2006-11-22 14:21:33 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Chainsaw: can you cite your "support"?
2006-11-22 14:29:38 · update #1
No! He had no evidence for his Ton's of saran gas, or anything else, as Hans Blix told the UN in his report, in which Bush had 8,000 pages removed! Love to see those 8,000 pages!
The Blockade and Clinton's Operation Desert Fox, plus the UN, did a number on Hussein! He would never admit to other countries he was weak!
There is plenty of proof they weren't there and proof that Bush lied at the SOU! He knew that the report given by the British regarding nuclear weapons was a forgery, yet lied to America about it!
I have yet te see any proof they were there!
2006-11-22 14:31:43 · answer #1 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think that it is perfectly plausable that the Bush Administration cherry picked intelligence on the Iraqi WMD's. it had been stated clearly by people like Scott Ritter that there was no evidence that there was a WMD issue there. But the Bush Administration did a very clever thing; instead of going about proving that there were WMD's, they demanded that Iraq prove that there was not, something that is impossible.
Saddam and the Iraqi's could have opened every site that the UN, US and the IAEA wanted them to and it still would not be able to prove that there were not any WMD's, they would still be open to the charge that they were hiding them.
It was a lose-lose situation for them.
And as a side note, it looks as if the Bush Administration is looking to do the same thing with Iran....
2006-11-23 06:25:22 · answer #2 · answered by tony w 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. They whole world thought that he had them!
Clinton's Operation Desert Fox? Then why did Hillary say ""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." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Congressional Record, 10/10/02
2006-11-22 22:34:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't care what he was doing about the evidence.
I just want to see the looks on every ones face when the are found
deep in the desert or better in Iran.
2006-11-22 22:37:16 · answer #4 · answered by hunterentertainment 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
1. The UN admitted that Iraq had them.
2. Saddam admitted he had them
3. Saddam used them on the Kurds.
4. Saddam stated publicly that if he got a nuke, he would use it.
5. France, Germany, Hans Blix,... all admitted he had them.
There was more, but I have better things to do but teach you the truth.
2006-11-22 22:25:56 · answer #5 · answered by GOPneedsarealconservative 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
no
They were pressuring the Pentagon, Sending and then outing CIA operative who didn't tow the party line, twisting the intel to fit the hoped for policy.
As a conservative i disown them.
And Cheney should be in prison for lying about Mohammed Atta meeting Iraqis in Chechoslavakia
2006-11-22 22:23:32 · answer #6 · answered by Its me 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes.
2006-11-22 22:28:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. All intel services all ovr the world had reached the same conclusion.
2006-11-22 22:24:37 · answer #8 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes, when they wasn't fabricating and down right lying to go to war for their own personal gain.
2006-11-22 22:27:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
were no wmd.
bush told a horrible lie
2006-11-22 22:23:21 · answer #10 · answered by cork 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋