"Curveball" lied, people died.

[Yonivore]

CBS is reporting (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtml) that it has found the source of the bad Iraqi WMD intelligence; that would be one Rafid Ahmed Alwan, aka “Curveball.”

Are informants generally so aptly named?

The question, "Where did the WMD intel come from?," is a good question that everyone ignored in the rush to chant, “Bush lied!” As has been pointed out repeatedly, President Bush presented the nation and the UN with the same intelligence President Clinton used to justify the Iraqi Liberation Act (http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/US/Legislation/ILA.htm), and our flyovers and occasional bombings in that country - intelligence that pre-dated the Bush administration. Hillary Clinton, in 2003, concurred, saying that the information President Bush was showing was “consistent with what we saw,” when she and her husband were in the White House.

I’ve always maintained that since both presidents used the same intelligence, either both lied, or both told the truth. CBS is saying neither President lied; they were duped.


Curve Ball is an Iraqi defector named Rafid Ahmed Alwan, who arrived at a German refugee center in 1999. To bolster his asylum case and increase his importance, he told officials he was a star chemical engineer who had been in charge of a facility at Djerf al Nadaf that was making mobile biological weapons.

[…]

He eventually wound up in the care of German intelligence officials to whom he continued to spin his tale of biological weapons. His plan succeeded partially because he had worked briefly at the plant outside Baghdad and his descriptions of it were mostly accurate. He embellished his account by saying 12 workers had been killed by biological agents in an accident at the plant.

More than a hundred summaries of his debriefings were sent to the CIA, which then became a pillar - along with the now-disproved Iraqi quest for uranium for nuclear weapons - for the U.S. decision to bomb and then invade Iraq. The CIA-director George Tenet gave Alwan’s information to Secretary of State Colin Powell to use at the U.N. in his speech justifying military action against Iraq.
After 9/11, it would have been unthinkable for any president to allow Saddam, with his history (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/united_nations/reasons.html) of using biological weapons, of attempting to assassinate an American President and of harboring terrorists (http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200310210934.asp) like Abu Abbas, to maintain the status quo. And once upon a time, most Americans and most congressional creatures understood that, which is why the congress voted to depose Saddam and liberate the Iraqi people, a good move they’ve actually tried to distance themselves from, because it got difficult as Bush said it would. Some who talked up the action might have thought Iraq would be a “cakewalk (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer),” but Bush told us it would be a “long, hard slog (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031022-11.html).”

You’d think this story - which goes to the root of the “lies” that brought us into Iraq after 9/11, and puts to rest the “Bush lied” mantra - would be grabbing headlines all over the place. Oh, I forgot, it puts to rest the “Bush lied” mantra.

The narrative is so ingrained, and so many have so much invested in it, that it would be remarkable - and inspiring - to see a few folk in the press and congress suggest (even if they do it grudgingly) that “maybe Bush didn’t ‘lie,’ maybe the rhetoric has been too harsh,” but I won’t hold my breath for it. And I know the Bush WH won’t do anything to correct the narrative because they never do.

But if things continue to look up in Iraq, some in congress might want to go look at their vote authorizing action once again, and maybe even take a little credit for taking part in an action that was bold and visionary, even if it was terribly, terribly difficult, (nothing great is easy) and which liberated millions of people who are learning to trust the US - after being let down by us, before - and are slowly, slowly, learning to throw off the yoke of tribalism and begin to self-govern.

If things continue to look up in Iraq, then someday America will look back and say, “we did something great, there, and - considering Japan and Germany - we did it in a remarkable space of time.” If things collapse there, well…then we will be looking at a very different world, altogether. In either case, perhaps it is time to put the blame on the Curveball, and hope that our at-bats get better.

[Yonivore]

In the same vein as this thread, the Associated Press (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8SLJHA80&show_article=1) recounts Joe Biden's encounter with a group of fourth-graders in New Hampshire, under the headline "Biden's History Lesson to Fourth-Graders." Someone asked Biden, "How did the war in Iraq start?" Here is Biden's answer:


"Osama bin Laden set up camps there, and he was getting a lot of help from folks running that country called Afghanistan. And that's where he planned an attack on America to bring the World Trade Towers down and kill all those innocent Americans. We had a right to, and we should've gone, to Afghanistan to try to get bin Laden and those people who've done very bad things to America," he said.

"But the president, I think, he got a little confused," he continued. "I think he thought the folks in another country, way, way far away, far from here, it's also far from Afghanistan, called Iraq. He said, 'The guy in Iraq he helped bin Laden do bad things to us,' and he didn't. He wasn't a good guy, but he didn't help. So we used that kind of as an excuse to attack Iraq."
Actually, President Bush has never said that Saddam's Iraq had anything to do with the September 11 attacks. One would think that Biden must know this, even if the AP reporter doesn't. So one wonders: after four years, have the Democrats started to believe their own propaganda, or is Joe Biden really willing to lie to a group of schoolchildren?

[boutons_]

dubya/dickhead/neo-cunts went shopping for any "intel" they could fish up as pretext to invade Iraq and grab the oil.

yoni knows dubya's Iraq invasion is a failure, so tries to drag in anybody else to share the blame.


WMD, aluminum tubes, yellowcake, curveball, mobile weapons labs, Saddam-WTC, Saddam-AQ, etc, etc. ALL were total smoke-and-mirrors bullshit LIES to coverup the grab for oil.

Iraq is fucked and broken, the Iraqi people are fucked, Iraq is partitioned in practice, dubya fucked Iraq in every which way possible. NOTHING "great" about it.

loser yoni perpetually keeps shilling for loser dubya

you're doing a heckuva job, yoni

[Yonivore]

:lmao @ boutons and I don't even know what he said. But, if it's any resemblance to the disconnected, spittle-spraying, nonsense that caused me to put him on ignore, it's probably a good exclamation point on my posts.

Thanks boutons.

[boutons_]

yoni, you and WC have become objects of ridicule for you undying, lying support for dubya and his LONG string of fiascos, incompetences, and geo-political and domestic fuckups.

[FromWayDowntown]

Just to help out Yonivore: http://theanchoressonline.com/2007/11/02/clinton-bush-both-thrown-a-curveball-on-iraq/

By the way, is this finally an admission that there really weren't WMD's in Iraq?

[ChumpDumper]

"They're still translating the documents!"

[Yonivore]

Just to help out Yonivore: http://theanchoressonline.com/2007/11/02/clinton-bush-both-thrown-a-curveball-on-iraq/
Hey thanks! I'm not sure there'll be anymore at her site, but knock yourself out.


By the way, is this finally an admission that there really weren't WMD's in Iraq?
No; Because there were.

[ChumpDumper]

"All the volatile chemical agents were flown on passenger jets to Syria because everyone knows how easy and safe it is to do such a thing on a moment's notice."

[ChumpDumper]

And really, is this the first time Yoni has ever heard of Curveball?

No, there is no reason to blame Curveball. Curveball didn't give the order to invade.

[Nbadan]

After 9/11, it would have been unthinkable for any president to allow Saddam, with his history of using biological weapons, of attempting to assassinate an American President and of harboring terrorists like Abu Abbas, to maintain the status quo. And once upon a time, most Americans and most congressional creatures understood that, which is why the congress voted to depose Saddam and liberate the Iraqi people, a good move they’ve actually tried to distance themselves from, because it got difficult as Bush said it would. Some who talked up the action might have thought Iraq would be a “cakewalk,” but Bush told us it would be a “long, hard slog.”

Errrr.........


http://www.lib.ndsu.nodak.edu/blogs/council/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/6_22_bush_mission_banner1.jpg

[Nbadan]

...besides, it's not like there weren't other reliable intelligence sources in Iraq, almost every major nation including Israel had intelligence sources in Iraq, it's just that they didn't give the Neocons the 'smoking-gun' that they wanted....yes, they cherry picked intelligence and their source of choice was curveball.....

[George Gervin's Afro]

This almost becoming laughable. Bush oversold a war we didn't have to fight. He had no past war plan. He and the dick criticized our allies and Democrats who had the audacity to question the wisdom and planning of this fiasco. Now after 4 yrs all we can hope for is an islamic democracy based on the quoran.. priceless..

[Yonivore]

Errrr.........


http://www.lib.ndsu.nodak.edu/blogs/council/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/6_22_bush_mission_banner1.jpg
Regime change accomplished.

[PixelPusher]

Regime change accomplished.
Really? Which regime is "in charge" now?

[boutons_]

'Regime change accomplished."

Saddam changed out, and a still-born, emasculated "democratic" "govt" installed, but it hasn't turned out to be the intended US oil-donating-puppet. The Kurds are going their own way, while the rest of Iraq is partitioned into Shiite and Sunni regions.

Iraq still hasn't approved the law which gives oilfield ownership for 30 years to foreign oilcos. tsk tsk What a shame.

[George Gervin's Afro]

As I am watching 60 Minutes the more I hear I know Bush and Dick misled us to war. He wasn't even in Iraq during the time for some of the things he supposedly witnessed..

I wish we had someone with the balls to present articles of impeachment...

[SRJ]

I wish we had someone with the balls to present articles of impeachment...

If the case against Bush is as substantial as liberals believe, it wouldn't take "balls" to present articles of impeachment. Bush isn't popular and his party is in the minority in both houses of Congress. More than likely, the case for impeachment is not a strong one.

I'd love to see all of your Bush/Cheney dartboards and voodoo dolls; I'll bet some of them are quite creative and funny.

[boutons_]

"case for impeachment is not a strong one."

Neither was the harassment case of impeaching Clinton, but that didn't stop the Repugs. In fact, their main objective, in sync with their general witch-hunting of both Clintons throughout the 90s, was primarily harassment. The Repugs had to have known they couldn't get impeachment voted up in the Repug-controlled Senate.

dubya/dickhead/rummy/condi/powell actually have wasted US blood on their hands. Totally impeachable.

[101A]

"case for impeachment is not a strong one."

Neither was the harassment case of impeaching Clinton, but that didn't stop the Repugs. In fact, their main objective, in sync with their general witch-hunting of both Clintons throughout the 90s, was primarily harassment. The Repugs had to have known they couldn't get impeachment voted up in the Repug-controlled Senate.

dubya/dickhead/rummy/condi/powell actually have wasted US blood on their hands. Totally impeachable.

It was perjury; he lied under oath.

It was a slam-dunk
.
And you brought it up, don't go ranting on me.

[xrayzebra]

Let me see if I have this right. Germany and France didn't want
war with Iraq because "they" knew Saddam had no WMD.
It wasn't because they had some many lucrative contracts with
him that was bringing in gobs of money.

Everyone knew he didn't have WMD because he used them on
the Kurds and Iran numerous times. Okay, got that.

AQ was in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and most
other ME countries And they bombed
the good old USA. but they weren't in Iraq. Okay got that.

Yeah, guess you are all correct. Bush and his bunch just wanted
to invade Iraq for the oil.

Oh, and don't forget. Iran isn't trying to get the bomb.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Let me see if I have this right. Germany and France didn't want
war with Iraq because "they" knew Saddam had no WMD.
It wasn't because they had some many lucrative contracts with
him that was bringing in gobs of money.

Everyone knew he didn't have WMD because he used them on
the Kurds and Iran numerous times. Okay, got that.

AQ was in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and most
other ME countries And they bombed
the good old USA. but they weren't in Iraq. Okay got that.

Yeah, guess you are all correct. Bush and his bunch just wanted
to invade Iraq for the oil.

Oh, and don't forget. Iran isn't trying to get the bomb.


Noticed you didn't mentiopn that the guy we used to justify the invasion was a fraud. I guess him not even being in Iraq during the time he was to have supposedly seen certain things doesn't bother you. yet the dimm-o-craps do? this guy lied and we went to war overit and you still complaining about dimmo-craps.

[xrayzebra]

Oh, I thought you knew he was our only source of intelligence.
And really we did debrief him, not some other government. And cherry picked what he said.
Got it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Oh, I thought you knew he was our only source of intelligence.
And really we did debrief him, not some other government. And cherry picked what he said.
Got it.


doesn't this bother you a little bit?

[Yonivore]

Noticed you didn't mentiopn that the guy we used to justify the invasion was a fraud. I guess him not even being in Iraq during the time he was to have supposedly seen certain things doesn't bother you. yet the dimm-o-craps do? this guy lied and we went to war overit and you still complaining about dimmo-craps.
I love the absolutist narrative you're trying to draw here.

First, WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq. Not true, but you wouldn't be disabused of the notion.

And, now, since you've accepted as fact that WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq, then this guy "Curveball" was the ONLY source used to justify the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq.

That corner into which you've painted yourself must be getting pretty tight.

[Yonivore]

doesn't this bother you a little bit?
You know, it would; if it were true.

[clambake]

http://www.lib.ndsu.nodak.edu/blogs/council/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/6_22_bush_mission_banner1.jpg
"Did you see how it looked when I landed? I made um turn this here boat around so you couldn't see the coast of Sandy-a-go! And you people thought I was stewpid!"

[ChumpDumper]

I love the absolutist narrative you're trying to draw here.

First, WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq. Not true, but you wouldn't be disabused of the notion.Sorry, none of the other reasons mattered as much as this one. We were being told we were going to be nuked by Iraq.


And, now, since you've accepted as fact that WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq, then this guy "Curveball" was the ONLY source used to justify the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq.Nah, Feith and company cherry picked and exaggerated other questionable intel and outright lies too.


That corner into which you've painted yourself must be getting pretty tight.We were right, you were wrong. Stings, don't it?

[George Gervin's Afro]

I love the absolutist narrative you're trying to draw here.

First, WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq. Not true, but you wouldn't be disabused of the notion.

And, now, since you've accepted as fact that WMDs were the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq, then this guy "Curveball" was the ONLY source used to justify the ONLY justification for going to war in Iraq.

That corner into which you've painted yourself must be getting pretty tight.


The other reasons were presented as mere footnotes listed in small fine print.. Like a credit card commercial with the tiny documented rules and provisions that are presented in the final 2 seconds of the commercial located at the bottom of the screen..

[George Gervin's Afro]

From the Desk of Donald Rumsfeld . . .

In Sometimes-Brusque 'Snowflakes,' He Shared Worldview, Shaped Policy

By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 1, 2007; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...3103095_pf.html

In a series of internal musings and memos to his staff, then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld argued that Muslims avoid "physical labor" and wrote of the need to "keep elevating the threat," "link Iraq to Iran" and develop "bumper sticker statements" to rally public support for an increasingly unpopular war.

The memos, often referred to as "snowflakes," shed light on Rumsfeld's brusque management style and on his efforts to address key challenges during his tenure as Pentagon chief. Spanning from 2002 to shortly after his resignation following the 2006 congressional elections, a sampling of his trademark missives obtained yesterday reveals a defense secretary disdainful of media criticism and driven to reshape public opinion of the Iraq war.

Rumsfeld, whose sometimes abrasive approach often alienated other Cabinet members and White House staff members, produced 20 to 60 snowflakes a day and regularly poured out his thoughts in writing as the basis for developing policy, aides said. The memos are not classified but are marked "for official use only."

In a 2004 memo on the deteriorating situation in Iraq, Rumsfeld concluded that the challenges there are "not unusual." Pessimistic news reports -- "our publics risk falling prey to the argument that all is lost" -- simply result from the wrong standards being applied, he wrote in one of the memos obtained by The Washington Post.

Under siege in April 2006, when a series of retired generals denounced him and called for his resignation in newspaper op-ed pieces, Rumsfeld produced a memo after a conference call with military analysts. "Talk about Somalia, the Philippines, etc. Make the American people realize they are surrounded in the world by violent extremists," he wrote.

People will "rally" to sacrifice, he noted after the meeting. "They are looking for leadership. Sacrifice = Victory."

The meeting also led Rumsfeld to write that he needed a team to help him "go out and push people back, rather than simply defending" Iraq policy and strategy. "I am always on the defense. They say I do it well, but you can't win on the defense," he wrote. "We can't just keep taking hits."

The only man to hold the top Pentagon job twice -- as both the youngest and the oldest defense secretary -- Rumsfeld suggested that the public should know that there will be no "terminal event" in the fight against terrorism like the signing ceremony on the USS Missouri when Japan surrendered to end World War II. "It is going to be a long war," he wrote. "Iraq is only one battleground."

Based on the discussion with military analysts, Rumsfeld tied Iran and Iraq. "Iran is the concern of the American people, and if we fail in Iraq, it will advantage Iran," he wrote in his April 2006 memo.

Rumsfeld declined to comment, but an aide said the points in that memo were Rumsfeld's distillation of the analysts' comments, though he added that the secretary is known for using the term "bumper stickers."

"You are running a story based off of selective quotations and gross mischaracterizations from a handful of memos -- carefully picked from the some 20,000 written while Rumsfeld served as Secretary," Rumsfeld aide Keith Urbahn wrote in an e-mail. "After almost all meetings, he dictated his recollections of what was said for his own records."

In one of his longer ruminations, in May 2004, Rumsfeld considered whether to redefine the terrorism fight as a "worldwide insurgency." The goal of the enemy, he wrote, is to "end the state system, using terrorism, to drive the non-radicals from the world." He then advised aides "to test what the results could be" if the war on terrorism were renamed.

Neither Europe nor the United Nations understands the threat or the bigger picture, Rumsfeld complained in the same memo. He also lamented that oil wealth has at times detached Muslims "from the reality of the work, effort and investment that leads to wealth for the rest of the world. Too often Muslims are against physical labor, so they bring in Koreans and Pakistanis while their young people remain unemployed," he wrote. "An unemployed population is easy to recruit to radicalism."

If radicals "get a hold of" oil-rich Saudi Arabia, he added, the United States will have "an enormous national security problem."

The memos delve into issues beyond Iraq and terrorism. In a memo to national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley in July 2006, Rumsfeld warned that the United States is "getting run out of Central Asia" by the Russians, who are doing a "considerably better job at bullying" than Washington is doing to "counter their bullying."

As public discontent and congressional questioning grew in 2006, his final year at the Pentagon, a series of snowflakes revealed a man determined to counter the chorus of media criticism in one- or two-line zingers to staff members about specific articles.

"I think you ought to get a letter off about Ralph Peters' op-ed in the New York Post. It is terrible," he writes on Feb. 6, 2006. In a Feb. 2 New York Post column, Peters decried "chronic troop shortages in Iraq" while the Pentagon buys "high-tech toys that have no missions."

On March 10, he commanded J. Dorrance Smith, the assistant defense secretary for public affairs, to craft a "better presentation to respond to this business that the Department of Defense has no plan. This is just utter nonsense. We need to knock it down hard." A Washington Post-ABC News poll that month found that 65 percent of Americans thought that Bush had no plan for victory.

On March 20, Rumsfeld ordered a point-by-point analysis of the seven "mistakes" columnist Trudy Rubin wrote about in the Philadelphia Inquirer and a response to her essay -- which he wanted to see before it was sent out. Rubin wrote that the war had "gone sour."

"Please have someone find precisely when I said 'dead-enders' and what the context was," he ordered Smith in September 2006.

A November 2006 editorial in the New York Times that said the Army was ruined "is disgraceful," Rumsfeld wrote to Smith. The editorial said that "one welcome dividend" of Rumsfeld's departure was that the United States would "now have a chance to rebuild the Army he spent most of his tenure running down."

Rumsfeld later reprimanded his staff, writing, "I read the letter we sent in rebuttal. I thought it rather weak and not signed at the level it should have been." He then instructed staffers to prepare an article about the Army. "We need to get that story out," he wrote on Nov. 28, 2006, a Tuesday. He ordered a draft by Friday.

[Yonivore]

The other reasons were presented as mere footnotes listed in small fine print.. Like a credit card commercial with the tiny documented rules and provisions that are presented in the final 2 seconds of the commercial located at the bottom of the screen..
That's not how I read the AUMF in Iraq. But, whatever gets you through your delusions.

[George Gervin's Afro]

That's not how I read the AUMF in Iraq. But, whatever gets you through your delusions.


I am talking about the media blitz on wmds, mushroom clouds,mobile bio weapons labs, 45 minutes strike capabilities... drones.. you name it and they advertised it..

[Yonivore]

I am talking about the media blitz on wmds, mushroom clouds,mobile bio weapons labs, 45 minutes strike capabilities... drones.. you name it and they advertised it..
So, blame the media for being so focused on WMD's.

[ChumpDumper]

Blame the administration for putting the focus on WMDs.

[smeagol]

After the Iraq war we can safely say,

"The World is a much safer place to live in"

Keep up the good work . . .

[ChumpDumper]

Aug. 26, 2002
Dick Cheney, Vice President
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

Bush: Iraq Currently Expanding WMD Production
Sep. 12, 2002
George W. Bush, Speech to UN General Assembly
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

Sep. 12, 2002
George W. Bush
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

Bush: Iraq Has WMD Stockpile
Oct. 5, 2002
George W. Bush, Radio Address
"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."

Bush: Iraq Possesses and Produces Chemical Weapons
Oct. 7, 2002
George W. Bush
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

Bush: 500 Tons of Sarin, 30,000 Munitions
Jan. 28, 2003
George W. Bush
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent" and "upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents... "

May 30, 2003
Bush cites 2 trailers found as evidence of " the weapons of mass destruction" that were the United States' primary justification for going to war.
washingtonpost
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
George W. Bush, Speech to UN General Assembly 9/12/2002

"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
George W. Bush, Radio Address 10/5/2002

"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."
George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
George W. Bush, State of the Union Address 1/28/2003


Sep. 18, 2002
Donald Rumsfeld
His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of biological weapons—including anthrax and botulism toxin, and possibly smallpox.

His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons—including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard gas.

His regime has an active program to acquire and develop nuclear weapons.



It's the media's fault for recording all these quotes.

[ChumpDumper]

The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason.

Paul Wolfowitz, May 9, 2003


That's Vanity Fair's fault.

[FromWayDowntown]

That's not how I read the AUMF in Iraq. But, whatever gets you through your delusions.

In this case, such a "delusion" is probably informed by what our President told us on March 17, 2003 in a nationally-televised speech from the Oval Office (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html). The speech makes it quite clear that the purported stockpiles of WMD's provide the justification for war, and that while ridding Iraq of a dictator will be a happy consequence of an invasion, it is not an overriding justification for going to war:

THE PRESIDENT: My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the final days of decision. For more than a decade, the United States and other nations have pursued patient and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war. That regime pledged to reveal and destroy all its weapons of mass destruction as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

Since then, the world has engaged in 12 years of diplomacy. We have passed more than a dozen resolutions in the United Nations Security Council. We have sent hundreds of weapons inspectors to oversee the disarmament of Iraq. Our good faith has not been returned.

The Iraqi regime has used diplomacy as a ploy to gain time and advantage. It has uniformly defied Security Council resolutions demanding full disarmament. Over the years, U.N. weapon inspectors have been threatened by Iraqi officials, electronically bugged, and systematically deceived. Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have failed again and again -- because we are not dealing with peaceful men.

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq's neighbors and against Iraq's people.

The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.

The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other.

The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this threat. But we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward tragedy, we will set a course toward safety. Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger will be removed.

The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security. That duty falls to me, as Commander-in-Chief, by the oath I have sworn, by the oath I will keep.

Recognizing the threat to our country, the United States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to support the use of force against Iraq. America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United Nations. One reason the U.N. was founded after the second world war was to confront aggressive dictators, actively and early, before they can attack the innocent and destroy the peace.

In the case of Iraq, the Security Council did act, in the early 1990s. Under Resolutions 678 and 687 -- both still in effect -- the United States and our allies are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a question of authority, it is a question of will.

Last September, I went to the U.N. General Assembly and urged the nations of the world to unite and bring an end to this danger. On November 8th, the Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441, finding Iraq in material breach of its obligations, and vowing serious consequences if Iraq did not fully and immediately disarm.

Today, no nation can possibly claim that Iraq has disarmed. And it will not disarm so long as Saddam Hussein holds power. For the last four-and-a-half months, the United States and our allies have worked within the Security Council to enforce that Council's long-standing demands. Yet, some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it. Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this threat to peace, and a broad coalition is now gathering to enforce the just demands of the world. The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours.

In recent days, some governments in the Middle East have been doing their part. They have delivered public and private messages urging the dictator to leave Iraq, so that disarmament can proceed peacefully. He has thus far refused. All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing. For their own safety, all foreign nationals -- including journalists and inspectors -- should leave Iraq immediately.

Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a message for them. If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you. As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free. In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.

It is too late for Saddam Hussein to remain in power. It is not too late for the Iraqi military to act with honor and protect your country by permitting the peaceful entry of coalition forces to eliminate weapons of mass destruction. Our forces will give Iraqi military units clear instructions on actions they can take to avoid being attacked and destroyed. I urge every member of the Iraqi military and intelligence services, if war comes, do not fight for a dying regime that is not worth your own life.

And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, including the Iraqi people. War crimes will be prosecuted. War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, "I was just following orders."

Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war, and every measure will be taken to win it. Americans understand the costs of conflict because we have paid them in the past. War has no certainty, except the certainty of sacrifice.

Yet, the only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so. If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until the end. In desperation, he and terrorists groups might try to conduct terrorist operations against the American people and our friends. These attacks are not inevitable. They are, however, possible. And this very fact underscores the reason we cannot live under the threat of blackmail. The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed.

Our government is on heightened watch against these dangers. Just as we are preparing to ensure victory in Iraq, we are taking further actions to protect our homeland. In recent days, American authorities have expelled from the country certain individuals with ties to Iraqi intelligence services. Among other measures, I have directed additional security of our airports, and increased Coast Guard patrols of major seaports. The Department of Homeland Security is working closely with the nation's governors to increase armed security at critical facilities across America.

Should enemies strike our country, they would be attempting to shift our attention with panic and weaken our morale with fear. In this, they would fail. No act of theirs can alter the course or shake the resolve of this country. We are a peaceful people -- yet we're not a fragile people, and we will not be intimidated by thugs and killers. If our enemies dare to strike us, they and all who have aided them, will face fearful consequences.

We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be far greater. In one year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict harm on all free nations would be multiplied many times over. With these capabilities, Saddam Hussein and his terrorist allies could choose the moment of deadly conflict when they are strongest. We choose to meet that threat now, where it arises, before it can appear suddenly in our skies and cities.

The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators, whose threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war. In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on this earth.

Terrorists and terror states do not reveal these threats with fair notice, in formal declarations -- and responding to such enemies only after they have struck first is not self-defense, it is suicide. The security of the world requires disarming Saddam Hussein now.

As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also honor the deepest commitments of our country. Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are deserving and capable of human liberty. And when the dictator has departed, they can set an example to all the Middle East of a vital and peaceful and self-governing nation.

The United States, with other countries, will work to advance liberty and peace in that region. Our goal will not be achieved overnight, but it can come over time. The power and appeal of human liberty is felt in every life and every land. And the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the creative gifts of men and women to the pursuits of peace.

That is the future we choose. Free nations have a duty to defend our people by uniting against the violent. And tonight, as we have done before, America and our allies accept that responsibility.

Good night, and may God continue to bless America.

[xrayzebra]

Most of you aren't interested in the truth. I will not be
convinced otherwise. Hate Bush is your your thing. Love
the troops, hate their their mission. But you support the
troops. Yeah, and I love dimm-0-craps!

[George Gervin's Afro]

Most of you aren't interested in the truth. I will not be
convinced otherwise. Hate Bush is your your thing. Love
the troops, hate their their mission. But you support the
troops. Yeah, and I love dimm-0-craps!


:rolleyes

[xrayzebra]

:rolleyes

You got the message!

[George Gervin's Afro]

You got the message!


Ray you aren't interested in why we got into this war. bush = truth to you and that's your shortcoming.

[xrayzebra]

Ray you aren't interested in why we got into this war. bush = truth to you and that's your shortcoming.

I have no problem with the war. It was a starting point.
And hang on to your hat. The dimm-o-craps will keep right
on. You keep drinking the coolaid. I have told you many
times this is only the visible part of the "global" war.
We need a base in the ME and Iraq and Afghanistan is it.

[ChumpDumper]

So where are the WMDs?

[xrayzebra]

So where are the WMDs?

He used them on the Kurds and Iran. And buried the
rest. Okay?

[ChumpDumper]

He used them on the Kurds and Iran. And buried the
rest. Okay?Buried them where?

Did we ask him where?

Did we waterboard him and get the locations?

Why don't we have that information?

[Yonivore]

He used them on the Kurds and Iran. And buried the
rest. Okay?
I think he shipped some to Syria, as well. Of course, there's a lot of desert in Iraq that has no civilization and on which there is no conflict. It would take a miniscule tract of desert to hide all the WMD's it was claimed he had.

All that aside, there were plenty of indicators, left behind, that should have convinced any thinking American that Iraq had a very active and vibrant WMD program.

That's right, thinking American; as opposed to the spoon-fed nutters.

[xrayzebra]

Buried them where?

Did we ask him where?

Did we waterboard him and get the locations?

Why don't we have that information?

Damn Chump, call the Wh and give them your phone
number. They need you to ask all these questions.

[clambake]

I think he shipped some to Syria, as well. Of course, there's a lot of desert in Iraq that has no civilization and on which there is no conflict. It would take a miniscule tract of desert to hide all the WMD's it was claimed he had.

All that aside, there were plenty of indicators, left behind, that should have convinced any thinking American that Iraq had a very active and vibrant WMD program.

That's right, thinking American; as opposed to the spoon-fed nutters.
so you admit he disposed of them long ago=there are no wmd's

[ChumpDumper]

That's right, thinking American; as opposed to the spoon-fed nutters.Did we not even ask Saddam?

Isn't it right and thinking to ask him?

[Yonivore]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4066462/


TB: The president described Iraq as a gathering threat — a gathering danger. Was that an accurate description?

DK: I think that’s a very accurate description.

TB: But an imminent threat to the United States?

DK: Tom, an imminent threat is a political judgment. It’s not a technical judgment. I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized. Saddam was not controlling the society any longer. In the marketplace of terrorism and of WMD, Iraq well could have been that supplier if the war had not intervened.
The Duelfer and Kay reports have been grossly mischaracterized. Did we find stockpiles of weapons? No. Were there signs of an active weapons program? All over the fucking place.

It was in one of the reports, Kay's or Duelfer's, where a captured Iraqi official (Not "Curveball") claimed Iraq could have fielded chemical weapons in a matter of days or weeks.

[ChumpDumper]

We were told there were stockpiles of WMDs.

Why are you trying to deny these things?

If you actually read this, I'm sure you'll go off on some tangent about Democrats saying it too. Tough shit. They were wrong too. Your best defense is that you were thinking like a Democrat and taking them at their word?

[clambake]

in a matter of days or weeks? hell, i got enough shit it my garage to fashion a chemical weapon. days or weeks is just a matter of motivation.

[Yonivore]

From Charles Duelfer's March 30, 2004 testimony (https://www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2004/tenet_testimony_03302004.html) to Congress:


Let me begin by discussing procurement and financing, two critical areas that cut across all potential WMD efforts. The ISG has been investigating Iraq’s procurement process, sources of finance, the involvement of foreign firms, and the specific types of goods that were sought. Iraq utilized a complex and well developed procurement system hidden by an effective denial and deception strategy. By the late 1990s, Iraq, in contravention of UN sanctions, pursued the procurement of military goods and technical expertise for military capabilities.

The primary source of illicit financing for this system was oil smuggling conducted through government-to-government protocols negotiated by Iraq with neighboring countries. Money also was obtained from kickback payments made on contracts set up through the UN’s Oil for Food program.

Iraq derived several billion dollars between 1999 and 2003 from oil smuggling and kickbacks. One senior regime official estimated Iraq earned $4 billion from illicit oil sales from 1999 to March 2003. By levying a surcharge on Oil for Food contracts, Iraq earned billions more during the same period.

This was revenue outside UN control and provided resources the regime could spend without restriction. It channeled much of the illicitly gathered funds to rebuild Iraq’s military capabilities through the Military Industrialization Commission, the MIC. MIC worked with the Iraqi Intelligence Service to establish front companies in Iraq and other countries to facilitate procurement.

The budget of MIC increased nearly 100 fold from 1996 to 2003, with the budget totaling $500 million in 2003. Most of this money came from illicit oil contracts. Iraq imported banned military weapons and technology and dual-use goods through Oil for Food contracts. Companies in several countries were involved in these efforts. Direct roles by government officials are also clearly established.

Even as procurement and finance cut across all of Iraq’s technical development efforts, denial and deception were infused in these efforts as well.

Much is known about Iraq’s various efforts to conceal WMD from UNSCOM after the Gulf War in 1991. The ISG, however, has uncovered more details about the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq against UNSCOM and later UNMOVIC. Moreover, these efforts at deception did not end with the departure of inspectors in 1998, and indeed deception continued right up until war in 2003.

The Iraqi Intelligence Service was tasked with monitoring and infiltrating UNSCOM and UNMOVIC. Iraqi officials tell us hundreds of officers from multiple directorates were tasked to monitor the UN officials, employing a spectrum of capabilities from human to electronic surveillance. Elaborate plans were developed and rehearsed to enable sensitive sites to be able to hide sensitive documents and equipment on as little as 15 minutes notice. Iraqi intelligence engaged in a worldwide effort to collect intelligence on the UN, including efforts to recruit sources inside the UN, UNSCOM and UNMOVIC.

The ISG has developed new information regarding Iraq’s dual-use facilities and ongoing research suitable for a capability to produce biological or chemical agents on short notice. Iraq did have facilities suitable for the production of biological and chemical agents needed for weapons. It had plans to improve and expand and even build new facilities.

For example, the Tuwaitha Agricultural and Biological Research Center has equipment suitable for the production of biological agents. While it conducts civilian research, ISG has also determined that it was conducting research that would be important for a biological weapons program. For example, we are continuing to examine research on Bacillus thuringiensis that was conducted until March 2003. This material is a commercial biopesticide, but it also can be used as a surrogate for the anthrax bacterium for production and weapons development purposes. Work continued on single cell proteins at Tuwaitha as well. Single cell protein research previously had been used as the cover activity for BW production at al-Hakam. We are now focusing on what such activities meant.

With respect to chemical production, Iraq was working up to March 2003 to construct new facilities for the production of chemicals. There were plans under the direction of a leading nuclear scientist/WMD program manager to construct plants capable of making a variety of chemicals and producing a year’s supply of any chemical in a month. This was a crash program. Most of the chemicals specified in this program were conventional commercial chemicals, but a few are considered “dual use.” One we are examining, commonly called DCC (N,N-Dicyclohexyl carbodiimide), was used by Iraq before 1991 as a stabilizing agent for the nerve agent VX. Iraq had plans before OIF for large-scale production of this chemical. Again, what do these activities mean?

Likewise, in the nuclear arena, the ISG has developed information that suggests Iraqi interest in preserving and expanding the knowledge needed to design and develop nuclear weapons.

One significant effort illustrating this was a high-speed rail gun program under the direction of two senior scientists associated with Iraq’s pre-1991 nuclear weapons program. Documents from this project show that the scientists were developing a rail gun designed to achieve speeds of 2-10 kilometers per second. The ostensible purpose for this research was development of an air defense gun, but these speeds are what are necessary to conduct experiments of metals compressing together at high speed as they do in a nuclear detonation. Scientists refer to these experiments as “equation of state” measurements.

Not only were these scientists developing a rail gun, but their laboratory also contained documents describing diagnostic techniques that are important for nuclear weapons experiments, such as flash x-ray radiography, laser velocimetry, and high-speed photography. Other documents found outside the laboratory described a high-voltage switch that can be used to detonate a nuclear weapon, laser detonation, nuclear fusion, radiation measurement, and radiation safety. These fields are certainly not related to air defense.

It is this combination of topics that makes us suspect this lab was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development.

We continued our efforts to determine if Iraq was seeking to develop technologies for a uranium enrichment capability. Iraq’s efforts to procure high tolerance aluminum tubes were examined. Ostensibly these tubes were for small rockets, but the manufacturing tolerances specified were much higher than would normally be required for this purpose. Technical reasons for the high tolerances were explained by a number of Iraqis associated with their acquisition, but there are still a number of discrepancies to examine with regard to these tubes. Again, we need to determine what these activities mean.

In addition to WMD technologies, the ISG has continued to uncover a very robust program for delivery systems that were not reported to the UN. New information has been discovered relating to long-range ballistic missile development and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Missiles and UAVs were flight tested that easily exceeded the UN limit of 150 kilometers. More than that, the Iraqi regime was developing technology to extend one of their ballistic missile’s range beyond 150 kilometers with changes to airframes and fuels. Discussions were underway with North Korea regarding technology associated with a 1,300 km system—presumably the No Dong. Other foreign support was being used or solicited.

Iraq was developing a variety of UAVs using inertial navigation systems and navigation using GPS. New information on the L-29 based UAV has also been developed.

Foreign technology and technical assistance were critical to the progress made by Iraqi engineers and designers. Foreign missile experts worked in Iraq in violation of UN sanctions from 1998 until just before the start of OIF. They undertook a complete review of the al-Samoud surface-to-surface missile system, which exceeded UN range limits. Based on this technical assistance, Iraq determined the original al-Samoud concept was not optimal and changed the production process to incorporate the new design information. Contracts were concluded calling for foreign firms to produce several major al-Samoud subsystems.

A variety of foreign companies with high-level political connections acted as middlemen to import technology into Iraq for missile and UAV development. These actions clearly violated UN sanctions.

[clambake]

"I have all these WMDs and I'm not going to use them against a country that everybody knows is about to invade and try to kill me."

Saddam

[Nbadan]

The primary source of illicit financing for this system was oil smuggling conducted through government-to-government protocols negotiated by Iraq with neighboring countries. Money also was obtained from kickback payments made on contracts set up through the UN’s Oil for Food program.

Iraq derived several billion dollars between 1999 and 2003 from oil smuggling and kickbacks. One senior regime official estimated Iraq earned $4 billion from illicit oil sales from 1999 to March 2003. By levying a surcharge on Oil for Food contracts, Iraq earned billions more during the same period.

Oh, damn...not this again....we've already proven that one of the biggest beneficiaries of Saddam's 'illicit' food-for-oil program was a rich Texas Oil Tycoon....How do we know? He confessed in court....

[Nbadan]

most of this money came from illicit oil contracts. Iraq imported banned military weapons and technology and dual-use goods through Oil for Food contracts

Yeah, like the banned uranium enrichment centrifuges that turned out to be unbanned scud missile rockets....what a farce.....

[Nbadan]

So, so much "he has em', we know where they are at....their in the area of Tikrit...."


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003 and had not begun any program to produce them, a CIA report concludes.

In fact, the long-awaited report, authored by Charles Duelfer, who advises the director of central intelligence on Iraqi weapons, says Iraq's WMD program was essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the 1991 Gulf War.

CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/)

[boutons_]

Poor Yoni, daily bitch slapping

Iraq was not about anything but oil

[Yonivore]

So, so much "he has em', we know where they are at....their in the area of Tikrit...."



CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/)
Stuff from the report that CNN didn't report:


The way Iraq organized its chemical industry after the mid-1990s allowed it to conserve the knowledge-base needed to restart a CW program, conduct a modest amount of dual-use research, and partially recover from the decline of its production capability caused by the effects of the Gulf war and UN-sponsored destruction and sanctions. Iraq implemented a rigorous and formalized system of nationwide research and production of chemicals, but ISG will not be able to resolve whether Iraq intended the system to underpin any CWrelated efforts.

The Regime employed a cadre of trained and experienced researchers, production managers, and weaponization experts from the former CW program.
Iraq began implementing a range of indigenous chemical production projects in 1995 and 1996. Many of these projects, while not weapons-related, were designed to improve Iraq’s infrastructure, which would have
enhanced Iraq’s ability to produce CW agents if the scaled-up production processes were implemented.
Iraq had an effective system for the procurement of items that Iraq was not allowed to acquire due to sanctions. ISG found no evidence that this system was used to acquire precursor chemicals in bulk; however documents indicate that dual-use laboratory equipment and chemicals were acquired through this system.

Iraq constructed a number of new plants starting in the mid-1990s that enhanced its chemical infrastructure, although its overall industry had not fully recovered from the effects of sanctions, and had not regained pre-1991 technical sophistication or production capabilities prior to Operation Iraqi freedom (OIF).

ISG did not discover chemical process or production units confi gured to produce key precursors or CW agents. However, site visits and debriefs revealed that Iraq maintained its ability for reconfi guring and ‘making-do’ with available equipment as substitutes for sanctioned items.
ISG judges, based on available chemicals, infrastructure, and scientist debriefi ngs, that Iraq at OIF probably had a capability to produce large quantities of sulfur mustard within three to six months.
A former nerve agent expert indicated that Iraq retained the capability to produce nerve agent in signifi cant quantities within two years, given the import of required phosphorous precursors. However, we have no credible indications that Iraq acquired or attempted to acquire large quantities of these chemicals through its existing procurement networks for sanctioned items.

ISG uncovered information that the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) maintained throughout 1991 to 2003 a set of undeclared covert laboratories to research and test various chemicals and poisons, primarily for intelligence operations.
Also, most of the ISG's conclusion on the disposition of the WMD's is couched with the phrase "no evidence was found," which doesn't preclude that it still existed but that they were unable to find it.

Duelfer's report also said Hussein was pursuing an aggressive effort to subvert the international sanctions through illegal financing and procurement efforts, officials said. The official said the report states that Hussein had the intent to resume full-scale weapons of mass destruction efforts after the sanctions were eliminated, and details Hussein's efforts to hinder international inspectors and preserve his weapons of mass destruction capabilities.

Sanctions were crumbling under the stress of France and Russia and the U.N.'s corruption.

[PixelPusher]

Also, most of the ISG's conclusion on the disposition of the WMD's is couched with the phrase "no evidence was found," which doesn't preclude that it still existed but that they were unable to find it.

The Loch Ness monster is real. The fact that no evidence of the creature has been found doesn't preclude that Nessie still exists, just that the research teams with their sonar equipment were unable to find it.

[Nbadan]

Sanctions were crumbling under the stress of France and Russia and the U.N.'s corruption.

Actually, once the US went in, we found that sanctions seemed to be working better than planned...Iraq had not reconstituted much of it's conventional weapons programs, much less it's biological or chemical capabilities...besides, Iraq was hardly the 'imminent threat' that the Bush Administration portrayed it to be....fact is, the Average American has a better chance of constituting WMD with chemicals they have in their garage than Saddam had when the U.S. attacked under the as-pieces of finding huge stockpiles of weapons, not a ability to someday reconstitute a dormant WMD program.....

[Yonivore]

Actually, once the US went in, we found that sanctions seemed to be working better than planned...Iraq had not reconstituted much of it's conventional weapons programs, much less it's biological or chemical capabilities...besides, Iraq was hardly the 'imminent threat' that the Bush Administration portrayed it to be....fact is, the Average American has a better chance of constituting WMD with chemicals they have in their garage than Saddam had when the U.S. attacked under the as-pieces of finding huge stockpiles of weapons, not a ability to someday reconstitute a dormant WMD program.....
Actually, we found he had increased his budget for weapons programs from approximately 5 to 500 million dollars a year due to OFF kickbacks not being tracked by the UN.

[clambake]

Actually, we found he had increased his budget for weapons programs from approximately 5 to 500 million dollars a year due to OFF kickbacks not being tracked by the UN.
we increased our budget to make up stories. look up and you can see the results.

[ChumpDumper]

Actually, we found he had increased his budget for weapons programs from approximately 5 to 500 million dollars a year due to OFF kickbacks not being tracked by the UN.So where are the WMDs?

Did we not ask Saddam anything about this main reason for the war?

[clambake]

why bother. we don't look for bin ladin anymore. we know where the crude is.