Why do conservatives believe "Everyone thought Saddam had WMD"?

Question

There is no evidence for this. No intelligence organization, except the countries that invaded Iraq, publicly claimed they knew one way or the other. That is why they supported further inspections. And if Bush hadn't ordered the inspectors out, we would have found out the truth without war.

There are no films of any "rape rooms". Probably just another lie...

No Matthew - the discussion was: Did Iraq have WMD?

David W, the answer is very simple - Clinton signed the Act and the US kept up the pressure because they wanted to invade Iraq. WMD was a ruse - not a real threat.

Answer 1

actually Hans pleix and Mohamed El Braday told them there is none------cons thinks everybody should be gullible

but the CIA , Britain and Israel made up there own intelligence

Answer 2

I believe that Saddam's WMDs were destroyed shortly after the First Gulf War. For some reason, there were no official documents that recorded such events.

I guess Bush acted upon information that were false, and as a result; disaster was all he got in the run up to the Iraq war.

At times, come to think of the Iraq war as a war for Israel. I bet that most Israelis were rejoicing at Iraq's destruction.

Iraq never attacked the US and was no threat to the US or any other country; not even Israel.

The way Iraq was destroyed clearly reflected the greedy interests of all parties involved.

Answer 3

actual somewhat some international locations have been getting "oil for foodstuff" funds from Saddam as bribes for his or her help in lifting the UN sanctions. additionally you will remember that Saddam did little to deserve lifting of those sanctions. He violated each and every between the UN's dissimilar sanctions. He fired at US jets, he refused inspections, ect. As for individuals who concept he had WMDs, i anticipate you mean bill Clinton (who had a plan for regime substitute for Iraq), Al Gore, or John Kerry. all of them reported that Saddam had WMDs. further, there is a lot evidence to help that the Russian militia helped Saddam pass lots of his WMD to Syria purely before the conflict. in spite of the undeniable fact that i ought to admit that the Bush administration has performed a horrid interest of protecting their movements by this evidence.

Answer 4

http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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."

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed."

Senator Edward Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Speech at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
September 27, 2002
http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/statements/02/09/2002927718.html

Answer 5

They did find materials and plans to make WMD. What I think that is funny, is the fact that Liberals try to pin the whole thing of WMD being a lie on Bush, but when Clinton ordered bombings there, he even said right out his mouth that they were making WMD and that was the reasoning behind his bombings.

Answer 6

First of all, wmd's was not the sole reason for going in. Saddam Hussain violated 17 UN Resolutions and President Bush went to the UN and got them to agree Saddam had to comply or else. Saddam had fired on our planes days before we went in, a direct violation of the treaty! Of course, you probably would give him a shake of your finger telling him to stop that.

Secondly, the Democrats of Congress agreed we should go in.

Russia didn't go into Iraq and Putin said Saddam had wmd's.

Isreal's intell also said he had them and they didn't go into Iraq.

How can there be further inspections when Saddam didn't let them in. Not to mention it is a well known fact that Saddam played a game of hide and seek when he had numerous "palaces" built after the first gulf war.

Finally, after 9/11 President Bush said if you harbour a terrorist, or sponsor a terrorist, your a terrorist! Saddam was sponsoring terrorists to go into Israel to blow up civilians. This is a guy who admired Hitler and hated the Jews.

FACT: Saddam is the only dictator to USE wmd's.

Fact: Saddam was a butcher and a TERRORIST!

Fact: Only mf liberals, like you, defend the guilty! Soft on criminals and terrorists.

Fact: only liberals will bash this country before they bash the enemy. Go to hell traitor!

Answer 7

your question is an absolute lie, look it up. countries such as eygpt, jordan, saudi arabia as little as the week before we went to war said we WOULD get saddam's arsenal. the obstructionist such as france and russia were sure of saddam stockpiles as were hanz blick and the UN in their own reports. the arguement always was that we should give time for the inspections to work, as opposed to invade; that was the basis for the disagreement at the security council. bush and blair's arguement was how do we continue to give life to sanctions and restrictions on iraq after 12 years with no results. if we didn't believe saddam had WMD, then why did clinton sign the iraq libertion proclamation of 1996 and why did he shoot patroit missles at iraq right before his impeachment proceedings; should we bring him up on war crimes for attack the innocent country you describe. there is evidence if you will go back through archives of cnn, fox, ny times, etc., however, sometimes people believe what they want even when there is no evidence to support YOUR claim.

Answer 8

If I remember right, the discussion was not whether Saddam had WMD, but what should we do about it. France, Germany, and Russia wanted us to pursue the inspections, which hadn't worked in the past because Saddam kicked them out in 1998, to find and destroy Iraq's WMD.

Answer 9

It is because they believed it and they ridiculed and dismissed any evidence to the contrary. Our own CIA said that the evidence was thin, so Cheney fired the ones that told him the truth and got a different answer. Can you really expect Republicans to behave more intelligently and more maturely than their leader?

Of course many of us, including the governments of France, Germany and Japan, all allies, tried to dissuade us from this disastrous course, but the GOP needed to start a war to repay their campaign contributors.

Answer 10

Because EVERYBODY THOUGHT SADDAM HAD WMD'S!

Yes, it's that simple!

Answer 11

I guess we just pulled a name out of a hat. While watching the films about the rape rooms that animal had.