Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[JRK]

Nice sidestep with an extra sidestep of spam. LOL It's really funny how you rush to believe the "butcher of basra" et al and their claims that they can't prove all because their claims support your spin. LOL

You liberals amaze me
How far do you want to go with this?
esolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."

Blix stated inn 2003 that they had lied

Mr Blix said the declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

how far do you want to take this?

In case you missed it your own quote stated " Blix's public statements where he insisted that weapons Baghdad could not account for was not proof they existed and were hidden."

So in other words the fact that iraq could not account for them did not prove that they still existed.

That is from your own quote. So spamming other BS as you cherry pick comments that suit your needs even as you ignore more recent comments from the same source shows how desperate you are to spin this.

Cherry pick?
WTF are you doing?
By the way, how do you go from tthey never existed to
B]Mr Blix said t[/B]he declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

Those are Blixes words
not mine
so I think we have found a place as to who do you trust?
was that not part of the entire problem?

 

[drsmith1072]

Why hasn't your Messiah® caught bin Laden? Why did your Messiah® claim that he would during the campaign, only the turn around and say bin Laden isn't important?

Why are both you and he such fucking hypocrites?

Hey stupid......it was BUSH JR. that said he was no longer concerned with OBL, and that was only 2 years after 9/11.

And......FWIW........Bush Jr. gave Bin Laden a 7 year head start to get hidden.

Wanna talk about how Jr. lost Bin Laden at Tora Bora?

What are you babbling about?
GWB gave Bin Ladin a what?
You mean Clinton?
CLINTON BLEW 3 CHANCES TO SEIZE BIN LADEN

And as far as 9-11 and Saddam goes
i dare you to read this

Clinton-Era Reports Cited Saddam-bin Laden Ties
ust weeks after Clinton bombed the daylights out of suspected hideaways for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, he used his January 1999 State of the Union Address to warn America about both bin Laden and Saddam, mentioning the two terror kingpins almost in the same breath. "We will defend our security wherever we are threatened - as we did this summer when we struck at Osama bin Laden's network of terror," Clinton told Congress and the nation. "The bombing our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania reminds us again of the risks faced every day by those who represent America to the world." Moments later Clinton segued into the threat posed by Saddam:

"For nearly a decade, Iraq has defied its obligations to destroy its weapons of terror and the missiles to deliver them. America will continue to contain Saddam, and we will work for the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people." But rather than launch an all out assault on what reporters now call the "dubious" assertion that Saddam and bin Laden had made common cause, the press took Clinton's ball and ran with it.

In fact, as researched and documented this week by FrontPageMagazine.com, in 1999 the national news media was replete with reports linking the Butcher of Baghdad and the man who masterminded the killing of 3,000 Americans almost two years ago.

Here are a few highlights gathered by FrontPage from the press' Saddam-bin Laden file – stories that have since conveniently disappeared down the media's memory hole:

Associated Press Worldstream

Feb. 14, 1999 Taliban leader says whereabouts of bin Laden unknown

... Analysts say bin Laden's options for asylum are limited.

Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month. And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and violent anti-U.S. history .... San Jose Mercury News

SUNDAY MORNING FINAL EDITION

Feb. 14, 1999 U.S. WORRIED ABOUT IRAQI, BIN LADEN TIES TERRORIST COULD GAIN EVEN DEADLIER WEAPONS U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi's loose-knit organization much more dangerous ... In addition, the officials said, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal is now in Iraq, as is a renowned Palestinian bomb designer, and both could make their expertise available to bin Laden. "It's clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq," said Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counterterrorism operations at the Central Intelligence Agency ... Saddam has even offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support for Iraq.

... [in] late December, when bin Laden met a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan, there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world. Bin Laden, who strikes in the name of Islam, and Saddam, one of the most secular rulers in the Arab world, have little in common except their hatred of the United States ...

More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there may be contacts between bin Laden's organization and Iraq's Special Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam's son Qusay. Both the SSO and the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former President George Bush ...

"The idea that the same people who are hiding Saddam's biological weapons may be meeting with Osama bin Laden is not a happy one," said one American official.... Beacon Journal wire services

Oct. 31, 1999 BIN LADEN SPOTTED AFTER OFFER TO LEAVE DATELINE: JALALABAD, AFGHANISTAN: ... The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that the likely destination is Iraq. A Clinton administration official said bin Laden's request "falls far short" of the UN resolution that the Taliban deliver him for trial. ...

The Kansas City Star March 2, 1999 International terrorism, a conflict without boundaries By Rich Hood ... He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States and any country friendly to the United States. ...

United Press International Nov. 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle. WASHINGTON – The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee. ...

U.S. Newswire Dec. 23, 1999 Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks. ... Aauthor Yossef] Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."

National Public Radio MORNING EDITION (10:00 a.m.ET) Feb. 18, 1999 THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW. ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDS REPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER ... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.

Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ... known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place.

SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony. ... Foreign news services also carried news of the now-supressed Saddam-bin Laden connection:

Agence France-Presse Feb. 17, 1999 Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday. "If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in neighbouring countries."

Deutsche Presse-Agentur Feb. 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq

DATELINE: Kuwait City An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours. The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.

Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.

The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/16/123325

WOW! More spammed right wing talking points and propaganda by the right. LOL IMagine that.

I have a question, do you have any opinions of your own or do you think spamming the moronic opinions of others like a good little lemming is just as good??

 

[drsmith1072]

You liberals amaze me
How far do you want to go with this?
esolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."

Blix stated inn 2003 that they had lied

Mr Blix said the declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

how far do you want to take this?

In case you missed it your own quote stated " Blix's public statements where he insisted that weapons Baghdad could not account for was not proof they existed and were hidden."

So in other words the fact that iraq could not account for them did not prove that they still existed.

That is from your own quote. So spamming other BS as you cherry pick comments that suit your needs even as you ignore more recent comments from the same source shows how desperate you are to spin this.

Cherry pick?
WTF are you doing?
By the way, how do you go from tthey never existed to
B]Mr Blix said t[/B]he declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

Those are Blixes words
not mine
so I think we have found a place as to who do you trust?
was that not part of the entire problem?

Really?? from WHEN?? When did blix make those comments?? Why don't you go and take a look at his report to UN in march?? Why do you have to cherry pick comments from God only knows when instead of focusing more more recent comments??

Furthermore, when and where did I say that they never existed?? Or is this where you get desperate and make up shite and attribute your wok of fiction to someone who never made such a claim?

Oh and care to address the quote from your own post??

Here it is again for you since you missed it when you posted and when i reposted it.

" Blix's public statements where he insisted that weapons Baghdad could not account for was not proof they existed and were hidden."

So why is that you put so much weight what what blix says when it supports your spin and ignore his words when they don't support your spin??

 

[JRK]

Hey stupid......it was BUSH JR. that said he was no longer concerned with OBL, and that was only 2 years after 9/11.

And......FWIW........Bush Jr. gave Bin Laden a 7 year head start to get hidden.

Wanna talk about how Jr. lost Bin Laden at Tora Bora?

What are you babbling about?
GWB gave Bin Ladin a what?
You mean Clinton?
CLINTON BLEW 3 CHANCES TO SEIZE BIN LADEN

And as far as 9-11 and Saddam goes
i dare you to read this

Clinton-Era Reports Cited Saddam-bin Laden Ties
ust weeks after Clinton bombed the daylights out of suspected hideaways for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, he used his January 1999 State of the Union Address to warn America about both bin Laden and Saddam, mentioning the two terror kingpins almost in the same breath. "We will defend our security wherever we are threatened - as we did this summer when we struck at Osama bin Laden's network of terror," Clinton told Congress and the nation. "The bombing our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania reminds us again of the risks faced every day by those who represent America to the world." Moments later Clinton segued into the threat posed by Saddam:

"For nearly a decade, Iraq has defied its obligations to destroy its weapons of terror and the missiles to deliver them. America will continue to contain Saddam, and we will work for the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people." But rather than launch an all out assault on what reporters now call the "dubious" assertion that Saddam and bin Laden had made common cause, the press took Clinton's ball and ran with it.

In fact, as researched and documented this week by FrontPageMagazine.com, in 1999 the national news media was replete with reports linking the Butcher of Baghdad and the man who masterminded the killing of 3,000 Americans almost two years ago.

Here are a few highlights gathered by FrontPage from the press' Saddam-bin Laden file – stories that have since conveniently disappeared down the media's memory hole:

Associated Press Worldstream

Feb. 14, 1999 Taliban leader says whereabouts of bin Laden unknown

... Analysts say bin Laden's options for asylum are limited.

Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month. And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and violent anti-U.S. history .... San Jose Mercury News

SUNDAY MORNING FINAL EDITION

Feb. 14, 1999 U.S. WORRIED ABOUT IRAQI, BIN LADEN TIES TERRORIST COULD GAIN EVEN DEADLIER WEAPONS U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi's loose-knit organization much more dangerous ... In addition, the officials said, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal is now in Iraq, as is a renowned Palestinian bomb designer, and both could make their expertise available to bin Laden. "It's clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq," said Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counterterrorism operations at the Central Intelligence Agency ... Saddam has even offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support for Iraq.

... [in] late December, when bin Laden met a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan, there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world. Bin Laden, who strikes in the name of Islam, and Saddam, one of the most secular rulers in the Arab world, have little in common except their hatred of the United States ...

More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there may be contacts between bin Laden's organization and Iraq's Special Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam's son Qusay. Both the SSO and the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former President George Bush ...

"The idea that the same people who are hiding Saddam's biological weapons may be meeting with Osama bin Laden is not a happy one," said one American official.... Beacon Journal wire services

Oct. 31, 1999 BIN LADEN SPOTTED AFTER OFFER TO LEAVE DATELINE: JALALABAD, AFGHANISTAN: ... The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that the likely destination is Iraq. A Clinton administration official said bin Laden's request "falls far short" of the UN resolution that the Taliban deliver him for trial. ...

The Kansas City Star March 2, 1999 International terrorism, a conflict without boundaries By Rich Hood ... He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States and any country friendly to the United States. ...

United Press International Nov. 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle. WASHINGTON – The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee. ...

U.S. Newswire Dec. 23, 1999 Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks. ... Aauthor Yossef] Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."

National Public Radio MORNING EDITION (10:00 a.m.ET) Feb. 18, 1999 THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW. ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDS REPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER ... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.

Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ... known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place.

SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony. ... Foreign news services also carried news of the now-supressed Saddam-bin Laden connection:

Agence France-Presse Feb. 17, 1999 Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday. "If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in neighbouring countries."

Deutsche Presse-Agentur Feb. 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq

DATELINE: Kuwait City An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours. The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.

Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.

The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/16/123325

WOW! More spammed right wing talking points and propaganda by the right. LOL IMagine that.

I have a question, do you have any opinions of your own or do you think spamming the moronic opinions of others like a good little lemming is just as good??

i have a question for you
once you are provided with information that is not from the main stream media (Dan Rather), why does the other 1/2 of the story scare you liberals so?
I truly believe that W did what he said he was going to do
unlike Obama who has done nothing but run up the debt

B]Mr Blix said t[/B]he declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

what do you call this?
at what point after 9-11 do you say enough is enough

 

[drsmith1072]

into a war over the WMD thing. Bush was not.
Take the red pill.

Yet....Clinton murdered 1 million Iraqi children under HIS watch through his international sanctions, and what of the innocent civilians he bombed and killed in Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan and Serbia? I guess they don't matter:

[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Maybe Americans don't care about the hundreds of Iraqis Clinton killed during the impeachment trial bombings of Iraq, and the scores of Iraqi civilians (and sheep) killed during the almost daily bombings of Iraq in the two years since then. Most Americans, incredibly enough, don't even know we're still at war, that we've been bombing Iraq every other day for the last two years! [/FONT]

[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Okay, for the sake of argument, say we can forgive Clinton for killing a few hundred or thousand Iraqis with bombs. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Bombs are merciful compared to what Clinton has done to the innocent children of Iraq, the most vulnerable of all, by maintaining ten years of the harshest sanctions in the history of mankind, begun on August 6, 1990, and kept in place at the insistence of the United States. On May 12, 1996, television’s "Sixty Minutes" interviewed Madeleine Albright (then U.S. ambassador to the UN, now Secretary of State). Leslie Stahl asked Albright, "We have heard half a million children have died [from economic sanctions in Iraq]. That's more children than died in Hiroshima. Is the price worth it?"
[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Albright replied, "I think this is a very hard choice. But the price, we think, is worth it."
[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]I believe there is a special place in hell reserved for Madeleine Albright. [/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Yes, even four and a half years ago, 500,000 Iraqi children had already died as a direct result of economic sanctions. Over one million Iraqi civilians have died from the sanctions, mostly children under age five. Those are not Iraqi figures -- those figures come from Unicef, the World Health Organization, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the UN’s Department of Humanitarian Affairs, and other international sources. The "oil-for-food" program is so ineffectual that two consecutive UN directors of that program (Denis Haliday and Hans Von Sponeck) resigned, out of protest that they were presiding over a humanitarian disaster which can only be called genocide. They were UN Assistant Secretaries General, the highest ranking UN personnel ever to resign for reasons of conscience. Now Denis Haliday and Hans Von Sponeck are touring America and other countries, pleading for an end to the sanctions on Iraq.[/FONT]

Clinton’s Worst Crimes - The Ornery American

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1ejxB2asnI]YouTube - Bill Clinton's War Crimes[/ame]

So you claim what clinton did by continuing sanctions against iraq was "murder" so how do you feel about what W did with bombs and an invasion??

BTW I find it freaking hilarious that you are using an op-ed from some lame website as the source of your claims. LOL

Oh and how do you hold only clinton accountable for sanctions that your source even admits began in 1990 which was BEFORE clinton was president??

WOW, is all I have to say and to think JRK actually thanked you for that bs. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

What are you babbling about?
GWB gave Bin Ladin a what?
You mean Clinton?
CLINTON BLEW 3 CHANCES TO SEIZE BIN LADEN

And as far as 9-11 and Saddam goes
i dare you to read this

Clinton-Era Reports Cited Saddam-bin Laden Ties
ust weeks after Clinton bombed the daylights out of suspected hideaways for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, he used his January 1999 State of the Union Address to warn America about both bin Laden and Saddam, mentioning the two terror kingpins almost in the same breath. "We will defend our security wherever we are threatened - as we did this summer when we struck at Osama bin Laden's network of terror," Clinton told Congress and the nation. "The bombing our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania reminds us again of the risks faced every day by those who represent America to the world." Moments later Clinton segued into the threat posed by Saddam:

"For nearly a decade, Iraq has defied its obligations to destroy its weapons of terror and the missiles to deliver them. America will continue to contain Saddam, and we will work for the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people." But rather than launch an all out assault on what reporters now call the "dubious" assertion that Saddam and bin Laden had made common cause, the press took Clinton's ball and ran with it.

In fact, as researched and documented this week by FrontPageMagazine.com, in 1999 the national news media was replete with reports linking the Butcher of Baghdad and the man who masterminded the killing of 3,000 Americans almost two years ago.

Here are a few highlights gathered by FrontPage from the press' Saddam-bin Laden file – stories that have since conveniently disappeared down the media's memory hole:

Associated Press Worldstream

Feb. 14, 1999 Taliban leader says whereabouts of bin Laden unknown

... Analysts say bin Laden's options for asylum are limited.

Iraq was considered a possible destination because bin Laden had received an invitation from Iraqi President Saddam Hussein last month. And Somalia was a third possible destination because of its anarchy and violent anti-U.S. history .... San Jose Mercury News

SUNDAY MORNING FINAL EDITION

Feb. 14, 1999 U.S. WORRIED ABOUT IRAQI, BIN LADEN TIES TERRORIST COULD GAIN EVEN DEADLIER WEAPONS U.S. intelligence officials are worried that a burgeoning alliance between terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could make the fugitive Saudi's loose-knit organization much more dangerous ... In addition, the officials said, Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal is now in Iraq, as is a renowned Palestinian bomb designer, and both could make their expertise available to bin Laden. "It's clear the Iraqis would like to have bin Laden in Iraq," said Vincent Cannistraro, a former head of counterterrorism operations at the Central Intelligence Agency ... Saddam has even offered asylum to bin Laden, who has expressed support for Iraq.

... [in] late December, when bin Laden met a senior Iraqi intelligence official near Qandahar, Afghanistan, there has been increasing evidence that bin Laden and Iraq may have begun cooperating in planning attacks against American and British targets around the world. Bin Laden, who strikes in the name of Islam, and Saddam, one of the most secular rulers in the Arab world, have little in common except their hatred of the United States ...

More worrisome, the American officials said, are indications that there may be contacts between bin Laden's organization and Iraq's Special Security Organization (SSO), run by Saddam's son Qusay. Both the SSO and the Mukhabarat were involved in a failed 1993 plot to assassinate former President George Bush ...

"The idea that the same people who are hiding Saddam's biological weapons may be meeting with Osama bin Laden is not a happy one," said one American official.... Beacon Journal wire services

Oct. 31, 1999 BIN LADEN SPOTTED AFTER OFFER TO LEAVE DATELINE: JALALABAD, AFGHANISTAN: ... The Taliban has since made it known through official channels that the likely destination is Iraq. A Clinton administration official said bin Laden's request "falls far short" of the UN resolution that the Taliban deliver him for trial. ...

The Kansas City Star March 2, 1999 International terrorism, a conflict without boundaries By Rich Hood ... He [bin Laden] has a private fortune ranging from $250 million to $500 million and is said to be cultivating a new alliance with Iraq's Saddam Hussein, who has biological and chemical weapons bin Laden would not hesitate to use. An alliance between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein could be deadly. Both men are united in their hatred for the United States and any country friendly to the United States. ...

United Press International Nov. 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle. WASHINGTON – The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee. ...

U.S. Newswire Dec. 23, 1999 Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks. ... Aauthor Yossef] Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."

National Public Radio MORNING EDITION (10:00 a.m.ET) Feb. 18, 1999 THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW. ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDS REPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER ... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.

Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ... known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place.

SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony. ... Foreign news services also carried news of the now-supressed Saddam-bin Laden connection:

Agence France-Presse Feb. 17, 1999 Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday. "If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in neighbouring countries."

Deutsche Presse-Agentur Feb. 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq

DATELINE: Kuwait City An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours. The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.

Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.

The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq.

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/16/123325

WOW! More spammed right wing talking points and propaganda by the right. LOL IMagine that.

I have a question, do you have any opinions of your own or do you think spamming the moronic opinions of others like a good little lemming is just as good??

i have a question for you
once you are provided with information that is not from the main stream media (Dan Rather), why does the other 1/2 of the story scare you liberals so?
I truly believe that W did what he said he was going to do
unlike Obama who has done nothing but run up the debt

B]Mr Blix said t[/B]he declaration had failed to account for 6,500 chemical warfare bombs, adding that 12 empty chemical warheads recently found in a bunker south of Baghdad "could be the tip of the iceberg".
Iraq had also failed to prove it had destroyed all of its anthrax, Mr Blix said. There were "strong indications" that it had produced more than it had admitted.
He recalled that Iraq had declared that it produced 8,500 litres of anthrax and unilaterally destroyed the stock in the summer of 1991. But there was "no convincing evidence of destruction," he said.
He added that Iraq had not fully accounted for stocks of precursor chemicals used to make VX nerve gas. Baghdad had also lied about how close it had come to weaponising the gas in the late 1980s.
Mr Blix added that Iraq has refused to co-operate with a request from UN weapons inspectors regarding flights of U-2 spy planes for aerial imagery and surveillance.

what do you call this?
at what point after 9-11 do you say enough is enough

So that would be a no to answering my questions. Got it.

Still cherry picking I see. When did those comments come from?? Got a link and a timeframe??

" Blix's public statements where he insisted that weapons Baghdad could not account for was not proof they existed and were hidden ."

BTW I know it's hard for a lemming like you but 9/11 had nothing to do with iraq so please stop trying to make that connecntion. You are only making yourself look more and more foolish everytime you repeat it.

 

[drsmith1072]

Hey......you pretty much summed up why Jr. wanted to go into Iraq.

Oil and money.

If that is what you read, you should probably get some help for that eye issue. Well more help than the pot you have obviously been smoking. Either way, Oil and money were available and not pilfered nearly well enough to justify that line of assertion. Of course it makes for a nice dismissive comment when someone can't come up with anything of actual consequence or insight to say.

Well done

To paraphrase for clarity ( that means here is the short version) we went for reasons of national security (to pre-empt additional domestic attacks, by creating a battlefield that would draw our enemies out in open combat) and for long-term benefits (Middle Eastern democracy, alliance with a critical international region).

Oil and money wouldn't justify the cost, just do the math. We would have had to make Iraq a collony for that to be posible and even then not necessarily probable.

HUH?? Eye issue??

Is this not what you stated??

Iraq is a nation that has geographic significance, wealthy resources and an unpopular secular king that was unlikely to justify a mainstream reaction, while almost guaranteeing extremist attention.

Why mention their resources at all if that wasn't part of the goal??

Furthermore, are you admittting that W wanted to use Iraq because he knew it would draw the "extremists" into iraq so they could attack our troops instead of attacking us here in the US??

So according to you the claims by the left that the "extremists" in question were not there prior to the invasion is true and that we had to draw them there by using our troops as targets? WOW!

Also, according to you the the left was correct and the REAL reason we went in had nothing to do with WMDs or the fictional link between iraq and 9/11 but instead had to do with iraq's geographical location and how it is of strategic use to the US as "battlefield"??

Well now that is cleared up when are all of you rightwingers going to start apologizing to the the leftwingers that you have been attacking even though we are right about WMDs not being the real reason for the invasion?? LOL

 

[georgephillip]

Tell it to Duhhhrrrrsmith.

He says it's a line of BS made up by the right.

BTW, you know full well that 90% +++ of the deaths are Muslim on Muslim violence.

As the Occupying Power the US is 100% responsible for all of the Muslim on Muslim violence that's occurred in Iraq since March of 2003.

Or do you believe GCIV doesn't apply to Americans?

Fourth Geneva Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

georgephillip bullshit
Muslims killing Muslims is a direct event of a Muslim killing a Muslim
Its why this mess exists to start with is Muslims killing
You liberal have 0 common sense
without the violence we would not be there to start with
1991 Saddam was told to stop or else
by 2003 or else was all that was left and every damn UN sanction he had on him he broke

There was over 500 munitions found with agents of mass destruction he was not suppose to have
thats a fact
there is so much Anthrax he had that is missing. It was not our place nor the U.Ns to make this shit go away
it was his

JRK...Do you think Saddam would still be in charge if Iraq's principle export was cabbages?

There's some recent evidence that England's lords and ladies did it for the O-I-L:

"Five months before the March 2003 invasion, Baroness Symons, then the Trade Minister, told BP that the Government believed British energy firms should be given a share of Iraq's enormous oil and gas reserves as a reward for Tony Blair's military commitment to US plans for regime change...

"The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq 'post regime change'. Its minutes state: 'Iraq is the big oil prospect.

"BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity.'"

btw, Lady Symons took an advisory post with a UK merchant bank that "cashed in" on post-war Iraq reconstruction contracts.

"Last month she severed links as an unpaid adviser to Libya's National Economic Development Board..."

War is a racket.
Why can't you cons admit it?

Secret memos expose link between oil firms and invasion of Iraq - UK Politics, UK - The Independent

 

[drsmith1072]

U.S. to move operations from Saudi base
SAUDI ARABIA

April 29, 2003|Barbara Starr CNN

The large U.S. military presence at Saudi Arabia's Prince Sultan Air Base is expected to end in the coming months, depending on the security situation in Iraq, U.S. officials told CNN on Tuesday.

The decision to move significant U.S. military resources and personnel to neighboring Qatar marks a major shift in U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf region after a longtime presence in Saudi Arabia, currently at about 5,000 troops. U.S. to move operations from Saudi base - CNN Added Link

More than 100 aircraft and the U.S. Combined Air Operations Center at the base are expected to make the move, and some of those aircraft could be permanently reassigned to the United States, officials said.

here was another item that never gets discussed
this base closing and that cost was never put towards a the Iraq war (the savings)
Troops dying has no cost
Saddam and OBL behave, no troops die

Uh a base was moved from one location to another can you prove that anything has been saved??

Furthermore, did you actually just say that troops dying has NO cost?? Really??

How much does training cost? How much does burial and transport cost? If they have the government life insurance (can't remember what it was called just paid into when I served) where does the cost for that come from? Those are just the monetary costs not the emotional, the cost to our society and our economy. So I ask again, are you seriously claiming that "troops dying has no cost."?

 

[Intense]

Just a Reminder. Each Copy and Paste needs to be linked to It's Source. Reckless Disregard will Result in Posts being Removed and Infraction.

 

[drsmith1072]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

These were all the mission points made AFTER the fact. Aka the ones that were made up on the spot. Aka moving the goal post.

The INITIAL reason was that Saddam had WMDs and needed to be stopped because he was dangers. The rest were made up in a feeble attempt to save face.

End of story.

Really? do you realize those goals where set by the US congress and the president of the US long before GWB was even president?
My god you guys on the left make this stuff up as you go
Bill Clinton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.[1][2] It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against the Iraqi government.

And what does that have to do with W's choice to invade iraq 4 years later??? NOTHING REAL. Nice attempt to move the goal posts and make this about clinton and not W's CHOICE to invade iraq.
I do find it funny how you use wikipedia so much when the right calls it into question whenever someone on left chooses to use it. LOL

It's also hilarious how you keep going back to what clinton did in an attempt to support your spin even as you and others attack clinton for what he did. LOL

However, this is another example of how the right has no problem looking back even as one of their current core arguments is how it's wrong to look back and blame W for events that began on his watch. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

BOOOOOOOOOSH!!!! Oh and that CHAYNEEE too.!! Nuff said.

I guess you missed the fact that the rightwingers here are going out of their way to look back and blame clinton. Nevermind the fact that W made the choice to invade Iraq and nevermind the fact that reagan was supportive of saddam in the iran/iraq war and nevermind that HW left him in power after the first gulf war but you go a head and blame clinton even as you ignore the fact that the right accused him of lying or "wagging the dog" about most attempts he made to deal with iraq or bin laden.

 

[Wry Catcher]

What is the cost benefit of our invasion and occupation of Iraq?

By any objective measure it is a failure.

 

[idb]

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to U.S. troops in Aviano, Italy: "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."

USA TODAY Education - Confronting Iraq

The administration's top budget official estimated today that the cost of a war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion, a figure that is well below earlier estimates from White House officials.

White House Cuts Estimate of Cost of War With Iraq

Russert asked: "If your analysis is not correct, and we're not treated as liberators but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?"

Cheney would have none of it. "Well, I don't think it's likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. I've talked with a lot of Iraqis in the last several months myself, had them to the White House. . . . The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want [is to] get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that."

E. J. Dionne Jr. - How Cheney Fooled Himself - washingtonpost.com

It's gone completely according to plan...Mission Accomplished!

 

[mnbasketball]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

GEE LETS SEE

Destroyed the country, and Killed 100,000 civilians
4500 Americans dead
many 1000's of Americans veterans are now disabled
the war wasn't, isn't and won't be paid for by the budget
we didn't get anyone who was part of 9/11
we are tied into protecting the area probably for the rest of history, or at least a long, long time
the people of the country still hate each other
there is little real democracy there
and hoar's are still getting screwed and women rapped and killed
the country is not safe, would you go there to vacation?
you want more?

Not to mention it's not in the constitution to start wars against others for the purpose of overthrowing their government.

 

[mnbasketball]

President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq.

Did it say with an act of war against Saddam, no it said it supports democratic movements withing Iraq.

nice try dummy, but Bush choose to go to war to remove Saddam from power as most everyone saw it except your side who would follow the devil to the end if he was elected president and called himself a REPUBLICAN.

 

[JRK]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

GEE LETS SEE

Destroyed the country, and Killed 100,000 civilians
4500 Americans dead
many 1000's of Americans veterans are now disabled
the war wasn't, isn't and won't be paid for by the budget
we didn't get anyone who was part of 9/11
we are tied into protecting the area probably for the rest of history, or at least a long, long time
the people of the country still hate each other
there is little real democracy there
and hoar's are still getting screwed and women rapped and killed
the country is not safe, would you go there to vacation?
you want more?

Not to mention it's not in the constitution to start wars against others for the purpose of overthrowing their government.

My friend no-one said you had to agree with the war
I hate it, it sucks
This country made a choice, a majority choice after 9-11 and before 9-11 to remove Saddam
we did just that

Without Saddam's bull shit there is never a war
If he does the right thing in 1991
there is never a war
The US service men who gave there lives in Iraq did it by volunteering
Muslims killing Muslims is no different than Americans killing Americans
how many murders, rapes and whores are there or have been in this country sense 2003?
1000s
Even Clinton had, had enough
H.R. 4655 - Iraq Liberation Act of 1998

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

Authorizes the President, after notifying specified congressional committees, to provide to the Iraqi democratic opposition organizations: (1) grant assistance for radio and television broadcasting to Iraq; (2) Department of Defense (DOD) defense articles and services and military education and training (IMET); and (3) humanitarian assistance, with emphasis on addressing the needs of individuals who have fled from areas under the control of the Hussein regime. Prohibits assistance to any group or organization that is engaged in military cooperation with the Hussein regime. Authorizes appropriations.

There is so much spam with this event that the simple truth is Saddam had to go
that simple truth was followed by Al Qaeda fighting there war with us on the Iraqi soil

 

[georgephillip]

What is the cost benefit of our invasion and occupation of Iraq?

By any objective measure it is a failure.

Wry... Do you think Halliburton, Blackwater and Boeing, not to mention Goldman Sachs or the richest 1% of Americans, agree with you.

There are reports of defense contractors' profits quadrupling from the Iraq War.

War is a RacketTHREE TITLES [3] for the PRICE OF ONE.

 

[JRK]

What is the cost benefit of our invasion and occupation of Iraq?

By any objective measure it is a failure.

Wry... Do you think Halliburton, Blackwater and Boeing, not to mention Goldman Sachs or the richest 1% of Americans, agree with you.

There are reports of defense contractors' profits quadrupling from the Iraq War.

War is a RacketTHREE TITLES [3] for the PRICE OF ONE.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...id-contract-in-iraq-start-a-war-for-this.html
really?
Let me ask another question
Does these same companies not get work in Afghanistan?
Look if you dis agree with the war, thats your right
But to make a claim that GWB invaded Iraq so KBR could do some work is nuts
Why do that when GM (UAW) gets 50 billion for doing nothing?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Hey at least Halliburton & KBR pay Taxes. GE doesn't. GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt Hopey Changey's "Jobs Czar?" Pretty laughable no? GE & this White House represent corrupt cronyism at its worst. Halliburton & KBR pay Taxes. Why doesn't GE? Something else to ponder i guess.