Saddam Had WMDs; The Left Couldn't Care Less

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • John Ashcroft
    Veteran
    • Jan 2004
    • 2127

    Saddam Had WMDs; The Left Couldn't Care Less

    One could be forgiven for thinking that the detonation of two "improvised explosive devices" equipped with toxic chemical agents would be seen as confirmation that there are still Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) in Iraq. These events might even be seen as rebuttals to those who have derided the Bush administration for its prior inability to substantiate pre-war claims that such weapons in Saddam’s hands constituted an intolerable threat to the United States.

    Unfortunately, such thinking fails to appreciate a stand-by of Washington Beltway politics: "moving the goalposts." Whenever the opposing team comes close to proving its point, one simply relocates the end zone to a point out of reach.

    Rarely has this phenomenon been more in evidence than with respect to Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction. Practically everyone – members of the Coalition’s intelligence services, the United Nations, even the French, Germans and Russians – recognized that, at one time, Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and a program for building nuclear devices. Since he never satisfactorily accounted for the complete destruction of the stocks of WMDs, like those he previously used in lethal attacks on Iran and his own Kurds, the only reasonable conclusion was that they continued to exist in some form, in unknown quantity.

    To prove the point, one would seem to need only to have found a few chemical and/or biological weapons. Well, that would appear to have been the incontrovertible upshot of the two recent episodes, involving sarin and mustard gas weapons. Yet the goal-post-movers’ response has been that these do not – in and of themselves – confirm the claims that Saddam still had stockpiles of these sorts of WMDs.

    UN inspectors – whose return to Iraq in 2002 was only made possible by President Bush’s determination to disarm Saddam, one way or the other – shed no more light on the question. That did not, however, keep then-Chief Inspector Hans Blix from suggesting that there was no evidence Iraq still had active WMD programs.

    To disprove this contention, it would seem sufficient to establish that chemical and biological production facilities continued to exist, perhaps in the form of advanced fertilizer or pharmaceutical plants which, thanks to the dual-use nature of their technologies, would allow them readily to be used for weapons purposes. And the Iraq Survey Group, a team of specialists that has been scouring Iraq since the fall of Baghdad trying to ferret out and secure Saddam’s WMDs, has confirmed that, while actual weapons have eluded them so far, the ancien regime did indeed have the ability to produce fresh batches of chemical and biological agents at will. Yet the skeptics choose to ignore the reality that, in the wrong hands, even small amounts of such toxic substances – precisely what could be manufactured in short order by this sort of stand-by production capability – could cause immense loss of life.

    No less studiously ignored is evidence that has come to light that Saddam Hussein could, indeed, have handed Weapons of Mass Destruction to terrorists bent on employing them against the United States and its allies. As Charles Smith reminded us in Newsmax.com yesterday, "(F)ormer Clinton Defense Secretary William Cohen testified that in 1998 Saddam's top nerve gas experts met with several members of al-Qaeda in Baghdad."

    So the Clintons are now PNAC too???

    Recent events underscore the danger such a combination represents. Smith notes that just a few weeks ago, a number of al-Qaeda operatives based in Iraq were caught before they were able to carry out a plot aimed at killing tens of thousands of Jordanians with poison gas. Evidently, the failure to perpetrate such an atrocity permits some to persist in the fantasy that this aspect of the WMD case against Saddam is still without foundation.

    Whether partisan Democrats, antiwar zealots and rabid Bush-haters wish to admit it or not, Saddam Hussein is guilty as charged. We now know that Saddam once had significant quantities of Weapons of Mass Destruction and aspired to build more; he used them against his own people and his neighbors; and he persisted in violating nearly two-score UN Security Council resolutions – right up to the end of his days in power – by concealing his actual programs and capabilities.

    It is now safe to conclude as well that Saddam bequeathed a frightening legacy to post-liberation Iraq: the Weapons of Mass Destruction still at large in Iraq. The alternative thesis – namely, that the only two WMDs left in the entire country were employed in the (fortunately) failed IED attacks involving sarin and mustard gas conducted in recent days – is preposterous on its face.

    While we may still be in the dark as to where all of the remaining WMDs are – their specific condition and numbers – these attacks should serve indisputably to establish that there are at least some WMDs in-country and accessible to terrorists. Moreover, the Jordanian near-miss underscores the point that we should take no comfort from the fact that the status of such weapons is unknown, since some of them may wind up being used outside Iraq.

    It is entirely understandable that those who opposed the war with Iraq and/or President Bush for launching it would try to make hay of the difficulty we have had to date locating quantities of WMDs that former chief inspector David Kay once said would fit in a two-car garage, while searching a country the size of France. Now that we have begun to find them the hard way, it behooves such critics to stop moving the goal-posts, to recognize the validity of Mr. Bush’s concerns and to throw their support behind the urgent effort to find and destroy such weapons – wherever they may be, including possibly in neighboring Syria – before any more of them are used against us...inside Iraq or outside.

    Link: here
  • FORD
    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

    • Jan 2004
    • 59141

    #2
    Horowitz, another neocon traitor shitbag committing treason against the United States of America.
    Eat Us And Smile

    Cenk For America 2024!!

    Justice Democrats


    "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

    Comment

    • ELVIS
      Banned
      • Dec 2003
      • 44120

      #3
      Is that the only answer you have for everything ???

      Comment

      • FORD
        ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

        • Jan 2004
        • 59141

        #4
        Originally posted by ELVIS
        Is that the only answer you have for everything ???
        Considering the stranglehold these fascist traitors currently have on the government and the media, it's an answer that applies most of the time. Until we, the American people demand the removal of these traitors, this treason will continue
        Eat Us And Smile

        Cenk For America 2024!!

        Justice Democrats


        "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

        Comment

        • tobinentinc
          Head Fluffer
          • Apr 2004
          • 468

          #5
          Originally posted by FORD
          Considering the stranglehold these fascist traitors currently have on the government and the media, it's an answer that applies most of the time. Until we, the American people demand the removal of these traitors, this treason will continue
          Yes, these liberal traitors need to stop thier influence on the media. They have made it so Bush can do nothing right and that Kerry is the only answer. I demand that the liberals be removed.
          http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip...hics/sines.gif http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...m/kissarmy.jpg http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...ve/vhlogo1.gif

          Comment

          • Xocolatl
            Roth Army Recruit
            • May 2004
            • 18

            #6
            (shaking head) Bush Sr was trying to do that twelve years ago. Obviously it worked to some degree, but when his kid took over and undid all kinds of good works... now only the liberals in the media have disappeared. Yes, fuckers, you heard me right, the "liberal media" is anything but since it's owned by the conservatives and very little broadcast during the first three years of Junior's unearned reign questioned him. It's only now the media found its testicles, at long frigging last.

            The liberals aren't traitors, they're more patriotic than the sad sacks that march lockstep to what the media and the lying government tell everyone. Remember when the chant was Question Authority? Before your time, perhaps? This is a nation created by dissenters, historically.

            Comment

            • John Ashcroft
              Veteran
              • Jan 2004
              • 2127

              #7
              Put the crack pipe down every once in a while dude, it's rotting your brain.

              Comment

              • FORD
                ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

                • Jan 2004
                • 59141

                #8
                Originally posted by tobinentinc
                Yes, these liberal traitors need to stop thier influence on the media. They have made it so Bush can do nothing right and that Kerry is the only answer. I demand that the liberals be removed.
                Another mindless answer from the child

                But then, this one's not even really your fault. You honestly have no clue what a legitimate news media is, because you have never seen one. Some of us remember the difference.
                Eat Us And Smile

                Cenk For America 2024!!

                Justice Democrats


                "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

                Comment

                • John Ashcroft
                  Veteran
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 2127

                  #9
                  What from Cronkite????

                  An admitted liberal (much like the rest of them).

                  Dude, you've admitted yourself that you remember the "Internal Poll" that the newsmedia administered to it's staff. Remember the amount was in the high 70% of admitted liberals, 20% "Independents" (I.E. liberals who are afraid to admit it), and the remainder Conservative. In fact, I think your remark was something like "Oh yeah, I remember, that was cool!".

                  And now you're going to spout the line that the press is overwhelmingly Conservative???

                  Comment

                  • FORD
                    ROTH ARMY MODERATOR

                    • Jan 2004
                    • 59141

                    #10
                    Come on Asscrotch, we've been over this....

                    It doesn't matter what the views of the individual reporters are, when the editorial content, and the stories that get airtime are determined by the conservatives, or neo-cons, more likely, who own and operate the networks.

                    For example, did Peter Jennings lash out at Michael Moore (through Gen Wes Clark) during a presidential debate because Jennings personally had a problem with Moore saying that Junior was a deserter during the Vietnam War? True, Clark didn't take the bait, but the point is, was Jennings asking the questions based on what he believed, as he is percieved to be a "liberal", or was it a question that was fed to him by his Disney bosses?

                    In light of Michael Eisner's hostile attitude toward's Michael Moore's new movie, the answer is obvious.

                    So does it matter whether or not Peter Jennings himself is liberal, if neocons like Eisner are holding a gun to his head (figuratively speaking) when he's reading the news?
                    Eat Us And Smile

                    Cenk For America 2024!!

                    Justice Democrats


                    "If the American people had ever known the truth about what we (the BCE) have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - Poppy Bush, 1992

                    Comment

                    • tobinentinc
                      Head Fluffer
                      • Apr 2004
                      • 468

                      #11
                      Originally posted by FORD
                      Another mindless answer from the child

                      But then, this one's not even really your fault. You honestly have no clue what a legitimate news media is, because you have never seen one. Some of us remember the difference.
                      I'm just a mis informed kid. It's a damn shame the media never says anything good about Repbublicans, only what they've done wrong. They always say bad things about organized religion, white people, and bush. They are saying how our the Iraqi POWs were abused, but you never heard about that guy who was beheaded by the terrorists. Yep very conservative this media.
                      http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip...hics/sines.gif http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...m/kissarmy.jpg http://images.google.com/images?q=tb...ve/vhlogo1.gif

                      Comment

                      Working...