WMD Found in Iraq!!

[nomansland]

WMD found in Iraq according to New York Times best-selling author Richard Miniter:

 

• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

 

• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons

 

• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas

 

• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs

 

• Found: 17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin

[RETIREDFAN1]

Liberals continue to ignore the FACTS when they don't fit their view of how things should be. You will never see this in the leftist media. I know, because these facts have been out there for a while now, and never seen the light of day in the liberal media.

[Rhino2K]

Welcome to reality!!

 

 

We've been telling you (demopsychos) that for about three and a half years now.:bye:

[CatPride]

My oldest son goes to Iraq at the end of this month, and while I worry about him I think it was a good thing that we did going in there and getting rid of the tyrants. I also have to say that if I acted like Cindy Sheehan or whatever her name was, my son would be SSOOOO ashamed of me. The weapons are there people, it's just being covered up and making the current administration look bad.

[Straw]

Originally posted by CatPride

My oldest son goes to Iraq at the end of this month, and while I worry about him I think it was a good thing that we did going in there and getting rid of the tyrants. I also have to say that if I acted like Cindy Sheehan or whatever her name was, my son would be SSOOOO ashamed of me. The weapons are there people, it's just being covered up and making the current administration look bad.

 

Please tell your son thank you and goodluck.:thumbsup:

[WildcatPride]

Originally posted by CatPride

My oldest son goes to Iraq at the end of this month, and while I worry about him I think it was a good thing that we did going in there and getting rid of the tyrants. I also have to say that if I acted like Cindy Sheehan or whatever her name was, my son would be SSOOOO ashamed of me. The weapons are there people, it's just being covered up and making the current administration look bad.

 

You are correct. It was here. U2U me when he get settled on a FOB somewhere. Praying for you and all your family. Tell him thank you for his service on behalf of all of us.

[DeuceChunker03]

Maybe you could post an article? I could get on here and spout random numbers... like every other person, you have to back your post up with proof.

[Straw]

Originally posted by DeuceChunker03

Maybe you could post an article? I could get on here and spout random numbers... like every other person, you have to back your post up with proof.

 

Does it really matter to you Duece? Would you really believe it even if we showed you? Most of these he listed weren't even found by American troops.

[nomansland]

Originally posted by DeuceChunker03

Maybe you could post an article? I could get on here and spout random numbers... like every other person, you have to back your post up with proof.

 

Funny how the journalistic standard is different, depending on your perspective. I saw Mary Mapes (CBS 60 Minutes producer of story that led to Rathergate . . . ) tell Shawn Hannity that she didn't have to prove the National Guard document was authentic, it was up to her critics to prove it was a fake!!!

 

By the same token, I could take the same position and tell you to prove my "random numbers" are false . . .

 

But I won't. The information is from Richard Miniter's NY Times Best Seller, Disinformation. Read it if you are interested in refuting the facts.

[RETIREDFAN1]

She must have failed logic miserably. It is her duty to prove her statement. One does not strive to prove a negative, because it is virtually impossible. Hence, she must prove that her documents are authentive, if she is logical at all. (Being that she is a liberal, you can throw logic out the back door. )

[WildcatPride]

Sens. Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid and Dick Durbin have accused President George Bush of lying about Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction, insisting he “lied us into war.” They are even floating the suggestion that he be impeached.

 

Here are their accusations:

 

“The Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence to justify a war that America should never have fought.” –Ted Kennedy

 

“We all know the Vice President’s office was the nerve center of an operation designed to sell the war and discredit those who challenged it. … The manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq…the Vice President is behind that.” –Harry Reid

 

“I seconded the motion Sen. Harry Reid made last week. Republicans in Congress have refused, despite repeated promises, to investigate the Bush administration’s misuse of pre-war intelligence, so Senate Democrats are standing up and demanding the truth.” — Dick Durbin, who recently compared U.S. troops to the Nazis and Pol Pot.

 

Naturally, the Democrat’s media lemmings are reporting these charges as de facto truth, but there is considerable evidence that these Demo-gogues and their colleagues believed Iraq had WMD long before President George Bush came to Washington. Here is a small sample of that evidence from the Clinton years:

 

Bill Clinton: “If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”

 

Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State: “We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.”

 

Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Advisor and Classified Document Thief: “[saddam will] use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983.”

 

Harry Reid: “The problem is not nuclear testing; it is nuclear weapons. … The number of Third World countries with nuclear capabilities seems to grow daily. Saddam Hussein’s near success with developing a nuclear weapon should be an eye-opener for us all.”

 

Dick Durbin: “One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that…Iraq…may acquire or develop nuclear weapons.”

 

John Kerry: “If you don’t believe…Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.”

 

John Edwards: “Serving on the Intelligence Committee and seeing day after day, week after week, briefings on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction and his plans on using those weapons, he cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons, it’s just that simple. The whole world changes if Saddam ever has nuclear weapons.”

 

Nancy Pelosi: “Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process.”

 

Sens. Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry in a letter to Bill Clinton: “We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”

 

After President Bush was sworn into office in 2001, his administration was handed eight years worth of intelligence analysis and policy positions from the Clinton years — you know, the years of appeasement when Saddam was tolerated, when opportunities to take out Osama bin Ladin were ignored, as was the presence of an al-Qa’ida terrorist cell in the U.S. — which reared its head on 9/11.

 

In the weeks prior to the invasion of Iraq, Democrats, who had access to the same intelligence used by the Bush administration (much of which was compiled under the Clinton administration), were clear about the threat of Iraq’s WMD capability.

 

Ted Kennedy: “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”

 

John Kerry: “I will be voting to give the president of the U.S. the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. … Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein.”

 

Hillary Clinton: “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile-delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qa’ida members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”

 

Carl Levin: “We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein…is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”

 

Al Gore: “We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”

 

Bob Graham: “We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”

 

For the record: Here’s a partial list of what didn’t make it out of Iraq before the OIF invasion: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium, 1,700 gallons of chemical-weapon agents, chemical warheads containing the nerve agent cyclosarin, radioactive materials in powdered form designed for dispersal over population centers, artillery projectiles loaded with binary chemical agents, etc. Assuming Irag had no WMD because only small caches were recovered after Operation Iraqi Freedom began is perilously flawed logic. That, in no way, affirms what he spirited out through Iran and Syria before OIF. [Hmmm, there it is again]

 

So, ask Ted, Dick and Harry, what is their real agenda?

 

http://www.soldiersperspective.us/

[WildcatPride]

Here are some articles on the web that aren't classified.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

 

Swedish arms experts

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,...1397233,00.html

 

 

Iraqi Chemical Stash Uncovered

Post-Invasion Cache Could Have Been For Use in Weapons

 

By Ellen Knickmeyer

Washington Post Foreign Service

Sunday, August 14, 2005; Page A18

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5081300530.html

 

*****************************************************

US reveals Iraq nuclear operation

US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham

Abraham called the operation a "major achievement"

The US has revealed that it removed more than 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq in a secret operation last month.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3872201.stm

*****************************************************

 

Want more research? Come over here and talk to a soldier one on one who isn't kegging it at Spring Break this year.

[CatPride]

Thanks guys I'll tell him. He is very proud to serve. He believes in this mission with his whole heart, so I believe everyone should be behind him and all the other servicemen and women if you are liberal or conservative.

[RETIREDFAN1]

It's pointless to post articles or proof. Lefties will keep believing the lie: just like the Germans kept believing Hitler's lies. They are sheep being lead around by Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Hillary. :w00t:

[gooserboy86]

Originally posted by strawberry66

Originally posted by CatPride

My oldest son goes to Iraq at the end of this month, and while I worry about him I think it was a good thing that we did going in there and getting rid of the tyrants. I also have to say that if I acted like Cindy Sheehan or whatever her name was, my son would be SSOOOO ashamed of me. The weapons are there people, it's just being covered up and making the current administration look bad.

 

Please tell your son thank you and goodluck.:thumbsup:

 

 

dito.........

[Colligula]

Originally posted by CatPride

Thanks guys I'll tell him. He is very proud to serve. He believes in this mission with his whole heart, so I believe everyone should be behind him and all the other servicemen and women if you are liberal or conservative.

Liberals and conservatives both support our troops to the fullest. We just disagree wether or not its nessasary for them to be there.

[WildcatPride]

Clinton: Iraq has abused its last chance

Clinton

President Clinton addressed the nation from the Oval Office

Clinton spells out Iraq's non-compliance

# Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites.

 

# Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence.

 

# Iraq tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.

 

# Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all documents requested by the inspectors.

US Forces:

 

There are 15 U.S. warships and 97 U.S. aircraft in the Persian Gulf region, including about 70 aboard the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise. More than 12,000 sailors and Marines are in the region.

 

U.S. sources said eight of the warships, equipped with cruise missiles, have been moved into the northern part of the Gulf, within easy striking distance of Baghdad. More troops and jets have been ordered to the region.

 

More than 300 cruise missiles are available for use against Iraq, and there are air-launched cruise missiles aboard 14 B-52 bombers on the British island of Diego Garcia, sources said.

 

Britain has 22 strike aircraft in the region.

ALSO:

Pentagon unveils details of Operation Desert Fox

Transcript:Text of Blair's remarks on Iraq attack

Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike

RELATED VIDEO

Clinton statement from the Oval Office on attack against Iraq

Windows Media 28K 56K

 

Pentagon outlines 'Operation Desert Fox'

Real 28K 56K

Windows Media 28K 56K

 

British Prime Minister comments on the airstrikes

Real 28K 56K

Windows Media 28K 56K

 

Watch as anti-aircraft fire erupts over Baghdad

Real 28K 56K

Windows Media 28K 56K

 

In this story:

 

* 'Without delay, diplomacy or warning'

* Strikes necessary to stunt weapons programs

* Related stories and sites

 

December 16, 1998

Web posted at: 8:51 p.m. EST (0151 GMT)

 

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

 

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

 

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.

 

Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.

 

"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

 

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

 

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors.

 

'Without delay, diplomacy or warning'

 

The Iraqi leader was given a final warning six weeks ago, Clinton said, when Baghdad promised to cooperate with U.N. inspectors at the last minute just as U.S. warplanes were headed its way.

 

"Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning," Clinton said.

 

The president said the report handed in Tuesday by Richard Butler, head of the United Nations Special Commission in charge of finding and destroying Iraqi weapons, was stark and sobering.

 

Iraq failed to cooperate with the inspectors and placed new restrictions on them, Clinton said. He said Iraqi officials also destroyed records and moved everything, even the furniture, out of suspected sites before inspectors were allowed in.

 

"Instead of inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors," Clinton said.

 

"In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance -- not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed," the president explained.

 

Strikes necessary to stunt weapons programs

 

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

 

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

 

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

 

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

Offensive Strike

 

•Timeline

•Maps

•Where They Stand

•Flashback 1991

•Forces in the Gulf

•Bioweapons Explainer

•Message Boards

•UNSCOM Documents

•Related Links

 

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.

 

Such a change in Baghdad would take time and effort, Clinton said, adding that his administration would work with Iraqi opposition forces.

 

Clinton also addressed the ongoing impeachment crisis in the White House.

 

"Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down," he said.

 

"But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."

 

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

[CatPride]

Originally posted by Colligula

Originally posted by CatPride

Thanks guys I'll tell him. He is very proud to serve. He believes in this mission with his whole heart, so I believe everyone should be behind him and all the other servicemen and women if you are liberal or conservative.

Liberals and conservatives both support our troops to the fullest. We just disagree wether or not its nessasary for them to be there.

 

It's okay for you to disagree, just don't let him hear you. He's been spit on and cussed at by some liberals when he was stationed in Florida. It was during an anti-war protest and it was not a pretty thing. Liberals and Conservatives alike need to realize that he's doing a job that his boss has told him to do, it's just his boss is the President.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Originally posted by Colligula

Liberals and conservatives both support our troops to the fullest. We just disagree wether or not its nessasary for them to be there.

 

Let me be the first one to call BS on this statement. Liberals do NOT support our troops. You can't support the troops while degrading the job that they are doing at every opportunity you get.

[sppunk]

FYI, not supporting an illegitimate war is not the same as degrading a job.

[RETIREDFAN1]

Originally posted by sppunk

FYI, not supporting an illegitimate war is not the same as degrading a job.

 

This war is illegitimate in the minds of liberals and a few misguided conservatives. Not supporting the war is not supporting the troops.

[sppunk]

Originally posted by Colmesneilfan1

 

This war is illegitimate in the minds of liberals and a few misguided conservatives. Not supporting the war is not supporting the troops.

No, it is not. This falls along the "You're not a Patriot!!!" rhetoric the GOP threw out and no one bought. It's funny you guys are using old Soviet methods to drum up support for actions that have been misled about.

[CatPride]

My son sees it as you're not a Patriot and he doesn't even know what the GOP is.....and if we were using old Soviet methods, we would not be allowing you to share your opinion....you'd just take what we are saying as law and not be able to have an opinion....you can thank my son and others like him for those liberties. Please do it without spitting on him.

[sppunk]

Originally posted by CatPride

My son sees it as you're not a Patriot and he doesn't even know what the GOP is.

Well, with all due respect, in my eyes your son is wrong.

 

I wish your son, as I do all troops, a safe return home. But I do not believe they are being sent safely into a situation without merit or due reasoning.

 

I love how opposing a governmental action is unpatriotic. I was completely unaware we had to follow as moles hook, line and sinker everything our government shoves down our throats.

 

The Bosnian nonsense in the late 90s under Clinton was hogwash, and so is this. The difference: This is eroding American's safety abroad and killing young men and women needlessly.

[CatPride]

Good thing you get to have an opinion.....