2007-01-19 21:34:59 · 14 answers · asked by chardonnay 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Well the Bill Clinton said publically that Saddam/Iraq had was believed to have had WMD's. So did Madelaine Albright, so did the UN. So did many members of congress when they voted to go to war with Iraq.
Now its convienient for some to pretend they didnt say what they said, and pretend they didnt vote how they did, and point their finger at Bush when they had the same information he did at the time.
There were factories and processing plants that were there for the purpose of developing those kinds of weapons.. the fact that they didn't find any of them well... if they did have them they definitely had sufficient time to destroy or move them.
We may never know, but it was world belief at the time that he did.
2007-01-19 21:45:57 · answer #1 · answered by sociald 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Many people, both democrats and republicans, believed Saddam had WMD's and based on information released by the Bush administration, war was inevitable. It turn out the information was faulty and whether the administration knew this at the time or not is still up for discussion. Those that believed the original story began to admit they were wrong in giving the Bush administration the go ahead to invade Iraq. I would think it's the right thing to do when you discover you've been wrong to go ahead and admit it. Those that think this administration does no wrong will never admit we went to war under false pretenses. Now that the facts are known, it would be reasonable for many to believe the real reason for going into Iraq was to gain control of the massive oil supplies they hold. If they had no WMD's, and oil is not the reason, what other reason makes sense? Nation building? Democracy? Ain't gonna happen in that neck of the woods. Or, pile of sand. I believe Israel fits into the mix better than any of the above.
2007-01-20 06:28:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are numerous accounts of Saddam having and using chemical and biological weapons.
Go to a bookstore and find a book called "Saddam's Secrets" by Georges Sada, retired Vice Air Marshal of the Iraqi air force.
Read chapter 10. He explains what happened to the stockpiles and why we didn't find very much. We actually did find 5000 pounds of "pre-1991" sarin gas soon after the invasion.
2007-01-20 07:47:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow, I can't believe libbies are still beating this tired old drum. Yawn. Look, we get 80% of our oil from commie dipshits named Hugo in South American hellholes for starters. Thus, if it were for oil we would be invading that creep, NOT Iraq. Secondly, if we were controlling Iraq oil, gas in the USA would be under a buck.(Hell, I WISH this were a war for oil. Oil is an American interest. Nation building is not.)
Furthermore, WMD was the reult of not only US intel, but of Russia, England, and Israel as well. You think all those nations got together to give America cheap oil? Wake the hell up, and stop believing everything aging baby boomers are whining about.
2007-01-20 06:39:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Gonzofever hit the nail on the head. Re-read his answer, then read it again until it soaks in.
The answerer who criticized the President's inability to speak the "King's English" reveals her true elitist stripes. The man speaks American English and is perfectable acceptable to me.
2007-01-20 11:02:45 · answer #5 · answered by Michael C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bush thought that saddam had said weapons cuz the u.s. sold it to them there's actually footage of that... so yes he just wanted the oil... how do u connect osama to irak????? he just wanted an excuse revenge on the attempted murder of his father. are u gonna trust a president who can't even speak the king's english right???? america is brainwahed y don't u ask the families of dead american soldiers
2007-01-20 06:06:44 · answer #6 · answered by mv 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Ask the Kurds in Northern Iraq. He only killed a hundred thousand or so with them. They probably believe he had them.
As as for the lady who referred to the "Kings" English. We are American, we do not attempt to speak the Kings English correctly here,we have no intent to do so, and no I do not trust anyone who does.
2007-01-20 06:29:16 · answer #7 · answered by mark g 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Oh he had WMDs... in the early-mid 80s, when we were best mates. Ol' Rummy was shaking hands with this dictator while the mass killings were going on.
2007-01-20 05:53:28 · answer #8 · answered by Liberals love America! 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bill Clinton said he did
John Kerry said he did
Hillary Clinton said he did
Ted Kennedy said he did
Al Gore said he did
Kofi Annan said he did
The French said he did
The Russians said he did
The Germans said he did
The Jordanaians said he did
The UN said he did.
Did they all lie?
2007-01-20 07:43:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
why don't you ask the families of the 180,000 some odd people that were gassed with chemical weapons and the thousands of others that simply dissapeared without a trace. that's like saying that the jews were just paranoid about that ...oh what's his name...hitler, or something.
2007-01-20 05:46:31 · answer #10 · answered by Aaron 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋