English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The link below is filled with facts (oh-no!) about all the claims made by this administration. It would help to go through them and if you disagree, then fine but at least back it up. Thanks.

http://www.americanprogress.org/AccountTempFiles/cf/%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/PRIRAQCLAIMFACT1029.HTM

2006-07-13 14:19:42 · 10 answers · asked by eskimo 3 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Because Clinton said it, it doesn't mean it is true. Because Democrats say it, it doesn't mean ****. They could have both lied. That's the proof you have? No wonder you buy into such claims.

2006-07-13 14:30:56 · update #1

For Leogirl: You obviously did not click on any of the links on the site that take you to other sites, where the documentation occurs. Such sites include the State Department, NBC, Rueters, the CIA, and the White House itself. Or is the White House part of the liberal media? You didn't even bother to check so your answer is silly and holds no intellectual weight.

2006-07-13 14:34:22 · update #2

10 answers

hahaha...it's obvious that the only reason they have that holds any water is "to free the people" ... yet there are many more oppresive regimes out there

Leogirl0804... you don't have to believe it, but I haven't seen any cited links EVER to back up your opinions..

2006-07-13 14:37:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I believe them, because they were right! Saddam violated 17 resolutions, raped, murdered, tortured 100's of 1000's of his own people, and then dumped them like dogs in mass graves. Also, Hillary is on the SSIC. She seen all the intelligence, and voted to go to war. She even seen intel from her husband's administration, and concluded that Saddam had WMD, was a threat, had ties with Al-Qaeda, and ultimately voted to go to war. Not only her, but most Libs on the SSIC voted for this war based on Hillary's claims as well. Also, your link is a known Liberal propaganda link which makes it null and void.

"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 ... 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."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002






I'm going by the documentaries showing the mass graves, eye witnesses, and the Iraqi people that tell the brutal stories about Saddam! Hey, again, don't throw around some left wing link, and expect people to bite!

2006-07-13 21:34:22 · answer #2 · answered by mojojo66 3 · 0 0

Your memory is short. Many reasons were given, but it's pretty simple:

1) Kuwait was invaded by Iraq.
2) Kuwait asked an ally to help them. We did.
3) We fought Saddam back to Baghdad.
4) He agreed to a cease-fire that he broke repeatedly for a decade.
5) After ten years of such nonsense and impotent threats to Saddam by the U.N., we did what we signed onto with the U.N. We gave him serious consequences and hunted him to his hole, literally.
6) In brief, Iraq attacks Kuwait. Kuwait begs U.S. U.S. helps ally. Iraq agrees to cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire. Iraq breaks cease-fire.
U.S. breaks Iraq.

That's it. All this other seditious nonsense you spread is just that. Go put on a uniform and fight for the enemy. You're no use to us. Oh, that's right, they don't use a uniform. Too cowardly.

2006-07-13 23:31:19 · answer #3 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0 0

I don't and never have. Unfortunately I have not enough money to defect to another country and am stuck.... Maybe we can get lucky and have truly elected official next time around.

2006-07-13 21:24:06 · answer #4 · answered by ckm 2 · 0 0

Politicians and journalists have turned average American citizens into brainless zombies. It is a pity

2006-07-13 21:33:23 · answer #5 · answered by Chevalier 5 · 0 0

You give us a link for a left wing website that has no source documentation to even back up what it says and you expect me to change my mind. nahhh.....not working for me......
I'm still going with the truth. Thanks for trying though.

2006-07-13 21:25:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I still think it's because W.'s doing it for his dad.

2006-07-13 21:24:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

who the the hell does

2006-07-13 21:23:46 · answer #8 · answered by aaashley1111 1 · 0 0

I don't.

2006-07-13 21:23:15 · answer #9 · answered by rhymingron 6 · 0 0

It has been confirmed across the board that 18-wheelers were seen going into Syria before the war, crossing the border soon after Iraqi intelligence replaced the border guards and cleared nearby areas for their passage. There are also eyewitness reports of the trucks going into Syria, and eyewitness reports of their burial in Lebanon.



The trucks with the weapons were tracked to three locations in Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, currently controlled by the Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah. Sources I've spoken with that have seen satellite photos of the movements confirm that the WMD in Syria are at military bases, while the ones in Lebanon are buried. A fourth site in Syria, the al-Safir WMD and missile site, should also be looked at. From spring to summer 2002, there was a lot of construction here involving the expansion of underground complexes.



We have tremendous testimony as well, by General Georges Sada, the former second-in-command of Saddam's Air Force that 56 flights took place on converted Iraqi Airways planes in the summer of 2002 to transport weapons, along with a ground shipment. He claims to know the pilots involved. A second Iraqi general, Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, in an interview I published, confirmed in detail the movement of WMD into Syria saying that discussion on such a move went back to the 1980s. He claims his sources for this include Iraqi scientists and others in the regime that were very close to him even after he defected. He confirmed to me that Russian vehicles, including ones equipped to handle hazardous materials, were used. Reports of WMD being moved out of Iraq to Syria go back to 1997, and it is believed by many that weapons were moved in and out of Iraq using Syria routinely since the mid-1990s.



The Italian media also reported that their intelligence services had information indicating that in January and February of 2003, Iraqi CDs full of formulas and research work along with tubes of anthrax and botulinum toxin were sent off to Syria. By the end of February, Iraqi WMD expertise was already in Syria including a top nuclear physicist.



An Iraqi scientist also led Coalition forces to hidden stockpiles of precursor chemicals that could be used to make chemical and biological weapons. The scientist said some facilities and weapons were destroyed, and the rest were sent to Syria. Syrian defectors are also claiming that Syria is where the weapons are, along with Representative Curt Weldon's source in his new book. The Prime Minister of Albania even stated that based on information he has which is not available to the media, he cannot rule out such a transfer.



There is also a report that an Iraqi medium-range al-Hussein missile on a truck moved into Syria, and in the early stages of the war, was spotted briefly coming into Iraq, operating its radar overnight, and returning to Syria. Most reports about the transfer indicate missiles were included in the transfers.

Source(s):

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"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."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e 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."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"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."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"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. 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."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"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. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

2006-07-13 21:23:25 · answer #10 · answered by Self-Sufficient 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers