Explosives Went Missing After War

[InlineTurbo]

But point #3, what are you trying to get at? Al Quaeda had nothing to do with Iraq. Granted it's a common misconception, but I had to comment on it. One of my biggest problems with the way that this war was conducted was all the lies at the begining about Al Quaeda and 9/11 being connected to Sadam. Sadly, 40someodd% of Americans still belive it.

←

The only people repeating the Al Qaeda and 9/11 lies are people like you saying that others are saying it. There most definitely is a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

As to this story it is a non story. Most of it was gone before we got there and the rest we moved. Some very small amounts may have been taken during the chaos, but the fact remains that this stuff was supposed to be destroyed by the IAEA and they refused. They then let Sadam move a lot of it while claiming that it was still there. This happened about 19 months ago, but is just being reported *again* now (without reference to when it happened for the first few days) because of a letter sent by the U.N.? This should insult many of us because the U.N. is trying to effect our elections. It is clear they want the weak pro U.N. puppet Kerry in office over the strong leader Bush. Strong America = Bad for the world ambitions of the U.N. and France, Germnay, ect.

[ChuckV986]

As to this story it is a non story. Most of it was gone before we got there and the rest we moved. Some very small amounts may have been taken during the chaos, but the fact remains that this stuff was supposed to be destroyed by the IAEA and they refused. They then let Sadam move a lot of it while claiming that it was still there

Didn't I say that's what I thought

The only people repeating the Al Qaeda and 9/11 lies are people like you saying that others are saying it. There most definitely is a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

No, I'm not saying that others are saying it. I'm saying that Bush and his cronies did say it. Enough that at one point right before the war started I remember a poll showing some 75% of Americans believed Sadam was connected with 9/11.

The only people I've ever heard say that the Bush administration never tried to imply a connection between Sadam and 9/11 or Sadam and Al Quaeda are people that are checked out of reality, or people that are so far skewed to Bush's side that they will believe what ever he or his support groups say without question. I can remember having litterally dozens of arguments with people right before the war started about the Al Quaeda Sadam thing, or the Sadam 9/11 thing. I'd say something like "I really don't think we should be going into this war right now, at least not before Afghanistan is cleaned up. We'll just loose soldiers, and probably create a new generation of Iraqis hating the US if we don't kill them all. Just a bad idea before we get some more people on our side to bolster our numbers. Occupying a country takes a lot of troops." then, the person I was talking to would say something like "But Sadam helped to plan 9/11, and he could very well be hiding bin Laden in his country." then I'd reply with "*crickets.....*". At first I didn't know how to respond to people, then I just got sick of people's sheepish nature and stupidity. I started just calling people brainwashed fools I got so sick of it. No one thinks for themselves.

No-one trying to link Al Quaeda/9-11 and Sadam? Where you out of the country for the 6 months before the war? Stoned? Just not paying attention? Or are you just repeating the line the Bush and his cronies give out without question, either believing it to be true, or thinking everyone you talk to will too stupid to remember what the truth is?

It won't work on me. I was just livid that Bush dared to cheapen 9/11 by using for his own idiotic and shortsighted political purposes that I've held it against him and kept it in mind ever since. I was just so scared by the people I talked to, and the polls I saw that indicated that most of the country actually believed the nitwit! It'd be like people believing Al Gore actually did create the internet just because he said so. Or Johnson with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Except people actually did buy that...until they later found out the truth. A lot like the President now. He got caught lying about Sadam and 9/11, or even WMDs and the reason we went to war if you want to go that far, only now he's tried to reverse his position and get people to buy that. And a lot of stupid people are, I'm sorry to say. I don't see why it is that Bush can get away with truly flip-flopping, but Kerry gets jumped on for relatively minor political changes. It's probably because Kerry did a piss-poor job of running his campaign at first, so Bush's people thought they'd jump on the chance to sling mud at him, and discredit him before he could show Bush to be a lying, manipulative, unintelligent but oft likeable guy that unfortunately often finds himself in over his head. To be honest, I don't even think he's respnonsible for my charges of being lying or manipultive. I think that has more to do with his handlers.

Because that's what the guy is when you come down to it. I think I'd much rather have him as a friend than Kerry. But the fact that the majority of Americans, again and again, believe his out-and-out lies and gross distortions/manipulations of the facts, with dire consequences tell me that keeping him in the White House is downright dangerous. If all you have to do is say "9/11" in the same paragraph as something for people to believe that they're connected, then I don't see why he couldn't connect any Arab nation in the world to it. Besides the one that actually had the most to do with it in terms of $$ and people commited, of course. That scares me, understandably I think. If someone is obviously lying and trying to manipulate people, and you're laughing at his stupidity while everyone around is nodding their heads in aggreement, it gets very frustrating, and soon starts looking like some sort of horror movie, or an episode of the Twilight Zone where everyone is brainwashed and stuck in some alternative reality, and nothing you do will bring them back to Earth, where they should be.

If you really honestly believe that Bush never tried to link Sadam and 9/11 or Sadam and Al Quaeda I'll spend a few hours later on searching through the Archives of CNN, or the NYT, or even Fox News (despite how openly biased they are, I'd be willing to bet money that they'd have something.....). But do you honestly believe that? You seem like a pretty smart guy, and I'd find it quite disturbing if an intelligent person actually believed all of the stuff that Bush and co. are spewing out, praying that the American public will believe...for if they don't, they'll surely be out of jobs in a hurry. Though I guess we'll see on tuesday who's smart enough to see through Bush's lies and attempted (and unfortunately successful) manipulations and who isn't. Because no matter how much you dislike Kerry, you'd have to be stupid to vote for a guy like Bush, at least in my opinion. I've never found an intelligent person who could honestly tell me why they thought that:

a. He'll do a better job next time.

or

b. He'll do something different next time.

or

c. Obviously he was like the best President ever!!111!!1 And he's done nothing wrong. And I want him to do the same genious things he did last time all over again! And he's way better than that evil Clinton who ushered the country into an era of peace and prosperity and saw me personally get richer than I've ever been. Just because polls STILL show that 80% of the country would vote for him over Bush or Kerry doesn't mean that he was obviously a much better president than Bush could ever dream of being unless you're so far to the right that you think Pat Bucannan is liberal. But I'm going to HATE Clinton because he was so big and bad and did so much wrong for this country, and Bush is better. What do you mean Clinton doesn't have anything to do with it? I thought he was supposed to be evil.... Isn't that what you guys said in the last election? OOOOOHHHH. Different election..... I'm sorry, I didn't know. In that case, what should I talk about? Kerry filp-flopping? Ok.

Sorry for the long rant. It just really gets to me when people belive Bush's OBVIOUS lies. I just don't understand it. It's like we're a nation full of zombies or something. It really really scares me that he can lie through his teeth about anything and turn it to his favor. If the democrats weren't such pussies they'd crucify him. I mean really, the republicans tried to impeach Clinton for lying about getting a BJ, you'd think the democrats would have the back bone to impeach Bush given all the lies he told that landed us in Iraq, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands of Americans, the waste of hundreds of billions of dolalrs, and the deaths of untold tens of thousands of Iraqis.

[Bay13]

Clinton was impeached.

I'd comment more but you are as convinced about everything being lies as those you say believe them.

How about a list of specific lies. Just the lie not a rant about them.

1)

2)

3)

4)

[jwmerrill]

U.S. Team Took 250 Tons of Iraqi Munitions

The Kerry folks just love to rush to judgement. Please, stop being so shrill and let cooler heads prevail until we find out what actually happened.

jwm

Edited October 30, 2004 by jwmerrill

[ChuckV986]

Clinton was impeached.

I'd comment more but you are as convinced about everything being lies as those you say believe them. 

How about a list of specific lies. Just the lie not a rant about them.

1)

2)

3)

4)

←

Ok

1. Sadam was connected with 9/11

2. Sadam was connected with Al Quaeda

3. How about the lie in the 3rd presidential debate saying that he would never "use the US army for nation building." Iraq was a military enforced regime change followed by an extensive nation building operation.

4. We went to war in Iraq based on the best intelligence available at the time. What about the CIA report on Bush's desk talking about the Anarchy that would result if we ousted Sadam via force?

5. The war in Iraq is going well. What? I don't think that statement is remotely defensive.

6. Read this: http://www.georgewbush.com/Record/Environment.aspx And then join me in saying "What?" I can't think of a president who's been weaker on the Environment. A very close friend of mine is in a senior position at Argaon Nat'l labs, and was part of serveral groups of scientists that BEGED the president to do SOMETHING about Kyoto and Global Warming. They also gave him numerous other lectures on other scientific issues, which he chose to ignore. All of the positive environmental initiatives he speaks of on his site had nothing to do with him, and a lot to do with a lot of hard work in the congress. I don't think he said anything truthful about the Healthy Forests iniative, based on every scientist I've ever talked to.

7. Trying to make himself sound pro-stem cell research.... Right. I just don't understand his position. If embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, what moral person could possibly support not using them to potential save people's lives.

8. The myth of the Clinton recession. We know it isn't your fault that the tech bubble popped W, at least every informed person does, but trying to blame it on Clinton instead of talking about what actually happens makes you look uninformed on the economy.

9. He did a good job on healthcare. Tell that to the millions of people who lost healthcare under his administration... Prescription Drug Benefit=good idea, implemented in an ok way, that has nothing to do with Bush. He just signed it.

10. I'm strong on terrorism, Kerry is weak. Huh? When did Kerry ever say that. I've never heard him say anything about terrorism that doesn't indicate that he'll do anything but be strong on terrorism.

11. Any attempt to defend his fiscal policy as conservative or responsible... I don't think I even need to write much for that one.

12. "Missile Defense"=big waste of money, not good idea. Any qualified scientist will tell you the same thing. It costs a lot, is not reliable, and only encourages other countries to develop the same thing, or technology to counter it. MAD=good thing.

13. From his site: "We will preserve the peace by fostering an era of good relations among the world’s great powers." ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Anyone care to tell me how that statement is remotely defensible?

That's all I care to write right now without reseraching.

I'd comment more but you are as convinced about everything being lies as those you say believe them.

I didn't understand that statement.

And just to clarify, I understand those who refuse to vote for Kerry. But selecting a 3rd party canidate is a better option imo. I'm actually considering doing that, or writing someone in. Why? The more of Kerry I see, the less I like him, heh. And it's not like my vote matters anyway. I live in NJ and Kerry will win regardless.

[ChuckV986]

U.S. Team Took 250 Tons of Iraqi Munitions

The Kerry folks just love to rush to judgement. Please, stop being so shrill and let cooler heads prevail until we find out what actually happened.

jwm

←

I agree. This story would be a non-story if we weren't a few days away from the election

Beautiful car by the way!

[Bay13]

I didn't understand that statement.

It means exactly what it says, you are just as fired up on your points as you claim the blind that are following Bush are. You couldn't make a factual list without a rant.

Nice list but I don't see a list of lies, I see a list of things you don't agree with. I pretty much know when an intentional lie has been stated, I don't see any on the list.

Calling something a lie cause you don't agree with the out come(the war isn't going well) or the reasoning behind the action(there are WMDs) doesn't make it a lie. Hind sight is so nice.

[InlineTurbo]

1. Sadam was connected with 9/11

That has never once been said by the administration. As a matter of fact they went out of their way not to say that. Next.

2. Sadam was connected with Al Quaeda

He was. Al Qaeda was active in Iraq before we invaded. You don't operate in a dictator controlled state without the head of state knowing it. Next.

3. How about the lie in the 3rd presidential debate saying that he would never "use the US army for nation building." Iraq was a military enforced regime change followed by an extensive nation building operation.

Regime change was a goal under the Clinton administration. Bush just took the plans that were already there and put them into action. See answer to #4. Next.

4. We went to war in Iraq based on the best intelligence available at the time. What about the CIA report on Bush's desk talking about the Anarchy that would result if we ousted Sadam via force?

Huh? This is a lie how? Remember Congress (including John Kerry) had to OK the war. They did. End of story.

5. The war in Iraq is going well. What? I don't think that statement is remotely defensive.

Iraq is 100x better of now. You man not believe it, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. Tell me how many WARS have been fought where we conquered an entire country in a few months and lost around 1000 soldiers? There were days in Vietnam and WWI and WWII that we lost thousands of soldiers a day. More soldiers were killed in training accidents in WWII than in both Gulf wars combined. Also more were killed in Pearl Harbour and 9/11. If you go by numbers this is the most successful millitary campaign in the history of the world.

But I guess the only acceptable war to most lefties would be one where nobody gets hurt and we all play nice to each other. War sucks, but when there are some dangerous people that only listen to force then force is called for. Next.

6. Read this: http://www.georgewbush.com/Record/Environment.aspx And then join me in saying "What?" I can't think of a president who's been weaker on the Environment. A very close friend of mine is in a senior position at Argaon Nat'l labs, and was part of serveral groups of scientists that BEGED the president to do SOMETHING about Kyoto and Global Warming. They also gave him numerous other lectures on other scientific issues, which he chose to ignore. All of the positive environmental initiatives he speaks of on his site had nothing to do with him, and a lot to do with a lot of hard work in the congress. I don't think he said anything truthful about the Healthy Forests iniative, based on every scientist I've ever talked to.

Kyoto isn't about Global warming. It is about bringing the U.S. to its knees economically. Global warming has yet to be proven. And the Bush administration is decent on the environment. They just aren't up to Tree Hugging Hippy mode like all the leftys want. G.W. Bush could cure cancer and you guys would complain he didn't do it fast enough. Next.

7. Trying to make himself sound pro-stem cell research.... Right. I just don't understand his position. If embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, what moral person could possibly support not using them to potential save people's lives.

There was a ban on stem cell research under Clinton. Bush approves stem cell research for goverment funding and you complain? Yes he is against embryonic stem cell reseach being GOVERNMENT funded. Nobody is banning it, just not putting tax dollars behind it. There are enough people who pay taxes that think it is wrong that this isn't bad. He is for government funding of other types of stem cell research. Next.

8. The myth of the Clinton recession. We know it isn't your fault that the tech bubble popped W, at least every informed person does, but trying to blame it on Clinton instead of talking about what actually happens makes you look uninformed on the economy.

Actually this statement makes you look uninformed. The economy was on the slide during Clinton's last year. He did everything in his power to hide it, but it was true. You can only keep the smoke and mirros show going so long. Next.

9. He did a good job on healthcare. Tell that to the millions of people who lost healthcare under his administration... Prescription Drug Benefit=good idea, implemented in an ok way, that has nothing to do with Bush. He just signed it.

People lost healthcare under Clinton and just about every other president too. People lose jobs. It is sad, but it happens. Especially after the biggest terrorist disaster in American history and having the airline industry tank. (Did I mention Clinton had the opportunity to Capture/Kill Bin Laden at least twice and passed) So the fact that Clinton "just signed" most of the stuff he was given credit for means he didn't do anything during his administration? Remember the Rebublicans took over the the legislative branch under his term. Next.

10. I'm strong on terrorism, Kerry is weak. Huh? When did Kerry ever say that. I've never heard him say anything about terrorism that doesn't indicate that he'll do anything but be strong on terrorism.

You must not be listening much then. He is the candidate that wants to reduce terrorism to a nuisance. Not eliminate it, but make it tolerable. That is strong on terrorism? He for invading Iraq whe he started to run. Then he was against invading Iraq. Now he is for/against it, but it "depends on the outcome." He jumps the gun on the weapons story. He calls our troops incompetent and baby killers and votes to weaken our intelligence agencies and he is going to be strong on terrorism? Did i miss something in the definition of strength? Bush has ousted the Taliban and taken care of Sadam. That is strong. Voting against the $87 billion to fund the troops after saying it would be irresponsible not to vote for it and then complaining the troops dont' have armor. That is weak. Next.

11. Any attempt to defend his fiscal policy as conservative or responsible... I don't think I even need to write much for that one.

A Kerry supporter complaining about not being conservative. That is funny. Remember Kerry is a senator from Taxachussets. There is nothing conservative or responsible about that state or its senators. Bush had a war to fight. What is Kennedy's excuse? Next.

12. "Missile Defense"=big waste of money, not good idea. Any qualified scientist will tell you the same thing. It costs a lot, is not reliable, and only encourages other countries to develop the same thing, or technology to counter it. MAD=good thing.

I think you are stumbling onto the idea of why we want it. Next.

13. From his site: "We will preserve the peace by fostering an era of good relations among the world’s great powers." ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Anyone care to tell me how that statement is remotely defensible?

Sure it is. People respect strength. That is why foreign governments want Kerry in. He is a weakling and U.N. supporter. He would make America a doormat for Europe. Remember Clinton's secretary of state apologising for America being so strong.

I didn't see one example of a lie in all of that ranting. Just because you WANT it to be a lie doesn't make it one.

Edited October 31, 2004 by InlineTurbo

[wattsat]

Please, stop being so shrill and let cooler heads prevail until we find out what actually happened

Wish you had made that statement to Bush before he took our nation to War.

[InlineTurbo]

Wish you had made that statement to Bush before he took our nation to War.

←

Bush can't take our nation to war alone. He has to get the permission of Congress. Congress (including John Kerry) voted for the war. If Sadam had never invaded Kuwait in 1991 and had us put ceasefire rules on him which he later broke, had several U.N. resolutions put on him which he didn't comply with, and basically quit trying to deceive weapons inspectors then maybe we wouldn't have went to war. But don't study why we went to war, just blame the president. Because Sadam was just minding his own business flying kites with the childern of Iraq and the mean ol U.S. of A came knocking with its bombs and missiles. At least that is what our enemies would like you to think.

[jwmerrill]

Wish you had made that statement to Bush before he took our nation to War.

←

I wouldn't call the decision to go to war "shrill". Shrill is taking a news story, leaked by a UN organization just before the election (gee, no political agenda there) and running with it as absolute fact. Shrill is Al Gore on the campaign trail (has anyone seen him lately, thank God he wasn't elected). Shrill is a taking a "smoking gun" news story that was received on a fax and running it before checking it out just because you like the way it portrays a candidate in a bad light. Like it or not, the decision to go to war in Iraq was the culmination of years of intelligence (some of it bad), negotiations, and ignored sanctions, not a knee-jerk reaction to an anti US story leaked by the UN.

As for the importance in this story, BIG DEAL. With the amount of munitions that existed in Iraq, it should not be a surprise that some of it ended up in the hands in insurgents. To me the story is who leaked it, and the way the different candidates reacted to it. Kerry jumped right on the bandwagon and blamed Bush, while, in effect, he was calling our armed forces incompetent in a time of war. Sounds awfully familiar to me. (Vietnam) It has reinforced my belief in who I want to have guiding this country for the next four years.

jwm

Edited October 31, 2004 by jwmerrill

[InlineTurbo]

JWMerill, you should watch stolen honor. Very good flick. I challenge all of you Kerry Voters to watch Stolen Honor and still vote for the man. Know that there is no 'Republican Spin' in the movie. Just facts using Kerry's own words and testimony from Very Highly decorated POWs most of whome spent 5-7 years in the Hanoi Hilton. John Kerry was given a chance to come on the program and explain himself or apologize to the POWs, but didn't.

http://www.stolenhonor.com/documentary/watch-video.asp

Also here is some more fuel for the fire:

"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, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." Hillary Clinton (D), October 10, 2002

Looks like Hillary Clinton believes there was a Sadam Al Qaeda link too.

[Guest Guest]

Wish you had made that statement to Bush before he took our nation to War.

←

JWMerill, you should watch stolen honor.  Very good flick.  I challenge all of you Kerry Voters to watch Stolen Honor and still vote for the man.  Know that there is no 'Republican Spin' in the movie.  Just facts using Kerry's own words and testimony from Very Highly decorated POWs most of whome spent 5-7 years in the Hanoi Hilton.  John Kerry was given a chance to come on the program and explain himself or apologize to the POWs, but didn't.

http://www.stolenhonor.com/documentary/watch-video.asp

Also here is some more fuel for the fire:

"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, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." Hillary Clinton (D), October 10, 2002

Looks like Hillary Clinton believes there was a Sadam Al Qaeda link too.

←

JWMerill, you should watch stolen honor.  Very good flick.  I challenge all of you Kerry Voters to watch Stolen Honor and still vote for the man.  Know that there is no 'Republican Spin' in the movie.  Just facts using Kerry's own words and testimony from Very Highly decorated POWs most of whome spent 5-7 years in the Hanoi Hilton.  John Kerry was given a chance to come on the program and explain himself or apologize to the POWs, but didn't.

http://www.stolenhonor.com/documentary/watch-video.asp

←

Wow, that's a powerful film. It goes back to what I've been saying all along, and what Mr. Kerry continues to prove.. John Kerry committed treason back in the 70's and was given a pass. His actions prolonged the time many POWs spent in Vietnam. Mr. Kerry has never apologized for his actions, and would rather pretend that it never happened rather than admit he was wrong. His contempt for the military can still be seen today in his promise that he will use a global test to get the UN's permission for the United States to use force and by his reaction to the recent UN story on the missing munitions.

It's too bad that the media would rather hype the lies of Michael Moore than to give forum to the honorable veterens that appeared in this film. It's too bad that the media would also try to villainize a sitting President of the United States for his service in the National Guard but try to glorify a fraud like Kerry for pulling one man out of the water, when, after returning home, he may have ended up killing many more of our own by his treasonous actions. No Kerry supporter could watch this film and at least not develop a sense of doubt about the character of the man who would be President. Remember... it's character that counts.

Don't even get me started on John Edwards.

jwm

North Carolina (home of John Edwards)