BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 03:03 PM

Good posts Arne, refuting all the points made by our "warriors".

Unfortunately these pedants will learn nothing from your words. They have squirmed and wriggled ever since Bush prematurely proclaimed "Mission accomplished".

I'm sorry to say this, but you don't have to ask if these people value human life, to them if you're not British or American, you're barely human.

The points have all been made and the arguments won over Iraq, so let them prattle on attempting to muddy the water and obscure the important points

Iraq is important in that it proves we are led by criminals and liars who care nothing for human life, only power and money.

Even the "Joe Publics" have realised the truth, and it's only they who can stop a repitition...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 02:54 PM

Bloody people seem to be so willing to send someone else's kid off to get killed. BULLSHIT, and stop this fucking war. It is a war for profit, not freedoms or any of the other fine-sounding words the Bush administration flings around. It's about CORPPORATE GREED. PERIOD!

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 02:52 PM

"Cindy Sheehan be damned...."

What an asshole statement to make. She lost a son there. How would YOU feel if it had been your son, Hub? HUH?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 02:45 PM

Another point that I think that needs to be made is that in WW2, over 30,000,000 actual VERIFIED civilians died in direct war action. That war was from the end of 1939 until 1945.
Now in that same war, over 24,000,000 military personnel died in direct relation to war actions.

So by your logic, if 15,000 - 20,000 civilians in two years is not acceptable or losing over 2000 soldiers in two years is not acceptable then I guess we should have let Hitler and Mussolini off with a free pass and let them do what they did to Europe and just turn a blind eye to the atrocities that were going on?

How can you, honestly, sleep at night?

Why don't you just admit that your hatred toward this administration is what's driving your outspokenness about this war.

It's not about who's in office.....it's about doing what is right and just.

Cindy Sheehan be damned....


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:17 PM

GUEST,Arne,

I see that the meaning of the above message has sailed smoothly over the top of your cute little pointed head.

Read the message over and try again.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:05 PM

Susu's Hubby: Both sites listed that only 15000-20000 of the dead were actually Iraqi CIVILIANS.

Well, even if we were to take your numbers as fact, I'd note that this is over five times the number killed in the 9/11 attacks, in a country less than one fifth the size of the U.S. Which means that Iraq has suffered more that 25 times the devastation of an event that some people call the transforming event in the history of the United States, the date after which nothing ever will ever be the same.

I'd note that since Iraq has been damaged in more ways than simply casualties, it is suffering (i.e. WRT infrastructure, economy, medical resources, etc.) even more than that proportion.

The exact numbers don't matter too much. And we may never know them (in part because the U.S. refuses to even try and count them ... but rest assured that Iraqi families know when their loved ones have died). But it's hard to dispute that what the Iraqis have seen in the last two years has been carnage of enormous proportions.

Do you realyl want to belittle that?

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 11:56 AM

Teribus: One thing is consisted in all of them, he [Blix] clearly states that he and his inspection teams did not receive the full and pro-active co-operation of the Iraqi Authorities - 1441 demanded that from day one - hence the serious consequences that followed, even before March 2003, GWB and the US Administration made no secret whatsoever what was meant by 'Serious Consequences'

Just so we have you on record, Teribus: Do you state, for the record, that because Saddam refused to kiss some one's boots and serve them tea personally on their inspections, that a war (killing 2000 Americans and many more Iraqis) was therefore justified? OK, so I've stretching the language a bit to emphasise a point, but do you think that failure to provide "full and pro-active" co-operation is a casus belli???

I just want to know how cheaply you value himan life.

I'd note, BTW, that "serious consequences" was deliberately left vague (I believe in part so that the U.N. had some flexibility in their potential responses depending on circumstances andthe extent of any transgressions). If they had wanted to leave no doubt as to what would happen, as you seem to be claiming here, they would have said "war". Believe me, they're not unintelligent people (which, of course, brings to mind where we should be placing you).

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 11:42 AM

Teribus said [re moving the goalposts]: Case in point regarding Iraq being a threat to the US, if you are going to raise that, then quote the whole phrase and put it in context.

Hell, I'd be more that glad to have us simply agree that Saddam was never a threat to the U.S., making this point of dispute irrelevant. If you agree that Saddam wasn't such a threat, I think we can just dismiss the actual claims of the maladministration that he was as just so much bloviating and fear-mongering based of false premises. But I'd note that even Dubya's most recent speech (or is it?) doesn't back down on the imminent peril we face from Iraq as well as other places....   ;-) But, if you agree that Iraq was not a danger to the U.S. in 2002, then wouldn't you agree that the Iraq war was a "catastrophic success" (to use the words the maladministration actually used to describe it), and a completely bone-headed blunder?

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 11:32 AM

Teribus: Well, apparently George Bush believed it [that Saddam was a real threatto the US]."

Well, he can believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, Santa Claus, and flying monkeys, too (although I suspect that this would give me pause as to whether he was in need of stronger medications). But is it your contention that it's right and legal to go to war just because he believes something that ain't so?

With Saddam Hussein left in power and with the removal of sanctions, yes, Iraq would pose a threat to, ...

Yeah, and if wishes were fishes, if pigs had wings, and if cabbages were kings -- ummm, oops, never mind that last one, mon petit chou -- yes, I guess that perhaps beggars would ride and cows would jump over the moon. But there was quite a bit of dispute as to whether that would happen, and also as to what could or should be done about such and when, if such happened. In the meanwhile, Osama bin Forgotten managed to slip away. In fact, there was quite a bit of dispute about what to do if Saddam actually had WoMD in well-known places "north, south, eash and west around Baghdad and Tikrit", as the maladministration had assured us beyond doubt. War was only one of the options, and as Dubya said, it should be the "last resort", all the while making it the first and only one.... Doesn't this make you the least bit mad, Teribus?

Teribus again: ... lets recall the phraseology used by GWB, ...


Why? Are we going to have to parse him closely and carefully? ;-)

Teribus continues: ... The United States of America, the stability of the region, America's allies and the interests of the United States of America and those of her allies - Little Hawk it was never solely the threat to the US.

You must be tired from moving the goalposts around all over creation for Dubya so much. But I'd note that the interests of other nations are usually represented through the United Nations, and the United Nations refused to authorise Dubya's little war of choice. In fact, all of Iraq's neighbours refused to join the "Coalition of the Billing" this time around....

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Tam the man
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 09:09 AM

A load of pro bush crap

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 08:27 AM

Fact is, noone but God really knows if it's 50,000 or 100,000 'cause. like the incomin' caskets at Dover Airport, Bush ain't gonna let you you in on it...

Why? Simple...

Hurts the heck outtta recruitin' here at home... He wants our kids to think that Iraq is like one of their computer war games...

Plus, he don't want folks to know the real story 'er they might quit supportin' him and his Repub buddies... Boss Hog wouldn't like that at all 'cause Bush and Co. anr a drunkard's dream... Heck, it's the corporations that are writing the legislation... That's why there are ten's of thousands of lobbiest in D.C.... You go to Capitopl Hill and they are thicker than ugly on a gorilla...

Take the Medicare Prescription Program fir instance... You think the seniors are better off with it??? Apparently you ain't a senior... We gotta alot of folks who voted fir Bush in the Luray Valley but whereever you go you hear these folks complainin' about thde ***increase*** in cost's fir the medication... I got one farmer friend who comes up and hangs around my farm who I call Mr. Clifford... His meds are going up from $15 a month to $63 a month and he ain't alone!!!!

Where's these billions of dollars going???

Well, I'll tell ya' where they are going. Right into the pockets of the folks who wrote every word of this legslation: the insurance companies and the pharmacudical companies...

If you thoughgt the average American got screwed by the Bush administration's poor response to Katrina, fasten yer seatbelts, you ain't seen nmuthin' yet...

But one thing you can say... The boy is loyal to the people who bought this job fir him!!! Yep, we got the best democracy that money can buy...

Meanwhile more and more seniors (percentage wias or othwer) will, as they have every years since Bush's lawyers stole the 2000 election, continue to slip into poverty...

Welcome to Boss Hog's America...

Now, bend over and smile...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 07:04 AM

Teribus,

I've gone round and round with them about the 100,000 number they keep throwing around and just what it includes....the following is the first post of a thread that was quite popular for a few day here at the Cat.

"Subject: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight....
From: Susu's Hubby - PM
Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:23 PM

I guess all of you libs out there feel like you're in Florida once again by the way you're attributing the numbers of the war dead as all "civilians". (Yes, Bobert, you keep referring to all 100,000 as civilians.) It's as if you're still trying to discover the intent of the voter by looking at a blank ballot and willing it to be a vote for Gore or Kerry or whomever you're putting all of your hope and faith in at the moment.

Let's get to the count.

In another thread, a Catter asked for "proof" of where the 100,000 number came from. A fellow poster listed two links which, while putting on a seatbelt to keep out the river of sh*t because of the liberal slant (actually only one was severly slanted, the other was trying as hard as they could to actually list the numbers with some accuracy), I actually took time to read, once I got home from work. (Because I always try to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to try and care for me and mine.)

First, I'll admit that the 100,000 is an accurate number but the accuracy of the "facts" dreamed up by our fellow catters as to what exactly the 100,000 refers to is way off base.

I shall explain.

Both sites listed that only 15000-20000 of the dead were actually Iraqi CIVILIANS. A number that I actually quoted in one of my first posts on the Cat (if my memory serves me correctly).

The rest of the 100,000 are attributed to Saddam's regular army, Republican guard, and the special guys in the white jump suits ( sorry, I forgot their names). Oh.let's throw in quite a few terrorists into the mix as well as well as other fighters that came in from Syria, and other terrorist supporting countries. They make up the remaining 80,000-85,000 dead. In other words, by far, the HUGE majority of the dead were BAD GUYS.

Now let's throw this out for some analysis. Out of the 15000-20000 civilians killed, how many of these were, perhaps, killed by the 80000-85000 bad guys that we managed to kill? If memory serves me right, our troops in Fallujah stumbled across scores of individuals and entire families that were wiped out due to the bad guys holding the town for so long. How quick you libs are to forget that little fact. Here is where I will state that although the number of civilians killed is still way too many, civilians do get killed in war. Don't forget 9/11/01 and 12/7/41. 6000+ of our innocent people were killed.

So before you go and start spouting off your manufactured "facts", please take a little time to read the whole article from the source where you pull your numbers. You sure will save A LOT of embarrassment in front of your loyal throngs of lemmings.


Hubby"


Just go back and find the thread and witness the attacks that were offered afterwards. It's a little hard to follow because some of the posts are out of order due to the crash a few months ago. But you'll get the jest of what Bobert is rambling about.

Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 05:15 AM

"100,000 Iraqi women, kids and old folks who Bush has blown up!!! " Where did those figures come from Bobert - I know you aren't all that good with figures, so who made that number up for you, how and why?

"So do you actually believe that Iraq was a real threat to the USA, Teribus? Or was about to be?

Well, apparently George Bush believed it."

With Saddam Hussein left in power and with the removal of sanctions, yes, Iraq would pose a threat to, lets recall the phraseology used by GWB, The United States of America, the stability of the region, America's allies and the interests of the United States of America and those of her allies - Little Hawk it was never solely the threat to the US. Also I do not know whether GWB believed it, but the Security and Intelligence Agencies and House Committee's certainly, after evaluation, believed it, on the information available at the time, as did every member Government of the UNSC at the time.

Arne, no goalposts have been moved as you continue to assert. What you and those who support your point of view tend to do is cherry-pick at what people have said. Case in point regarding Iraq being a threat to the US, if you are going to raise that, then quote the whole phrase and put it in context. The aim of UNSCOM, or UNMOVIC, was not to find WMD in Iraq, it was to establish beyond doubt that Iraq held no stocks of weaponised CW or BW weapons, was not developing missiles with delivery capabilities greater than 150 kilometer range, that Iraq had not have programmes in existence aimed at developing nuclear, CW, BW and missiles. Every nation sitting on the UN Security Council in the summer of 2002 believed that Iraq had WMD, because UNSCOM had told them that they had. By the bye go and read through Dr.Hans Blix's monthly reports to the UNSC. One thing is consisted in all of them, he clearly states that he and his inspection teams did not receive the full and pro-active co-operation of the Iraqi Authorities - 1441 demanded that from day one - hence the serious consequences that followed, even before March 2003, GWB and the US Administration made no secret whatsoever what was meant by 'Serious Consequences'

GUEST,Geoduck - 11 Nov 05 - 10:55 PM

Good post, clear and informative, unfortunately it won't change anything around here, simple truth and plain statement of established and verified fact tends to confuse the cosy imaginings of the chattering "Peace at any price" Brigade.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 01:12 AM

Boab, my apologies, buddy. Your post was/is excellent and very clear to this ol' boy. The gullible thing is an old 'joke' of sorts.

I once said that to a fellow who was very pedantic about many things. He used the word gullible in a conversation, and I told him that the word wasn't real, that it didn't appear in the dictionary. He looked it up and gave me a superior look when he found it. I asked him to read the definition to me. It was words to the effect "easily fooled or duped". I smiled back. (I had someone pull that on me--that's where I learned it. I was reaching for the dictionary but managed to stop myself.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 01:03 AM

Peace--12.11 am;
   Jeeze!---Have I been using something from the Scots leid? Sorry!! I trust the general meaning came through nevertheless?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 01:02 AM

Teribus: Purely to shut me up once and for all, please present just ONE definative quote from the good Dr. Hans Blix, prior to 17th March 2003, that clearly and unequivocally states that that Iraq possesed no WMD, that Iraq held no precursor chemicals to produce WMD, that Iraq had no programmes running aimed at producing WMD - Then I might start buying into your fantasy. I will tell you now that you will not find one.

Moving the goalposts again, eh? Blix said he couldn't find the mobile bio labs (for good reason; they didn't exist), he checked out a supposed "SCUD bunker" and found a load of chickens***, etc., etc., etc.... One of the inspectors referred to the U.S. 'intelligence' (that was finally provided after they had begged and and pleaded for months to get, despite the requirement under UNSCR 1441 that the U.S. provide such) as "garbage, garbage, and more garbage" (although I'd heard the actual terms used were even less polite). He was checking all this definitive 'evidence' that the U.S. had that proved beyond a doubt that Saddam had WoMD, and was finding zip, nada, the 'evidence' was worthless. He did check out the Iraqi assertion that some of the CW had been destroyed shortly after GW1, and found in fact that the forensic evidence there was consistent with their claims. El Baradei had checked on the nuclear stuff and found zip (and reported as much). They were being given access to the scientists to interview them. They hadn't wrapped the case up, and pleaded for more time just to make sure, but read between the lines of their statements (particularly El Baradei's scathing comments on the Niger stuff), and you could tell they really didn't expect to find anything. At that point, any rational person starts to wonder if the 'evidence' isn't a complete crock and there really isn't anything (which would be a good guess, and which is what I stated in min-March, before the invasion). And then you have to ask: If this the kind of cr** that you go to war over??? Maybe you do, but I can tell that you're a Operation Yellow Elephant candidate but more than happy to have some other schmuck's kids killed for your paranoia.

In FACT the good Dr. Blix right up until the time that The US said enough was enough, did clearly state repeatedly that he and his inspectors were not receiving the full co-operation of the Iraqi Authorities....

SFW (if true)? Making Saddam stand on one leg, hold his arms askew and say "I'm a teapot" wasn't the purpose. The purpose was to find any WoMD. And only if any alleged non-cooperation interfered with the successful accomplishment of that mission could it be relevant. But Blix stated that he was able and continuing to do his job, despite less than full cooperation (from both the Itaqia and the U.S., I might add).

Or do you really think that the failure to humiliate Saddam enough really was worth the price of 2000 American lives??? If so, you're really one sick puppy....

HTH.

G-Duck: "Iraq timeline 1991 thru 1999 I shortened it up as much as I could."

You left out 2002-2003 (wonder why?). That's when the latest inspections were done.

Bobert: Now today, Veterans Day, Bush pulls out that lame play from his worn out play book....

It's worse than you imagine, Bobert: The same damn speech, and the stoopid Repubs think that this time it's going to work.... Hell, I've heard the RW talking heads call today Dubya's "Gettysburg" moment. They really are laying it on rather thick for a retread speech (that Dubya didn't even write) that didn't work the last time either....

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:37 AM

Canada: we had a team from Vancouver of about fifty SAR people near New Orleans--they chartered a plane and got there before the director of FEMA knew anything was wrong. I understand they were directly responsible for helping save forty lives. FYI, Susu's Hubby.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:27 AM

Susu's Hubby: It just seems odd to me that the same people that said "there are no WMD's" are the same ones who harped on Bush because of the Hurricane Katrina debacle.

Ummmm, clue for you: There was a hurricane and it was heading straight for the Big Easy. In fact, many people were watching the newscasts rather than vacationing and pretending to play guitar, and were quite aware of this fact..... Just thought you might like to know.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:11 AM

"the aforementioned gullible"

I have it on excellent authority that the word 'gullible' does NOT appear in the dictionary.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST, Boab
Date: 12 Nov 05 - 12:03 AM

Geoduck--
Congratulations on the amount of labour you have put into your "time-line" [above]. Having said that, I would like to register my opinion that it hardly stands well against all the other litanies of deception that have been thrown at the gullible over recent years. The items of truth which crept in here and there were included only because they happened to give an appearance of credibility to the aim of the writer [not all your stuff, but you must take responsibility for repeating it], this aim being to convince the aforementioned gullible that Iraq DID have "weapons of mass destruction" when GW. gallantly sent his teenagers and young men and women to fight the good fight for the oil barons and their backers. Most of those who profess to still believe in those elusive weapons are well aware that they are trying to give credence to a lie; they have some kind of perverse loyalty to the cretins in high places who used to peddle it as justification for their actions. Not nowadays---it was always about "Iraqi freedom", don't y'know?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:52 PM

What Kendall said..... Heck, if he had all this tuff then why didn't he use them????? Senior moment that day???

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: artbrooks
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:51 PM

The thread title is WMDs WERE found in Iraq! Personally, I'm still waiting...what was found and where? Not medical equipment, not chemicals that could be made into weapons (as could some of the stuff in my laundry room), not demilitarized artillery shells, but real weapons of mass destruction. Militarized biologicals. Toxic or incapacitating chemical agents...VX, GB, Sarin, Mustard, suit yourself. Nuclear or radio-explosive weapons. I'm waiting.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: kendall
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:42 PM

If Saddam had had WMDs, he would have used them. Nuff said.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:10 PM

No relation, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:07 PM

6,000 plus posts with out one single cut 'n paste... Click on "Bobert" and read some of them... You may learn a few things.... I might not spell too well 'er typt to well either but I read a lotta stuff froma lotta sources... Go back and read some of my pre-war arguments, fir instance...

Heck, I talked about jsut about every issue on the block... I've talked about prison reform... I've talked about Main Street programs... I've talked abotu public/private partnerships... I think I've prolly put more pro-active creative ideas into this jopint than anyone else... Okay, maybe as much....

You just have me pegged as a complainer but, hey, research the body of work I've done here and you'll find not one single cut 'n paste, yeah, alot of complainin' about Bush but also alot of creative ideas...

My first post in Mudcat was about the establishment of a Department of Peace....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 11:01 PM

"Iraq timeline 1991 thru 1999 I shortened it up as much as I could."

It woulda been easier to leave in what you took out. Pardon me for being so bold, but exactly WHAT did you leave out?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Geoduck
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 10:55 PM

So what is your contribution other than to criticize?

And yes I did read it and several other Scott ritter articles. I learned a lot. What have you learned today? A new way to harpoon anybody smarter than you?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 10:45 PM

Yo, duck, you gotta a brain... Use it and guit clicking on yer corporate bought-'n-paid-for cut 'n pastes.... Not one single person in the universe reads them... No one, other than Boss Hog's PR folks who write thuis dribble...

You got anything to say other than "Quack"???

I mean it, a long cut 'n paste here in Mudville ain't gonna get read by one single person... You prolly didn't even read it...

Quack!!!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Geoduck
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 10:29 PM

Iraq timeline 1991 thru 1999 I shortened it up as much as I could.

1991 February Gulf War Ends

3 April
Resolution 687 passes in the UN. Saddam stays in power, economic sanctions remain. Saddam must destroy weapons and allow inspection of all weapons facilities by a special UN commission: UNSCOM. Iraq is given 15 days to provide a list of its weapons of mass destruction.

4 April
Iraqi deception over weapons of mass destruction begins. Iraqi nuclear scientists are ordered to hide nuclear weapons from inspectors, collect and move computer data and formulate a justification for the existence of Iraqi nuclear labs.

6 April
Iraq formally accepts Resolution 687.

18 April
Iraq declares some chemical weapons and materials, as required under Resolution 687, but states that it does not have biological weapons program.

19 April
Swedish diplomat Rolf Ekeus is appointed Executive Chairman of UNSCOM.

9 June
UNSCOM begins first inspection in Iraq.

23-28 June
UNSCOM/IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) tries to intercept Iraqi vehicles carrying nuclear related equipment called calutrons. Iraqis fire warning shots in the air to prevent inspectors from approaching vehicles. David Kay is chief UNSCOM official for that inspection.

Summer
Ekeus arranges for a loan to UNSCOM of an American U2 plane to take surveillance photos of Iraq. Many point to this event as the beginning of UNSCOM's reliance on various national intelligence agencies for help in disarming Iraq.

2 August
UNSCOM's first biological inspection team is told by Iraq that any research into biological weapons was "for defensive military purposes."

15 August
UN Security Council again demands Iraq to provide a full disclosure of its weapons.

September
UNSCOM determines that it needs to be more aggressive to uncover Iraq weapons. Former U.S. Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter is hired.

21-30 September
IAEA inspectors discover files on Iraq's nuclear weapons program. Iraqis confiscate some documents from inspectors, but inspectors refuse to release other documents. In response, the Iraqis block inspectors from leaving parking lot for four days. Inspectors are freed only after UN Security Council issues a threat of force.

                
1992
18 February
Special Report of the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM details Iraq's refusal to abide by Security Council disarmament resolutions.

19 March
Iraq declares existence of 89 ballistic missiles and chemical weapons, but also states that they destroyed most of these materials unilaterally the previous summer (in violation of resolution 687).
        
May-June

Iraq provides its first Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited weapons programs.

July
UNSCOM begins to destroy large quantities of Iraq's chemical weapons and production facilities.

6-29 July

Confrontation at Ministry of Agriculture where UNSCOM believes there are important documents on ballistic missiles. UNSCOM stages 17-day sit-in outside of building. UNSCOM inspectors finally leave when their safety is threatened, and when UN Security Council seems unwilling to support UNSCOM with a threat of force.

1993

January
Iraq refuses to allow UNSCOM the use of its own aircraft to fly into Iraq. Iraq also starts incursions into the demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait and increases its military activity in the no-fly zones.

19 January
US forces fire approximately 40 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Baghdad factory linked to Iraq's nuclear weapons program. Iraq then informs UNSCOM that it will be able to resume its flights.

21 January
Clinton Inauguration.

18 June
President of Security Council protests Iraq's refusal to allow UNSCOM to place monitoring cameras at two missile engine test stands.

26 June
Clinton warns Iraq over standoff.

27 June
US strikes Iraq intelligence headquarters, in retaliation for Iraqi complicity in plot to kill former president George Bush during visit to Kuwait.

5 July
UN inspection team leaves Iraq. Iraq subsequently agrees to UNSCOM demands. The inspection team returns.

1994
10 February
Joint statement by Tariq Aziz of Iraq and Rolf Ekeus stating that significant progress had been made in both political and technical areas of weapons verification.

Spring
UNSCOM/Israel intelligence connection begins in earnest. Israel begins to provide UNSCOM with U-2 photo interpretation.

June
Weapons inspectors Ritter and Smidovitch learn, through Israeli intelligence reports, that Qusay Hussein, Saddam's younger son, is the key player in hiding and preserving Iraq's special weapons. Qusay heads the Apparatus of Special Security which is under the umbrella of the Special Security Organization (SSO).

June
UNSCOM completes destruction of large quantities of chemical warfare agents and production equipment.
September-October

Iraq rejects appeals to withdraw threat to stop cooperating with UNSCOM and starts deploying troops in direction of Kuwait. In response, US begins to deploy troops to Kuwait.

8 October
President of UN Security Council states that Iraq's demands are unacceptable and that it must withdraw troops deployed in direction of Kuwait.

15 October
Iraq states that it has withdrawn troops from border with Kuwait.

1995
UNSCOM is close to declaring Iraqi weapons inspections completed.

March
Iraq provides the second Full, Final and Complete Disclosures of its prohibited biological and chemical weapons programs.

Summer
By the middle of 1995, the unity of the UN Security Council begins to fray, as certain countries, particularly France and Russia, becoming increasingly interested in the financial opportunities of a post-sanctions Iraq.

1 July
In response to UNSCOM's evidence, Iraq admits for first time the existence of an offensive biological weapons program, but denies weaponization.

July
Iraq threatens to end all cooperation with UNSCOM and IAEA if there is no progress toward the lifting of sanctions and the oil embargo by 31 August 1995.

August
Iraq provides the third Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited biological weapons program.

August
Israeli intelligence report provided to Ritter reveals that Iraq was attempting to purchase missile gyroscopes (guidance devices) from a Russian export company.

8 August
Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law and head of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs, defects. Kamel informs UNSCOM and foreign intelligence agencies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. In response, Iraq withdraws its third Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited biological weapons, and turns over treasure trove of documents on its WMD programs. Iraq claims no knowledge of this and say documents were held secretly by Hussein Kamel.

November
Iraq provides the second Full, Final and Complete Disclosure of its prohibited missile program.

10 November
Operation Teacup Mission #1: The search for banned missile gyroscopes. Operation Teacup was a series of UNSCOM missions that utilized foreign intelligence to uncover and intercept Iraqi attempts to reconstitute its missile programs. Scott Ritter asked for US help in intercepting a shipment of gyroscopes, but they refused. Israel helped instead. With the added help of Jordan, Ritter intercepted 240 Russian gyroscopes and accelerometers en route to Iraq from Russia. However, before UNSCOM could gain access to these gyroscopes, the CIA intercepted them.

16 December
Iraqi scuba divers are directed by UNSCOM to dredge the Tigris River near Baghdad. They find over 200 additional missile instruments and components. These items' serial numbers suggest that they originated in Russia.

1996
February

Stepped up intelligence gathering begins (as result of revelations by Hussein Kamel): UNSCOM brings eavesdropping devices into Iraq. The information is delivered to analysis centers in Britain, Israel, and the US.

Hussein Kamel, the defector and Saddam's son-in-law, returns to Iraq. Within days he is murdered along with his brother, father, sister and her children.

March
After UNSCOM is denied access to five sites (and can enter them only after significant delays) UNSCOM deploys its "Shake the Tree" tactic. Its goal is to make the Iraqis paranoid and get them to inadvertently reveal their concealment methods.

The UN Security Council criticizes Iraq for its intransigence, but does not threaten immediate military action.
        
May-June
UNSCOM supervises the destruction of Al-Hakam, Iraq's main facility for the production of biological warfare agents. (Read a report on this facility)

June
Iraq again denies UNSCOM teams access to sites.

June
US fails in its attempt to marshal support for military action in the UN Security Council.

19-22 June
Rolf Ekeus negotiates with Iraq, gaining the right for UNSCOM to inspect "sensitive" sites, but on what appears to be the Iraqi's terms. Only four inspectors will be allowed in to each of these sites.

June
Iraq provides the third Full, Final and Complete Disclosure of its prohibited biological weapons program.

June
Iraq provides the third Full, Final and Complete Disclosure of its prohibited missile program.

July
Ritter's attempts to conduct surprise inspections on the Republican Guard facility at the airport is blocked by Iraqi officials. By the time he and his team are allowed into the facility a few days later, they find nothing.

Summer
The UN Security Council expresses unease with UNSCOM's confrontational tactics. They want UNSCOM to move their mission toward some sort of conclusion.

August
Iraqi forces attack the city of Irbil in Northern Iraq (known as part of "Kurdistan"). President Clinton responds by expanding the no-fly zones to the southern suburbs of Baghdad, but does not attack Iraqi forces in the north.

September
Increasing tension between UNSCOM and the CIA. Rolf Ekeus meets with CIA Director John Deutch, expressing frustration that the CIA is not sharing sufficient data. Ekeus also requests more advanced technical help from the CIA for future operations.

November

UNSCOM inspectors uncover buried missile parts, but are prevented by Iraqi officials from removing these parts for outside analysis.

9 December

The UN Security Council allows Iraq to make limited oil sales for the purpose of purchasing food and medicine.

30 December

The UN Security Council deplores Iraq's intransigence on the missile parts.

1997

February
Iraq allows UNSCOM to remove missile parts.

26 March
Madeleine Albright delivers speech at Georgetown University in which she argues that sanctions likely will not end until Saddam is replaced. Many observers regard this speech as undercutting UNSCOM's ability to gain Iraqi cooperation.

June
Iraq interferes with UNSCOM's helicopter operations, threatening the safety of the aircraft and their crews.

18 June

The Security Council expresses concern over Iraqi actions against UNSCOM helicopters.

21 June
Iraq again blocks UNSCOM's teams from entering certain sites.

21 June
The Security Council passes a resolution condemning Iraq's actions, but no action is taken.

July
Australian diplomat Richard Butler succeeds Rolf Ekeus as Executive Chairman of UNSCOM.

September
Iraq provides the fifth Full, Final and Complete Disclosure for its prohibited biological weapons program.

25 September
UNSCOM inspects a food laboratory. One of the inspectors, Dr.Diane Seaman, enters through the back door and catches men running out with suitcases. These suitcases contain log books for the creation of bacteria and chemicals. The letterhead comes from the president's office and from the Special Security Office (SSO).

UNSCOM tries to inspect the SSO headquarters but is blocked.
23 October

UN Security Council passes a resolution demanding that Iraq cooperate with UNSCOM, continues the suspension of the periodic sanctions review that it had suspended earlier this year, and foreshadows additional sanctions pending a further report on Iraq's cooperation with UNSCOM.

October
UNSCOM completes the destruction of more large quantities of chemical weapons and related equipment. Iraq only had admitted that some of this equipment had been used to produce VX gas in May 1997.

29 October
Crisis begins: Iraq claims it will throw out US inspectors and will shoot down U2 surveillance planes.

November
Scott Ritter claims that the CIA begins to withhold significant information from UNSCOM.

2 November
Iraq bars three American weapons experts from entering the country.

12 November
UN Security Council passes a resolution condemning Iraq's actions.

13 November
UNSCOM withdraws all weapons inspectors because of Hussein's order to expel all American arms experts.

14 November
Military strikes against Iraq seem likely.

18 November
Boris Yeltsin meets with Aziz. War is averted.

20-22 November
Saddam Hussein agrees to allow UN weapons inspectors to return to Iraq after 3 week suspension.

24-25 November
New struggle begins over UNSCOM's inspection of Iraqi Presidential Palaces.

December
UNSCOM continues aggressive inspections, including at the Special Security Office, Saddam's personal security force, which UNSCOM believes also is coordinating Iraq's weapons concealment activities. Washington presses UNSCOM to call these inspections off after the first one is vehemently opposed by the Iraqis.

12-16 December
Richard Butler meets with Tariq Aziz in Iraq over Iraq's refusal to grant inspections of sensitive sites. Butler leaves without an agreement. Clinton reserves right to "consider other options."
                
1998
January
Iraq wants Scott Ritter's team out. They claim that the inspections team is too American-dominated, that "sensitive" sites such as Presidential palaces are off limits, and they say that Ritter is a spy.

12 January
US responds by threatening force.

15 January
Ritter gets a call from Butler the night before a surprise inspection at SSO. Butler tells him that US Ambassador to the UN Bill Richardson wants Ritter to call it off and wants him to go back to Bahrain.

22 January
Monica Lewinsky story breaks.

23 January
Brink of war: serious threat of military force in the air.

31 January
Military force likely. Aircraft carrier USS George Washington is off Bahrain coast, poised for military action.

18 February
Albright, William Cohen, and Sandy Berger visit Ohio for internationally televised "town hall" meeting on Iraq. Angry audience members disrupt the meeting.

20 February
The UN Security Council passes a resolution that permits Iraq to double its "oil for food" sales, to $5.25 Billion every six months. [By January 1999, The New York Times is reporting that Kofi Annan is convinced that the Iraqi leadership is not spending the money to alleviate hunger and medical emergencies in his country, and instead continues to blame the suffering of the Iraqi people on sanctions.]

22-24 February
Crisis defused when UN Secretary General Kofi Annan reaches deal with Saddam, who promises unconditional co-operation with inspection team. Inspections resume. Saddam agrees to the inspection of the eight so-called presidential sites.

[Ritter claims that Annan secretly promised Iraq that the confrontational inspections of sensitive sites would occur only once: sometime in the next four months.]

March
US Intercepted communications are sent by satellite relay to the NSA in Fort Meade.

2 March
US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright urges Richard Butler to keep Scott Ritter from heading the inspection team that is to enter Iraqi "sensitive" sites. After other leaders of UNSCOM inspection teams back Ritter in a memo to the Executive Chairman, Ritter returns to Iraq.

20-23 March
Butler states publicly that the agreement UN General Secretary Kofi Annan strikes with the Iraqis has helped to create a sense of cooperation with the Iraqis.

April
Scott Ritter complains to Richard Butler that the US, Israel, and Great Britain have stopped providing intelligence reports, and that the Americans have taken over UNSCOM's operation. American officials disagree, stating that only Ritter was cut off from information because he was needlessly complicating UNSCOM's work.

4 April
UNSCOM completes initial inspection of eight Presidential sites.

8 April
UNSCOM reports to the Security Council that Iraq's declaration on its biological weapons program is incomplete and inadequate.
        
15 May
Operation Teacup: Romania. An Iraqi delegation goes to Bucharest to meet with individuals who could provide missile guidance systems. UNSCOM sets a trap with the intent of presenting this information to the UN Security Council. But UNSCOM is never able to get this information to the Council.

Spring
An inspection team discovers a dump full of destroyed Iraqi missiles. An analysis of the parts proves that Iraq had made a weapon containing VX.
                
11-15 June
Butler meets with Tariq Aziz to develop roadmap for concluding inspections.

2 August
UNSCOM begins a planned series of surprise inspections.

3 August
Butler meets with Tariq Aziz who demands that inspections must end and that Iraq must be certified as free of weapons of mass destruction. Butler says he cannot do that. Aziz suspends talks.

5 August
Iraq suspends all co-operation with UNSCOM.

7 August
US embassies in East Africa are bombed.

17 August
Clinton admits affair with Lewinsky.

18 August
Brink of war with Iraq.

20 August
US bombs terrorist training camp in Afghanistan and a factory in Sudan in retaliation against Osama bin Laden, the accused mastermind of the East Africa embassy bombings.

25 August
Butler, according to Ritter, asked Ritter to "redefine" his team--meaning Butler wants Ritter to back off from confrontational inspections.

26 August
Ritter resigns from UNSCOM. He accuses the US of undercutting UNSCOM. He calls the UN response to Iraq "a surrender to the Iraqi leadership" and says he will not be a part of it.

9 September
UN Security Council passes a resolution which condemns Iraq's lack of cooperation.

22-23 October
UNSCOM convenes a meeting to discuss the 1998 analysis of samples taken from remnants of Iraq's special warheads. The US charges that these warheads contained traces of chemical weapons.

31 October
Iraq shuts down all UNSCOM inspections.

13-14 November
Clinton orders airstrike on Iraq. Then calls it off at the last minute when Iraq promises unconditionally to co-operate with UNSCOM.

18 November
UNSCOM inspectors return to Iraq.

23-26 November
Iraq makes it clear that it will not cooperate with UNSCOM inspectors, alternately intimidating and withholding information from them.

30 November
Butler meets with US National Security Advisor Sandy Berger to coordinate time lines for possible military strike against Iraq.

9 December
UNSCOM inspectors show up for an unscheduled search of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party headquarters. Only four inspectors are allowed to enter. Butler then calls off the inspection.

11 December
Iraq announces that inspections can no longer take place on Friday, the Muslim day of rest. They refuse to provide test data from the production of missiles and engines.

13 December
Clinton secretly approves attack on Iraq.

15 December
Richard Butler provides a report to the UN Security Council which argues Iraq is still blocking inspections. This report serves as the basis for a military strike.

16 December
UNSCOM withdraws all weapons inspectors from Iraq.

16-19 December
Operation Desert Fox: bombing commences against Iraq. The House vote on impeachment is delayed.

17 December
Some members of the UN Security Council attack Butler, saying that he manipulated the report that the US used to justify the attack against Iraq. Butler vehemently denies the charges.

19 December
Just before bombing ceases, Iraqi vice-president Taha Yassin Ramadan announces that Iraq will no longer co-operate. He declares UNSCOM's "mission is over."
        
21 December
Three of the five permanent members of the Security Council (Russia, France, and China) call for lifting the eight-year oil embargo, recasting or disbanding UNSCOM, and firing Butler. A US official (unnamed) indicates that the US will use its Security Council veto against any such measures.

1999
4 January
The Washington Post reports that Kofi Annan obtained evidence that the US collected eavesdropping intelligence through UNSCOM with the UN's permission.

7 January
US officials confirm their role in the monitoring operation of communications in Iraq. They say that intelligence agents from several countries, including the US, were assigned to work on inspection teams.

4 February
Richard Butler tells CNN that when his term expires on June 30, 1999, he will resign.

Source: UNSCOM's official chronology, and FRONTLINE's research.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/unscom/etc/cron.html

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 10:27 PM

So do you actually believe that Iraq was a real threat to the USA, Teribus? Or was about to be?

Well, apparently George Bush believed it. He seems to have, anyway, going by what he said and did. I wouldn't be surprised if he did believe it. And if he did, then of course in his own mind he would be justified in launching a preventive war.

But, hell, everyone is justified in their own mind for whatever they do...Saddam included. They all think it's the right thing to do at the time, as they see it.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 10:22 PM

bb-

re: your your post at 1:27 and the forward by Blair,

"So I believe people will understand why the Agencies cannot be specific about the sources, which have formed the judgements in this document, and why we cannot publish everything we know.

We all know that we can believe everything Blair has to say on the subject! Right?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 09:31 PM

"Bobert - PM
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 08:54 PM

What Hans Blix was sayin' on March 17th, TeribusWantabee, was that Saddam was being cooperative"

Please provide reference for the above statement - if you can't provide clear unequivocal statement of fact attributed to Dr. Hans Blix - then please Bobert, shut the fuck up about it, because you are prattling on about something that never happened. just for once in your life try and get things honest and straight, something that is not coloured with your own political prejudice. You without any shadow of a doubt are one of the most bigotted people I have ever known.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 08:54 PM

What Hans Blix was sayin' on March 17th, TeribusWantabee, was that Saddam was being cooperative about lettin' the inspectors do their jobs... Or has that part of the story been surgically removed by the Bush revisionists from the real story...

And I remember Bush demanding that Saddam prove that he didn't have any WMD's... Like how do does one go doing that??? I mean, think about it!!! How is a person supposed to prove they don't have something??? If you are teachin' somekind of math/logic/pilosophy class you coould flunk the entire class with that kinda of impossible assignment...

And there's still the question of folks who knew a lot about Iraq who were not only ridiculed by the Bush-hawks but by the press... Scoot Ritter is a prime example... Ritter, a former inspector in Iraq had a lot to say but it seems that those who were hell bent on war didn't have time to listen to what he had to say... Heck, lookin' back, he was 100% on the money while Bush was battin' 0%...

Now today, Veterans Day, Bush pulls out that lame play from his worn out paly book that got us in to the Iraq-mire, and wants folks who have seen him as the Emperior without pants to think of themselves as helping the enemy...

Well, I ain't got no beef with the 100,000 Iraqi women, kids and old folks who Bush has blown up!!! If I have a beef it's with the blower-upper!!! And so will historians!!!

Guarenteed... Think JFK, LBJ and Nixon got tarnished by Nam, you ain't seen nuthin' yet... Ths baby's all Bush's and it ain't gonna take no DNA samples to prove it...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 08:39 PM

Islamic terrorists will likely sneak across the Mexican border.

Heading South I would imagine.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Teribus
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 08:27 PM

GUEST,Arne Langsetmo,

Purely to shut me up once and for all, please present just ONE definative quote from the good Dr. Hans Blix, prior to 17th March 2003, that clearly and unequivocally states that that Iraq possesed no WMD, that Iraq held no precursor chemicals to produce WMD, that Iraq had no programmes running aimed at producing WMD - Then I might start buying into your fantasy. I will tell you now that you will not find one.

In FACT the good Dr. Blix right up until the time that The US said enough was enough, did clearly state repeatedly that he and his inspectors were not receiving the full co-operation of the Iraqi Authorities - Now Arne that was required from day one - The UN knew that, Saddam and his buddies knew that, but unfortunately for the cosy UN back scratching, 'lets make a bit of cash out of this situation UN club', President George W Bush meant what he said and believed that HIS country was under threat, and proved it by going to the trouble and expense of parking 250,000 US troops on Saddam's doorstep.

I could not give a flying fuck whether or not WMD were found in Iraq. But the following every single person person in this world now knows for certain 100%:
- Iraq now holds no WMD.
- Iraq is no longer pursuing a policy to acquire WMD
- Iraq now no longer is in a position to threaten the peace and stability of the region.
- Iraq no longer subsidises international terorist organisations

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 07:42 PM

It just seems odd to me that the same people that said "there are no WMD's" are the same ones who harped on Bush because of the Hurricane Katrina debacle. According to them, because Bush took too long in getting FEMA to the site, there would be 10,000 bodies floating in a toxic soup. Did they lie? I think once a liar always a liar.


I guess the gators got the other 9000 bodies. Cause we sure ain't found THEM yet.




Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 07:40 PM

So why isn't Bush/Blair et al proclaining this??????? They need YOU to come to their defense?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 07:40 PM

Fine. So...what we are saying is that there were no significant amount of such weapons found as would pose any real threat to the USA or provide the USA with any real reason to launch an invasion, GeoDuck. We are saying that scaremongering was used to cajole the American public into supporting an unprovoked war...a war which was launched against the majority public opinion of almost every population in the World, including that of the UK, Bush's one serious ally in the effort.

I figure that if you looked hard enough in any country in the World (except maybe Lichtenstein and Pitcairn Island) you could find something that Bush would have used as his excuse for this war.

The fact remains, Iraq was no credible threat to the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Geoduck
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 07:14 PM

Peace:

How do you propose someone to show you a WMD found in Iraq?

Show me your brain and then I will believe you have one.

And my charge is that the Anti-Bush lynch mob claim that there were no WMDs found in Iraq is false. I could yell "thay lied" but that would be using the same lowbrow, thug tactics that they use.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne Langsetmo
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 06:59 PM

BB: Arne, Show me where Saddam complied. Read UNR 1441 - same goalposts the whole game.

No, no, no. Why don't you show me where ... and how ... they didn't comply. Then we can sit back, you and I, in our nice comfy chairs before our nice neat Internet-accessible terminals, far from the blood and smoke, and discuss whether any such alleged "non-compliance" was worth a single U.S. soldier dead, much less the 2000 -- and growing every day -- that we have to date. Be specific now.

BB: Prohibited material and programs WERE found.

None as amounted to as much as a duck's fart (much less the life of a single U.S. soldier). As for "programs", of those, there weren't any.

BB: "Just saying it is so don't make it so" right back at you."

Why don't you read what you just wrote. Put up or shut up. I already did my putting up at the top of the thread.

Have you ever talked with any of the flight crews attempting to enforce the no-fly zones prior to the invasion of Iraq? Active combat is the best description.

Where "attempting to enforce the no-fly zones" is defined as "provoking the Iraqis, testing their defences, trying to get them to turn on the AD radars and then sending a HARM up their ass, and bombing pretty much anything else they could on the slightest excuse." (Don't get me wrong, Clinton did the same thing, but I condemn him for this as well).

Point of fact: not a single U.S. plane "enforc[ing] the no-fly zones" was los to fire; not a single pilot hurt. The only ones doing the dying in these encounters were Iraqis. The "no-fly" zones were not a U.N.-approved measure, but were imposed unilaterally by the U.S. in the aftermath of the first Gulf war. Such an invasion of sovereign airspace is legally an act of war in itself. If any enemy or rival of the U.S. did such fly-overs of U.S. airspace, they'd be flaming wreckage in seconds. If the U.S. did not wish their planes to be shot at, the solution was within their own hands. But in fact, the U.S. deliberately sought to draw Iraqi reaction and/or fire on multiple occasions, in part to use such as an excuse to begin the softening up and weakening of the Iraqi defences and communications facilities in preparation for Dubya's coming war.

Still waiting for what you're going to tell Cindy Sheehan. Or are you going to spit on her, and malign her and insult her as the rest of the Fighting 101st Keyboarders have done, this Veterans' Day?

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Peace
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 06:40 PM

"There were no WMDs found in Iraq"

Your sarcasm goes no place. For time fifty three or whatever the fuck it is

SHOW US ONE

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 06:38 PM

BB - Active combat? I'm sure. If some pilots from a superpower were flying and bombing over Canada on a daily basis for 10 years in a big "no-fly" zone that THEY had unilaterally declared to exist over British Columbia and the Maritimes, I guess we'd shoot at them. You bet we would. That's what happens when you violate the airspace of a sovereign nation.

My impression is that it would not have mattered WHAT Saddam had done to comply with Bush's demands...and he did a lot. The decision to invade had been made long before the demands were ever made. The rest was window-dressing for the benefit of public PR. Saddam knew it. There was nothing he could do, other than to simply flee his own country and go into exile. He certainly was not going to do that...and even if he had, it would have been followed by an American intervention anyway, because Iraq would have become de-stabilized. The decision to invade Iraq was made a long way back, and had nothing to do with any threat that Iraq posed to the USA or the Western World. It had to do with oil and power politics. It had to do with gaining strategic resources and strategic positioning in the Middle East.

In terms of George Bush himself...I think he's a fairly naive man, and he may well believe a great deal of what he says about his reasons for invading Iraq. I don't think the men behind him are nearly so naive, and I am referring to Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and whoever else is behind them. Bush is their puppet, in my opinion, but Bush himself is probably not really aware of that. I actually feel a bit sorry for him at times. I bet he was happier running the baseball team.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:54 PM

Arne,

Have you ever talked with any of the flight crews attempting to enforce the no-fly zones prior to the invasion of Iraq? Active combat is the best description.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:52 PM

GregF,

So now I am required to have the "correct" opinion in order to have any opinion at all? See my discussions on freedom of speech- you seem to be weak on the concept.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:46 PM

Arne,

Show me where Saddam complied.


Read UNR 1441 - same goalposts the whole game.


Prohibited material and programs WERE found.


"Just saying it is so don't make it so" right back at you.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Geoduck
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:28 PM

The hue and cry of the anti Bushites is:

There were no WMDs found in Iraq

Notice the word No, Nada, Keine, Negatory, Aucun

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: GUEST,Arne L:angsetmo
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:23 PM

BB: Try looking at the facts. The UN DID declare hime to be in non-compliance, no matter what you belive they should have done.

And then he complied (despite the hallucinations of da Preznit to the contrary as I've detailed in a link above). And then the Security Council refused to authorise the armed invasion (which is a step beyond declaring Saddam in violation). The Security Council was instead in favour of letting the inspections (which Saddam did accede to after the first U.N. resolution) continue. What's so difficult to grasp about that concept? The invasion was Dubya's idea, Dubya's call, Dubya's mistake, and all his alone.

BB: ... programs that would lead to WMD, not possesion of completed WMDs.

"intentions of projects of weapons of mass destruction program related activies ... or anything, including cross-eyes glances, resembling such".

Moving the ol' goalposts again. Strange thing here, BB: While no WMD were found, no actual programs were found, no significant potential to do such was found even had there been any intent, we still have 2059 dead U.S. soldiers (and counting). Isn't it time for you to start talking about how democracy is in full flourish in the Middle East, with -- *miracle of miracles* -- an astonising 99% of the eligigle votes in some Sunni area coming out in favour of the new constitution?

BB: Hitler did not succeed in killing all the Jews- would you than state that he did not actually attempt genocide since some survived?

Godwin's Law. A deeply offensive comparison. But your problem here, even given that transgression, BB, is that essentially no WoMD were found (and before you start waugh-waughing about "but ... but ... the violations ... it's the violations of agreements!", I'd point out that the US is/was in violation of plenty of international agreements as well [including the requirements under UNSCR 1441 itself that nations with intelligence relevant to the resolution turn such over to the UN], and if it's the death penalty for Saddam, it's the death penalty for all). See my very early comments (under the name "GUEST"; forgot to put in my name). As other wiser folks have pointed out, even the malodourous Dubya maladministration flacks have given up pretending that any WoMD were found, and they'd be screaming it at the top of their lungs if they thought they could get by with that (one problem they had is that two separate investigations by their own chosen people found just that: No WoMD).

BB: The UN stated the IRAQ was in non-compliance, thus hostilities resumed.

Just saying it is so don't make it so. Try again.

Oh, and BTW: Your apparent notion that an actual armed attack across the Korean DMZ is the same thing as a disagreement -- with plenty of room for lawyerly squabbles, where no one's lives are lost -- is quite puzzling.... Do you really think they are one and the same thing??? Tell me, truthfully....

What mattered here was whether Saddam had dangerous WoMD, not whether he could walk whatever dotted line that Dubya and co. laid down for him blindfolded and on tip-toe. Even the law recognizes the difference; substiantial compliance trumps lawyerly nit-picking. And more so, when the consequences, both in Iraqi and U.S. servicemen's lives, are so severe. Perhaps if you think about it, you might be able to see that.... Or you can go tell Cindy Sheehan and 2000 other mothers that their son is dead because Saddam only gave us 1200 pages of documents....

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:15 PM

Here we go loop de loop
Here we go loop de lie....

Anybody else tired of Re-Fried Beardedbruce?

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:01 PM

Had Saddam complied with the cease-fire terms, and the UN resolutions, there would have been no reason to invade Iraq.

Those "anti-war" folks who insisted that the US NOT act against the violations, BUT DID NOT DEMAND that Saddam comply are a major contributing cause of the invasion- they gave Saddam reason to think that he did not need to comply. It does not matter WHY people act, but what the CONSEQUENCES of their actions are.

I have in the past stated that the invasion was poorly planned and the post-combat phase was a foul-up- BUT the reason to go in was valid, and IMO required.

Subject: RE: BS: WMDs WERE found in Iraq!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 04:57 PM

I regard war as an actual physical event, BB, not a legal technicality.

The whole world was involved in the debate as to whether the USA should "go to war" against Iraq, prior to the younger Bush's attack. They were focused on the actual reality OF a full-scale attack, not some lawyer's legal definition of the word "war".

Bush made the decision to invade. THEN it became a war. Prior to that, it had been an ongoing state of threat and harassment (involving sanctions and some bombing in the "no-fly" zones.

We all know when a war is really a war, and playing with BS lawyer words doesn't change that. It's just common sense. When your borders are invaded, and the skies are filled with the enemy warplanes, it's a war.

The Korean War, in actual terms of reality, ended with the ceasefire, regardless of whether they agreed on paper that the war was over. A 6-year-old schoolboy can see that. Anyone can see it, except a lawyer, a politician, or someone who doesn't want to see it. Lawyers will tell you differently, because they are clever, and cleverness is always happy to twist reality any way it wants to in order to achieve its desired objective...which is to "win" a verbal point in a debate. In court, that works, but we're not in court here...we're in real life where common sense is more important than legal techicalities.