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

Here's a refresher.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/

2007-03-11 17:59:04 · 23 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Mark, why do you use the word "probably" when in fact you have no evidence whatsoever?

As a good Republican, you should have said they are DEFINITELY in Syria, and anyone who doesn't believe you is a LIBERAL TRAITOR. LMAO!!!!!!

2007-03-11 18:05:26 · update #1

9D4KHP - are YOU ignorant enough to think I don't know the attack on the Kurds occurred BEFORE the Gulf War, after which Iraq destroyed its WMD?

2007-03-11 18:06:23 · update #2

23 answers

Ignore, hands down.

2007-03-11 18:01:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

I think they're taking the tack that we didn't really invade to find and destroy the WMDs which didn't exist - we REALLY invaded to free the Iraqi people! Of course, if we'd found the WMDs that didn't exist, then that would be the reason again.

The fellow who pointed out the attack on the Kurds is way, way off. The weapons used for that were later destroyed - and furthermore, some were given to Saddam by the U.S. government. So it probably doesn't help his argument to bring THAT up.

2007-03-12 02:00:44 · answer #2 · answered by Havick 3 · 1 1

Hey 9D4KHP, that's was a long time ago - about the same time Rumsfeld was chummy chummy with Hussein.

Remember Hans Blix? Most Republicans berated him, and said he was wrong. But he was right. But the simple answer of course is that they knew. Check the video below for more damning evidence.

Yes, most Dems should have been more scrupulous (though read the text of Kerry's speech on the floor before you judge him completely). But the bottom line is they trusted the commander in chief. Bush, as Commander-in-chief earned that. But he abused that trust and he abused all Americans by lying to us all.

2007-03-12 01:11:45 · answer #3 · answered by Rob O'C 2 · 3 1

Considering that the US has been implicated in the initial preparation and supply of Saddam's Chemical Weapons, it would probably be a good idea if Republicans were to forget the facts pertaining to Saddam's WMD programs. Without America's influence and approval, he would NEVER have been able to develop those weapons.

2007-03-12 01:30:27 · answer #4 · answered by Sailinlove 4 · 2 2

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." -Bush

Address to the nation, March 17, 2003

Those would be...rocks?

"Are Republicans trying to forget or ignore what Bush said about WMD before the war?"

That's not even a consideration for most Republicans. They've just filed that away under, "Who cares? Hussein was a jerk anyhow"

Republicans don't care that Bush lied. All they care about is that they can concoct justification in their own minds...which is self-delusion.

It's so much easier if Bush can successfully lie to them, but if that falls through...they'll lie to themselves. They're willing to do their bit too, ya know! :)

2007-03-12 01:21:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

That Saddam had WMD's? What, was that pepper spray he used on the Kurds in 1986?

And did Isreal bomb an empty building 10 years earlier?

I think Republicans believe that Bush certainly believed Saddam either had, or was trying to get, WMD's. And that, either way, Saddam had to be removed as a menace to the neighborhood either way. In 1990 he invaded his neighbor with his million-man army. Couple that with gassing the Kurds, it wasn't hard to believe (either him or us) that Saddam would use whatever WMD's he had access to.

And we certainly didn't want to repeat 1990 AFTER he had nuclear weapons. I don't think we care that he did, or did not, in deed, posses them, looking back. Just that he is no longer a threat to the regions oil supply.

He's not, is he long hair?

(Outa' the car, Long Hair!)

2007-03-12 01:07:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

no I didnt,but then again I remember what Hillary and congress and the house voted about WMD's before the war too,get a better refresher

2007-03-12 01:06:17 · answer #7 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 6 1

Nobody (i.e. Republicans or Democrats) cares. All politicians are corrupt liars and will feed us whatever they think will keep us quiet while they slowly squeeze the freedom out of us.

2007-03-12 01:04:26 · answer #8 · answered by Cybeq 5 · 3 1

Are you ignorant enough to believe that the thousands of Kurds kiled by WMDs committed mass suicide including the children?
You need to wake up and rethink.. never mind probably not possible for you.
Go ahead and report it, libs can't get enough of doing that.
Whatever, why did he play the shell game with the inspectors if there was nothing to hide, wake up long haired freak LMAO at you!
Don't you wish Vietnam was still going on so you could protest 2 wars at once? ha ha

2007-03-12 01:03:59 · answer #9 · answered by 9D4KHP 2 · 7 6

The Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and all the other Democrats voted to go to war too dude. I think everyone is regretting it now.

2007-03-12 01:14:22 · answer #10 · answered by Hypocrite Hunter 3 · 5 3

No. Are the dems trying to forget that the information was based on information that was thought to be credible. Bush didn't lie!

2007-03-12 01:18:07 · answer #11 · answered by ? 4 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers