IMMINENT THREAT???????
- Thread starter Mcleanhatch
- Start date
you're just confused
i dont think he said that at all.
i think he did call iraq an imminent threat, but not an "imminent threat" you see what i'm saying? he might have never of said those words, but he doesn't have too. 70% of american believing saddam had something to do with 9/11 proves that. Its another form of Propoganda.
the Bush administration accused Saddam of working with Al Qaeda, and invovled with 9/11. Accussing it of having WMD. And Saddam's regime alleged ability to strike the United States.
no wonder people where saying that Bush call iraq an imminent threat. (not an "imminent threat")
you're just confused.
read more on this
http://www.prioritypeace.org/WarTruth-3.pdf
i dont think he said that at all.
i think he did call iraq an imminent threat, but not an "imminent threat" you see what i'm saying? he might have never of said those words, but he doesn't have too. 70% of american believing saddam had something to do with 9/11 proves that. Its another form of Propoganda.
the Bush administration accused Saddam of working with Al Qaeda, and invovled with 9/11. Accussing it of having WMD. And Saddam's regime alleged ability to strike the United States.
no wonder people where saying that Bush call iraq an imminent threat. (not an "imminent threat")
you're just confused.
read more on this
http://www.prioritypeace.org/WarTruth-3.pdf
Well, McLeanFaggot, no one is going to find bush saying "Iraq is an imminent threat" because he never said that sentence...not exactly any ways. All you have to do, McNugget, is read the transcripts from his pre-war speach's, the speach at Cincinnati Museum Center is a good place to start. Bush's speach writers sure did a great job of twisting words around and at the same time making the public believe Iraq poses a threat to Amerika. "The threat comes from Iraq." Not quite "imminent threat" but still a threat. "confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror"
wtf?? i always thought bush was saying iraq is an immenent threat....if not whats all that talk about Weapons of mass destruction and why the hell did he send troops to attack if they weren't a threat he coulda just sat back and chilled.. why did he go in there...
i dunno i aint that smart but if iraq wasn't an immenent threat what the hell did he go in there for
i dunno i aint that smart but if iraq wasn't an immenent threat what the hell did he go in there for
maybe because of things like this below
Mcleanhatch said:
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040110151409990007
Updated: 10:55 PM EST
Possible Chemical Discovery in Iraq
Blister Gas Weapons Found, Initial Tests Show
By ROBERT H. REID, AP
BAGHDAD, Iraq (Jan. 10) - Danish and Icelandic troops have uncovered a cache of 36 shells buried in the Iraqi desert, and preliminary tests showed they contained a liquid blister agent, the Danish military said Saturday.
Mortar shells unearthed by forces stationed in southern Iraq are shown lined up on a road near Basra.
The 120mm mortar shells were thought to be leftovers from the eight-year war between Iraq and neighboring Iran, which ended in 1988, said U.S. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt.
The shells were found by Danish engineering troops and Icelandic de-miners near Al Quarnah, north of the city of Basra where Denmark's 410 troops are based, the Danish Army Operational Command said in a written statement.
The shells were wrapped in plastic but had been damaged, and they appeared to have been buried for at least 10 years, the statement said.
It said British experts did a preliminary test and said the shells contained "blister gas," but did not elaborate.
Before the war, the United States alleged Iraq still had stockpiles of mustard gas, a World War I-era blister agent that is stored in liquid form. U.S. intelligence officials also claimed Iraq had sarin, cyclosarin and VX, which are extremely deadly nerve agents.
"We're doing some preliminary tests to ensure that if they do contain any kind of blister agent that we can dispose of them properly," Kimmitt said.
The Danish military emphasized that the tests were not definitive. In the weeks after the Iraq war, the U.S.-led coalition found several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals.
Other discoveries turned out to be old caches that had already been tagged by United Nations inspectors and were scheduled for destruction.
Saddam Hussein's regime used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during that war and killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians in a chemical attack on the northern city of Halabja in 1988.
President Bush said the United States was going to war to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, but a nine-month search by a succession of U.S. teams has failed to find any current stockpiles of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal.
In October, Dutch marines found several dozen artillery shells from the 1991 Gulf War in the southern Iraqi town of Samawah, but the shells contained no biological or chemical agents. Samawah is 100 miles west of the southern region where the Danes discovered shells Saturday.
01/10/04 15:13 ET
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
Updated: 10:55 PM EST
Possible Chemical Discovery in Iraq
Blister Gas Weapons Found, Initial Tests Show
By ROBERT H. REID, AP
BAGHDAD, Iraq (Jan. 10) - Danish and Icelandic troops have uncovered a cache of 36 shells buried in the Iraqi desert, and preliminary tests showed they contained a liquid blister agent, the Danish military said Saturday.
Mortar shells unearthed by forces stationed in southern Iraq are shown lined up on a road near Basra.
The 120mm mortar shells were thought to be leftovers from the eight-year war between Iraq and neighboring Iran, which ended in 1988, said U.S. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt.
The shells were found by Danish engineering troops and Icelandic de-miners near Al Quarnah, north of the city of Basra where Denmark's 410 troops are based, the Danish Army Operational Command said in a written statement.
The shells were wrapped in plastic but had been damaged, and they appeared to have been buried for at least 10 years, the statement said.
It said British experts did a preliminary test and said the shells contained "blister gas," but did not elaborate.
Before the war, the United States alleged Iraq still had stockpiles of mustard gas, a World War I-era blister agent that is stored in liquid form. U.S. intelligence officials also claimed Iraq had sarin, cyclosarin and VX, which are extremely deadly nerve agents.
"We're doing some preliminary tests to ensure that if they do contain any kind of blister agent that we can dispose of them properly," Kimmitt said.
The Danish military emphasized that the tests were not definitive. In the weeks after the Iraq war, the U.S.-led coalition found several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals.
Other discoveries turned out to be old caches that had already been tagged by United Nations inspectors and were scheduled for destruction.
Saddam Hussein's regime used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during that war and killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians in a chemical attack on the northern city of Halabja in 1988.
President Bush said the United States was going to war to destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, but a nine-month search by a succession of U.S. teams has failed to find any current stockpiles of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal.
In October, Dutch marines found several dozen artillery shells from the 1991 Gulf War in the southern Iraqi town of Samawah, but the shells contained no biological or chemical agents. Samawah is 100 miles west of the southern region where the Danes discovered shells Saturday.
01/10/04 15:13 ET
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
Mortar shells! Artillery Shells!
Mclean, flash the bat signal, we have found Weapons of Minimum to Moderate Destuction!
And don't you like how they only put one line about "blister gas", and then added that the officials wouldn't comment...lmao.
What a plan, answer no comment to one press question and you have Little Mcleans worldwide thinkin you're the real deal.
Mclean, flash the bat signal, we have found Weapons of Minimum to Moderate Destuction!
And don't you like how they only put one line about "blister gas", and then added that the officials wouldn't comment...lmao.
What a plan, answer no comment to one press question and you have Little Mcleans worldwide thinkin you're the real deal.
But hold on mcnugget, didn't you say Saddam has killed hundreds of thousands? 5,000 at Halabja? Didn't you say it was ten thousand? Wait what the fuck does that matter, a 5,000 kill diference, when you're talking about slaughter in the hundreds of thousands? Where are some facts from Newsmax about the 400,000 dead under Saddam?
How much of what is contained in this thread did you know about before you made that statement? Did you know the United Nations is seeking Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity, multiple war crimes, and possible genocide. The leaders of that country are millionairs that kill at will, living in palaces with no regard for human life whatsoever, and your asking yourself why we did this. If not the cause, support the outcome. There are plenty of reasons to invade that country. WMD... LMAO!
Tenkamenin made some great points, but were talking about why we (right now) should enter that country, not why it would be morally wrong because of how other vicuous leaders rose to power. The reasons--even if they are to fix what we have done in the past--are still present. None of what Tenkamenin presented says that Saddam should not be removed from office.
Your right Tenkamenin did make some great points.. but all i'm trying to say is why did we not do anything about it in the past why did we just sit on our ass until now sadam gassed the kurds in the 80's... And why did we support other brutal murderers. why should we go after sadam and not other evil dictators are we going to liberate the world.. are we going to go into every country to free the people or are we content with iraq.. And if sadam gassed the kurds in the 80's and the first iraq war was in the early 90's then why did the war stop if we still need to punish him for what he did in the 80's
no, the US is not going after other brutal dictators. Becuase other countries don't have the 2nd largest oil reverses in the world. That was the case in iraq. It was only a matter of time for the US to grab it.
The US didnt help the kurds in the north, and the Shiite in the south, becuase doing so would have had unpredicable results. The kurds might have wanted to split the country in half.
"Since the gulf war in 1991, a whole Iraq was deemed essential to preventing neighbors like Turkey, Syria and Iran from picking at the pieces and igniting wider wars ... For decades, the United States has worshiped at the altar of a unified yet unnatural Iraqi state." [1]
"Turkish officials are concerned that a semi-autonomous zone in Iraqi Kurdistan might become a way station on the path to independence." [2]
1. The Three-State Solution
2. Bridging the Kurdish-Turkmen Gap
The US didnt help the kurds in the north, and the Shiite in the south, becuase doing so would have had unpredicable results. The kurds might have wanted to split the country in half.
"Since the gulf war in 1991, a whole Iraq was deemed essential to preventing neighbors like Turkey, Syria and Iran from picking at the pieces and igniting wider wars ... For decades, the United States has worshiped at the altar of a unified yet unnatural Iraqi state." [1]
"Turkish officials are concerned that a semi-autonomous zone in Iraqi Kurdistan might become a way station on the path to independence." [2]
1. The Three-State Solution
2. Bridging the Kurdish-Turkmen Gap
are you trying to tell me this war was about profit and not about liberating iraq?