that Pres. Bush said they "found no weapons of mass destructiun" in Iraq? Why would the Pres. lie to the public about this? For those who have followed this issue closely, you know Saddam had the bulk of his WMD flown to Syria shortly before the invasion took place. The documents to prove this were handed over by the former Gen. in charge of the Iraqi air force. The info can be verified by satalite tracking data from N.O.R.A.D.
Is it possable that Iran now has some, if not all, of this material in thier possesion? Wouldn't that explain why Iran has become a greater blip on the N.S.A threat radar?
2006-08-21 05:10:31 · 9 answers · asked by S.A.M. Gunner 7212 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Unfortunately, either way the American public wouldn't believe him. That's the state that we are in right now. Personally, I think what he meant by that statement was that we didn't find the large quantities that we expected to. Nothing we found was more than trace elements, which of course means there was more. It was all taken across the border to Iran and Syria. Anyone with common sense knows this. It's just that they have such hatred of a party or person that they can't see or admit to it. I'm quite sure it's the reason that Iran is taking the stand that they have. They know what they have in their hands. Bush also made a good point when he said "just imagine the condition we'd be in if we hadn't taken a stand when we did with the condition the Middle East is in right now". Those aren't his exact words, but close enough. Perhaps people would rather we were fighting on our own ground than another country. They'll just never understand. Bush by no means is the best President, but he's by no means the worst. I support his decisions with this and think this was a very good news conference.
2006-08-21 06:41:06 · answer #1 · answered by HEartstrinGs 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh why YES, of course! Saddam had all his WMDs secreted off to Syria just before the invasion. The very same thing happened to the Democratic vote in Florida and the beer-count after Cheney's quail hunting lunch! Why can't these these fools see the conspiracies that surround us!
One thing kinda' stick in my craw though; with Saddam being such a slick and connected guy and all just before the sh!t storm, him taking such good care of his WMDs and all (he even flew them First Class, I've heard), why did he then just turn around and bury himself in a freakin' HOLE for so long, half-staved and covered with lice? All while his WMDs are living the good life in Syria? Well, he's the world leader, not me.
PS: know what else can be verified by NORAD? Santa's progress across the Christmas Eve sky!
2006-08-21 06:02:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's a press conference. He's speaking on the fly. He should have mentioned the chem shells we found & of course the captured scientists like that Chem Ali guy. Personal I hate the term WMD. NBC weapons was a more clear term.
2006-08-21 05:24:42 · answer #3 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Which PC are you referring to Darell? Well, the facts of the matter are just as Israel is armed today by US, Iraq was also armed once by US and it encouraged Iraq to start a war against Iran. But when Iraq invaded Kuwait, the rules of the game changed. Similarly, when Afghanistan was occupied by USSR, the so-called Talebans were armed by US. After the Russians left Afghanistan, the American influence waned and the place, including Pakistan used by USA for its acts of war or terrorism in Afghanistan, apparently became a breeding ground for terrorists.
Now, who is responsible for promoting terrorism in the first place? The answer is USA! And, when America had the taste of terrorism at its door steps (9-11), it began to realize its past follies but it was rather too late! And, to fight terrorism, America has now turned itself into perhaps the worst terrorist state in the world sponsoring state terrorism overseas!
2006-08-21 05:39:55 · answer #4 · answered by Sami V 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Probably cause if he said they found some everyone would call him a liar.
So he's screwed either way.
Yes, I agree they were flown to syria and who know where else. and they are over there from allies way back (including us)
2006-08-21 05:38:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm thinking that the problem is the term. We clearly found chemicals over there and people to make more. Maybe we should start calling them NBC weapons.
2006-08-21 07:56:06 · answer #6 · answered by BluntTrama 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
each and every man or woman, everywhere and at every time looks greater Presidential the our contemporary President.....even Kari who develop into asking questions approximately turning out to be 4th grade type president sounded greater Presidential than the present President
2016-12-11 12:38:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you serious? This is not a lie...
But when liberals point out the lies he has acutally said, you denounce them,and give bizarre "facts" proving them wrong...
There were no WMDS, we shouldn't be in Iraq... End OF STORY...
Can you prove any of the crap you just said?
2006-08-21 05:24:52 · answer #8 · answered by RATM 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I DON'T BELIEVE A WORD HE SAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-08-21 05:20:32 · answer #9 · answered by bobby-bob 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋