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

Didn't he buy yellow cake from Niger?
Didn't he have hundreds of tons of Sarin nerve gas?
Didn't he have mobile biological weapons labs?
Where are they?

Oh, that's right, the Bush administration LIED to us about all that. None of it existed.

So why should we believe them now about Iran?

Hmm?

2007-10-27 15:09:42 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

25 answers

Maybe we wont find any "nuke WMDs" or any evidence of "sponsering terrorism either". God bless america Bush is only about oil and doing whats best for israel and not us.(which is a illegal state and kills many innocent refugees too)
EDIT: Hey soldeir boy iran never says they wanna wipe anybody off and thanks for the thumbs down repuke moron.Israel is a illegal state for christ sake

2007-10-27 15:17:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 7

The Good Comrad claims the General in charge of shipping told us they are in Syria. Pray tell, how did we miss such a movement with Northern and Southern Watch in place? Don't forget we have other ways of watching. Iraq was the most monitored country in history.

The Iraqi General told us what we wanted to hear.

For years, we paid Chalabi (massive amounts of money) to tell us what we wanted to hear. He did exactly what we wanted. He told us stories for a salary of several hundred thousand PER MONTH. That is called reliable sources.

Now what, we have a retired Mullah from Iran? The best information money can concoct!

John W, Your claim is interesting. Intel is just like any other research discipline. You get information, refine it, and determine whether it is credible and reliable or not. The Clinton Administration did not use incredible, unreliable information--information that many said was incredible and unreliable during the Bush Administration. To Hell with the Na-sayers! It said what the powers that be wanted it to say.

And, here we are today.

2007-10-27 20:52:15 · answer #2 · answered by James S 4 · 1 1

Please read the link below. It contains the reasons for our military offensive against Iraq. Begin reading after the first "whereas". The WMD issue was the one the U.S. used in a vain attempt to have the UN Security Council issue a new Peace Enforcement Resolution under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter. The link below is the Act of Congress which authorized the military offensive against Iraq. I am sorry that CNN and others cannot distinguish between Capitol Hill and Turtle Bay.

2016-04-10 22:16:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Good to know you are not protecting your country!!!
When two of the largest buildings in stature & finance fall, thousands of people die, religion is touted as the reason for attacking the infidels (oh that would be you & I). Nuclear weapons are being tested whether knowingly or not. These morons align with whoever lets them in & you still think this is all made up!!!!!
Just because you haven't heard or seen (or perhaps you should go and SEE the results of many poisons & gases that Saddam released on his own people)doesn't mean anything.
I would think that Taliban recruiting & training camps found in North America should at least get your attention a little bit.
......I could go on but you keep your head in the sand!!

2007-10-27 15:37:00 · answer #4 · answered by freshex2001 2 · 3 3

I guess the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were exterminated with poison tainted Kool Aid when Saddam ruled. Of course there were WMDs. They are in another country now...like Syria.

A more cynical answer is...yes we did find the WMDs. They are in the minds and actions of the Democrats and Liberals of America.

2007-10-27 20:58:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

That's funny because Hillary Clinton gave several speeches around the same time, relaying the same information that both parties received from the CIA. Not all of the world's problems are the president's fault, even though that is how the information seems to be relayed out. Iran is attacking Americans in Iraq, I've witnessed some of their explosions for myself (pretty strong stuff). Foreign governments are saying all the same information about Iran, which wasn't the case with Iraq. If Iran's nuclear ambitions aren't stopped soon, we'll all pay for it later.

2007-10-27 15:22:29 · answer #6 · answered by Jason H 5 · 7 5

If you manage to calm down, you should read these articles.

You seem very persistant in your beliefs, so I'm sure this is in vain. At least you can't say you weren't given the right information.

Hundreds of those "nonexistant" chemical weapons (WMDS) were recovered:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

Some were used against our military when after we invaded (don't worry, no one was seriously hurt)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4997808

Info on Saddams Chemical Weapon Program:
http://www.iraqwatch.org/profiles/chemical.html

While Saddam may not have been cooperating with Al Qaeda (it's still not been proved or disproved) he did sponsor other terrorism:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9513/#9

A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee found that Wilson was lying about his findings in Niger, that Wilson was lying about documents being fake (we didn't even have them until 8 months after his trip), that Wilson was lying about his wife recommending him for the job, that Wilson was lying about his memo being circulated and that he was lying about the CIA telling the White House it had doubts about the Yellowcake intelligence:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A39834-2004Jul9?language=printer

http://www.aim.org/media_monitor/1804_0_2_0_C/

We did recover low grade Yellowcake from Iraq and sent it back to the United States. Once here it was analyzed and it was determined that it was enough to make one nuclear bomb (had Saddam had the capabilities of enriching it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/22/politics/22NUKE.html?ei=5007&en=32e4a82798061939&ex=1400558400&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=print&position=

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/12/103450.shtml

A defected scientist from Saddam's regime has said that in the days leading up to the invasion Saddam shipped his WMDs to Syria.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1578980/posts?page=20

2007-10-27 15:27:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

Bush lied? It seems to me that he depended too much on intelligence gathered during the Clinton Administration.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE

And when WMD's were not found, the Dem's put the blame on Bush.

2007-10-27 19:55:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Syria

2007-10-27 15:24:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

It took us 6 months to get boots on the ground on the other side of the world..

All his weapons were shipped to Syria in trucks!

2007-10-27 15:23:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

We didn't have to go to Iraq to find WMD. They're right here in America, but we call them Liberals.

Anthrax was found, and deposed of by us in Iraq.

2007-10-27 20:00:01 · answer #11 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers