U.S. Weapons Inspector: Iraq Had No WMD

[Ron 10]

Quote

Saddam Hussein was a slimy cockroach, but we seem to be using a bazooka to control him.

If a 7-year-old doesn't put his shoes away when you tell him to, you choose an appropriate punishment. Cutting off his feet so that you don't have to tell him to put his shoes away again is probably disproportionate, even if you said when you were really really angry that you wish he didn't have any shoes.

Well if you gave that 7 year old 12 years to put his shoes away, and him having not put away those shoes could kill many people....Then its not the same thing is it?

Its not that small.

SH had WMD's he was supposed to give them up and PROVE to us he did.

He didn't do that.

Quote

But I don't want that to be our national policy -- it invites other countries, and terrorists, to challenge that policy. If they're not mature, they're going to act like teenagers (or skydivers ) and say something like "fuck you I'll do what I want to"

they are doing it anyway.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,058]

>Well if you gave that 7 year old 12 years to put his shoes away, and him
> having not put away those shoes could kill many people....Then its not
>the same thing is it?

No, it's not. And your comparison might make sense if Saddam had WMD programs. He didn't.

>SH had WMD's he was supposed to give them up and PROVE to us he did.
>He didn't do that.

He was doing it. We didn't want to wait the extra months to see the process through to the end. We waited 144 months; waiting 146 months (an additional 1.3%) may have saved 1000 US soldiers and 10,000 innocent Iraqis. I hope that, the next time we have such a decision to be made, we have a president who puts a higher value on the lives of our military than that.

[Ron 10]

Quote

No, it's not. And your comparison might make sense if Saddam had WMD programs. He didn't.

Uh he HAD WMD's....We have dead bodies to prove that. He had kept the ability to make more...And most importantly...He never complied with the UN resolution.

Quote

He was doing it. We didn't want to wait the extra months to see the process through to the end. We waited 144 months; waiting 146 months (an additional 1.3%) may have saved 1000 US soldiers and 10,000 innocent Iraqis. I hope that, the next time we have such a decision to be made, we have a president who puts a higher value on the lives of our military than that.

Uh, he palyed the game for 12 YEARS!!!!! What makes you think he would play ball in two mths?

And you and your type would have opposed action in two mths, ten mths, two years or another 12 years.

Quote

we have a president who puts a higher value on the lives of our military than that.

Im glad we have a President that puts value on protecting the US from enemies.

But I bet you would rather have a President that commited war crimes? Turned his back on his fellow soldiers? Can't make a choice and stick with it?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,058]

>Uh he HAD WMD's . . .

Not when we attacked him, he didn't. Note the title of this thread, and then read the first few posts. Even Powell admits we will likely never find any. We told him to get rid of the WMD's and he did.

>What makes you think he would play ball in two mths?

The threat of an invasion will do wonders to get the ball rolling; that's why he was so cooperative in the months leading up to the invasion.

>And you and your type would have opposed action in two mths . . .

Nope. If we had a two month deadline, and he didn't meet it, I'd support invasion. It would still suck, but at least we would have done everything we could short of war before we used violence.

>Im glad we have a President that puts value on protecting the US from enemies.

Unfortunately, he's failed. Terrorism has sharply increased since his actions to "protect" the US from its enemies. (Even though he did try to get the state department to give a false report that said it did decrease.)

>But I bet you would rather have a President that commited war crimes?
> Turned his back on his fellow soldiers? Can't make a choice and stick with it?

You talking about Bush or Kerry? Cause after the US occupation raped and killed prisoners, after Bush cut veterans benefits and sent US soldiers into combat without body armor, and after he waffled on gay marriage, greenhouse gases, Bin Laden and WMD's - it's hard to tell who's who.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

Not when you count in all the innocent lives lost in Iraq from our weapons.

Call me silly, I tend to put my fellow citizens over others.

I don't know all the other citizens in my country. I don't know the citizens over there. Both have the same right to live without having a bomb come through their roof. Call me silly, I don't think anyone should be able to make that call either. A human is a human. A life lost is a life lost. What was tragic about 9/11 is that they were innocent people on the way to work - and the entire world cried because of it. The people across the world didn't have a myopic view simply because of nationalistic borders. I feel I should give them the same respect. A tragic, unneccessary death is tragic no matter the location. A dead child from an act of war is tragic no matter where it is.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

And even today, while GW was sitting there, the UN let him know his ousting of SH was illegal since the security counil did not vote on it.

That does not make it illegal. The UN thinks to highly of itself.

So does GW. I would prefer someone blowing hot air than someone with no real substantial proof or a war monger.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Ron 10]

Quote

Not when we attacked him, he didn't

Well if he had done what he was supposed to 12 years ago this whole issue would not matter huh?

Quote

Nope. If we had a two month deadline, and he didn't meet it, I'd support invasion. It would still suck, but at least we would have done everything we could short of war before we used violence.

I don't believe that for a second.

Quote

Unfortunately, he's failed. Terrorism has sharply increased since his actions to "protect" the US from its enemies. (

Really? I have not seen one attack in the US.

Quote

>But I bet you would rather have a President that commited war crimes?
> Turned his back on his fellow soldiers? Can't make a choice and stick with it?

You talking about Bush or Kerry? Cause after the US occupation raped and killed prisoners, after Bush cut veterans benefits and sent US soldiers into combat without body armor, and after he waffled on gay marriage, greenhouse gases, Bin Laden and WMD's - it's hard to tell who's who.

Il give you a simple primer.

Kerry COMMITED war crimes.
Bush had soldiers under him do bad things.

Quote

sent US soldiers into combat without body armor

Kerry voted to do that.

Quote

waffled on gay marriage

Kerry again.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

So does GW. I would prefer someone blowing hot air than someone with no real substantial proof or a war monger.

You clearly have no idea about politics...If you make a threat and dont back it up...you are nothing.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

don't know all the other citizens in my country. I don't know the citizens over there. Both have the same right to live without having a bomb come through their roof

Clear proof you were never in the military....People die in war.

It's OK some people can't handle that simple fact.

Simple fact....If SH had followed the UN resolution...none of this would have happend.

Whatever...You will never understand leadership or hard choices.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[PhillyKev 0]

We threatened serious consequences. There are other serious consequences than war.

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Whatever...You will never understand leadership or hard choices.

Seems to me this choice was made too easily. The harder choice would have been to find an alternate plan.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Clear proof you were never in the military

I consider that a good thing. I came to my decisions on my own via education. I didn't have myself broken and had them forced down my throat. I've read plenty of studies that show the long term damaging social effects the military can have on an individual.

Quote

....People die in war.

NO??? Next you are gong to tell me there is no Easter Bunny!! You missed my point, and that isn't what you said before. You said you would prefer to see American's live over someone not from this country. I have serious issues with that. Who has the authority to make that judgement? I believe that everyone has the right to live. We went to war under false reasons, and now thousands of very innocent Iraqi citizens are dead. I wonder how happy those families are that they have been liberated. The world didn't cross off those in 9/11 were dead because of an act of war - which is was - they were just sad at the lost of innocent lives. Same thing in Spain, Same thing in Russia. The lives that we took prematurely in Iraq are just as tragic as those lost in 9/11. Don't think so? Then go talk to those families over there - the ones we are supposedly helping for altrusitic reasons, not just so we can have control of their oil.

Simple Fact: If GW had waited this may not have happened. The world asked him to wait...and if he did the situation in Iraq may still be free but without the mounting piles of bodies.

Quote

Whatever...You will never understand leadership or hard choices.

Back at ya - whatever! I've been a manager a few times in my career and have had to make hard choices on who got fired, and who may not be able to feed their family next month because the company can't afford two positions anymore. Yes, I understand hard choices and I had an entire philosophy class dedicated to that in college, as well as part of one of my business classes. So I have been educated and had to make hard choices.

The way you spin everything you should apply to take Rove's job.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

We threatened serious consequences. There are other serious consequences than war.

See, now that sort of out of box thinking will never get you elected.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

We threatened serious consequences. There are other serious consequences than war.

By 2003, I don't think there were. We had already tried economic sanctions, border invasions, random cruise missile bombings, and insurgent support (though in typical fashion, did it half assed). All methods short of full invasion failed, and the history showed that improved compliance was short lived as our attention drifted.

[PhillyKev 0]

"Grading Iraqi Compliance," A Report by the Sanctions and Security Project of Fourth Freedom Forum and the Kroc Institute (March 2003).

"Contested Case: Do the Facts Justify the Case for War in Iraq?" by David Cortright, Alistair Millar, George A. Lopez, and Linda Gerber, Kroc Institute/Fourth Freedom Forum Policy Brief F8 (February 2003)
[Executive Summary] [Full Report]

"UN Weapons Inspections in Iraq: A Progress Report," by David Cortright, Alistair Millar, George A. Lopez, and Linda Gerber, Kroc Institute/Fourth Freedom Forum Policy Brief F6 (January 23, 2003) [Executive Summary] [Inspections Chart] [Full Report]

"War Aginst Iraq: A Dangerous Bet," by Daniel Lindley, Chicago Tribune, October 27, 2002.

"Winning Without War: Sensible Security Options for Dealing with Iraq," by David Cortright, George A. Lopez and Alistair Millar, Kroc Institute/Fourth Freedom Forum Policy Brief F5 (October 2002).

Disarming Iraq: Nonmilitary Strategies and Options, by David Cortright and George A. Lopez, Arms Control Today (September 2002).

"Stop the War Before it Starts," by David Cortright, The Progressive, August 2002.

Policy Report: Sanctions, Inspection, and Containment: Viable Policy Options in Iraq, by David Cortright, Alistair Millar and George A. Lopez (May 2002).

"The Limits of Coercion," by George A. Lopez and David Corright, The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, vol. 56, no. 6(November-December 2000): 18-20.

"Trouble in the Gulf: Pain and Promise," by George A. Lopez and David Cortright, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 54, no. 3 (May-June, 1998): 39-43.


There's a few alternatives listed in the above studies.

[kelpdiver 2]

You can't actually list them - instead you hide them in footnotes, which curiously are mostly from the same people?

George Lopez is a professor of Peace Studies - it's not a shock that he prefers anything to war. How he became director of the Atomic Scientists says something about their bias as well.

[jimbarry 0]

Quote

Quote

It's you sir who are going to keep your unsupported views no matter what. Hey, why let a few facts get in the way?

You could direct that statement at Bush and it would be more accurate. He afterall is the one that didn't let facts get in the way of his invasion.

nice try. SH spent 12 years resisting inspection and never abided by UN resolutions to disarm. This was the primary premise for invasion. How is this not a fact?

Quote

Quote

When in actuality, if they had lived up to their agreements, that would have been good enough to avoid war. He's still be in power and his murderous spawn would still be alive.

You accuse me of spouting opinion as if it were fact and then you come out with this gem. How the hell do you know that?

It's a gem, because the logic is inescapable. Please follow along... If SH abides by the UN resolutions to disarm and allow verification (say, in 1992, or even in 2002), then there is no justification for war because the conditions for the US Congress to authorize the President the use of military force are completely removed. Why is this so difficult to acknowledge? (Bush wasn't even president until Jan 2001. 9 years after SH was supposed to have verified to the UN that no wmd remained.)

Quote

You are telling me that the progress made by the restricted UN inspectors should have equalled that of the US inspectors there after the invasion? How would that be?

How could it be any other way? Actually, it should have been a lot easier for SH to destroy and allow the verification of his wmd and programs than for outsiders, because (get this) the weapons were his and he knew where they were. SH agreed to fully cooperate, so why would there be any "restricted UN inspectors"?

Quote

It is the responsibility of the US to get its facts right before invading other nations and slaughtering innocent people isn't it?

And the facts were straight. SH spent 12 years shuckin' and jivin' the UN. Those are the facts, but some just choose not to see them. The loss of innocent people is SH's fault, no one else's.

Quote

How the fuck would the Iraqis prove a negative like that to Bush's satisfaction anyway?

All SH had to do was disarm and prove it to the UN back when Clinton was president, and Bush would've had nothing to say about it. Also remember that Bush did everything but beg the UN to become relevant and step up to its responsibilities. But Kofi Annan and his cronies were too bribed-up on Saddam's oil-for-food kickbacks to care. Bush did the right thing. Plain as day.

But, you still seem to be stuck on the track that it was up to the world to prove that SH still had wmd before we would have justification to invade.

[Ron 10]

Quote

We threatened serious consequences. There are other serious consequences than war.

What like another UN resolution that he can ignore?

Economic sanctions that France can violate?

Wait another 12 years?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

I consider that a good thing. I came to my decisions on my own via education. I didn't have myself broken and had them forced down my throat. I've read plenty of studies that show the long term damaging social effects the military can have on an individual.

You know nothing about the military. You know nothing about honor and giving of yourself so others have it better.

Your "education" missed some very important lessons if you think the Military is like the movies you learned it from.

You are speaking about an area you know nothing about.

Quote

You said you would prefer to see American's live over someone not from this country.

So given the choice you would rather which one die? An American or someone from another country? You have to pick one....Not picking is not an option. I would rather NO ONE die...But if I have to pick I'll side with the US to live.

Quote

I have serious issues with that

I don't care what issues you have with me.

And I do think that your personal issue with me makes it so you will bicker with me on anything...I could say the sky is blue and you would have a different opinion.

Quote

We went to war under false reasons

You have no proof that anyone knew they were false.

Quote

I wonder how happy those families are that they have been liberated

My friends that have come back from the region have told me that they are quite happy. Maybe you should get some info other than what Moores movies?

Quote

The world didn't cross off those in 9/11 were dead because of an act of war

And it was an act of war. I don't hold them as "evil" for killing those people. They did what they thought was right. However people do have to live with the actions they set into motion. And since most people are not happy about them killing all those people, they will have to pay a price for it.

They started a religious war...RELIGION is a true evil. More people have died in the name of "My God over yours"...Than any other reason.

Quote

Then go talk to those families over there - the ones we are supposedly helping for altrusitic reasons, not just so we can have control of their oil.

Man get off the oil Bull Shit. That and the 200 election...Move on. You might want to use that as your new personal slogan...MOVE ON.

Quote

Simple Fact: If GW had waited this may not have happened. The world asked him to wait...and if he did the situation in Iraq may still be free but without the mounting piles of bodies.

Simple fact: If Bush 41 had handled it, or Clinton, or the UN had not ignored the situation for 12 YEARS, or Saddam had actually complied with the resolution....We would never have had to do anything.

If Bush had waited...How long? Another 12 YEARS?

Quote

I've been a manager

Not all Managers are leaders. Managers organize, plan budgets, delegate tasks, ect.

Quote

had to make hard choices on who got fired, and who may not be able to feed their family next month because the company can't afford two positions anymore.

Thats bad, but still not tough...Try who lives and who dies.

Quote

Yes, I understand hard choices and I had an entire philosophy class dedicated to that in college, as well as part of one of my business classes

Oh since you have TAKEN CLASSES you are able to understand?...Again..Bull Shit. Classes give you tools, and ideas, but that does not mean they take in your brain, or you understand the big picture.

Quote

So I have been educated and had to make hard choices.

You have had the oportunity to sit in a class and listen to a teacher talk about hard choices and leadership. You have read books about it maybe...But that does not mean you can do it.

Quote

The way you spin everything you should apply to take Rove's job.

You should seek a job hugging a tree not at all conected with the real world.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[PhillyKev 0]

They've been listed, debated and hashed over on this forum a billion times already. Those were from the Kroc institute. There are dozens of other think tanks that proposed alternatives to war prior to our invasion.

The point is, the Bush administration never even considered an alternative. Everyone else, orther nations, other people in this country, members of congress, members of his own cabinet tried to get them to look at alternatives. And they didn't. They wanted war at any cost and under any conditions.

[Ron 10]

Quote

The point is, the Bush administration never even considered an alternative.

The world waited 12 YEARS for Saddam to comply.

Quote

Everyone else, orther nations, other people in this country, members of congress, members of his own cabinet tried to get them to look at alternatives. And they didn't. They wanted war at any cost and under any conditions.

The UN voted to use force.

The US Congress voted to use force.

If at anytime they didn't want to go down that path...They could have voted no.

They didn't.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,099]

Quote

Quote

The point is, the Bush administration never even considered an alternative.

The world waited 12 YEARS for Saddam to comply.


.

Since all we've found is a handful of obsolete shells, it seems he had complied. Going to war on account of poor paperwork is a bit extreme.

Saddam had been no threat to anyone for those 12 years. He had been kept harmless by sanctions and US/UK overflights at negligible cost in lives and $$.

Bush has squandered 1000+ US lives and ten times as many Iraqi lives and $200+ BILLION for no increase in regional or world security, and Bush has become Al Qaeda's best recruiter.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

You are speaking about an area you know nothing about.

All subcultures can claim that.

Nope. Never served in the military. I still have all my own thoughts because of that. I've mentioned it before - I've talked for years with my dad, uncles, cousins, brother, close friends and the people I see every week about the military. The only thing good they tend to say was "I got to paid to see the world, but it wasn't anything they promised. Jump thru hoops and you will not get slapped on the wrist."

I'm working with people that served that are being denied the education dollars they were promised when they signed up with the recruiter.

I just had a two hour talk with a life time Marine that quit 4 years from military retirement because of what he saw in Iraq. From watching a friend get killed with an IED, to watching mothers throw rocks at them for killing their children. He didn't have one good thing to say about the war.

And I think the video of the tortured Iraq prisoners shows alot as well.

Quote

I could say the sky is blue and you would have a different opinion.

Well, it is a little cloudy today.

Quote

You have no proof that anyone knew they were false.

We have no proof either way.

Quote

Saddam had actually complied with the resolution

Due to the lack of WMD's being found (re:TONS as promised were there) it looks like he did.

Quote

If Bush had waited...How long? Another 12 YEARS?

Nah, maybe another few months just to make sure. What was the rush at that point.

Quote

Thats bad, but still not tough...Try who lives and who dies.

NO one deserves that choice. Esp if it means deciding that innocent children may die. Ever think that the tough choice to have acceptable innocent lives lost may be fueling the insurgents? And tough choices? It seems that anyone that disagrees with Bush is let go. From my understanding the general that didn't want to go into Faluja was relieved of duty.

Quote

You should seek a job hugging a tree not at all conected with the real world.

There is nothing wrong with being a humanitarian. Shoot first and ask questions later type tend to think there is, and tend to rely on labels.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

The world waited 12 YEARS for Saddam to comply.

So frickin what? Is there some kind of rule that if you wait for 12 years for something you have to start killing people? During those 12 years we weren't doing everything we could do to insure compliance. We could have started doing those things.

I know, you're going to say that SH was responsible for proving it. Again, I say so frickin what. Is there some rule that if someone doesn't do what they're supposed to that you start killing people? There were other ways to insure compliance besides invasion.

Quote

The UN voted to use force.

No, they didn't. They voted on serious consequences. Bush and his ilk were incapable of realizing that there are consequences besides war.

Quote

The US Congress voted to use force.

No they didn't. They voted to authorize the use of force of alternative methods weren't successful. They weren't successful because none were tried. Bush used a loophole that you guys keep flaunting to say that Kerry and everyone else voted for war when in fact they didn't.

Quote

If at anytime they didn't want to go down that path...They could have voted no.

They didn't.

They weren't given the opportunity. See above.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Since all we've found is a handful of obsolete shells, it seems he had complied. Going to war on account of poor paperwork is a bit extreme

All he had to do was work with us...I mean if he DID comply what did he have to hide?

Quote

Saddam had been no threat to anyone for those 12 years. He had been kept harmless by sanctions and US/UK overflights at negligible cost in lives and $$.

Sanctions France ignored.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334