Reply With Quote
bush said they were there present time, not in 1998
I'd like your opinion.
I believe the President and I are in agreement on the question. The WMD's were there and, between the time they were last seen and the invasion, they were either moved, hidden, or destroyed...we just don't know which.
So, what do you think? Were they never there? But, that can't be since we know they existed in 1998.
bush said they were there present time, not in 1998
And that couldn't have changed between the time he said it and the time we invaded? It's not like he had the luxury of sending troops directly to the stockpiles...we had to invade and Baghdad took 21 days to fall. Alot can happen in 21 days...especially when the suspected amounts of WMD materials would fit nicely into a two-car garage.
Why aren't you holding Saddam Hussein responsible for not declaring the dispostion of the weapons?
"Every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources, these are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more- many more- and he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. Most of the launcher and warheads have been hidden in large groves of palm trees.... This is evidence, not conjecture. This is true- this is all well do ented."
-Colin Powell
Sorry Yonivore but rumor has it they LIED!
Or were lied to.
Yes, the American public was lied to.
Exactly when?
Again, date the quote.
sounds like his presentation to the un in early 2003
"There are a lot of people who lie and get away with it, that's just a fact."
- Donald Rumsfeld
So where is the lie?
dammit man read
"Every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources, these are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more- many more- and he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. Most of the launcher and warheads have been hidden in large groves of palm trees.... This is evidence, not conjecture. This is true- this is all well do ented."
-Colin Powell
What's that got to do with anything?
So where is the lie?
I'd still like to hear someone on the left express some opinion of where they think the WMD's, everyone knew Saddam Hussein had, went.
Anyone?
"Every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources, these are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more- many more- and he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. Most of the launcher and warheads have been hidden in large groves of palm trees.... This is evidence, not conjecture. This is true- this is all well do ented."
So why is that a lie?
hey im not on the left and you for damn sure arent a libertarian
They were destroyed. Everyone knew they were not there, even Dubya, but he wanted his war and he got you to give it to him.
uh because the facts, the evidence did not exist.
Did Powell or Bush make those statements up?
Okay is it me, or does anyone else find it extremely disconcerting to go from spending months reading him defending the invasion of Iraq to spending the last couple of weeks of him arguing against it....whatever name he happens to be using these days?
This is too ing creepy.....I'm GTFBackO of this forum. Ya'll can keep your nasty derision alllllll to yourselves.
When were they destroyed?
cant the big cat have some fun?
That's exactly what I've been thinking, but then again, maybe he finally lightened up with the whole missing WMD's thing? Eh, whatever, he's good for a few giggles.Okay is it me, or does anyone else find it extremely disconcerting to go from spending months reading him defending the invasion of Iraq to spending the last couple of weeks of him arguing against it....whatever name he happens to be using these days?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
