Ron Mars
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,194
- Reaction score
- 170
- Location
- Central Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
don't be lazy, it is there; if you do not want to face with the truth , then it is your choice, my another proof is the research of Charles Duelfer, he says there were no nukes,biological or chemical weapons in Iraq as alleged, anyway , it seems you do not want to accept the excuse Bush used to intervene into ıraq, it is ok for me; but it is sad to still see some people who have no idea what is going on the ''earth' where i live ....
They did not claim that Iraq had nuclear weapons.Simon W. Moon , Andalublue
i really cannot understand you, the us army along with England did invade ıraq after those claims there were nukes,biological and chemical weapons...
They did not claim that Iraq had nuclear weapons.
You don't have to understand me, just English. English isn't your first language, is it?
Simon W. Moon , Andalublue
i really cannot understand you, the us army along with England did invade ıraq after those claims there were nukes,biological and chemical weapons, after the invasion they created a research group to prove what they claimed was true; however, the group said the contrary; a war started and ended , but one of you still do not know the reason , and the other one is thinking those claims are the facts not excuses to invade Iraq so we should read the exact words in that report.
Well, the language of the report is English. So any failures in understanding English can lead to failures to understand what the report says.it is neither my language nor english; it is interpretation; there is a report, which claims somethings, if you do not want to accept the truth , what can my language or english do? btw, i thought you were stick to the debate not debater.
Again, wanted to is not equal to did. Read the report. :coffeepap
Again, wanted to is not equal to did. Read the report. :coffeepap
Well, to be fair we did find the missiles we went looking for. Also, we did find some WMD remnants from the past. however, we didn't find what we said was there like, "a few hundred metric tons of CW agents" or mobile bio-weapons labs.Soguks, I agree with you entirely EXCEPT for the 'nukes' bit. No one claimed he had 'nukes', just weapons of mass destruction, specifically long-range missiles and chemical weapons. No such weapons were discovered after the invasion, hence all the controversy.
The above is meaningless partisan noise.This is why Libs are so very dangerous.
They need to see the mushroom cloud before they take action, and then that's not enough.
There can be no assertion that there were nukes but still be an assertion that there were other weapons. The two are not mutually exclusive.another person another start, tell me please if there was no nukes or such weapons; why usa invaded Iraq then? and why the cia set a research group for those 'weapons'?
wanted to is not equal to did
This is why Libs are so very dangerous.
They need to see the mushroom cloud before they take action, and then that's not enough. Never mind the idiot had and used WMD and committed all manner of atrocities.
What was that line from after 911? C O N N E C T T H E D O T S...
.
There can be no assertion that there were nukes but still be an assertion that there were other weapons. The two are not mutually exclusive.
no i am still sticking to my claim, cuz there is a report, claiming there were nukes, chemical and biological weapons in ıraq; so why i should believe in another claim Bin Laden is dead; where is the body?
no i am still sticking to my claim, cuz there is a report, claiming there were nukes, chemical and biological weapons in ıraq; so why i should believe in another claim Bin Laden is dead; where is the body?
I don't think that anyone said it was incorrect to do so.
But saying that someone has WMD doesn't mean the same thing as saying someone has a nuke. The reason it's not the same is that WMD applies to more things than just a nuke.
For an example, if someone says that they have vegetables, it's not the same as saying that they have carrots.
Buried at sea. With the fish. There's no reason to doubt his death here.
Simon W. Moon , Andalublue
i really cannot understand you, the us army along with England did invade ıraq after those claims there were nukes,biological and chemical weapons, after the invasion they created a research group to prove what they claimed was true; however, the group said the contrary; a war started and ended , but one of you still do not know the reason , and the other one is thinking those claims are the facts not excuses to invade Iraq so we should read the exact words in that report.
Hicksville?
were you there?..think a bit, you killed your most dangerous enemy and then threw him at sea without sharing any info, Do you think everybody but yourself would believe you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?