akyron said:
Kind of hypocritical from going from one spin to the next don't you think?
Why don't you read
the actual report?
Key Findings
Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone. He wanted to end
sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when
sanctions were lifted.
"What is clear is that Saddam retained his notions of the use of force and had experience that demonstrated the utility of WMD. He was making progress in eroding sanctions and, had it not been for the events of 9-11-2001, things would have taken a different course in the Regime. Most Senior members of the Regime and scientists assumed that the programs would begin in earnest when sanctions ended-and sanctions were eroding."
Deulfer also says in another report there was a massive increase of border activity with Syria during his fact gathering. Saddams men replaced the standard border guards for the length of this activity. He has no idea what went over in hundreds of trucks but to me it is highly suspicious.
Exactly what about these statements are vague to you?
But after extensive interviews with Hussein and his key lieutenants, Duelfer concluded that Hussein was not motivated by a desire to strike the United States with banned weapons, but wanted them to enhance his image in the Middle East and to deter Iran, against which Iraq had fought a devastating eight-year war. Hussein believed that "WMD helped save the regime multiple times," the report said.
Duelfer said Hussein hoped someday to resume a chemical weapons effort after U.N. sanctions ended, but had no stocks and had not researched making the weapons for a dozen years.
The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.
What's so interesting is that the defenders of this nightmare war think the following:
1. That if someone is anti-war that means that you are PRO SADDAM. Can't you see how incredibly stupid that thinking is?
2. You cite one tiny little quote, not in it's complete use, you snip it to make it sound like you're right when the entire quote says you're wrong. Isn't that called propaganda?
3. You completely ignore that we went to war with Iraq but not with OBL. We diverted almost all of our resources to Iraq, a country that never, ever attacked us, was not threatening us, and that was, for lack of a better description, ball-less.
4. In case you all need to be reminded, OBL DID attack us, not once, not twice, but many times all over the world killing thousands of Americans. Remember? You know, planes into buildings, sinking ships, blowing up embassies....yet with all of the trillions of dollars we spend on the military, all of the training we pick Iraq as out target and let OBL continue to be a threat to us.
5. Since OBL started killing us and blowing up things can anyone name even one single instance that Saddam even threatened us, no less did anything?
So I for one would really appreciate it if all of you pro-war "Americans" would slap yourself in the face and come out of your stupor and try to recognize who our enemy is and who is threatening us!
I for one do not like that 1600+ Americans soldiers have been killed and at least 12,000 others have been wounded and more than 100,000 families have had their lives totally screwed up by what will go down in history as one of the very worst military decisions of the last 100 years.
Good job Bush! Good job Bush supporters, you've conspired to make us less safe and more dead! Take a bow!
:2bow:
