So now that it's over why did we do it?

[Creep0321 0]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html

just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found, even after the mass shipping into Iran/Syria. Just by that point, it wasnt "headline" worthy news anymore.

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html

just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found, even after the mass shipping into Iran/Syria. Just by that point, it wasnt "headline" worthy news anymore.

From the article to which you linked:

Boylan said the suspected lab was new, dating from some time after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. The Bush administration cited evidence that Saddam Hussein's government was manufacturing weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for the invasion. No such weapons or factories were found.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Creep0321 0]

Quote

From the article to which you linked:

Boylan said the suspected lab was new, dating from some time after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. The Bush administration cited evidence that Saddam Hussein's government was manufacturing weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for the invasion. No such weapons or factories were found.

Weapons no, chemicals yes, in a lab that was found before they were weaponised, fortunately. Again dont forget about the exodus to Syria and Iran.

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[billvon 3,120]

>just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found

True - we sold them to Iraq.

[Creep0321 0]

Quote

>just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found

True - we sold them to Iraq.

Just like we gave stingers and weapons to the muj in the 70's times change, shit happens, simple fact is they did not comply with UN treaties.

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[Creep0321 0]

Quote

>just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found

True - we sold them to Iraq.

Look at the reverse as well, germany comes to mind...

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[billvon 3,120]

>Just like we gave stingers and weapons to the muj in the 70's times change, shit
>happens, simple fact is they did not comply with UN treaties.

S'ok. Neither do we.

(BTW I like the change from "they had WMD's" to "they didn't comply with UN treaties." Next perhaps "they were rude to us?")

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>just throwing it out there, chemical agents were actually found

True - we sold them to Iraq.

So what. If I sell you a gun, am I responsible for what you do with it?

[billvon 3,120]

>So what. If I sell you a gun, am I responsible for what you do with it?

If you were to emulate the US, you could sell someone an AK-47, hand it to them, then shoot them dead for having an assault weapon in your store!

[Creep0321 0]

Quote

>So what. If I sell you a gun, am I responsible for what you do with it?

If you were to emulate the US, you could sell someone an AK-47, hand it to them, then shoot them dead for having an assault weapon in your store!

typical liberal mentality.... reality... if we give you an AK, to protect yourself, then years later you turn around and try to hurt us, are we not justified in responding?

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>So what. If I sell you a gun, am I responsible for what you do with it?

If you were to emulate the US, you could sell someone an AK-47, hand it to them, then shoot them dead for having an assault weapon in your store!

That's a really bad analogy. More like I sell you a gun, you shoot your wife and neighbor and I shoot you to stop you from killing more people.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

if we give you an AK, to protect yourself, then years later you turn around and try to hurt us, are we not justified in responding?

Except Iraq did not try to hurt you, nor did it have the capacity to do so when the decision was made to invade.

The decision was based on faulty intelligence. The question remains if the intelligence was deliberately faulty or if people were incompetent.

[billvon 3,120]

>typical liberal mentality....

I think this is the first time a right winger has described Bush as having a "typical liberal mentality!"

> if we give you an AK, to protect yourself, then years later you turn around and try to
>hurt us, are we not justified in responding?

You are. If you just HAVE the AK-47 (i.e. if Iraq just HAS chemical weapons, which it didn't) you're not.

You tell me. Let's say you think your neighbor has an AK-47. You are afraid of AK-47's and are worried that he will attack you with it. Are you justified in killing him for fear that he might attack you?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

That depends...does he look funny?

[Creep0321 0]

Quote

>typical liberal mentality....

I think this is the first time a right winger has described Bush as having a "typical liberal mentality!"

> if we give you an AK, to protect yourself, then years later you turn around and try to
>hurt us, are we not justified in responding?

You are. If you just HAVE the AK-47 (i.e. if Iraq just HAS chemical weapons, which it didn't) you're not.

You tell me. Let's say you think your neighbor has an AK-47. You are afraid of AK-47's and are worried that he will attack you with it. Are you justified in killing him for fear that he might attack you?

no, but after he kills a few neighbors(like iraq did) situation changes... throw the UN in and you have plenty of reason to...

Jack of all trades.
Military Free Fall Jumpmaster.
USA Static-line Jumpmaster.

[billvon 3,120]

>no . . . .

OK so we agree there. You can't attack someone just because you are afraid of what they might tdo at some point in the future.

>but after he kills a few neighbors(like iraq did) situation changes...

So when we ask someone to attack someone for us, and they do - we can then attack them? Sorta strange way to look at allies.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>typical liberal mentality....

I think this is the first time a right winger has described Bush as having a "typical liberal mentality!"

> if we give you an AK, to protect yourself, then years later you turn around and try to
>hurt us, are we not justified in responding?

You are. If you just HAVE the AK-47 (i.e. if Iraq just HAS chemical weapons, which it didn't) you're not.

I wonder what happened to all those chemical weapons we knew Iraq had because we sold them to them?

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I wonder what happened to all those chemical weapons we knew Iraq had because we sold them to them?

What they didn't use would have degraded due to a relatively short shelf life.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

(BTW I like the change from "they had WMD's" to "they didn't comply with UN treaties." Next perhaps "they were rude to us?")

It's pretty easy to show non compliance.

But you had it right in post #18. We've done this topic to death...6 years ago.

[billvon 3,120]

>I wonder what happened to all those chemical weapons we knew Iraq had because
>we sold them to them?

They used them against Iran. We know this because we gave them the military intelligence (primarily satellite photos) to help them pinpoint those attacks.

[shah269 0]

Quote

>I wonder what happened to all those chemical weapons we knew Iraq had because
>we sold them to them?

They used them against Iran. We know this because we gave them the military intelligence (primarily satellite photos) to help them pinpoint those attacks.

Thanks for that by the way!

Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay.

The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools!

[davjohns 1]

Quote

>Conclusion? There was never any WMD.

Nope, no one said that. UN weapons inspectors just said there were no WMD's that were not accounted for when we invaded.
reply]

Please go back and read the post I was responding to. The last claim was that the intelligence community was wrong or lying.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

• Quote

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I wonder what happened to all those chemical weapons we knew Iraq had because we sold them to them?

What they didn't use would have degraded due to a relatively short shelf life.

So in your l
Opinion, all this special training is unnecessary?

http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/uk-experts-help-iraq-destroy-chemical-residues-144204378.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

So in your l
Opinion, all this special training is unnecessary?

In general, I support making sure people know what they're doing before trying to do it.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

So in your l
Opinion, all this special training is unnecessary?

In general, I support making sure people know what they're doing before trying to do it.

Oh, I thought you were claiming the chemical weapons had degraded to the point they were no longer dangerous 9 years ago. If that was true, why do the people handling their destruction today need special training on how to handle them safely. Wouldn't the be even more degraded now?