WMD search ends... in silence

[techweenie]

Well, almost, it was announced a couple of days ago that the search ended last month with the judgement that

1. There were no WMDs in Iraq

2. There were no WMDs moved out of Iraq

3. Iraq had no programs capable of producing WMDs in the foreseeable future.

So Scott Ritter and the dozens of other people who were there actually knew what they were talking about, and the handful of Pelicanhead Bush apologists weaving paranoid conspiracy theories were wrong.

Were there already posts on this that I missed? I mean other than a year and a half of posts predicting this result?

[bryanthompson]

third repost.

[speeder]

Not so fast there........, I think that Fintstone found some WMDs over there. I'm digging for the post......

[kach22i]

Originally posted by techweenie
2. There were no WMDs moved out of Iraq

Really?

A small part of me is still holding out on this one - Syrian border all clean?

Thought the war was gone about in the wrong way all along.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by techweenie


2. There were no WMDs moved out of Iraq

Yes indeedy, I would LOVE to see how anyone could possibly know this. Not saying it 's untrue, but to state it as fact (which is impossible to know) taints the rest of the article. I'de pull the unknowable before spreading this myself, lest you appear a shill

[Z-man]

It was wrong for the Bush admin to trust a source claiming WMD without apparently verifying it.

Unfortunately, this was the primary basis for starting the war in Iraq.

Doesn't put this present admin in the best light...

That said, I still believe Saddam was a threat to peace, based on what else they found in Iraq - mass graves, dictator extravagance...etc, and his past record. (Remember the scub missles fired into Israel during the first war?)

Perhaps a less forceful approach would have uncovered the atrosities in Iraq in a less harmful manner- we will never know. Many lives were lost - perhaps many could have been saved.

Isn't Saddam Husein being tried for crimes against his people? His mistreatments of his people has been uncovered.

Interesting times we live in. Interesting times.
-Z.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Z-man

Interesting times we live in. Interesting times.
-Z.

they'd be more interesting if you didn't pull so many pictures from the grid girls thread

[techweenie]

Saddam was/is a bad guy. Invading his country a second time for things he did before the first invasion is a pretty lame reason to kill 1,33X Americans and wound 10,000 more. Not to mention the $300 billion we borrowed to invade. Not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqis killed...

Meantime Bin Laden roams free... al Quaeda is stronger than ever in Saudi Arabia and other countries around the world. And we still haven't gotten Afghanistan under control.

[techweenie]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Yes indeedy, I would LOVE to see how anyone could possibly know this. Not saying it 's untrue, but to state it as fact (which is impossible to know) taints the rest of the article. I'de pull the unknowable before spreading this myself, lest you appear a shill

Not too complicated, really. Since there weren't any to move, they couldn't have been moved.

That's hardly 'impossible to know.'

[bryanthompson]

al Quaeda is stronger than ever in Saudi Arabia and other countries around the world. And we still haven't gotten Afghanistan under control.

Al Qaeda had a stronghold and safe-haven in Afghanistan, which they don't have anymore. Assuming you're right in saying that they are stronger in countries where they weren't before, it's a success. Being "stronger" is a matter of scales... Before they had some loose tribes running around bombing random things. Now that there's no afghanistan for them to hang out in, as a matter of scale, the smaller ones seem stronger.

Afghanistan has had elections, and I haven't heard much of a ruckus out of the insurgents, which the media said would never stop, lately.

Bush could have said that we were going to war in Iraq for the sole puppose of it being "the right thing to do" and that would be enough. Saddam had years and years to figure out how to hide what we know he had, and what we know he was trying to develop. It's just a matter of time, it'll be found; probably buried in the desert, in tunnels, or in Syria.

[techweenie]

Bryan, I agree with your assessment in theory, but Afghanistan is only about 15% under control, geographically. In most of the country life is very much like it was 4 years ago -- including opium farming.

So I don't know that al Quaeda *doesn't* have roots there. I'm not sure anyone knows their true presence in Afghanistan.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by techweenie
Not too complicated, really. Since there weren't any to move, they couldn't have been moved.

That's hardly 'impossible to know.'

Don't be a rube, he DID have and DID use them at one time. Hence it is impossible to know if he moved, destoyed, or used them all up.

[techweenie]

I guess you havent' been paying attention again.

The chemical/biologicals we gave Saddam in the 80s are basically rendered harmless by deterioration. Any tentative steps toward building his own crude weapons were stamped out in '91.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by techweenie
I guess you havent' been paying attention again.

The chemical/biologicals we gave Saddam in the 80s are basically rendered harmless by deterioration. Any tentative steps toward building his own crude weapons were stamped out in '91.

Fine, yes you have PROVEN that no WMD's were ever moved out of Iraq. Your logic professors must have loved you.

I mean really this is quite a milestone achievment! Negatives can now (apparently) be proven! I stand in awe.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Forget WMDs, where's this liberal press everyone keeps talking about? Where's the media uproar?

I see the blatantly apologist right wing media on a sickeningly daily basis, but where are all those country and president-hating liberals who will do anything to humiliate bush?