to have participated in the unilateral destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991. Such interviews might have helped towards the resolution of some outstanding issues, although one must be aware that the totalitarian regime in Iraq continued to cast a shadow on the credibility of all interviews."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/SC_BRIEFING_NOTES_6_JUNE_2003.doc​

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

You just flip-flopped again.

You're such a lying dumbfucking rightie, that you're now arguing with yourself...

We didn't invade Iraq because of a broken UN resolution...

Bush invaded Iraq because they failed to comply with repeated UN resolutions...

Again... it was not his "breaking resolutions" that was the issue.

.... you're so full of shit, you can't keep your stories straight.

 

[Boss]

Boss 11658567

UN1441 made no provision for the US CIA to have to come in and show them any damn thing.

Of course. That is why the offer by SH was an act of immediate proactive cooperation on substance that went along with the immediate active cooperation on process and granting access to all sites.

No no nooo... it was NOT immediate. It came after invasion was inevitable, months after inspections had begun under UN1441. After months of obfuscating, protesting, dragging their feet, refusing to turn over documents and making things as difficult as they could for UN inspectors. It was an 11th-hour attempt to stave off an impending invasion and that's all it ever was. They weren't serious, they had zero intentions of allowing the CIA to poke around in Iraq and the only reason they proposed it was because they knew it couldn't be accepted at that point.

 

[Boss]

Holyfuckingshit!

You just flip-flopped again.

You're such a lying dumbfucking rightie, that you're now arguing with yourself...

We didn't invade Iraq because of a broken UN resolution...

Bush invaded Iraq because they failed to comply with repeated UN resolutions...

Again... it was not his "breaking resolutions" that was the issue.

.... you're so full of shit, you can't keep your stories straight.

I am dreadfully sorry you are too fucking retarded to comprehend context of what is being said. I truly wish you the best with your affliction and hope you can overcome it in the future and live a productive life.

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

You just flip-flopped again.

You're such a lying dumbfucking rightie, that you're now arguing with yourself...

We didn't invade Iraq because of a broken UN resolution...

Bush invaded Iraq because they failed to comply with repeated UN resolutions...

Again... it was not his "breaking resolutions" that was the issue.

.... you're so full of shit, you can't keep your stories straight.

I am dreadfully sorry you are too fucking retarded to comprehend context of what is being said. I truly wish you the best with your affliction and hope you can overcome it in the future and live a productive life.

The context of the hacked up quote you posted was based on an "IF" that Blix said more time was needed to determine. You fucking lied by hacking off the if condition as though it really happened. Even worse, you tried to back date it to before the war started as though it were justification for Bush deciding to launch his war.

You can apologize all you want -- you've proven yourself to be a lying fucktard rightie.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

 

[Boss]

Fuck you. You put a fake Blix comment in quotes and ascribed it to him in March, 2003. Called on it, you're now forced to admit he didn't say that nor did he say it in March, 2003.

When do you stop making shit up? You know, you wouldn't have to if facts and the truth was on your side, right?

Hooray to the fucking clown jerk for scoring a technical point!

What you call a "technical point," is in fact, highlighting what a lying fucktard rightie you are. First you make up a quote and attribute it to the wrong report .... then, when you correct that, you post half a quote out of context.

You quote Blix as reporting...

"...the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. "​

But in context, he actually said:

"In paragraph 11, we note that the long list of proscribed items unaccounted for has not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation. It was the task of the Iraqi side to present items unaccounted for, if they existed, or to present evidence – records, documents or other – convincing the inspectors that the items do not exist. If – for whatever reason – this is not done, the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. However, an effective presence of international inspectors will serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction.

Although during the last month and a half of our inspections, the Iraqi side made considerable efforts to provide explanations, to begin inquiries and to undertake exploration and excavations, these efforts did not bring the answers needed before we withdrew. We did not have time to interview more than a handful of the large number of persons who were said by Iraq to have participated in the unilateral destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991. Such interviews might have helped towards the resolution of some outstanding issues, although one must be aware that the totalitarian regime in Iraq continued to cast a shadow on the credibility of all interviews."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/SC_BRIEFING_NOTES_6_JUNE_2003.doc​

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Well the fucking report was from June, after the inspectors had evacuated from Iraq and US troops were already deployed... time was up. There was no more opportunity for Saddam to comply.

He says "if for whatever reason this can't be done" and it hadn't been done... time to do it was over. I have no idea what you think he was trying to say... do you think he believed Bush would withdraw the invasion forces and return to UN inspections again? That time had passed, the inspectors were gone, troops were already on the ground in Iraq.

He is simply saying "we needed this to be done, if it can't be done we can't be sure." Well, it wasn't done so we can't be sure.

 

[Boss]

Holyfuckingshit!

You just flip-flopped again.

You're such a lying dumbfucking rightie, that you're now arguing with yourself...

We didn't invade Iraq because of a broken UN resolution...

Bush invaded Iraq because they failed to comply with repeated UN resolutions...

Again... it was not his "breaking resolutions" that was the issue.

.... you're so full of shit, you can't keep your stories straight.

I am dreadfully sorry you are too fucking retarded to comprehend context of what is being said. I truly wish you the best with your affliction and hope you can overcome it in the future and live a productive life.

The context of the hacked up quote you posted was based on an "IF" that Blix said more time was needed to determine. You fucking lied by hacking off the if condition as though it really happened. Even worse, you tried to back date it to before the war started as though it were justification for Bush deciding to launch his war.

You can apologize all you want -- you've proven yourself to be a lying fucktard rightie.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

No, I didn't do anything of the sort. I posted what Blix said which confirms Iraq had not complied with UN1441.

YOU are the one trying to misinterpret it and make it into some kind of weak argument for more inspections.

Again, in June 2003, AFTER the US had launched an invasion of Iraq and UN inspectors were gone, there was never going to be any more inspections. Now, if you want to retardedly believe that Blix hoped he could continue inspecting... that's fine, maybe he did hope that... but the time for inspections was up. Wasn't going to happen.

 

[Faun]

Fuck you. You put a fake Blix comment in quotes and ascribed it to him in March, 2003. Called on it, you're now forced to admit he didn't say that nor did he say it in March, 2003.

When do you stop making shit up? You know, you wouldn't have to if facts and the truth was on your side, right?

Hooray to the fucking clown jerk for scoring a technical point!

What you call a "technical point," is in fact, highlighting what a lying fucktard rightie you are. First you make up a quote and attribute it to the wrong report .... then, when you correct that, you post half a quote out of context.

You quote Blix as reporting...

"...the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. "​

But in context, he actually said:

"In paragraph 11, we note that the long list of proscribed items unaccounted for has not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation. It was the task of the Iraqi side to present items unaccounted for, if they existed, or to present evidence – records, documents or other – convincing the inspectors that the items do not exist. If – for whatever reason – this is not done, the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. However, an effective presence of international inspectors will serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction.

Although during the last month and a half of our inspections, the Iraqi side made considerable efforts to provide explanations, to begin inquiries and to undertake exploration and excavations, these efforts did not bring the answers needed before we withdrew. We did not have time to interview more than a handful of the large number of persons who were said by Iraq to have participated in the unilateral destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991. Such interviews might have helped towards the resolution of some outstanding issues, although one must be aware that the totalitarian regime in Iraq continued to cast a shadow on the credibility of all interviews."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/SC_BRIEFING_NOTES_6_JUNE_2003.doc​

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Well the fucking report was from June, after the inspectors had evacuated from Iraq and US troops were already deployed... time was up. There was no more opportunity for Saddam to comply.

He says "if for whatever reason this can't be done" and it hadn't been done... time to do it was over. I have no idea what you think he was trying to say... do you think he believed Bush would withdraw the invasion forces and return to UN inspections again? That time had passed, the inspectors were gone, troops were already on the ground in Iraq.

He is simply saying "we needed this to be done, if it can't be done we can't be sure." Well, it wasn't done so we can't be sure.

I see. So you're a moron AND a lying fucktard rightie. He was saying the U.N. was not afforded enough time to determine the outcome of his "IF" condition. You then changed that as though he said it was confirmed, which he never said. You even made up your own quote and attributed to Blix.

Not to mention, there were no ongoing weapons programs. We invaded for nothing. Had Bush let the U.N. finish the job they were sent in to do, some 6,000 Americans would still be alive today. Not that you care about them, you've already made it clear that you loathe the troops.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

You just flip-flopped again.

You're such a lying dumbfucking rightie, that you're now arguing with yourself...

We didn't invade Iraq because of a broken UN resolution...

Bush invaded Iraq because they failed to comply with repeated UN resolutions...

Again... it was not his "breaking resolutions" that was the issue.

.... you're so full of shit, you can't keep your stories straight.

I am dreadfully sorry you are too fucking retarded to comprehend context of what is being said. I truly wish you the best with your affliction and hope you can overcome it in the future and live a productive life.

The context of the hacked up quote you posted was based on an "IF" that Blix said more time was needed to determine. You fucking lied by hacking off the if condition as though it really happened. Even worse, you tried to back date it to before the war started as though it were justification for Bush deciding to launch his war.

You can apologize all you want -- you've proven yourself to be a lying fucktard rightie.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

No, I didn't do anything of the sort. I posted what Blix said which confirms Iraq had not complied with UN1441.

YOU are the one trying to misinterpret it and make it into some kind of weak argument for more inspections.

Again, in June 2003, AFTER the US had launched an invasion of Iraq and UN inspectors were gone, there was never going to be any more inspections. Now, if you want to retardedly believe that Blix hoped he could continue inspecting... that's fine, maybe he did hope that... but the time for inspections was up. Wasn't going to happen.

Blix was talking about the last month and a half they were there. He was talking in the context of not being afforded enough time to complete his job. And you made up a quote out of whole cloth. You fucking lied through your keyboard. A google search revealed you made it up and made it look like Blix actually said the made up quote you ascribed to him.

 

[Boss]

Fuck you. You put a fake Blix comment in quotes and ascribed it to him in March, 2003. Called on it, you're now forced to admit he didn't say that nor did he say it in March, 2003.

When do you stop making shit up? You know, you wouldn't have to if facts and the truth was on your side, right?

Hooray to the fucking clown jerk for scoring a technical point!

What you call a "technical point," is in fact, highlighting what a lying fucktard rightie you are. First you make up a quote and attribute it to the wrong report .... then, when you correct that, you post half a quote out of context.

You quote Blix as reporting...

"...the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. "​

But in context, he actually said:

"In paragraph 11, we note that the long list of proscribed items unaccounted for has not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation. It was the task of the Iraqi side to present items unaccounted for, if they existed, or to present evidence – records, documents or other – convincing the inspectors that the items do not exist. If – for whatever reason – this is not done, the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. However, an effective presence of international inspectors will serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction.

Although during the last month and a half of our inspections, the Iraqi side made considerable efforts to provide explanations, to begin inquiries and to undertake exploration and excavations, these efforts did not bring the answers needed before we withdrew. We did not have time to interview more than a handful of the large number of persons who were said by Iraq to have participated in the unilateral destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991. Such interviews might have helped towards the resolution of some outstanding issues, although one must be aware that the totalitarian regime in Iraq continued to cast a shadow on the credibility of all interviews."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/SC_BRIEFING_NOTES_6_JUNE_2003.doc​

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Well the fucking report was from June, after the inspectors had evacuated from Iraq and US troops were already deployed... time was up. There was no more opportunity for Saddam to comply.

He says "if for whatever reason this can't be done" and it hadn't been done... time to do it was over. I have no idea what you think he was trying to say... do you think he believed Bush would withdraw the invasion forces and return to UN inspections again? That time had passed, the inspectors were gone, troops were already on the ground in Iraq.

He is simply saying "we needed this to be done, if it can't be done we can't be sure." Well, it wasn't done so we can't be sure.

I see. So you're a moron AND a lying fucktard rightie. He was saying the U.N. was not afforded enough time to determine the outcome of his "IF" condition. You then changed that as though he said it was confirmed, which he never said. You even made up your own quote and attributed to Blix.

Not to mention, there were no ongoing weapons programs. We invaded for nothing. Had Bush let the U.N. finish the job they were sent in to do, some 6,000 Americans would still be alive today. Not that you care about them, you've already made it clear that you loathe the troops.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Unfortunately for you and Saddam, UN1441 didn't offer the luxury of time for Saddam to comply. It ordered his "immediate" cooperation. Most non-retards understand that "immediate" doesn't require further explanation.

I didn't change a word, I posted what Blix concluded in June 2003 in the final report. His conclusion was, IF we don't have the answers to our questions, we can't be certain about these programs. Most of the 6,000 Americans died at the hands of radical terrorists who are now being allowed to take over Iraq due to your cowardly "run away" strategy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

{{{ 27 January 2003 (A) "...for some time farfetched allegations have been made publicly that questions posed by inspectors were of intelligence character." (B) "On a number of occasions, demonstrations have taken place in front of our offices and at inspection sites." (C-a) "...a sightseeing excursion by five inspectors to a mosque was followed by an unwarranted public outburst. (C-b)The inspectors went without any UN insignia and were welcomed in the kind manner that is characteristic of the normal Iraqi attitude to foreigners. They asked perfectly innocent questions and parted with the invitation to come again. (C-c) Shortly thereafter, we receive protests from the Iraqi authorities about an unannounced inspection and about questions not relevant to weapons of mass destruction. 14 February 2003 (D) The Iraqi side has tried on occasion to attach conditions, as it did regarding helicopters and U-2 planes. Iraq has not, however, so far persisted in these or other conditions for the exercise of any of our inspection rights. If it did, we would report it.}}}}

Boss 11659867

Thank you for continuing to post proof that Saddam was not complying with the terms of UN1441

I'm still waiting for the quote from Blix where he says Iraq was not complying with UNSC Res 1441. You can't call that minor stuff "not complying" if Blix doesn't.


Boss 11660249

No no nooo... it was NOT immediate. It came after invasion was inevitable, months after inspections had begun under UN1441.

Nope. It came early in the inspection process under 1441

Res 1441 was passed mid November 2002. The proactive SH offer to let the CIA come in was public by December 21 2002. About ten days later Sec State Powell said Iraq was cooperating and that war was not inevitable. So you contradict the U.S. Secretary of State in office at that time.

. Powell on ABC January 2003.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, sir, that mobilization is occurring in Iraq right now, or in the region around Iraq. But at the same time, Iraq seems to be cooperating with the inspectors. I know your views on the Iraqi declaration, but aside from that, do you have any other evidence that Iraq is not complying with the UN resolution?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, the declaration is certainly noncompliant. There is no question about it. I don't think anybody is defending that declaration.

They have been cooperating with the inspectors and we'll see if that cooperation continues. There has been some resistance in recent days to some of the things the inspectors are looking for, and we are providing more information and intelligence to the inspectors to cue their visits and we'll see whether that attitude of cooperation continues.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: And if it does, war is not inevitable?


SECRETARY POWELL: We've never said that war is inevitable. The President has always said that he is interested in a peaceful solution. But at the same time, if Iraq does not cooperate or if we find reason to believe that they do have weapons of mass destruction that they have not identified and turned over to the international community, then the President has all of his options available to him. And he has the option of also going back to the United Nations or acting unilaterally with likeminded nations.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. Happy New Year.


SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you. Happy New Year to you and yours, George.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Thank you.

So war was not inevitable and Iraq was cooperating when SH offered to let the CIA come in.

Just another (technicality) screw up on your part - right Boss??

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It ordered his "immediate" cooperation.

And Iraq immediately cooperated. Unfortunately for your world of make believe Res 1441 did not distinquish between cooperation on process and cooperation on substance. There is no legally binding way for you to tie Iraq solely to later cooperation on substance while you entirely disregard cooperation on process which came immedately.

 

[Faun]

Fuck you. You put a fake Blix comment in quotes and ascribed it to him in March, 2003. Called on it, you're now forced to admit he didn't say that nor did he say it in March, 2003.

When do you stop making shit up? You know, you wouldn't have to if facts and the truth was on your side, right?

Hooray to the fucking clown jerk for scoring a technical point!

What you call a "technical point," is in fact, highlighting what a lying fucktard rightie you are. First you make up a quote and attribute it to the wrong report .... then, when you correct that, you post half a quote out of context.

You quote Blix as reporting...

"...the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. "​

But in context, he actually said:

"In paragraph 11, we note that the long list of proscribed items unaccounted for has not been shortened by inspections or Iraqi declarations, explanations or documentation. It was the task of the Iraqi side to present items unaccounted for, if they existed, or to present evidence – records, documents or other – convincing the inspectors that the items do not exist. If – for whatever reason – this is not done, the international community cannot have confidence that past programmes or any remaining parts of them have been terminated. However, an effective presence of international inspectors will serve as a deterrent against efforts aimed at reactivating or developing new programmes of weapons of mass destruction.

Although during the last month and a half of our inspections, the Iraqi side made considerable efforts to provide explanations, to begin inquiries and to undertake exploration and excavations, these efforts did not bring the answers needed before we withdrew. We did not have time to interview more than a handful of the large number of persons who were said by Iraq to have participated in the unilateral destruction of biological and chemical weapons in 1991. Such interviews might have helped towards the resolution of some outstanding issues, although one must be aware that the totalitarian regime in Iraq continued to cast a shadow on the credibility of all interviews."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/SC_BRIEFING_NOTES_6_JUNE_2003.doc​

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Well the fucking report was from June, after the inspectors had evacuated from Iraq and US troops were already deployed... time was up. There was no more opportunity for Saddam to comply.

He says "if for whatever reason this can't be done" and it hadn't been done... time to do it was over. I have no idea what you think he was trying to say... do you think he believed Bush would withdraw the invasion forces and return to UN inspections again? That time had passed, the inspectors were gone, troops were already on the ground in Iraq.

He is simply saying "we needed this to be done, if it can't be done we can't be sure." Well, it wasn't done so we can't be sure.

I see. So you're a moron AND a lying fucktard rightie. He was saying the U.N. was not afforded enough time to determine the outcome of his "IF" condition. You then changed that as though he said it was confirmed, which he never said. You even made up your own quote and attributed to Blix.

Not to mention, there were no ongoing weapons programs. We invaded for nothing. Had Bush let the U.N. finish the job they were sent in to do, some 6,000 Americans would still be alive today. Not that you care about them, you've already made it clear that you loathe the troops.

If facts and truth were on your side, you wouldn't have to lie.

Unfortunately for you and Saddam, UN1441 didn't offer the luxury of time for Saddam to comply. It ordered his "immediate" cooperation. Most non-retards understand that "immediate" doesn't require further explanation.

No, it was unfortunate for the nearly 6,000 Americans who died in vain and tens of thousands of others wounded because they were sent into Iraq to hunt for a weapons program which didn't exist and could have been determined by U.N. inspectors.

I didn't change a word,

The hell you didn't. You claim Blix said, "the international community cannot be certain as to the status of Saddam's WMD programs," and of course, Blix never said that.

Do you ever stop lying?

I posted what Blix concluded in June 2003 in the final report. His conclusion was, IF we don't have the answers to our questions, we can't be certain about these programs. Most of the 6,000 Americans died at the hands of radical terrorists who are now being allowed to take over Iraq due to your cowardly "run away" strategy.

That wasn't "my" strategy. It was George Bush who promised al-Maliki the U.S. would pull all of the troops out of Iraq, not me.

 

[Boss]

{{{ 27 January 2003 (A) "...for some time farfetched allegations have been made publicly that questions posed by inspectors were of intelligence character." (B) "On a number of occasions, demonstrations have taken place in front of our offices and at inspection sites." (C-a) "...a sightseeing excursion by five inspectors to a mosque was followed by an unwarranted public outburst. (C-b)The inspectors went without any UN insignia and were welcomed in the kind manner that is characteristic of the normal Iraqi attitude to foreigners. They asked perfectly innocent questions and parted with the invitation to come again. (C-c) Shortly thereafter, we receive protests from the Iraqi authorities about an unannounced inspection and about questions not relevant to weapons of mass destruction. 14 February 2003 (D) The Iraqi side has tried on occasion to attach conditions, as it did regarding helicopters and U-2 planes. Iraq has not, however, so far persisted in these or other conditions for the exercise of any of our inspection rights. If it did, we would report it.}}}}

Boss 11659867

Thank you for continuing to post proof that Saddam was not complying with the terms of UN1441

I'm still waiting for the quote from Blix where he says Iraq was not complying with UNSC Res 1441. You can't call that minor stuff "not complying" if Blix doesn't.


Boss 11660249

No no nooo... it was NOT immediate. It came after invasion was inevitable, months after inspections had begun under UN1441.

Nope. It came early in the inspection process under 1441

Res 1441 was passed mid November 2002. The proactive SH offer to let the CIA come in was public by December 21 2002. About ten days later Sec State Powell said Iraq was cooperating and that war was not inevitable. So you contradict the U.S. Secretary of State in office at that time.

. Powell on ABC January 2003.

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, sir, that mobilization is occurring in Iraq right now, or in the region around Iraq. But at the same time, Iraq seems to be cooperating with the inspectors. I know your views on the Iraqi declaration, but aside from that, do you have any other evidence that Iraq is not complying with the UN resolution?

SECRETARY POWELL: Well, the declaration is certainly noncompliant. There is no question about it. I don't think anybody is defending that declaration.

They have been cooperating with the inspectors and we'll see if that cooperation continues. There has been some resistance in recent days to some of the things the inspectors are looking for, and we are providing more information and intelligence to the inspectors to cue their visits and we'll see whether that attitude of cooperation continues.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: And if it does, war is not inevitable?


SECRETARY POWELL: We've never said that war is inevitable. The President has always said that he is interested in a peaceful solution. But at the same time, if Iraq does not cooperate or if we find reason to believe that they do have weapons of mass destruction that they have not identified and turned over to the international community, then the President has all of his options available to him. And he has the option of also going back to the United Nations or acting unilaterally with likeminded nations.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. Happy New Year.


SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you. Happy New Year to you and yours, George.


MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Thank you.

So war was not inevitable and Iraq was cooperating when SH offered to let the CIA come in.

Just another (technicality) screw up on your part - right Boss??

Again... UN1441 does not give Iraq permission to stage protests, lobby complaints, harass or obstruct inspectors in any way. Iraq was not cooperating and UN1441 called for immediate, proactive and active cooperation or face serious consequences.

There has been some resistance in recent days to some of the things the inspectors are looking for...

This is not allowed under terms of UN1441. He was given one last chance to cooperate with the UN inspectors and comply fully, proactively, actively and immediately. He chose to not do that and persisted in trying to play games.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NF 11660698

I'm still waiting for the quote from Blix where he says Iraq was not complying with UNSC Res 1441. You can't call that minor stuff "not complying" if Blix doesn't.

Still waiting Boss. Where did Blix say Iraq was not complying? You have mounted a defective argument that is based upon nothing but stupidity by thinking you and Bush43 got to determine whether Iraq was complying or not under the legal force of UNSC Res 1441 in its entirety.

There was a means to deal with non-compliance within 1441 and that action was never ever close to being considered by the authorities that mattered.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Boss 11660354

I posted what Blix said which confirms Iraq had not complied with UN1441.

Confirms to whom? To what authority? Blix never once said Iraq had not complied with UNSC 1441. You are not telling the truth or representing anything close to the facts regarding that period in history. When are you going to provide a quote where Blix actually said Iraq was not complying with UNSC 1441? You keep avoiding it. So I'll keep asking your for what you know does not exist.

 

[jasonnfree]

Right wingers still trying to revive the wmd crap I see. Screw isis, they have no capability to harm America. You guys are apologists for the oil companies and the bush/cheney crime family. Time for you to go dig up some dirt on Hillary or Bernie, maybe help offset the embarrassment of Denny haster.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Boss 11660354

Again, in June 2003, AFTER the US had launched an invasion of Iraq and UN inspectors were gone, there was never going to be any more inspections.

The reason Bush invaded Iraq was to 'inspect' Iraq by killing people. Have you heard of the Iraq Survey Group? They finished the inspections after the invasion. They found nothing doing it the bloody way? Blix requested to continue inspections after the invasion but since Bush had no clue how to maintain the level of stability in the country that existed on March 17, 2003, Iraq became far too dangerous for UN inspectors to resume their work.

After 35 days of inspections including first time unrestricted inspections of Saddam's sprawling palaces it was Bush and Blair that were not cooperating with UNMOVIC and the IAEA.

January 2, 2003 Inspector states no banned weapons found in Iraq so far by Michael Jansen, The Irish Times ... UN inspectors searching Iraq for banned weapons of mass destruction have found nothing so far. ... UNMOVIC has repeatedly complained that the US and UK have not provided the inspectors with intelligence about materials or facilities which could prove that Iraq is in breach of Security Council resolution 1441.

Inspecting Iraq A Record of the First 40 Days compiled by the Project on Defense Alternatives

But you are wrong again. Bush decided he would have the US do the inspections after rejecting Iraq's early offer to allow the CIA to come in peacefully, dope that he was. You must know that 4484 Americans are dead because of that decision. The tragic part is there was no way an intelligent person would conclude prior to the invasion that starting a war with Iraq would actually 'resolve the longstanding disarmament issues' that was basically a paperwork issue. That's 4484 dead over the missing paperwork threat. You are something Boss.