WMD search officially over in Iraq

[Ragnarok]

Remember how we went through months of fear tactics to convince the US that invading Iraq was vital to our safety as a country? Remember how they promised there were tons of chemical and biological weapons and how Saddam was inches away from developing nuclear weapons?

Well, the "search" is over and no one seems to be paying attention or cares that the war was based on a lie. Perhaps 100,000 Iraqis dead, well over 1200 (or more) of the military.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/12/wmd.search/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. inspectors have ended their search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in recent weeks, a U.S. intelligence official told CNN.

The search ended almost two years after President Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, citing concerns that Saddam Hussein was building weapons of mass destruction and may have hidden weapons stockpiles.

One would think this country would care that they were deceived, yet this will go entirely unnoticed and unpunished. Of course, if you're asking the relevance of the decision to invade and what it personally means to you, if you're a US citizen and between 18-26, you may be selected to personally go clean up Bush's mess.

[Wayfarer]

Decieved is a bit different from mistaken. And personally I don't think the 'fear tactics' you describe are all that different from the tactics you are employing by trumping this up and making a big deal about it in order to make some point which, chances are, you would have remained convinced of regardless of the outcome.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Decieved is a bit different from mistaken. And personally I don't think the 'fear tactics' you describe are all that different from the tactics you are employing by trumping this up and making a big deal about it in order to make some point which, chances are, you would have remained convinced of regardless of the outcome.

Well thats a pretty big mistake to make don't you think? War should not be taken lightly, atleast have the facts straight before making the decision to invade a country. This is a big deal, whether you think so or not, if you find this "mistake" not to be a big deal, then thats your own problem.

[Insidious Rex]

Only the most extreme right wing wack jobs still hold that they are hiding huge caches of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq today. Although Bush still thinks it could be a possibility . And even most of the conservatives in this country have moved on to other reasons to justify the war knowing full well they have no ground to stand on anymore with the WMD argument (they have even taken to trying to turn the argument around to blame Democrats in the CIA for it...). Thats been true for a while now. So I dont think this will be much more then a blip as far as news and controversy goes. At least in this country.

[Wayfarer]

No. I don't think it was a that big a mistake. There were credible reasons to believe the Iraqi WMD program presented a threat - including statements made by former Iraqi officials claiming the government had WMD capabilities. If highly informed Iraqis were mistaken about the matter, it's kind of ridiculous to blame other countries from making the same mistake.

But that's not the point at hand. The problem right now is your blatant hypocracy as you make a big deal about 'fear tactics being used to gain support for a war', out of one side of your mouth, while with the other side you use similar fear tactics to argue that 'you might have to clean up this mess'.

[Starr Polish]

I agree with Wayfarer (and I am NOT a Bush supporter).

Republicans and "right-wingers" are not the only ones to use fear tactics as a means to an end. Almost everyday before the elections I had extreme liberals and registered Dems (I am moderate leaning slightly left and registered independent) bringing up the draft bill...in classes that had nothing to do with politics whatsoever. Funny that they left out that the last time they tried to pass it, it only got two votes, and one of those who voted for it was a Democrat...

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

No. I don't think it was a that big a mistake. There were credible reasons to believe the Iraqi WMD program presented a threat - including statements made by former Iraqi officials claiming the government had WMD capabilities. If highly informed Iraqis were mistaken about the matter, it's kind of ridiculous to blame other countries from making the same mistake.

But that's not the point at hand. The problem right now is your blatant hypocracy as you make a big deal about 'fear tactics being used to gain support for a war', out of one side of your mouth, while with the other side you use similar fear tactics to argue that 'you might have to clean up this mess'.

*edited out by HOBBIT*

Personally, I could care less what you think of me, so do me a favor and refrain from insulting me behind a computer screen because not only is it childish but not worthy of my time. Anyways thats all I have to say to you, I think I'll be the bigger man and walk away, heres some advice for you, grow up.

[inked]

Ragnarok,
Fact remains that Sadaam is documented to have used nerve gas on the Kurds. Sadaam said he had the weapons and would use them.

So we took him at his word.

Now whose fault is it? And I remember the whole Congress believed the data at the time and voted to approve the war. Even that Kerry fellow married to the Heinz heiress voted for it.

Are you blaming only the right wing jack jobs for the votes of the left wing jack jobs? Which group of jack jobs blew the mind-reading and x-ray vision tests? Both look equally culpable in this particular matter. Which is why it won't be a biggie in the media and Michael Moore won't make a movie of leftish jack jobs supporting the war. (Maybe tho' he could do something worthwhile like a docudrama on another Michael's trial? And show that at Cannes for the promotion of a society for men who are victimized because they luv children, though some female teachers are gonna lobby for feminist inclusion, I suspect!)

IR, Maybe we should give you a new nickname, something like jj?

[HOBBIT]

Admin Note:

Ok keep it civil folks. I had to edit out a few messages here.

Name calling is not acceptable. If you don't have anything nice to say to someone, don't say anything at all....... or pm them that stuff. Don't post it here. It will be edited.

[The Gaffer]

Ragnarok, you're right to bring this story to our attention because it didn't even merit a mention on the "oh-so-left-wing" BBC news.

Personally, as someone who opposed the war from the outset, I am amazed that no WMDs have been found. It was apparent to me all along that the real reasons for invading Iraq were to do with economics and politics, not military threat. "WMDs" and non-existent Iraqi links with 9/11 were just a smokescreen which, as you rightly say, were stoked up to create a climate of fear that effectively made it impossible for any serious politicians in the US to oppose the invasion.

Whatever you think about Michael Moore, there are many telling points in his documentary, such as the fact that most of Congress passed the Patriot Act without having had the chance to read it.

Let's not forget that when Saddam gassed the Kurds and Iranians, he was Our Man in Baghdad. If we're talking about hypocrisy, here's the gold medal performance.

[Hemel]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Ragnarok, you're right to bring this story to our attention because it didn't even merit a mention on the "oh-so-left-wing" BBC news.

We did get it reported. It was mentioned a few days ago. Hardly as headlines though. One wonders about the role of the government in controlling the media ... again.

I see our lot are appointing bods to review intelligence services. again.

I'm not impressed.

[The Gaffer]

Howdy, Hemel

Been a while since we've both been online at the same time. How's life on the boats?

[Starr Polish]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Whatever you think about Michael Moore, there are many telling points in his documentary, such as the fact that most of Congress passed the Patriot Act without having had the chance to read it.

This may be true, but most of the bills passed aren't read...not just the Patriot Act.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

Whatever you think about Michael Moore, there are many telling points in his documentary, such as the fact that most of Congress passed the Patriot Act without having had the chance to read it.

Most liberal haven't read it either and erroneously state things in it that aren't even there. So don't act like michael moore is some savior - he only reported what he disagrees with.

As for WMD the ENTIRE damn world thought he had WMD - including the UN. So to say that America liesd to go to war is ridiculous. Also - do you honestly think that he had Dr Germ so high up as a government official for eye candy? Give me a break. It has been stated in the Dulfer reprot that Hussein's plan was to make deals with various countries in order to get sanctions lifted. Once they were lifted - his goal was to have the WMD program back on track. You can believe what you want. There were NMANY reasons stated for going into Iraq - WMD was only one of them.

And I agree with what Wayfarer has posted and NO Im not too concerned that WMD weren't found - there were many other reasons for me supporting the war. As I've said - we went into Bosnia for less reasons - no one is bitching and monaing about that. Oh wait - I forgot - that was in Europes interest - of course they wouldn't have a problem with it.

[Wayfarer]

Originally Posted by Starr Polish

...most of the bills passed aren't read...not just the Patriot Act.

Which is scary. One recent bill that was nearly passed included at least one provision that none of the senators knew about - it was added by a senators aide, and would have given him the power to read confidential files on citizens (tax files, I think).

Sometimes it seems that most of the bureaucracy in this 'democratic' country circumvents the democratic process.

[Ragnarok]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

no one is bitching and monaing about that. Oh wait - I forgot - that was in Europes interest - of course they wouldn't have a problem with it.

My my, both you and Wayfarer with the temper tantrums.

[Nurvingiel]

Well I'm glad the search is over. The less WMDs there are in the world the better - no matter who's hands they are in. I agree with JD about the intel, though my feelings about the war in general are quite mixed.

I might comment... but should this thread not be renamed the Iraq III thread? Maybe we should bump Iraq II? (I believe that, unlike Iraq I, that one didn't get closed. )

[The Gaffer]

Combatting disinformation:

In Bosnia, there was a 3-year ethnic civil after it declared independence from Yugoslavia. External involvement was NATO peacekeeping troops, whose role was taken on by an EU force in December last year.

I think what you're constantly referring to is Kosovo, where NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 because they were shaping up to repeat the ethnic cleansing they'd attempted in Bosnia and elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia.

The situations are completely different (a country disintegrating, ethnic conflicts [which don't forget, had previously led to the outbreak of WW1], a state that was repeatedly exporting mass rape, murder and warfare in an attempt to subjugate its neighbours and systematically remove entire ethnic groups; the intervention in Kosovo involved far less input than did the one in Iraq). It betrays a lack of sophistication to simply try to argue that Kosovo had "less" of a justification for intervention than Iraq.

You can argue that Saddam had done similar things (he did invade Kuwait, and he did wage punitive war on his own people) of course, and that the invasion was justified. It's a question of when we're justified in taking the risk of starting a war.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

You can argue that Saddam had done similar things (he did invade Kuwait, and he did wage punitive war on his own people) of course, and that the invasion was justified. It's a question of when we're justified in taking the risk of starting a war.

Doesn't seem like the world is ever happy with whatever the US does. We freed Kuwait in "91" from the Iraqis and the UN said get out after that. We got out and Saddam killed the Kurds. We manage to invade Iraq for many reasons besides the WMD threat, justifiably IMO, and the world says: "why didn't you finish the job in "91"? Go figure. There's just no making the world happy with anything we do. Hypocritical whining is all it is.

[barrelrider110]

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

No. I don't think it was a that big a mistake. There were credible reasons to believe the Iraqi WMD program presented a threat - including statements made by former Iraqi officials claiming the government had WMD capabilities. If highly informed Iraqis were mistaken about the matter, it's kind of ridiculous to blame other countries from making the same mistake.

Including Saddam himself. He didn't want his enemies, er, neighbors to think he had given them up either. I once hotly blamed the Dub-ya for this huge "mistake" but I'm a bit more understanding now.

We need to move on. We need to fix this mess. If we walk out, would Saddam be back in power? I say, yes. Give him 5 years. On the otherhand, imposing our version of democracy in that corner of the world may not be the right thing. I dunno.