goch1

TASINE: "so few people have a speaking acquaintance with LOGIC." But you do, right? Logic is not always the "T***H." I would submit that NO ONE actually knows the t***h, because "FACTS" have been evolving for as long as humans have been on this earth. Your "T***h", your "Facts", are based on what you think you "KNOW." Most of the world "KNEW" that there were WMD's in Iraq. Of course the Chemicals they uncovered (ever hear of "Chemical Warfare?") don't count. I would submit to you that even "LOGIC" doesn't always prove to be TRUE.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Love your example........simple enough for even l*****ts to grasp!! LOVE IT!!

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

I'll give you and everyone else this: t***h is most difficult to obtain as the political left has worked so very hard for the past century to change it to suit their agenda that many, many words have evolved into their exact opposites. The word anarchy is now thought by most people to, in essence, describe "chaos". Why? Because that's what the dictionaries say it is. The fact is that the word was invented to mean: NO RULER. Now who would want to destroy that word's meaning? Well, using LOGIC, I would offer that the RULERS of nations don't like to hear one of their subjects refer to "no ruler"......sounds dangerous to the tyrant of any nation. But, now change that meaning to "chaos" and all the troubles that accompany chaos are fearful, threatening, and WRONG.....because there does not have to BE any chaos......only the people can make chaos within a country with no rulers. Another word to suit the left's agenda is the once lovable word, "gay". A sweet word that once depicted happy, cheerful, lovable people......no more. The political left has embraced the innocent word, gay, to mean a sexual attraction between people of the same sex, until recently considered decadence, but forced by the left to mean the opposite.....and I don't think most, if ANY, homosexuals are "gay", but are miserable.

TexaCan Loc: Homeward Bound!

👍👍👍👍👍👍

Loki Loc: Georgia

Saddam was given plenty of time to get rid of his stocks of operable nerve agents. I believe it was Tasine who mentioned the truck convoys going out of the country. We dithered around too long. As a vet yourself, you should know that binary agents are not hard to t***sport, store, or hide, nor do they require sophisticated delivery systems. Don't forget that Hussain actually USED these weapons on the Kurds. There is no doubt that he possessed them at one time. There is also no doubt that we gave him plenty of time to t***sport such weapons as he did have out of the country. I am no fan of Dubya, but I am not so sure he was wrong on this.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dubya did only 1-2 things I disagreed with. For the most part he was second only to Reagan in my book. I will never believe he did anything to deliberately hurt this nation.....I DO think some democrat presidents, particularly the current one ACTIVELY AND KNOWINGLY DO THINGS TO HARM AMERICA. Partly because of that, I detest all l*****ts because they, all of them, are helping him destroy us.

bilordinary Loc: SW Washington

You hit the nail on the head, Tasine!
They try very hard to fill our heads with fear, hatred, and depend on our greed to control us.
Hard to use logic when emotions are triggered.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

Exactly, but I don't think they are finding it as easy as they thought they would.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Jim,

This WMD thing is complicated, so many conflicting reports all wanting to blame Bush or the Dem. congress..

We should be specific. Bush was claiming ACTIVE WMD. These were not found, ever. What was found were old WMD from the 80s early 90s.. The Iraq/Iran war.... Ronnie and his. exploits...

The discovery of old, degraded chemical munitions in Iraq is not news. The Bush administration went to war expecting to find older weapons, along with a thriving new chemical weapons program (that didn’t exist). Ten years ago, the final report of the weapons inspectors sent to find Saddam Hussein’s WMDs (commonly known as the Duelfer Report) was released, and it noted that “a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered” in the country, but that Iraq had not produced any new weapons.

Back in the summer of 2006, Rick Santorum was on his way to losing his Senate seat and needed a “game changer” to save his political career. So he threw together a press conference to triumphantly announce: “We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons.” He was talking about “500 chemical munitions shells that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988,” according to the Washington Post.


ADVERTISEMENT

Everyone laughed at him, not just for how t***sparently desperate the stunt was, but also because Bush administration said Santorum was wrong. I’ll repeat that, so there’s no confusion – Bush administration officials said that the presence of ancient chemical weapons in Iraq did not vindicate George W. Bush’s case for war:

But defense officials said Thursday that the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age, which they determined to be pre-1991.

Pentagon officials told NBC News that the munitions are the same kind of ordnance the U.S. military has been gathering in Iraq for the past several years, and “not the WMD we were looking for when we went in this time.”

There you have it. If the word of the Bush administration isn’t enough to convince you that Bush was not right about chemical weapons in Iraq, then I’m not sure what will. And the Times report, far from vindicating George W. Bush, is actually just further proof of the gross political manipulation that lay at the heart of the disastrous conflict he started.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Tom,

Nice to see a new guy on OPP...

Lot of fun and addicting also. Mostly we have right wing conservatives and the do like to pile on..

Some are very inventive with insults, other simply repeat the same ole, same old..

But have a thick skin and the place is fun.. No matter which side of the aisle you are on...

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
H**e to tell you this, but you are wrong. The WMD were there. The tons of yellow cake uranium was later shipped to Canada, if I am not mistaken. You on the left can whine til hell freezes over and in the end merely look like grumpy old sisters. Bush never lied, never went to war on his own hook, never willingly allowed Americans to die, never blamed anything that went wrong on an innocent bystander, never was a t*****r. Your side cannot say the same, so I would suggest you try, just ONCE to stop listening to those who are determined to run and RUIN your life. No l*****t has ever once cared one ounce about you or anyone else except himself......if I had their money as they have mine, I believe I could prove it to you. OF COURSE THE 'WEAPONS WERE NOT THERE.......THEY WERE IN SYRIA WHERE IRAQ TOOK THEM WHILE THE US CONGRESS DITHERED WITH BUSH RE ENTERING IRAQ.[/B] Bear in mind I have never said he is a perfect human, same as you, same as me. Difference is HE was doing a responsible job while we were NOT.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Hi Tas,

I will concede a point to you on the Syria move..

As for the yellow cake, I have read many conflicting reports on it being found or not existing.. I any case, if it was in place, it was not processed and not part of any WMD...
We can go back and forth about what was found and not found, but the fact is that none were found in operational condition. All that were found were traced back to US design during the Reagan administration.
Now that I think about, Yellow cake was that not the issue with the f email CIA agent who was outed? She contradicted the Bush/chany statement and that was the end of her career.. Valery someone ??

As an aside, when Bush Jr. was elected I told one of my coffee buddies that we would be going to war with Iraq... I was right, but did not have the reason correct.. I was thinking revenge. Saddam put a price on Bush the first head... What a fool thing to do..

To be clear... I do not believe that Bush and co believed WMD in operational form existed.. And yet they lied and called it a fact.. NO it was not...

Oh, the delay while feuding with congress.... Someone has said that is what makes a Democracy so difficult, a Dictator could simply say the word and go...

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

There is no evidence that suggests that Bush, his admin officials including Powell, or the CIA, or the UN, or the 100s of Democrat Congressmen, or dozens of other countries intel services, or Bill Clinton as POTUS lied about Saddam having WMDs.

Hating Bush is not evidence of anything but your state of mind.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

If you dig deep enough - you'll always find magma, but a smart person will just go to a volcano where the magma is on the surface. We know that Saddam HAD chemical weapons and such, because we GAVE them to him during the Iran/Iraq war ( duh ), and we know he used them there and on his own folks - 20 years prior to our invasion. Of course there would be traces left - traces.

If it takes 12 years to find proof of your premise for going to war, then you lied up front. I suppose Russia or China could sanction invading the USA, because we had the neutron bomb, chemical weapons, biological weapons, etc.

The premier measure of "rightness" for an action - is whether it would be "right" for anyone, not just the USA.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

It did not take 12 years to find proof that we were justified in going to war.

We were justified before we went. Finding no stockpiles does not change that fact.

You do know that a strong bipartisan v**e supported the invasion, don't you?