• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer (1 Viewer)

So let me get this straight....

Bush under the insistance of the Republican congress set up a website to show documents from Saddam's failed nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War and among those papers was Saddam's cookbook on "how to build to a nuclear bomb"??? OMG. :shock:

And to top it off those documents have been sitting there on that website for THREE YEARS????

Is that the Republicans idea of National Security? And for this we are spending billions nay trillions of taxpayer money?

THANK YOU REPUBLICANS for making our world so much safer.


In the meantime they are torturing people and spying on US citizens and taking away our freedom and illegally invading countries all in the name of stopping terrorists?


It just doesn't get any stupider than this.
 
Last edited:
In the defense of the Republicans.. its not exactly a secret on how you make a nuke.
 
PeteEU said:
In the defense of the Republicans.. its not exactly a secret on how you make a nuke.

Yes well how many people knew it was the Republicans themselves giving away the instructions?

BTW, how you fairing down there? Are things calming down?
 
Moot said:
Yes well how many people knew it was the Republicans themselves giving away the instructions?

BTW, how you fairing down there? Are things calming down?

Down where?
 
To be fair, the nuclear bomb documents were actually posted in September, so they have only been there for several weeks....but even a day is too long, IMHO.

The desperation to show that there was justification for invading Iraq is the driving force behind the decision to post these documents without proper oversight.

This is far from "no big deal" as the Bush apologists are inevitably going to argue. It is a major gaff, and not the first. There were also sensitive chemical weapons documents posted previously. You would think that having goofed once, there would be more oversight.

That hole they're digging keeps getting deeper, and deeper.....
 
jujuman13 said:
Oh will the stupidity of this Bush administration ever end?
Link

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/w...&ex=1163134800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

Now, just hold the damn phone for a second.

Bush was being IRRESPONSIBLE for posting documents for a program which DIDN'T EXIST, and in any account was NO THREAT TO THE U.S.?

I mean, after all, Bush lied about Iraq's programs, right? IRAQ WAS NEVER A THREAT. THEY POSED NO DANGER. THEY HAD NOTHING WHICH COULD THREATEN US.

Right?

Now, lest you say this was all pre-Gulf War, here's the kicker:

QUOTE
Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990’s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein’s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

European diplomats said this week that some of those nuclear documents on the Web site were identical to the ones presented to the United Nations Security Council in late 2002, as America got ready to invade Iraq. But unlike those on the Web site, the papers given to the Security Council had been extensively edited, to remove sensitive information on unconventional arms.

The deletions, the diplomats said, had been done in consultation with the United States and other nuclear-weapons nations. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which ran the nuclear part of the inspections, told the Security Council in late 2002 that the deletions were “consistent with the principle that proliferation-sensitive information should not be released.”

In Europe, a senior diplomat said atomic experts there had studied the nuclear documents on the Web site and judged their public release as potentially dangerous. “It’s a cookbook,” said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of his agency’s rules. “If you had this, it would short-circuit a lot of things.”
 
Moot said:
Yes well how many people knew it was the Republicans themselves giving away the instructions?

BTW, how you fairing down there? Are things calming down?

It was the government, not the Republicans, the RNC had nothing to do with it.
 
Bush was being IRRESPONSIBLE for posting documents for a program which DIDN'T EXIST, and in any account was NO THREAT TO THE U.S.?
 
Stinger said:
It was the government, not the Republicans, the RNC had nothing to do with it.

Let me see if I have this right:

1) The Republicans own the government at this time.

2) The nuke instructions were put up by the government.

3) Republicans had nothing to do with it.

Ummmmm...... Could you explain this to me again? I dont understand.
 
LOL, let me get this straight, the NYTimes of all people are now claiming that "some things should just be left secret" lol, now I have heard it all!:2rofll:
 
danarhea said:
Ummmmm...... Could you explain this to me again? I dont understand.

Yes.

The Bush administration posted particulars of the nuke program that Iraq didn't have.
 
Goobieman said:
Bush was being IRRESPONSIBLE for posting documents for a program which DIDN'T EXIST, and in any account was NO THREAT TO THE U.S.?

Goobie, your ******* up a rope...the other side is so unfamiliar with logic they couldn't define it with a dictionery and a year to look it up.

BubbaBob
 
Stinger said:
It was the government, not the Republicans, the RNC had nothing to do with it.

The poster did not say the RNC had something to do with it. According to the report I heard on the Today show from Andrea Mitchell (which I taped adn will watch again this evening), she said that the Republican-run intelligence committees in both the House and the Senate were pushing for publicizing these records. Negroponte said no. Apparently Bush himself pressured Negroponte to publicize them, which, eventually, he did.

Here's part of the article:

Mr. Negroponte had resisted setting up the Web site, which some intelligence officials felt implicitly raised questions about the competence and judgment of government analysts. But President Bush approved the site’s creation after Congressional Republicans proposed legislation to force the documents’ release.


So the statement is true--the Republicans had everything to do with this, and I hope the Democrats use this to their advantage.
 
Deegan said:
LOL, let me get this straight, the NYTimes of all people are now claiming that "some things should just be left secret" lol, now I have heard it all!:2rofll:

You know what is so obnoxious with your response, Deegan? It's the New York Times who put Negroponte on notice of these documents. Otherwise, they would still be up.
 
aps said:
So the statement is true--the Republicans had everything to do with this, and I hope the Democrats use this to their advantage.

The duly elected Repubilicans who control that branch of the government who told them to release information that would not hurt our national security but tell the American people the truth about what we knew about Saddam and his WMD and ties to terrorist. So the government released them and did a typical government job of it. And they did so to quell the misinformation from the left. Too bad we even had to do it in the first place.
 
Stinger said:
The duly elected Repubilicans who control that branch of the government who told them to release information that would not hurt our national security but tell the American people the truth about what we knew about Saddam and his WMD and ties to terrorist. So the government released them and did a typical government job of it. And they did so to quell the misinformation from the left. Too bad we even had to do it in the first place.

OMG, you are too much, Stinger.....too much! :lol:
 
aps said:
You know what is so obnoxious with your response, Deegan? It's the New York Times who put Negroponte on notice of these documents. Otherwise, they would still be up.

No, what's so obnoxious is it is spot on, and nothing more.:lol:

There was absolutely no threat what so ever, this is all about appearance.
 
aps said:
OMG, you are too much, Stinger.....too much! :lol:

Well post where the directive said to release classified information? This is government what do you expect? YOU are on the side that we the people should know everything and here you complain about it.
 
From what I can tell...these documents prove Saddam had a Nuclear Program.....No Sh!t. Thats why we had inspectors there in the freakin' first place, everyone knew he had a program....Sudan probably has one as well. The point is, we shouldnt be telling people how to build something we will blow them up for.

The Documents do nothing to show Iraq actually HAD Nukes....only that they wanted to make them...this was already well established.
 
Stinger said:
Well post where the directive said to release classified information? This is government what do you expect? YOU are on the side that we the people should know everything and here you complain about it.

I do not get the impression that the Republicans knew there were classified records in that information, but they knew there was a risk. Negroponte, who is the Director of National Intelligence, did not want to publish them and warned them of this possibility. Here's a portion of an article from the Baltimore Sun:

Former White House chief of staff Andrew Card said today that top officials knew there were risks when they decided to post the documents.

"John Negroponte warned us that we don't know what's in these documents, so these are being put out at some risk, and that was a warning that he put out right when they first released the documents," Card told NBC's "Today" show.

Pressed by Republican members of Congress, Negroponte's office last March ordered the unprecedented release of millions of pages of Iraqi documents, most of them in Arabic, collected by the U.S. government over more than a decade.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/na...,4485553.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines

Please stop your nonsense in trying to put blame elsewhere. You're embarrassing yourself.
 
tecoyah said:
The Documents do nothing to show Iraq actually HAD Nukes....only that they wanted to make them...this was already well established.

No one ever said the HAD a nuke, what was said was they wanted one and that is undeniable. Had we listened to Blix and the French and the Russians and the leftest, he most likely would have one now.
 
aps said:
I do not get the impression that the Republicans knew there were classified records in that information, but they knew there was a risk. Negroponte, who is the Director of National Intelligence, did not want to publish them and warned them of this possibility. Here's a portion of an article from the Baltimore Sun:

Well according the Hofestra they did and yes they, in order to counter the misinformatin campaign of the left decide some of the material, most of the material needed to be released. Not ALL of it. They erred of the publics right to know. And since the left has constantly defended releasing classified information your compliants ring hollow.

And as usual for government it probably got screwed up.

Former White House chief of staff Andrew Card said today that top officials knew there were risks when they decided to post the documents.

Yeah but your side wouldn't shut up about it.................now you have confirmation. Saddam wanted a nuke and knew how to make one. If the left hadn't engaged in it's disinformation and smear campaign NONE of the documents would have had to be released so let's go to the core issue here.


Please stop your nonsense in trying to put blame elsewhere. You're embarrassing yourself.

The blame lies squarely with whomever put out the unredacted documents if they indeed violated any secrets or disclosed secert information. Welcome to government.

Now if you have evidence anyone in congress overruled anyone or knowingly released classified information then present it.
 
Stinger said:
No one ever said the HAD a nuke, what was said was they wanted one and that is undeniable. Had we listened to Blix and the French and the Russians and the leftest, he most likely would have one now.

You do understand that, Iran has been trying for longer, with no inspections, and no infrastructure destruction but has yet to succeed....right? Hell North Korea has invested untold time and $$$ to the same hope, and just now fired off a limited success. Yet you are telling me Saddam was inches away from doing what they cannot.....Yeah, Right.
 
Stinger said:
Well according the Hofestra they did and yes they, in order to counter the misinformatin campaign of the left decide some of the material, most of the material needed to be released. Not ALL of it. They erred of the publics right to know. And since the left has constantly defended releasing classified information your compliants ring hollow.

Oh brother. I think what Andrea Mitchell said was that the Republicans were hoping to find proof that there were WMDs or that Saddam was reconstituting his nuclear program. That was the basis for publishing the information. Since when have Republicans done something because of Democrats whining? LOL

Now if you have evidence anyone in congress overruled anyone or knowingly released classified information then present it.

What is your problem, Stinger? When did I accuse someone in Congress of knowingly releasing information? I said this: "I do not get the impression that the Republicans knew there were classified records in that information, but they knew there was a risk." Stop telling me to prove something to you I never said. I don't get you. Are you intentionally distorting what I say, or do you not understand the meaning of the words I use? :confused:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom