gigantikok: [quote author=DeeBlackthorne link=board=99;num=1067045112;start=20#22 date=10/28/03 at 19:46:26]Um, I don't know about anyone else, but I'm still waiting on these WMDs to show up, mate. Reality check: not there. Bush said they're there; his cronies said they're there; we fought this war 'cause, supposedly because they were there and they were a threat. And not that I think Sadaam was the greatest, most diplomatic leader in the world and that he seriously engaged in political moves to hurt his own people...[/quote]
Did you not read my post in the other topic???
[quote author=gigantikok link=board=99;num=1066747449;start=20#35 date=10/26/03 at 17:24:05]It was not the UN inspectors job to find weapons, it was Sadam's job to destroy them, under the supervision of the UN inspectors so that the weapons that the U.S., Britain, AND THE UN all acknowledge existed were destroyed. Since all agreed that the weapons existed, without Sadam's cooperation it could not be proved that they did not still exist and could be used. Without conclusive evidence of their disposition, combined with the fact that HE HAD USED WMD ON OTHER COUNTRIES AND HIS OWN PEOPLE, yes, invasion and destruction of his regime became the only option.
Where are the weapons now? The recent Kay Report confirmed that he had an active, ongoing program of WMD, including nuclear weapons. A great deal of evidence has been found to confirm this and was included in the Kay Report. Unfortunately, no major stock of these weapons has been found. Since we know he had them and Sadam gave no evidence of having destroyed them, what happened?
There are two possibilities: (1) he destroyed them but didn't want to admit it. This action is consistent with Arab culture in the sense that a ruler cannot admit weakness (voluntary destruction of weapons), but would like to have the threat of their use to ward off enemies. But I think he believed we would not actually invade so why would he destroy them? (2) he had them hidden and their whereabouts are still unknown. After the first Gulf War, Sadam signed a agreement to suspend hostilities in which he agreed to destroy WMD, which, by the way kind of confirms he had them or else why would he admit he had them!?! (the 12 point agreement contained promises to restore human rights and reform government to be more democratic!). How long did he have to do all this - 2 WEEKS!! According to you 12 additional years were not long enough to prove HE WAS NOT GOING TO COMPLY UNTIL HELL FROZE OVER WITH THE TERMS HE SIGNED IN 1991.
I frankly can't believe that the WMD were destroyed. If they were it is because communication from Sadam to the weapons storage facilities was knocked out in the first days of the war and the officers in charge took it upon themselves to destroy the weapons so we wouldn't hang them when the war ended. They are still hidden and those who know (and in a dictatorship the number of those would be real small, maybe even only Uday and Qusay, and they can't talk) are still afraid of Sadam. I think this is a strong possibility. They other really frightening option is that they have been shipped out. If so, we are all in real serious danger. We have to figure this out soon.
The bottom line though is that if we cut and run, the Arab terrorists will conclude we don't have the stomach - as that paragon of virtue Clinton demonstrated repeatedly in Somalia, after the Africa embassy bombings, after the USS Cole - to carry the fight to them. I estimate that if we retire from Iraq before stability is installed, within 12 months there will be a major terrorist attack on the U.S. (I mean here) involving nuclear, chemical or biological agents causing the death of many thousand more than 9/11. We are at war. Osama and others like him continue to make their intentions perfectly clear. What is the surrender weasel anti-terrorist policy? It's a mystery to me.
This is a summary of the important conclusions in the Kay Report:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/apostolou200310031526.asp
IRAQ DOES HAVE WMD: ARMS MAN
By DEBORAH ORIN
Click on the link below to access the story.
http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/7396.htm
One last link for those of you that are still interested:
http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.asp?ref=/hanson/hanson200310240838.asp
Alright, I am done.
-Gig
[/quote]
You believe what you want to believe, Dee. You hear what you want you hear, you make assumptions you want to. I assume they were destroyed, you assume that they weren't and that Bush is a lieing idiot. I doubt that will change.
Oh, and to the assumption that Bush is out, might want to rethink that friend. There seems to be a large number of Liberal posters willing to argue against me on this site, but for the most part, Bush's approval rating is up there. Maybe not so much among youth, but they never vote anyway. He's getting reelected, especially since every loser the Democratic party is scrambling for just won't cut it or put up a good fight.
