Why isn't Bin Laden wanted for 9-11?

[CMike]

And that he was the 2nd in command of the Iraqi air force.

 

[Jay Canuck]

And that he was the 2nd in command of the Iraqi air force.

who you contend has connections to Al Qeada.....so now you trust him? - He's trying to sell books to retards like you that will buy.

 

[CMike]

You might be able to poo poo one of these sources.

But all of them...

No way Jose

 

[CMike]

Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam and al Qaida

Exhaustive review finds no link between Saddam and al Qaida | McClatchy

The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release later this week, did confirm that Saddam's regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East,

The new study of the Iraqi regime's archives found no documents indicating a "direct operational link" between Hussein's Iraq and al Qaida before the invasion, according to a U.S. official familiar with the report.

He and others spoke to McClatchy on condition of anonymity because the study isn't due to be shared with Congress and released before Wednesday

And all this was written by Warren P Strobel, An

Do play again sometime.

I will play.... right now stoooopid. -

1. that Pentagon report has been released and backs up the story I linked to.
2. the only point you have to refute the report is that the perrson who wrote the story before the report is in anti-war activist which doesn't make the story nor the report any less factual.

nice try but you are beaten to a pulp again.

Yeah...how do you feel the Pentagon report backs up your story?

 

[Fizz]

oh and a list of what they didn't find

Exactly

The question is why didn't they find it?

you just admitted that the weapons weren't there - thanx for the update Sherlock.

And they didn't find them because.....I don't know....because they were never there in the first place?

what point are you trying to make?

look at the list. iraq admits to having most of them.

 

[Jay Canuck]

So where are the WMD's then?

the both of you liars have nothing.

 

[Fizz]

So where are the WMD's then?

the both of you liars have nothing.

is your claim that iraq had NO WMDs? not one? i just want to clarify this.

 

[Jay Canuck]

So where are the WMD's then?

the both of you liars have nothing.

is your claim that iraq had NO WMDs? not one? i just want to clarify this.

is it your claim that Iraq had WMD's that could reach the U.S.A and that the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud so they should have been invaded?

 

[DiveCon]

So where are the WMD's then?

the both of you liars have nothing.

is your claim that iraq had NO WMDs? not one? i just want to clarify this.

is it your claim that Iraq had WMD's that could reach the U.S.A and that the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud so they should have been invaded?

who gives a shit if it could "reach the USA" in your opnion anyway
you are too fucking stupid to understand that they werent supposed to have ANY no matter now far they could reach

 

[Fizz]

So where are the WMD's then?

the both of you liars have nothing.

is your claim that iraq had NO WMDs? not one? i just want to clarify this.

is it your claim that Iraq had WMD's that could reach the U.S.A and that the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud so they should have been invaded?

no. that isnt my claim. my claim is that there was a danger of iraq giving WMDs to terrorists to attack american targets. it doesnt need to be in the mainland usa and the WMD doesnt need to get to its target autonomously.

i have answered your question so please answer mine.

 

[Jay Canuck]

is your claim that iraq had NO WMDs? not one? i just want to clarify this.

is it your claim that Iraq had WMD's that could reach the U.S.A and that the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud so they should have been invaded?

no. that isnt my claim. my claim is that there was a danger of iraq giving WMDs to terrorists to attack american targets. it doesnt need to be in the mainland usa and the WMD doesnt need to get to its target autonomously.

i have answered your question so please answer mine.

I am contending that Iraq did not have WMD's at all except for gas and some low grade urainium that could maybe have been made into a dirty bomb. If it is your fear that those low grade weapons could have been sold to terrorists then why did the USA deal weapons to Iraq in the first place?

 

[Jay Canuck]

you got no Bin Laden, you got no operational connections between Al Qaeda and you got no WMD's ....time for you guys to spin another excuse.

 

[Fizz]

is it your claim that Iraq had WMD's that could reach the U.S.A and that the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud so they should have been invaded?

no. that isnt my claim. my claim is that there was a danger of iraq giving WMDs to terrorists to attack american targets. it doesnt need to be in the mainland usa and the WMD doesnt need to get to its target autonomously.

i have answered your question so please answer mine.

I am contending that Iraq did not have WMD's at all except for gas and some low grade urainium that could maybe have been made into a dirty bomb. If it is your fear that those low grade weapons could have been sold to terrorists then why did the USA deal weapons to Iraq in the first place?

are you now claiming that the USA sent weapons to iraq after they were prohibited from having them? if not then there is the answer to your question. if you are claiming that then please document it.

 

[Jay Canuck]

Given that the WMDs that were used to justify the invasion and war against Iraq never materialized, one would think that the neoconservatives who pushed and misled America into the war, and those members of Congress who complacently rubber-stamped the president’s actions, and those members of the press who served as the administration’s cheerleaders would be at least mildly outraged over how Saddam Hussein acquired his WMDs in the first place — from the United States and other countries during the Reagan administration. Unfortunately, the response has been the standard ho-hum one hears whenever the rot at the center of the empire surfaces: “It was just a policy mistake; it happened a long time ago; we need to put it behind us; and it’s now time to move on.”
It is that mindset of denial, however, that is certain to doom our nation to increasing conflicts, crises, and turmoil. To restore political, moral, and economic health to our country, it is necessary to excise the cancer associated with the unrestrained — and oftentimes secret — exercise of government power. In order to excise such a cancer, however, it is first necessary to acknowledge and confront its existence.

Reagan's WMD Connection to Saddam Hussein

 

[Fizz]

you do know that WMDs were only one of many reason given to invade Iraq, right? seems to me like you need only one of those many reasons to be correct in order to justify the invasion.

 

[Jay Canuck]

you do know that WMDs were only one of many reason given to invade Iraq, right? seems to me like you need only one of those many reasons to be correct in order to justify the invasion.

Then pick one that hasn't been used and debunked and spin away Chucko.

 

[Fizz]

you do know that WMDs were only one of many reason given to invade Iraq, right? seems to me like you need only one of those many reasons to be correct in order to justify the invasion.

Then pick one that hasn't been used and debunked and spin away Chucko.

iraq violated the cease fire agreement by firing at our aircraft.

 

[Jay Canuck]

well that is worth over 5000 American lives, $3 trillion+ in taxpayer cash and the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians.

 

[Fizz]

well that is worth over 5000 American lives, $3 trillion+ in taxpayer cash and the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians.

i dont think anything is worth 5000 american lives but that wasnt the point.

 

[CurveLight]

you do know that WMDs were only one of many reason given to invade Iraq, right? seems to me like you need only one of those many reasons to be correct in order to justify the invasion.

Then pick one that hasn't been used and debunked and spin away Chucko.

iraq violated the cease fire agreement by firing at our aircraft.

Where were our aircraft when iraq fired at them? Oh wait. That doesn't matter. The NFZ was not part of the UN Cease Fire agreement so basically what your dumb ass is trying to say is when iraq fired at our aircraft that violated iraq's sovereign airspace iraq was wrong to defend itself.

Firing at our aircraft did not violate the UN Cease Fire you ignorant ****. Even if it did there was nothing in the UN Cease Fire that automatically granted any UN member a green light to invade iraq. But ***** like you don't care about the facts. How the fuck can you be as dumb as you are?