Previous  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next

I don't need to be long-winded to get my point across. The context is good.

   

Thats just it, you have no point.

   

Since you didn't read it - this is the original point.

   

Man! you're gonna halfta learn to ignore some posts bookie, she'll drag you in circles forever!

Back to the original topic, Bush and his band of trigger happy idiots (compimented by the odd spin doctor) are now lying in the bed they've made for themselves. He had no reason to go to war, Saddam had behaved very badly in the past and is no doubt an evil man. The past does not justify killing more innocents in the present which is what Bush did when he pushed the war button. As evil as he is, Saddam was behaving himself relativly well in the time leading up to the war, what with UN inspectors and what have you. Obviously some people can't remember that far back. The UN inspectors were reporting no signs of weapons of mass destruction and now that bombers have flattened what was left of the country guess what? Still no sign of those weapons. The Bush administration went flying in there when the whole world was screaming stop, and now he wants help cleaning up. Ya RIGHT!

   

George Bush is acting like a spoiled rich kid and thinks the world is his maid. I really hope the UN doesn't blink on this. It is against international law to be the aggressor in an unprovoked war, let the US sink in their own quagmire then make them pay when the UN does go in to clean up the mess.

   

At least Bush is doing something, unlike the Canadian Government. The only quagmire is Chretien and his groupies. Thank God we do not live under the regime of Saddam Hussein. How many innocents did he kill, I really don't think we will ever know the numbers. Having said that, it is absolutely frightening to hear how close the Iraqies were to having nuclear capabilities. So does one wait for the Big One, or do you stop it before it starts. Waiting would have cost the US and the world more in the long run. This is only my opinion and really don't need to be burned at the stake, thanks.

   

Beckie please read this entire post before responding. Taken from CNN, it's old news, I'm kinda bringing you up to date here...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Intelligence documents that U.S. and British governments said were strong evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have been dismissed as forgeries by U.N. weapons inspectors.

The documents, given to International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, indicated that Iraq might have tried to buy 500 tons of uranium from Niger, but the agency said they were "obvious" fakes.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell referred to the documents directly in his presentation to the U.N. Security Council outlining the Bush administration's case against Iraq.

"I'm sure the FBI and CIA must be mortified by this because it is extremely embarrassing to them," former CIA official Ray Close said.

Responding to questions about the documents from lawmakers, Powell said, "It was provided in good faith to the inspectors and our agency received it in good faith, not participating ... in any way in any falsification activities."

"It was the information that we had. We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press" last Sunday.

"We don't believe that all the issues surrounding nuclear weapons have been resolved [in Iraq]," he said.

How were forgeries missed?
But the discovery raises questions such as why the apparent forgeries were given to inspectors and why U.S. and British intelligence agents did not recognize that they were not authentic.

Sources said that one of the documents was a letter discussing the uranium deal supposedly signed by Niger President Tandja Mamadou. The sources described the signature as "childlike" and said that it clearly was not Mamadou's.

Another, written on paper from a 1980s military government in Niger, bears the date of October 2000 and the signature of a man who by then had not been foreign minister of Niger in 14 years, sources said.

"The IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts that these documents -- which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger -- are not in fact authentic," ElBaradei said in his March 7 presentation to the U.N. Security Council.

Close said the CIA should have known better.

"They have tremendously sophisticated and experienced people in their technical services division, who wouldn't allow a forgery like this to get by," Close said. "I mean it's just mystifying to me. I can't understand it."

A U.S. intelligence official said that the documents were passed on to the International Atomic Energy Agency within days of being received with the comment, " 'We don't know the provenance of this information, but here it is.' "

If a mistake was made, a U.S. official suggested, it was more likely due to incompetence not malice.

"That's a convenient explanation, but it doesn't satisfy me," Close said. "Incompetence I have not seen in those agencies. I've seen plenty of malice, but I've never seen incompetence."


so you see Beckie...

Saddam posed no international threat at the time George Dubya declared war. Not nuclear, not biological. He hasn't been a threat since desert storm. So when you say "at least George Bush is doing something" , at least he's doing something about what? Saddam was cooperating with the UN and UN inspectors. It is a good thing that he's gone, but the ends don't justify the means. Of all the wars in history, only a select few justified the cost in human life, this was not one of them. Not by a long shot.

   

Point taken, however, I not only refer to Iraq, but the War on Terrorism. I'm sure you would agree that every life in the free world changed on 9-11. We no longer have an enemy with borders or boundaries. This enemy is capable of literally total annihalation. Saddam was one piece of the puzzle, he has in the past used biological weapons on his own people and on Iran. They did exist and not all accounted for.

The BS document concerning Nigeria, to me is acceptable, if it meant getting rid of that monster. Unearthing mass graves, buried trucks with biological capabilities.

Iraq was easy. What are we going to do about Iran and Korea? Do you think Iran will devulge information as requested by the UN which none of these countries respects or give any credibility to. It has no teeth. Without the US and Britian, I shutter to think. For it is these countries who are shedding their blood while we argue over power and control. God Bless America and their sons and daughters lost.

Take Care

   

Iraq posed no threat to the world? Hmmm, the rest of the world wasn't threatned by the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo, so are you saying we should have never gotten involved?

   

I do believe there is a difference between regional instability and a chemical/biological threat, don't you? Your comparing apples to oranges.

   

I find it very annoying when you try and put words in my mouth. This is the second time you've done it and I'm annoyed. Don't do it anymore.

You can't compare Iraq to Bosnia or Kosovo anymore than I can compare it to Vietnam. You wanna talk about Iraq and the mess the Bush administration has itself in? We'll talk about Iraq. Just don't put words in my mouth, it annoys me

   

I wasn't talking to you, robair, unless you have two identities

   

That was directed at Pole, that's why I quoted Pole, get it? New to the whole forum thing, huh Beck?

   

oops, but annoyance is a weapon in the war of wits

   

...but is it mere annoyance beckie? I've been dying for a war of wits on here. All I get is chest -beaters, my chest is OK, how's yours?

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5 ... 8  Next