The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #98924   Message #1987343
Posted By: Arne
05-Mar-07 - 03:41 PM
Thread Name: BS: Proof that Bush lied
Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
Teribus:

Your timeline:

November 9, 2002 - At the urging of the United States government, the UN Security Council passed United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 986, and 1284), notably to provide "an accurate full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by Resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles".

March 17, 2003 - Bush Administration demands Hussein and his two sons Uday and Qusay to surrender and leave Iraq, giving them a 48-hour deadline. This demand was reportedly rejected.


Third of a year there. Missing a few items:

Iraq agrees to U.N. inspections. Inspections begin. El Baradei says there's no nuke program. We learn that the "Dodgy Dossier" was plagiarised from a decade-old grad thesis, and that the Niger yellowcake documents were a cheap fake. Blix gets Saddam to agree to destroy the arguably legal al Samoud missiles rather than provoke a fight, and his inspectors start to work on the U.S. 'intelligence'. The inspectors get check out the "WoMD" sites and come up with (literally) chickensh*t. One inspectors refers to the U.S. 'intelligence' as "garbage, garbage, and more garbage" (although reportedly in earthier terms). Blix reports finding no WoMD, but does report that there's evidence that the Iraqis destroyed large portions if if not all in the aftermath of GWI. Dubya promises to seek a second resolution from the Security Council for military action, but withdraws and reneges on his promise after it becomes clear that even with arm-twisting and bribes, he won't manage more than an embarrassing five votes in the Security Council.

Wonder why you omitted that stuff, Teribus.....

Maybe because you think we're unedjoomakated hicks. Nope. We are not fooled (nor was I at the time). We were right (and I was right before the war). You were wrong. You're on the distbin of history, and you don't have the sense that Gawd gave a chicken so as to climb off. Your words here will be your legacy; a sad and pathetic commentary on the essence of human nature: Some of us are capable of the sublime, but there's still way too many subject to fatal flaws as well. Enjoy.

Cheers,