"They are weapons of mass destruction. They're harmful to human beings. And they have been found," Rumsfeld said. "And they had not been reported by Saddam Hussein as he inaccurately alleged that he had reported all of his weapons. And they are still being found and discovered."

strong, clear and authoritative

that's donald rumsfeld for you

I don't know... maybe you can appreciate the subtlty and nuance of john kerry's 'I voted for that before I voted against it' statements, but that's a bit too french for my liking

I prefer rumsfeld's straight talk

quote:

---

It wasn't a stockpile. It was mostly empty shells and old munitions that were buried to get rid of them.

---

my use of "stockpile" was not in reference to the 500 degraded shells that were allegedly found but to WMDs that were hypothesized to exist but were never found.

^

looks like grapes is raging against the machine again...

rumsfeld is incompetent. i don't think any secretary of defense has ever had so many generals calling for his head.

How do we know the WMD were not planted? What were the circumstances of this stockpile being previously overlooked during more than a decade of searching, and now suddenly turning up? If all of this has been discovered over the last three years, why has the Bush administration waited and taken flak for lack of evidence to support their case?

There are questions one should ask themselves before absorbing any new information. To not question is tantamount to self-deceit.

quote:

---

these aren't 'the' wmd that we were searching for.

---

but that doesn't square with the joint resolution authorizing force

107th CONGRESS
2d Session

H. J. RES. 114

[Report No. 107-721] To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

October 2, 2002

Mr. HASTERT (for himself and Mr. Gephardt) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

October 7, 2002

Reported with amendments, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed

JOINT RESOLUTION

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;...

these found wmd fall well within the scope of the resolution

you just don't like it because your worldview has depended on there being no wmd in iraq

tough shi.t, moonbat moron

I'm starting to wonder if Jason and Dicks are the same nut case suffering from multiple personality disorder.

And why are you starting to wonder that, cynic?

look cynic, I'll actually engage you seriously because for the most part, you've got a pretty good head on your shoulders

but I'll correct you in several places because you're just plain wrong

I don't think that bush can do no wrong... in fact, I could go on and on about where I think that his administration has made mis-steps

I do however give him plenty of benefit of the doubt here, not only because I'm not prone to suffering fits of bush derangement syndrome, but also because he's acting strongly to counter the problems that clinton did nothing about, and also for the most part I think that the g.w.b. administration has acted wisely

in a lot of ways we're in uncharted territory here, so I'm supporting their efforts

as with these wmd that we now know have turned up, look at objections raised... first they were empty, but that's false, because 500 of them had remnants of sarin and mustard... next they were harmless, but that's false, because even wwi mustard shells found in france are still extremely dangerous... next these weren't the wmd that the US went to war for, but that's false, because they fall well within the scope of the joint resolution, which made no distinction between wmd held and produced before or after 1991... you've got to get over the g.w.b. thing

I do understand exactly why the terrorists attacked us, and will continue to try... they *do* hate our freedom... I'm not trying to dismiss all of the complex reasons behind the phenomenon (I haven't dismissed out of hand your inbreeding angle for instance), but you can't deny the pure hatred of behind phrasing like 'this filthy country' in reference to canada from the wife of one of the toronto 17... they hate our freedom... we're free to be unislamic... they hate it, and us... don't delude yourself

i think bush did deserve the benefit of the doubt when he first took office. i gave him that. and i supported him after 9/11. i supported the war in afghanistan without reservation. i do however think we made a strategic mistake by relying too heavily on the northern alliance. we thought we could minimize losses by putting them on the front lines. and we did. but we also let bin laden slip away because we didn't have enough US forces on the ground to capture him. i don't even hold bush responsible for this. it was a mistake in hindsight. which i'm not sure anyone saw coming.

but then bush used up his good will when he sold a false bill of goods to the american public. yes, the cia believed sadam had wmd. but bush seriously overstated the evidence we had to that effect. and his administration used evidence they were told was unreliable. he greatly exaggerated any link to bin laden. we now know that the cia had already concluded that bin laden would not work with sadam. that they were in fact enemies. and we know the cia believed sadam was contained and of no threat to its neighbors. bush used anti-muslim sentiment and fear generated from 9/11 to build just enough support for war in Iraq. now that we as the american public know more of what he knew going in, that support has vanished.

and i would say that many members of his administration are not only incompetent but also corrupt. several retired generals have called on rumsfeld to retire. and rightly so. putting aside the fact that we went into iraq under false pretenses, he has mismanaged the war every step of the way. from not listening to generals who said they need more troops. to not anticipating an insurgency. to underestimating their strength and resolve once the materialized. to dissolving iraq's army, which could have provided security under a "democratically" elected government. as for corruption, turd blossom leaking valerie plame's identity then lying to cover it up was only the tip of the iceberg. i don't think any administration in history has had so many scandals as this one. in a way, it works to their advantage. you get desensitized to it when there's a new one every week.

regarding the wmd that are the subject of this thread, simply put they are not what we were looking for. we were told that iraq had continued to secretly produce chemical and biological weapons after the first gulf war and they were maintaining battle ready stockpiles of wmd. these were buried in the sand during the iran/iraq war and forgotten. as even fox news said, they were not part of a stockpile we were told we were looking for. when you fail to acknowledge that, i'm lead to believe you're either not being honest or you're too biased to see the truth.