Related Information to Post War Iraq

Post War Iraq - Page 13

Hi y'all, do you all know what the latest is with regards to the search for WMD in Iraq? Were any found at all? Or are things just conveniently forgotten..... just like that?

Iraq War Post

QUOTE

Were any found at all? Or are things just conveniently forgotten..... just like that?

:spock: Nope (see some earlier posts). You know, its the US, so they do not really have to answer for what they do/did.

Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics

As usual ABC Nightline asks / comments on all the right things:

Things aren't working out exactly according to plan.  Post-war Iraq is
proving to be a much tougher problem in many ways.  It certainly appears
that there is some sort of organized resistance starting to take shape.
Are we going to see one or two American soldiers killed each day?  How
long will we allow that to go on?  More to the point, what can we do to
stop it?  Whatever happened to the idea that the Iraqi people would
welcome American troops as liberators?  Where are the weapons of mass
destruction?  What about ties between Iraq and terrorists?

Intelligence is not an exact science.  People can get things wrong, for a
variety of reasons.  War quickly turns to chaos.  Things change.  But it
appears that we got a lot of things wrong this time.  Why?  And what are
the long-term implications?  There is a more disturbing issue here.  Was
the intelligence, or at least the analysis of it, shaped by political
concerns?  Did the analysts come up with the intelligence that their
political bosses wanted to hear?  That's the issue that we're going to
look at tonight.  Very few people are shedding tears for Saddam Hussein.
The evidence found after the war shows that he was probably more brutal
than anyone thought.  But that wasn't the reason given for going to war.
Nightline correspondent Dave Marash will look at the intelligence
conclusions reached before the war, and what we know about all of that now
that at least a little of the dust has settled.

Page 13 Iraq War Post

"Rumsfeld said Iraq was as large as California and search teams had only been working there seven weeks. He said there were hundreds of suspected sites to investigate.

"It will take time," said Rumsfeld. "

https://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...feld_weapons_dc

Exactly what the UN inspectors were asking for before the war on Iraq --- more time! Now it's his turn to asked for that.

Makes me mad to think of all the destruction, killings, maimings, etc., and finally they admit that maybe, just maybe Saddam did destroy the WMD!  >:(

[He said the speed of U.S. advance may have caught Iraq by surprise, but added: "It is also possible that they decided that they would destroy them prior to a conflict." ]

Iraq War Post

You bring up so good points there Fireduck. It makes me think abou the following points too:

1. Is the US so big, so bad, so bully that the world cannot point out these kinds of situations in a more demanding way?

2. Why did the UN say it is wrong for the US to start a war against Iraq, but that it is okay for them to govern them? That to me seems to be a contradiction in terms.

Post War Iraq

You know, JB, the second question that you asked just goes to show how little the rest of the world can do when the US starts to bully its way around. Remember Bush said, "Either you are with us or against us" ? Can you imagine if he was President during the Soviet era, and he said that then. Probably more than half the world will stand with the Soviets then. But the Presidents of those days were more pragmatic and smile their way into the other countries heart.... maybe.

But this Bush is so smug and conceited that he dared to say something so brash. Reminds me of some western movies I used to watch when I was young. The bad guy shot another guy at the saloon just because he didn't like the way that other guy stared at him. Is that where the Texan President learnt his diplomatic ways?  ;)

Post War Iraq - Page 13

"Nope (see some earlier posts). You know, its the US, so they do not really have to answer for what they do/did. "

That is a prejudice comment.  I really don't like the anti american attitude here to be honest with you.  I have a question for the lds that are visiting this forum that belong to other countries, and that is does the Holy Ghost promt your ill feelings towards the United States?

With regard to the search for WMD, the United States has not given up the search and we are very well aware of the fact that we have to present this information to the international community.  Now what I am going to ask, I ask in all honesty that you strip yourselves of this attitude that America is a big bad bully and you think about this for one second before responding.

1)  DO you honestly believe that Saddam did not have WMD?
2)  Being the fact that in the past he did have chemical and biological weapons, the question goes, who do you think is telling the truth, Saddam who said they got rid of the chemical and biological weapons or the United States who says Saddam never had credibility to begin with?

There can only be two logical ways that this arguement can go, either Saddam did get rid of his weapons by destroying them, or they are lying agian.  Seeing that they have a history of the latter, I conclude that their weapons are either hidden well, have been sold to terrorist (thank you UN for giving them that much time)

Now lets talk about something that really annoys me, and that is that the standard for WMD is always being upgraded by the media and the international community.  The original accusation was that Saddam would have nuclear weapons in a short time, that he already had chemical and biological weapons.  Well, he did have a nuclear weapons program, the plans for it were found in the house of an Iraqui scientist, the UN declared that those were plans for Iraq's old nuclear program, as if they had nothing to do with any new nuclear program.  So following the UN inspectors were are held hostage to the quite frankly stupid idea that Iraq had no intention of ever using those old plans for a new program, it just does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out.  I have heard that even if Iraq started a nuclear program it would take like 12 years, that is what the UN wanted us to believe.  DO you know why I disagree with that?  Because it did not even take the United States 4 years to develope its first nuclear program, and that was when it was all done from scratch.  No America was not rich back then either, it had just recovered from a depression.

What about the chemical weapons, they have actually found all those suits, soldiers don't just carry chemical suits for no reason.  What about traces of nerve gas?  Journalist have manipulated that whole issue away from the truth and made it out that there was none found in Iraq, wrong there was, unfortunatly journalist don't know where they need to rely on the opinion of biochemist, sometimes journalist think they know everything.

"But this Bush is so smug and conceited that he dared to say something so brash. Reminds me of some western movies I used to watch when I was young. The bad guy shot another guy at the saloon just because he didn't like the way that other guy stared at him. Is that where the Texan President learnt his diplomatic ways?"

You are either with us or with the terrorist.  Sorry, but there is no neutral ground on an issue of international terrorism, just as there is no neutral point between good and evil.

Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 13

QUOTE

That is a prejudice comment.  I really don't like the anti american attitude here to be honest with you.

We are not anti-american, we are anti-war. Just because you are a US citizen, does not mean we have to think like US citizens do.

QUOTE

I have a question for the lds that are visiting this forum that belong to other countries, and that is does the Holy Ghost promt your ill feelings towards the United States?

Brian, lets leave the Church out of this thread. The percentage of LDS on the forum that participate in these discussions is probably 2%. Plus by doing so you isolate members of other faiths... after all this is an international forum. (The spiritual side of it is for the other thread on the LDS board).

QUOTE

1)  DO you honestly believe that Saddam did not have WMD? 2)  Being the fact that in the past he did have chemical and biological weapons, the question goes, who do you think is telling the truth, Saddam who said they got rid of the chemical and biological weapons or the United States who says Saddam never had credibility to begin with?

I think he did at one time, but our big point here is who MADE Saddam? You see you are only looking at it from one angle. You need to read through the Iraq war thread (now locked but you can read it) concerning how Saddam started in the first place. The second thing, most of the reviews here come from ABC, CSMonitor, Deseret News, and CNN, both of which are US based, are they Anti-American because they ask questions, because they see the US as the bully in this case?

QUOTE

There can only be two logical ways that this arguement can go, either Saddam did get rid of his weapons by destroying them

And if he did, what does that make the US look like?

QUOTE

You are either with us or with the terrorist.  Sorry, but there is no neutral ground on an issue of international terrorism, just as there is no neutral point between good and evil.

See Offtopic Quote

[offtopic]@ Fireduck... a brief synopsis about BrianT is that he is an avid Bush supporter... hence the overtones. Now reply with that in mind. LOL Thank goodness Stranger left, can't deal with two of these at the same time.[/offtopic]