Bush was warned there were no WMD, says former CIA man

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Not much.

I call Bull ****ing ****

[KrazyHorse]

He couldn't figure out a way to even keep the stuff he already had, try as he might. Building anew was out of the question.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither
the UK and the US were most likely very well aware how successful snactions were, and were not.

No, they were obviously not.

[KrazyHorse]

Just because you got suckered in doesn't mean that the rest of us should have been too.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Spiffor

If your point is that Bush wasn't the only reason for the invasion, then sure. Duh.

If your point is that the 2003 invasion had any sort of legality (the legality of a war is defined by international law, not domestic law), then no.

Argue with KH. Even he admits they broke a cease fire.

Heres a hint. The US signed the cease fire as a seperate party from the UN.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by DaShi


At the very most, not enough to be found in 4 years of searching.

And again, the UK (and others) thought he was doing it.

Why was that?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Spiffor

To be fair, a great many people did. IT was mainly the Yanks who didn't.

Being inundated with the Bush propoganda, it was hard for many not to. They didn't have much information to begin with. The last they heard was in '91 when Saddam was this terrible bad guy. Then not much but the occasional story about them trying to shoot down our planes, until 9/11.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by notyoueither


And again, the UK (and others) thought he was doing it.

Why was that?

I don't know. Lead in the water?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

They could or could not as it suits them.

?

Countries' leaderships can always do as it suits them, dude.

International law isn't international, and it doesn't have the force of law. Justification does not wisdom make.

Was the US going to war with Iraq some sort of horrible wrong; an injustice the likes of which the world has never before seen? Of course not. Was it a bad idea? I think so. Furthermore, I'm damn sure that the closest you could have come to making a good case for the invasion was not because of some trumped-up fears about CNB threats. That was garbage analysis. I saw right through it, and so should everybody else. It's sort of sad that they didn't.

When you're paid for your opinion on it, I'll pay more heed.

In the mean time, people who were paid to know about the topic, and who were far from being a Yank agreed that Saddam had weapons.

You made one mother ****ing lucky guess.

Congratulations. Have a cookie.

I'm not going to be swayed by your denial of the obvious the next time though.

Let's see... does NK have nuclear weapons? Are we in favour of the PRC doing something about that? Hmmmm, tough ****ing question.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by DaShi


I don't know. Lead in the water?

It couldn't be that he was acting like he had them or was developing them, now could it?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by DaShi


Being inundated with the Bush propoganda, it was hard for many not to. They didn't have much information to begin with. The last they heard was in '91 when Saddam was this terrible bad guy. Then not much but the occasional story about them trying to shoot down our planes, until 9/11.

Wow.

Gold star for profound ignorance.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

yeah, spiff is right, america's attack on iraq was a violation of international law.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by notyoueither


It couldn't be that he was acting like he had them or was developing them, now could it?

Nope.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by DaShi


Nope.

That's got to be the final answer.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
yeah, spiff is right, america's attack on iraq was a violation of international law.

*beeelcccchhhh*