How many different dates do _you_ have to type to show that it is old news and accept that this is old news?

Ok, I'll bite one more time.....

When should this have been announced to us? If the NY Times is going to report this, when should they have reported this?

I don't know why you're so concerned, nothing, nothing is going to sway you guys...doesn't matter anyway.

Why not this headline story on CNN and NYTimes:

<b>99.91% of Munitions in Iraq Have Been Destroyed and/or Secured for Destruction - World a Safer Place to Live!!!</b>



:cool:

Because I don't know if that's an accurate assessment given this portion of this article:

Early this month, Dr. ElBaradei put public pressure on the interim Iraqi government to start the process of accounting for nuclear-related materials still ostensibly under I.A.E.A. supervision, including the Qaqaa stockpile.

Appears to me they are "starting the process"of accounting for......

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! SmileWavy

I think the reason why the concern is the missing weapons is because these are the weapons being used against our troops and iraqi civilians. If these weapons were safeguarded a lot more people might be alive right now.

Thats probably a foriegn concept to the bush lovers since they try to deny that reality any time they get.

Not going to answer my question red-beard?

When should this have been announced to us? If the NY Times is going to report this, when should they have reported this?

Where was that stated in the article? Or is this a guess?

This is what should be reported. But then, it might make the present administration look good.

Well, it sounds like it could have been reported in May, 2004. It also sounds like the IAEA knew by May, 2003 that there was nothing there. So, sometime between May 2003, and May 2004.

So, split the difference and say Nov, 2003. Good enough for you?

Am I missing something here? You have tons of munitions
that you don't want to fall into the wrong hands...BLOW THEM UP!

Is not to hard with all those explosives lying around.

john

Check out this from drudge (http://drudgereport.com/nbcw.htm):

Game, set, match. They were gone before we got there, this story's been churned up after EIGHTEEN FRICKING MONTHS for the sole purpose of helping Kerry.

Isn't it amazing that almost every "big" new story that puts our nation or our president in a bad light turns out to be like this....Printed on page one...then retracted on page 30. Sheesh!

Do you have reading comprehension problems?

Do you even remember when we invaded iraq? The issue at hand is why did the military wait so long before attempting to secure such a large cache of weapons?

Ya bush lovers have your heads so far up your collective asses that you all can't even see a simple case of incompetance for what it is.

Trying to spin every bush screwing the pooch story into a 'oh no, the liberal media is slandering bush' whine doesn't change the fact that your candidate sucks.

Talk about a reading comprehension problem....read this very slowly.....We secured the site immediately. The weapons were already gone when we invaded Iraq. Duh...how pathetic!

Well, it may be simple to you Iraqi-US-foriegn-policy-making-expert-GoOPers here on the boards, but its not so simple for Scott McClellan:

From dailyKos.com:

The problem is that the White House has spent the entire day claiming that they knew nothing about this until ten days ago, October 15th. Scott McClellan said this repeatedly during his gaggle with reporters this morning. Indeed, he went on to say the following: "Now [i.e., after the notification on October 15th], the Pentagon, upon learning of this, directed the multinational forces and the Iraqi survey group to look into this matter, and that's what they are currently doing."

So McClellan says that the Pentagon only just learned about this. And that's why they only now assigned the Iraq Survey Group to examine what happened at al Qa Qaa.

Edit: had to fix my Engrish

OMG, the military didn't secure a weapons cache before they actually got to it! And now we find out the the White House knew nothing until 10 days ago about something that didn't happen.

OK, how about these headline possibilities:

<b>UN Celebrates: Coalition Forces Destroy 405,898 Tons of Weapons in Iraq!

France Thanks US & Allies: 405,898 Tons of Weapons Destroyed in Iraq!

US Destroys 10,033 Weapons Caches: Search Continues For 100s of Tons of Additional Weapons

Large Caches of Weapons Moved Prior to US Liberation: Were WMD's Included?

The NY Times: All the News That Fits Our Political Agenda

</b>

:D

http://drudgereport.com/nbcw.htm

you're really mad that this was published huh?

Are you in favor of censorship or something?

The truth is that the republicans have been very busy. Defending incompetence is a full time job.:D

We have not been defending the New York Times