You'd have thought America would have planted some WMD's in Iraq to find, no?

[scottybuzz]

Doesnt make sense, most believe that America attacked iraq for its oil plain and simple, yet the reason for going to war was because of the WMD, didn't someone think for a second hold on, we actually know that there probably arent any in iraq, lets plant some while we are attacking and "find them" then that will make the war partially justified.

The big bad america that they are it would be the perfect thing to have done to justify attacking to shut everyone up who critised them.

The reason that WMD's werent found, makes me believe that America really did attack because Bush felt it was the right thing to do and they must have really believed that iraq had their own WMD.

Im just pondering and this is probably the wrong board to bring it to. But here we go for a 10 page thread woot woot!

[anarchy]

If it would have been found out that they were planted, then you would have had another watergate + the whole world against usa = not worth the risk

[tony286]

They were planning to go to iraq before 911, they used it as the excuse. Lets looks at all the good it did, the dollar is in the toilet and gas is over 4 bucks a gallon.

[scottybuzz]

Originally Posted by tony404

They were planning to go to iraq before 911, they used it as the excuse. Lets looks at all the good it did, the dollar is in the toilet and gas is over 4 bucks a gallon.

Re-read the thread. You have missed the point completley.

"they used it as the exuse"

So why didnt they plant any?

Anarchy thats a good reason, but people will always try no matter what previous failings have shown.

[Odin]

Did they believe Iraq had WMD? No doubt. They "knew" they had the capability for some time, after all look what he did to the Kurds. Was there some recent escalation or activity that indicated an increased threat to America by these or any other WMD within his grasp? Of course not. WMD has fuck all to do with the war. If it was about WMD they would of invaded North Korea. Anyone who honestly thinks WMD were anything other than a justification for the war is pretty naive and ignorant.

[stickyfingerz]

Saddam claimed they did, France, Britian, EVERYONES intelligence said they had Wmd. This wasn't just the U.S. saying this. People have short term fuckin memories lmao. Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors come in to the buildings they were supposed to as per the UN agreement. He broke the agreement I think 17 times over 11 years. The U.N. would not enforce the agreement so we did. End of story.

So what would you guys do if a tube site was told 17 times to take down some of your content and they ignored you? lmao

[Rochard]

People have short term memories... Everyone has forgotten what Iraq did... We can start off with them invading Kuwait, destroying 600 oil wells, firing on US war planes on a daily basis that were enforcing the terms of surrender from the first Gulf War.....

And this doesn't include the fact that Iraq attempted to kill President Bush Sr. while he was in Kuwait.

Sorry kids, but firing on a US warplane and trying to kill a former US President, well, is an act of war.

[sandman!]

Originally Posted by Rochard

People have short term memories... Everyone has forgotten what Iraq did... We can start off with them invading Kuwait, destroying 600 oil wells, firing on US war planes on a daily basis that were enforcing the terms of surrender from the first Gulf War.....

And this doesn't include the fact that Iraq attempted to kill President Bush Sr. while he was in Kuwait.

Sorry kids, but firing on a US warplane and trying to kill a former US President, well, is an act of war.

the planes your talking about were flying over iraq i would love see someone come into you back yard and tell you what you can and cant do

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by Rochard

People have short term memories... Everyone has forgotten what Iraq did... We can start off with them invading Kuwait, destroying 600 oil wells, firing on US war planes on a daily basis that were enforcing the terms of surrender from the first Gulf War.....

And this doesn't include the fact that Iraq attempted to kill President Bush Sr. while he was in Kuwait.

Sorry kids, but firing on a US warplane and trying to kill a former US President, well, is an act of war.

Very short term memories is correct. Can you name the country that helped make Saddam powerful? The one that supplied him with state-of-the-art weapons? The one that loaned him a shitload of money to build his military up?

We can play this game with the Taliban too.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

Very short term memories is correct. Can you name the country that helped make Saddam powerful? The one that supplied him with state-of-the-art weapons? The one that loaned him a shitload of money to build his military up?

We can play this game with the Taliban too.

They seem to forget that part. lol

[Jakez]

Doesn't anyone remember them getting busted a while back for transporting nuclear bombs or some shit? Sounds like this is exactly what they were trying to do..

[sandman!]

Originally Posted by Jakez

Doesn't anyone remember them getting busted a while back for transporting nuclear bombs or some shit? Sounds like this is exactly what they were trying to do..

link

[sltr]

i figured we did and just couldn't find em again :-(

it's a big desert man!

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

Very short term memories is correct. Can you name the country that helped make Saddam powerful? The one that supplied him with state-of-the-art weapons? The one that loaned him a shitload of money to build his military up?

We can play this game with the Taliban too.

Straw man arguments ROCK!! So lets say your best friend is always over. Never done you wrong. You helped him out tons of times, you took him from dirt poor, and showed him how to get the better things in life. Your friend becomes successful and well off. Then one day you come home and find him fucking your wife, and you kick his ass. Does your wife turn to you and say.. "Its your fuckin fault honey. YOU are the one that helped him get to where he is in life, and I found him really sexy now that he is successful. See what you did dumbass?"

Doesn't fucking matter where we were in the past. If an Allie turns against you he is no longer an Ally. And you cant be blamed for helping them get to the point where they had the power to fuck with you.

Enough with the dumb arguments. Saddam was bad. He was an ally when we needed him to be. He turned against us, and we took him out. He had PLENTY of chances after the first Gulf war to get his shit back together. Do some reading on what him and his sons did to Kuwaitis THEN come back to the thread. Its pretty hard to find the info now days, been buried in the SE's by a bunch of lefty sheep. Ive talked FIRST HAND to Kuwaiti immigrants that went through that shit. Nashville has the largest population of Kuwaitis in the U.S. So I know what he did. He was a monster after he got that power. Unless the U.S. has some experimental Crystal ball they can see the future with you can't blame his bullshit on them years after we helped him. Its stupid.

Maybe the rest of the world that hates the U.S. can blame France for helping us way back when. lol Stupid strawman arguments.

[xxxdesign-net]

if you think that Cheney and Rumsfeld and co are too honest to plant wmds you are a fool.... if they didnt do it, its because they couldnt...

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Straw man arguments ROCK!! So lets say your best friend is always over. Never done you wrong. You helped him out tons of times, you took him from dirt poor, and showed him how to get the better things in life. Your friend becomes successful and well off. Then one day you come home and find him fucking your wife, and you kick his ass. Does your wife turn to you and say.. "Its your fuckin fault honey. YOU are the one that helped him get to where he is in life, and I found him really sexy now that he is successful. See what you did dumbass?"

Doesn't fucking matter where we were in the past. If an Allie turns against you he is no longer an Ally. And you cant be blamed for helping them get to the point where they had the power to fuck with you.

Enough with the dumb arguments. Saddam was bad. He was an ally when we needed him to be. He turned against us, and we took him out. He had PLENTY of chances after the first Gulf war to get his shit back together. Do some reading on what him and his sons did to Kuwaitis THEN come back to the thread. Its pretty hard to find the info now days, been buried in the SE's by a bunch of lefty sheep. Ive talked FIRST HAND to Kuwaiti immigrants that went through that shit. Nashville has the largest population of Kuwaitis in the U.S. So I know what he did. He was a monster after he got that power. Unless the U.S. has some experimental Crystal ball they can see the future with you can't blame his bullshit on them years after we helped him. Its stupid.

Maybe the rest of the world that hates the U.S. can blame France for helping us way back when. lol Stupid strawman arguments.

I wouldn't exactly classify Saddam as our "best friend". We hated the Iranians more than we hated Iraq at the time, so we gave him all the weapons we could muster. We knew he was gassing his own people, but we didn't care. As long as he kept fighting Iran and selling us oil, he could slaughter as many of his own people as he could (with our weapons).

And Saddam was a fucking lunatic. No one denies that. But there are hundreds of lunatics running countries and parts of countries throughout the world. There have been genocides taking place in parts of Africa and Eastern Europe up to today. There are countries like Pakistan and North Korea that actually have nuclear weapons available. So out of all these major threats and atrocities taking place, why pick such a small blip on the radar such as Iraq? It's like having 5 guys coming at you with machine guns and you choose to take out the guy carrying only a knife. If you're going to argue that this was about a "threat to our security", then why not take out the countries that are actually a threat to our country? If you're going to play the "atrocities" card, why not take out the countries that are committing much worse atrocities than Saddam ever did?

But the most amusing aspect of the whole Middle East debacle is the demonization of Saddam as if he was any different than the other leaders in the Middle East. Do you know there is a country that has a leader that financially supports terrorist organizations (heck they hold fundraisers for them!)? A country that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 hijackers came from? A country that runs on Sharia law and opresses their people much more than Saddam was when we went to war? But guess what? He gets to hold hands with our President.

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Unless the U.S. has some experimental Crystal ball they can see the future with you can't blame his bullshit on them years after we helped him. Its stupid.

It's actually their job to be the crystal ball. The CIA has been reporting on blowback dating back to the 50's regarding their operations. It is their responsibility to determine the consequences of their actions.

[IllTestYourGirls]

plans to attack Iraq go back to clinton years, clinton was suppose to do so but other illegal wars happened so he could not. Bush just took the opening.

I do believe however, everyone thought, or at least the whole world government got their stories straight, that Iraq had WMD. Saddam was acting guilty. But wouldnt you if you had a neighbor like Iran?

What did we want Iraq to do? Say "ok you are right we have nothing, we cant defend ourselves, our troops are armed with rusty nails and tin cans" and leave the door open for Iran to walk in? Iran maybe no threat to the US but sure as hell is to Iraq.

This is what happens when you have an interventionalist policy. You end up attacking countries that cant defend themselves look like asses lose a ton of wealth, make your economy tank, lose the trust of the world and isolate yourself.

Hmmmm kinda like Osama said we would do... guess we are not winning the war after all.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

I wouldn't exactly classify Saddam as our "best friend". We hated the Iranians more than we hated Iraq at the time, so we gave him all the weapons we could muster. We knew he was gassing his own people, but we didn't care. As long as he kept fighting Iran and selling us oil, he could slaughter as many of his own people as he could (with our weapons).

And Saddam was a fucking lunatic. No one denies that. But there are hundreds of lunatics running countries and parts of countries throughout the world. There have been genocides taking place in parts of Africa and Eastern Europe up to today. There are countries like Pakistan and North Korea that actually have nuclear weapons available. So out of all these major threats and atrocities taking place, why pick such a small blip on the radar such as Iraq? It's like having 5 guys coming at you with machine guns and you choose to take out the guy carrying only a knife. If you're going to argue that this was about a "threat to our security", then why not take out the countries that are actually a threat to our country? If you're going to play the "atrocities" card, why not take out the countries that are committing much worse atrocities than Saddam ever did?

But the most amusing aspect of the whole Middle East debacle is the demonization of Saddam as if he was any different than the other leaders in the Middle East. Do you know there is a country that has a leader that financially supports terrorist organizations (heck they hold fundraisers for them!)? A country that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 hijackers came from? A country that runs on Sharia law and opresses their people much more than Saddam was when we went to war? But guess what? He gets to hold hands with our President.

So some of the people that were involved in 911 were from Saudi. Ok was the Saudi gov behind it? Listen personally I think most of the Middle east is corrupt. Saddam was bad. He fucked with the lion and the lion finally got annoyed with and bit him in half. There is a great scene in PoolHall Junkies where Christopher Walken talks about a lion that is being messed with by the lionesses, and hyenas that would translate well to this. The guy tried to kill one of our Presidents that is enough right there for me to give a big thumbs up to blowing the country off the map. But Ive got work to do nuff with the Saddam talk. lol

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

So some of the people that were involved in 911 were from Saudi. Ok was the Saudi gov behind it? Listen personally I think most of the Middle east is corrupt. Saddam was bad. He fucked with the lion and the lion finally got annoyed with and bit him in half. There is a great scene in PoolHall Junkies where Christopher Walken talks about a lion that is being messed with by the lionesses, and hyenas that would translate well to this. The guy tried to kill one of our Presidents that is enough right there for me to give a big thumbs up to blowing the country off the map. But Ive got work to do nuff with the Saddam talk. lol

It wasn't exactly some, it was 15 of the 19. I would classify that as most of the hijackers. I'm not saying the Saudi government was behind it, but if I was President, I wouldn't be holding hands with their leader after this development.

And it's much easier to give a thumbs up to a war you don't have to fight in. A war you don't have to sacrifice anything for. Lets be honest, if you truly believed that going into Iraq was the best choice for the safety of our country, you'd be over there fighting in it right now.

[hypedough]

Anarchy is right, not worth the risk.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

It wasn't exactly some, it was 15 of the 19. I would classify that as most of the hijackers. I'm not saying the Saudi government was behind it, but if I was President, I wouldn't be holding hands with their leader after this development.

And it's much easier to give a thumbs up to a war you don't have to fight in. A war you don't have to sacrifice anything for. Lets be honest, if you truly believed that going into Iraq was the best choice for the safety of our country, you'd be over there fighting in it right now.

Come on now, you can do better than that. Strawman arguments seem to be your forte tonight lol. ok seriously Im back to work now. lol

[IllTestYourGirls]

Originally Posted by pocketkangaroo

It wasn't exactly some, it was 15 of the 19. I would classify that as most of the hijackers. I'm not saying the Saudi government was behind it, but if I was President, I wouldn't be holding hands with their leader after this development.

And it's much easier to give a thumbs up to a war you don't have to fight in. A war you don't have to sacrifice anything for. Lets be honest, if you truly believed that going into Iraq was the best choice for the safety of our country, you'd be over there fighting in it right now.

my finacee has had two friends die over there, I have had 3 friends do tours, two are still there. All my friends signed up to protect the constitution. Going to war without congress declaring a war is..............................

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Come on now, you can do better than that. Strawman arguments seem to be your forte tonight lol. ok seriously Im back to work now. lol

You stated that you had no problem going to war with a country for something. I simply stated it's a tougher decision to make when it is your ass on the line.

This has always been an issue with war. If the Bush twins were eligible for a draft, I guarantee you the decision by the President would have been much different. When it's just some kids from poor parts of the country, it's not as big a deal.

[sortie]

Originally Posted by Chief

Did they believe Iraq had WMD? No doubt. They "knew" they had the capability for some time, after all look what he did to the Kurds. Was there some recent escalation or activity that indicated an increased threat to America by these or any other WMD within his grasp? Of course not. WMD has fuck all to do with the war. If it was about WMD they would of invaded North Korea. Anyone who honestly thinks WMD were anything other than a justification for the war is pretty naive and ignorant.

The US sold Sadam Husein the chemical weapons he used against Iran and the kurds.

Here's a nice photo of Rumsfeld doing his business :

[scottybuzz]

Originally Posted by Rochard

People have short term memories... Everyone has forgotten what Iraq did... We can start off with them invading Kuwait, destroying 600 oil wells, firing on US war planes on a daily basis that were enforcing the terms of surrender from the first Gulf War.....

And this doesn't include the fact that Iraq attempted to kill President Bush Sr. while he was in Kuwait.

Sorry kids, but firing on a US warplane and trying to kill a former US President, well, is an act of war.

Thats besides the point of the thread title.

They publically said they invaved iraq for WMD, so when they realised they had none, why not plant any?

It doesnt make sense, this would have solved so much.
If everyone claims how bad the Bush adminsitration is then this is surely just a quick job for them, no questions asked type of thing.

[Sausage]

Originally Posted by anarchy

If it would have been found out that they were planted, then you would have had another watergate + the whole world against usa = not worth the risk

Unfortunately the whole world is against America. Would be nice to see some other countries step up and do some heavy lifting though....

[digi]

huh? who is against america?

People might not agree with the Iraq war and bush's foreign policies but nobody is against the US. I dont know why people think this.

[stickyfingerz]

Originally Posted by scottybuzz

Thats besides the point of the thread title.

They publically said they invaved iraq for WMD, so when they realised they had none, why not plant any?

It doesnt make sense, this would have solved so much.
If everyone claims how bad the Bush adminsitration is then this is surely just a quick job for them, no questions asked type of thing.

Yes it kind of proves the point that the U.S. DID believe he had them. Along with about 8 other major countries, and the U.N. It wasn't something we fabricated as an excuse. It was believed to be a fact at the time, and frankly I still believe he did have them, and they went across the border to Syria. There were pictures of truck convoys that left Iraq and went across the border that were floating around for a long time, but of course without someone on the ground to say what was in the huge truck convoy going from Iraq to Syria. Then who is to say what was in the trucks. It was probably bread shipments going to all the hungry kids living across the border. Yes I am almost sure thats what it was.

[payd2purv]

A bunch of guys that can barely run porn sites going to CRACK the 9/11 conspiracy!

[scottybuzz]

Originally Posted by payd2purv

A bunch of guys that can barely run porn sites going to CRACK the 9/11 conspiracy!

your post was retarded but infact quite ironic.

Its funny how anybody can believe that the bush administration could set up the worlds most elaborate plan to send planes in the twin towers, just so they get support to go to war to rid iraq because of the wmd, but they didn't even think of planting any before hand to prove they made the right move by attacking and thus gaining world support.

Kinda puts in perspective just how stupid at least the theoretical standpoint of 9/11 conspiracies are.

[scottybuzz]

I shall try and quote that a little better;

A government who planned the most intricate plan ever in the history of the world of bombing its own towers, flying planes, creating fake people, planting explosives, the list goes on and on etc etc.

Yet they completley did not think to plant WMD to make their attack on iraq look real and authentic.

Think down that school of thought for a while.

[scottybuzz]

Originally Posted by Sausage

Unfortunately the whole world is against America. Would be nice to see some other countries step up and do some heavy lifting though....

Hey just remember who is helping you out in Iraq and Afghanistan, my country is doing plenty of heavy lifting for america (england) and don't you forget that!

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Oh boy. The real reason for Iraq is to have a stable power in the middle east. If Iraq comes together it would be the most powerful middle Eastern country in the world. That is what Iran is afraid of.

Iraqi's are the closest to the concept in values of Freedom and equality in the middle east. Even Under Saddam they were somewhat westernised.

[anarchy]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Straw man arguments ROCK!! So lets say your best friend is always over. Never done you wrong. You helped him out tons of times, you took him from dirt poor, and showed him how to get the better things in life. Your friend becomes successful and well off. Then one day you come home and find him fucking your wife, and you kick his ass. Does your wife turn to you and say.. "Its your fuckin fault honey. YOU are the one that helped him get to where he is in life, and I found him really sexy now that he is successful. See what you did dumbass?"

Doesn't fucking matter where we were in the past. If an Allie turns against you he is no longer an Ally. And you cant be blamed for helping them get to the point where they had the power to fuck with you.

Enough with the dumb arguments. Saddam was bad. He was an ally when we needed him to be. He turned against us, and we took him out. He had PLENTY of chances after the first Gulf war to get his shit back together. Do some reading on what him and his sons did to Kuwaitis THEN come back to the thread. Its pretty hard to find the info now days, been buried in the SE's by a bunch of lefty sheep. Ive talked FIRST HAND to Kuwaiti immigrants that went through that shit. Nashville has the largest population of Kuwaitis in the U.S. So I know what he did. He was a monster after he got that power. Unless the U.S. has some experimental Crystal ball they can see the future with you can't blame his bullshit on them years after we helped him. Its stupid.

Maybe the rest of the world that hates the U.S. can blame France for helping us way back when. lol Stupid strawman arguments.

Congratulations stickyfingerz, you have been accepted into the 'true US patriots' program. Your continued unquestioning belief into our message spread trough 'true patriot certified' US media channels was verified thanks to dragnet. Please start submitting information about friends, family and neighbours who might have any questions about the US cause. Your claims will be verified with the utmost secrecy and patriotism, to make sure we become the homeland we ought to be!

True US patriot recruiter,
Jeff Delong
GOV certified ID #198430734

[pocketkangaroo]

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Yes it kind of proves the point that the U.S. DID believe he had them. Along with about 8 other major countries, and the U.N. It wasn't something we fabricated as an excuse. It was believed to be a fact at the time, and frankly I still believe he did have them, and they went across the border to Syria. There were pictures of truck convoys that left Iraq and went across the border that were floating around for a long time, but of course without someone on the ground to say what was in the huge truck convoy going from Iraq to Syria. Then who is to say what was in the trucks. It was probably bread shipments going to all the hungry kids living across the border. Yes I am almost sure thats what it was.

Oh yes, they're in Syria. Because God knows if someone decides they are going to come to my house and kill me, I run and hide all my weapons at my neighbors house.