BF2S Forums oops!! more bad news for you "Where is the WMD'S" crowd

Too bad it came many, many months after the admin. ADMITTED there was little evidence of WMDs. (note the choice of words)

Also I think this is a bit old news, I saw this several days ago in the local paper. In any case that doesn't prove very much - saying 'I know how to build a bomb' or 'I have a manual for building a bomb' is very different from saying 'I have a bomb'.

Spark wrote:

Too bad it came many, many months after the admin. ADMITTED there was little evidence of WMDs. (note the choice of words)

Also I think this is a bit old news, I saw this several days ago in the local paper. In any case that doesn't prove very much - saying 'I know how to build a bomb' or 'I have a manual for building a bomb' is very different from saying 'I have a bomb'.

nooooooo, what it says is he was researching building nukes and bio/ chem weapons........If you read the article it said he was "as little as a year away". I knowwwwwwwwwww you didn't read the article spark

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Too bad it came many, many months after the admin. ADMITTED there was little evidence of WMDs. (note the choice of words)

Also I think this is a bit old news, I saw this several days ago in the local paper. In any case that doesn't prove very much - saying 'I know how to build a bomb' or 'I have a manual for building a bomb' is very different from saying 'I have a bomb'.

nooooooo, what it says is he was researching building nukes and bio/ chem weapons........If you read the article it said he was "as little as a year away". I knowwwwwwwwwww you didn't read the article spark

Fucking neo-cons...a 3rd year engineering student could build an atomic weapon.  Lack of enriched uranium is the only thing that would prevent an actual bomb from being built.

Oooooh, So Damn Insane has WMDs.  See, the we told you so!  The liberals would have let the world come to and end!

Get a fucking life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Too bad it came many, many months after the admin. ADMITTED there was little evidence of WMDs. (note the choice of words)

Also I think this is a bit old news, I saw this several days ago in the local paper. In any case that doesn't prove very much - saying 'I know how to build a bomb' or 'I have a manual for building a bomb' is very different from saying 'I have a bomb'.

nooooooo, what it says is he was researching building nukes and bio/ chem weapons........If you read the article it said he was "as little as a year away". I knowwwwwwwwwww you didn't read the article spark

Fucking neo-cons...a 3rd year engineering student could build an atomic weapon.  Lack of enriched uranium is the only thing that would prevent an actual bomb from being built.

Oooooh, So Damn Insane has WMDs.  See, the we told you so!  The liberals would have let the world come to and end!

Get a fucking life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LMAO.....sorry the article destroys all your notions that Saddam was innocent in the nukes/bio/chem weapons development game. Now what are ya gunna argue in regards to Saddam and the WMD's? I guess you could argue that he didn't have them yet. Shame on us for not allowing him time to finish.

I'd like to point (without joining any political faction) that the article states evidence of wmd's before the first gulf war of 1991. the pretence of the current Second Gulf War was that Hussein was still developing wmd's. There is no evidence to suggest that his regime continued this weapons programme after their defeat in 1991.

maffiaw wrote:

I'd like to point (without joining any political faction) that the article states evidence of wmd's before the first gulf war of 1991. the pretence of the current Second Gulf War was that Hussein was still developing wmd's. There is no evidence to suggest that his regime continued this weapons programme after their defeat in 1991.

Correct, affirming what I said earlier.

You (lowing) still haven't acknowledged the difference between KNOWING how to build a bomb and actually BUILDING a bomb.

lowing, you don't seem to understand this, but I'll try anyway:

The article shows that Saddam researched nukes before 1991.  Everybody already knew this.  Going to war over it would be like the US and Britain going to war over taxes collected pre war of independence, or Germany and France going to war over the Ruhr.

Masques wrote:

NY Times article wrote:

Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.
...
But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war.
...
Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, fearing that the information could help states like Iran develop nuclear arms, had privately protested last week to the American ambassador to the agency, according to European diplomats who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. One diplomat said the agency’s technical experts “were shocked” at the public disclosures.

So let me get this straight...Republicans, in desperation to prove themselves right about Iraq, forced the government to release outdated documents that reveal nothing in particular (indeed reveal things that most people already know about Iraq) and in the process endanger American national security.

Brilliant.

Your not seeing the big picture here...we can't sift through all the backwards Arabic so we let the public do it FOR us you get it?!?

Kinda like we let YOU decide....see now if they didn't put those documents online then we would have to go through the process of fabricating evidence and we all know that's just too easy we rather you pretend that this evidence is there....fool proof

Sylvanis wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Too bad it came many, many months after the admin. ADMITTED there was little evidence of WMDs. (note the choice of words)

Also I think this is a bit old news, I saw this several days ago in the local paper. In any case that doesn't prove very much - saying 'I know how to build a bomb' or 'I have a manual for building a bomb' is very different from saying 'I have a bomb'.

nooooooo, what it says is he was researching building nukes and bio/ chem weapons........If you read the article it said he was "as little as a year away". I knowwwwwwwwwww you didn't read the article spark

You need to be a more critical reader.  It was referring that at the time (pre-Gulf War) he was researching building nukes.  All this article proves is that in 1991 the action against Iraq was justified.

"The campaign for the online archive was mounted by conservative publications and politicians, who said that the nation’s spy agencies had failed adequately to analyze the 48,000 boxes of documents seized since the March 2003 invasion. With the public increasingly skeptical about the rationale and conduct of the war, the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence committees argued that wide analysis and translation of the documents — most of them in Arabic — would reinvigorate the search for clues that Mr. Hussein had resumed his unconventional arms programs in the years before the invasion. American search teams never found such evidence."

Search teams NEVER FOUND SUCH EVIDENCE.

Pointless post.  All it shows is that Bush is dumb enough to post instructions on building atomic weapons on a government site.

Pointless post I agree. Makes the OP look desparate for some justification for the Iraq travesty - and fails.

wreck® wrote:

OMG they found paper ? Definitive proof ..if you don't think paper is a WMD you're obviously a bleeding heart pacifist.

I like this guys style!

Spark wrote:

maffiaw wrote:

I'd like to point (without joining any political faction) that the article states evidence of wmd's before the first gulf war of 1991. the pretence of the current Second Gulf War was that Hussein was still developing wmd's. There is no evidence to suggest that his regime continued this weapons programme after their defeat in 1991.

Correct, affirming what I said earlier.

You (lowing) still haven't acknowledged the difference between KNOWING how to build a bomb and actually BUILDING a bomb.

yeah I did Spark, my response was......IF you have the technology to build WMD's and you don't allow the UN into your country to inspect your programs as dictated by the peace treaty of 91, then the world has the right and obligation t oassume that you are doing something that you are not supposed to be doing. Saddam gave the world EVERY REASON POSSIBLE to beleive he was building or storing WMD'S by violating the UN resolutions to allow inspectors into his country and inspect his weapons facilities.

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing, you don't seem to understand this, but I'll try anyway:

The article shows that Saddam researched nukes before 1991.  Everybody already knew this.  Going to war over it would be like the US and Britain going to war over taxes collected pre war of independence, or Germany and France going to war over the Ruhr.

Yeah Bubbalo, you don't seem to understand this but I will try anyway....As a matter of fact I will put it in an analogy you will understand now:

If you have been doing drugs, and you get grounded for that by your parents, and they only way you can get realeased to go play outside is to allow your parents full access to your bedroom so they can go through your stuff. Now, all of a sudden, you refuse to let your parents into your room, for weeks you refuse, then you let them in once, but they are not allowed to look in the second drawer down on your dresser. When they insist that they have full access to your dresser, you kick them out of your room. A month later you say they can now come back in and look in your dresser all they want, but, you do not allow them access to your closet. When they insist, you kick them out of your room again. A month later you say they can come back and inspect your closet now, but when they go to look under your bed you refuse to let them amd you throw them out of your room. After about 10 months of these games, they finally say enough, they re-ground you and THEN TAKE full access to your room, just like you agreed on in the first place. What do they find??.....roach clips, papers, books on drugs. EVERYTHING you need to actually roll your your own joints, just no joints. Ya think you have your parents convinced that you were not doing drugs???? 1 + 1 = 2

hope that helps

Last edited by lowing (2006-11-05 04:57:53)