| Author |
Message |
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
 Tue May 18, 2004 10:23 pm |
|
As RM said, it was on the agenda even during the Clinton administration. One of Bush's promises was that he was going to bring A LOT of American troops home. 9/11 happened. Things cannot always go as we would wish. Bush did try to go through the UN to get something done about Saddam, who is, lest we forget, a terrorist himself. The UN apparently didn't have the balls to do anything. (So what SH was letting inspectors in? He was breaking other terms, and had no intention of stopping, not to mention, he'd had over ten years to disarm). Someone had to act. It was the over-aggressive Americans who finally did. With the aid of the UK, and several other countries. So basically, it needed to be done, someone did it. But, your personal feelings are your own, and you are entitled to them.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Wed May 19, 2004 3:58 am |
|
Why don't people accept it that there could have been more than one reason for going to war? The main one could have been something such as fighting terrorism. But there could be other smallers reasons such as freeing the Iraq's as well.....
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Wed May 19, 2004 5:34 am |
|
Cause some want to argue all the time and try to prove they are right when indeed they are wrong and they don't want to accept the fact they could be wrong. I think Bush did a good job anyway what other democrats or socialist might think.
Bush was right after all there were WMDS.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed May 19, 2004 4:47 pm |
|
| Jeremy wrote: | | Why don't people accept it that there could have been more than one reason for going to war? The main one could have been something such as fighting terrorism. But there could be other smallers reasons such as freeing the Iraq's as well..... |
Okay, I will admit that there was more than one reason to go to war.
But the ABSOLUTE MAIN and ORIGINAL reason was for WMDs, and that has been proved true.
Also, we went in to stop terrorists and eventually decided to COMPLETELY free Iraq...
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 2:07 am |
|
Again. NO WMD's have been found in Iraq. Just banned Toxins.
-------signature-------
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." President Thomas Jefferson
"A man's respect for law and order exists in precise relationship to the size of his paycheck." Adam Clayton Powell Jr.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 7:36 am |
|
A chemicle warhead which was banned by the UN, and would have been destroyed had weapons inspectors found it. But of course....now that we find something....its not good enough, because, no one really cares about chemical weapons anymore....it has to be a nuke, or else it just wont cut it.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 12:59 pm Re: Chemical Weapons and Bombs Found in Iraq |
|
| B'Ellanna_Torrez wrote: | | Quote: | However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war.
"I doubt if it's the tip of the iceberg but it does confirm what we've known ... that he [Saddam] had weapons of mass destruction that he used on his own people," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News. "This does show that the fear we had is very real. Now whether there is much more of this we don't know, Iraq is the size of the state of California."
But there were more reasons than weapons to get rid of Saddam, he added. "We considered Saddam Hussein a threat not just because of weapons of mass destruction," Grassley said.
Iraqi Scientist: You Will Find More
Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border.
George said the finding likely will be the first in a series of discoveries of such weapons.
|
|
| Quote: | | Again. NO WMD's have been found in Iraq. Just banned Toxins. |
Uh-huh. There was a reason I wrote part of the article in bold. If and when it's confirmed, it would be one of the weapons we went to war for. I think THAT should fit the bill, don't you? Even an Iraqi scientist thinks we'll find more; and I would bet he's right.
These were NOT the first findings of weapons Saddam should not have had. A little over two weeks ago, they'd found some others, but the news was very low-key. Even with this finding, you'd THINK the media would make it a bit of a deal! But of course not; I live in a political area (Liberal) and a great number of people around here didn't even know about this, even listening to all their talk radio and "News." You listen to people call in on C-SPAN or a radio show, and half the time if they're talking about the war they have to be reminded by the host (If it's a decent one) that we DID find incriminating weapons. Fancy that...
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 4:56 pm |
|
It HAS already been confirmed that it was sarin.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 5:40 pm |
|
I stand corrected. 
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri May 21, 2004 8:19 pm Re: Chemical Weapons and Bombs Found in Iraq |
|
| B'Ellanna_Torrez wrote: | | B'Ellanna_Torrez wrote: | | Quote: | However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war.
"I doubt if it's the tip of the iceberg but it does confirm what we've known ... that he [Saddam] had weapons of mass destruction that he used on his own people," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News. "This does show that the fear we had is very real. Now whether there is much more of this we don't know, Iraq is the size of the state of California."
But there were more reasons than weapons to get rid of Saddam, he added. "We considered Saddam Hussein a threat not just because of weapons of mass destruction," Grassley said.
Iraqi Scientist: You Will Find More
Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border.
George said the finding likely will be the first in a series of discoveries of such weapons.
|
|
| Quote: | | Again. NO WMD's have been found in Iraq. Just banned Toxins. |
Uh-huh. There was a reason I wrote part of the article in bold. If and when it's confirmed, it would be one of the weapons we went to war for. I think THAT should fit the bill, don't you? Even an Iraqi scientist thinks we'll find more; and I would bet he's right.
These were NOT the first findings of weapons Saddam should not have had. A little over two weeks ago, they'd found some others, but the news was very low-key. Even with this finding, you'd THINK the media would make it a bit of a deal! But of course not; I live in a political area (Liberal) and a great number of people around here didn't even know about this, even listening to all their talk radio and "News." You listen to people call in on C-SPAN or a radio show, and half the time if they're talking about the war they have to be reminded by the host (If it's a decent one) that we DID find incriminating weapons. Fancy that... |
Exactly. The media is Liberal, hence does not make a big deal out of things that could help the President. It has been proved that it is sarin, and it may or may not, most likely is, one of the weapons we've been searching for.
NOTHING will satisfy the Liberals--we've found WMDs and they say "they're not WMDs." Yes they ARE! And they are BANNED WEAPONS, for cripse sake!
Goes to show more depth into the true nature of the Liberals.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sat May 22, 2004 2:22 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Again. NO WMD's have been found in Iraq. Just banned Toxins. |
Not sure about this, but is it just me or are chemical weapons counted weapons of mass distuction?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat May 22, 2004 3:13 pm |
|
| Jeremy wrote: | | Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Again. NO WMD's have been found in Iraq. Just banned Toxins. |
Not sure about this, but is it just me or are chemical weapons counted weapons of mass distuction? |
"Chemical and Biological weapons" is what President Bush had said were WMDs in the past...And so yes, they are WMDs.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
