Keep in mind that Congress can receive the same intelligence that the president. They have just as high security clearance. They also get briefed by the CIA director just like the President.

Chuck Schumer > October 10, 2002
"It is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and future potential support for terrorist acts and organizations that make him a danger to the people of the united states."

Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998 "If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Madeleine Albright > February 1, 1998 "We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Nancy Pelosi > December 16, 1998 "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Ted Kennedy > September 27, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Jay Rockefeller > October 10, 2002 "There was unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember that we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

Joe Biden > August 4, 2002 "[H]e does have the capacity, as all terrorist-related operations do, of smuggling stuff into the United States and doing something terrible. That is true. But there's been no connection, hard connection made yet between he and al-Qaida or his willingness or effort to do that thus far. Doesn't mean he won't. This is a bad guy."

Dick Durbin > September 30, 1999
"One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may acquire or develop nuclear weapons."

Bill Nelson > August 25, 2002
"[M]y own personal view is, I think Saddam
has chemical and biological weapons,
and I expect that he is trying to develop
a nuclear weapon. So at some point,
we might have to act precipitously."

Nancy Pelosi > October 10, 2002
"Yes, he has chemical weapons. Yes, he has biological weapons. He is trying to get nuclear weapons."

Bill Clinton > February 17, 1998
"We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st Century.... They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."

Johnny Edwards > February 6, 2003
"The question is whether we're going to allow this man who's been developing weapons of mass destruction continue to develop weapons of mass destruction, get nuclear capability and get to the place where -- if we're going to stop him if he invades a country around him -- it'll cost millions of lives as opposed to thousands of lives."

Al Gore > September 23, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

John Kerry > February 23, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East.”

Is there a point in here somewhere?

.

What's happenin' Liquid?

Just got back home after two weeks in the hospital. The original knee cap they implanted pretty much came unattached bout two weeks ago,so they had to do it all over again.

so i am same as usual.... the best drugs insurance can buy and the cheapest whiskey I can buy

Good thing it's not the other way around...

Is there a point in here somewhere?

.

come on now Dharma.... If having a point is a prerequisit to posting something.... 90% of the posts on here would of never been...

I was in a convenience store the other day, standing behind a young lady whose posterior was quite admirable. I couldn't help but think of your sig pic -- and of course I started to laugh out loud. She turned around and asked what was so funny -- and this made me laugh even more because there was no way I was going to tell her. I apologized and said it was nothing, got myself under control. I don't know, maybe it's one of those "you had to be there" moments but I still think it was funny as hell.

Oh no... I didnt haveot be there.... LOL that is funny as hell... lucky you didnt get smacked over it.

Bravo Mate.Pretty to the point and w/o needed further
explanation.Becuse it must be explained in simple terms.So the vast majority of
the Electorate fully comprehend.

Democrats LIE
Republicans Talk Turkey

I was in a convenience store the other day, standing behind a young lady whose posterior was quite admirable. I couldn't help but think of your sig pic -- and of course I started to laugh out loud. She turned around and asked what was so funny -- and this made me laugh even more because there was no way I was going to tell her. I apologized and said it was nothing, got myself under control. I don't know, maybe it's one of those "you had to be there" moments but I still think it was funny as hell.

******************************
Yes,how apropos.A typical Liberal device.When the heat starts to
inflate & Amass,rely on deflection.Juts laugh off the obvious.Like
Hillary did with Chris Wallace a couple weeks ago.
And those like her,who supposedly want to safeguard and make this
Country strong and free from attacks,like what just happened in Pakistan.
Bee 4 Real.
See a Dimocrat,laugh AT a Dimocrat.

Is there a point in here somewhere?

.

Yes,virtually yer entire pathetic attempt to Paint Bush as
Lone cowboy,out to wrangle some Cattle and Oil in Iraq on
Lone Bogus incentive and intelligence has been pretty mush
Flushed out and disinfected.
Now,don't you feel like a Used Pansy Wallflower.?
Juts a widdle.!

Democrats LIE
Republicans Talk Turkey
These quotes were either said during the time Iraq had a program for developing WMD, or were based on the information provided by the Bush administration, which we now know to have been faulty.

These quotes were either said during the time Iraq had a program for developing WMD, or were based on the information provided by the Bush administration, which we now know to have been faulty.

Not Faulty.... a lie.

.

7 out of 13 of those quotes were pre Bush administration. It is a fact Iraq was just as close to developing WMD then as they were until being taken down. The programs were not dismanttled..... they were just put on hold while Iraq played the UN for punk bitches.. It is our fault they never got it back up and running.

7 out of 13 of those quotes were pre Bush administration. It is a fact Iraq was just as close to developing WMD then as they were until being taken down. The programs were not dismanttled..... they were just put on hold while Iraq played the UN for punk bitches.. It is our fault they never got it back up and running.Not true, LF. They had been "dismantled."

Hope you're well.

I guess i am going to have to disagree with your definition of dismantling... spreading the pieces out to hid them better is not what I call dismantling... I may be wrong on the extent... if you have an article i would most definitely read it with open eyes.

I am well... had to get more work done on the knee... i am O.K now back and pissing fire...... I am still looking for those girls who can tie the cherry stem in each others mouths are doing....

Not true, LF. They had been "dismantled."

Hope you're well.

So,YOU know more than Little Hans Blix.? Because he dint knowed
nuthin of the sort,even a year AFTER Iraqi Freedom.
Only long enough AFTER the War effort to make himself slightly
more respectable at dinner engagements of those who
eventually were implicated in the - Oil for Food - imbroglio.

Isn't it lovely the way you stealthy backtrackers,love to mince
History and accuracy.Like you're acturally entertaing notions of FACT.

So,YOU know more than Little Hans Blix.? Because he dint knowed
nuthin of the sort,even a year AFTER Iraqi Freedom.
Only long enough AFTER the War effort to make himself slightly
more respectable at dinner engagements of those who
eventually were implicated in the - Oil for Food - imbroglio.

Isn't it lovely the way you stealthy backtrackers,love to mince
History and accuracy.Like you're acturally entertaing notions of FACT.How do you type with those little talons, Polly?

U.N. inspector: No evidence found before Iraq war
Amid pressure on Blair, Aznar and Bush about WMDs
Thursday, June 5, 2003 Posted: 2:26 PM EDT (1826 GMT)


UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- U.N. inspectors found no evidence before the U.S.-led invasion in March that Iraq had reconstituted its chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs, chief U.N. inspector Hans Blix said Thursday.

The comments come as U.S. President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar face mounting criticism from lawmakers in their countries over the weapons issue. (Critics blast Blair, Spain's Aznar pressed on WMDs)

"The commission has not at any time during the inspections in Iraq found evidence of the continuation or resumption of programs of weapons of mass destruction or significant quantities of proscribed items, whether from pre-1991 or later," Blix told the U.N. Security Council in what is expected to be his final report.

"The commission has not at any time during the inspections in Iraq found evidence of the continuation or resumption of programs of weapons of mass destruction or significant quantities of proscribed items, whether from pre-1991 or later," Blix told the U.N. Security Council in what is expected to be his final report.


It never said dismantling. I believe they were not active prior to the war but the progress they did make was not a far lengths away from starting it up again. I did not think they crossed the line where they couldnt pick it back up again at A NOTICE

Keep in mind that Congress can receive the same intelligence that the president. They have just as high security clearance. They also get briefed by the CIA director just like the President.
Gee.....whatta great-justification for staying-the-course. :rolleyes:

This is just like Dharm.............

If it is Democrats...... he looks the other way, if it is Republicans...........
....... oh nooooo evil evil evil evil.

Is there a point in here somewhere?

.

These quotes were either said during the time Iraq had a program for developing WMD, or were based on the information provided by the Bush administration, which we now know to have been faulty.


Shilohproject,

You seem to be becoming more and more the rabid partisan and less and less the honest observer.

Congress was privy to the same information the President was privy too. It was not only GWB who felt as those quoted felt but also the investigative branches of most foreign countries.

To try to lay the blame at Bush's door and imply that he lied to Congress does you little credit.

Gee.....whatta great-justification for staying-the-course. :rolleyes:

Weapons of Mass Destruction is no a justification for our continued presence in Iraq. Preventing a virtual bloodbath is the justification. In hindsight it is obvious that the U.S. and its allies should probably not have invaded Iraq but as they say, hindsight is twenty twenty.

The fact of the matter is, we did invade Iraq and we set certain actions and events into motion. We cannot now simply wash our hands of the entire affair and leave. It behooves the United States to remain in Iraq until a more stable condition is in effect.

It behooves the United States to remain in Iraq until a more stable condition is in effect.

What if our presence is a cause of instability?

I don't think it is. I think it is just the opposite, the only thing keeping Iraq from descending into total chaos.

I think the U.S. invasion and removal of Saddam Hussein was a factor in the initial instability but I think that were the U.S. to leave the present instability would be even worse.

I don't think it is. I think it is just the opposite, the only thing keeping Iraq from descending into total chaos.

I think the U.S. invasion and removal of Saddam Hussein was a factor in the initial instability but I think that were the U.S. to leave the present instability would be even worse.

You may be right, but if a principal cause of the instability is the Sunni/Shia conflict, our presence may just be a distraction from resolving that conflict.

The only thing that kept religious conflict in check was the iron control of Saddam Hussein. With few exceptions Sunnis and Shiites hate each other and are more than willing to kill each other. They do so not only in Iraq but also in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia and almost anywhere else where they are both found in close proximity.

Each group considers the other not Muslim enough and the deaths will continue until and unless forced to stop by a strong, outside force.

Shilohproject,

You seem to be becoming more and more the rabid partisan and less and less the honest observer.Your opinion in this matter is not only irrelevant, but is a sign of your political position and little else.

Congress was privy to the same information the President was privy too.Wrong. The White House has consistantly failed to fully brief the Congress, and in the cases when it did, offerred gisted reports not raw data. No responsible conclusion can be drawn on only one side of the picture.

It was not only GWB who felt as those quoted felt but also the investigative branches of most foreign countries.Wrong again. "Most of the world" did not support the move ito invade Iraq and several of the leading intellegence services warned that the data used to support the go-ahead was either manufactured or unverified.

To try to lay the blame at Bush's door and imply that he lied to Congress does you little credit.I didn't say "lied." It is a question of compotency and objectivity, not outright deceit, as far as I am concerned.

Each group considers the other not Muslim enough and the deaths will continue until and unless forced to stop by a strong, outside force.
Wrong again. An outside force will not stop the violence, but rather provide another target for it. This is an internal matter whch will not be solved at all by an outside force.

Your opinion in this matter is not only irrelevant, but is a sign of your political position and little else.
Since I am as much a participant in this forum as you my opinion is at least as relevant as yours. Getting a bit big for your britches there Shilohproject if you think your opinions on any matter are more important than any other poster's.

Wrong. The White House has consistantly failed to fully brief the Congress, and in the cases when it did, offerred gisted reports not raw data. No responsible conclusion can be drawn on only one side of the picture.

Further down in your post you say you aren't suggesting Bush lied, but that is exactly what you are doing. You are suggesting he 'cooked the books' on the raw data, ie. lied.



Wrong again. "Most of the world" did not support the move into invade Iraq and several of the leading intellegence services warned that the data used to support the go-ahead was either manufactured or unverified.

Again, you are suggesting the Bush administration lied, unless you have another definition of manufactured data.

I didn't say "lied." It is a question of compotency and objectivity, not outright deceit, as far as I am concerned.

No, you didn't say lied. You merely implied it. You are taking a page from Freethinker's book and playing semantic games.

Since I am as much a participant in this forum as you my opinion is at least as relevant as yours. Getting a bit big for your britches there Shilohproject if you think your opinions on any matter are more important than any other poster's.I was addressing your opinion of me, not of the topic under discussion. Your opinion of me is irrelevant. Further, for you to bring it into the discussion is weak since it doesn't look at the matter being examined.

Further down in your post you say you aren't suggesting Bush lied, but that is exactly what you are doing. You are suggesting he 'cooked the books' on the raw data, ie. lied.Wrong again. I am saying not that he "cooked the books," but rather that he read the data a specific way, which was faulty, spread that position to congress and that lead to their faulty understanding. Their relience on the White House failed them.(Rather than trying to defend a position, go back and read my posts on this thread and learn what I am actually saying.)

Again, you are suggesting the Bush administration lied, unless you have another definition of manufactured data.The White House was not the party that manufactured the data. Rather the data they relied on was eiter manufactured or unverified. They accepted it because it fit the world view they imagined already was true.

No, you didn't say lied. You merely implied it. You are taking a page from Freethinker's book and playing semantic games.No, no and no. Perhaps you didn't actually read what I wrote?

I always read what you write, Shilohproject.

Sorry if I don't agree with you but in my opinion you are trying to unfairly blame the Bush administration for believing something most of the world believed at the time. It was not only American intelligence saying Iraq had WMDs but also the intelligence units of other nations.

I always read what you write, Shilohproject.

Sorry if I don't agree with you but in my opinion you are trying to unfairly blame the Bush administration for believing something most of the world believed at the time.To "unfairly blame," based on a differant reading of competancy and openning slant, is one thing. To label them as "liars," is another. I spent much of my professional life dealing with these issues and am intimately aware of the problems relating to prepositioned views. I have never accused the administration of deceit, but rather incompetence.

No. As of last count, I have lost 7 friends or colleagues in Iraq. Wasted.]