Read the UNSC Resolutions which were the foundation for the UN inspectors... I suspect to most people "no WMD" meant no stockpiles of WMD... But as this was not the tripwire set by the US and Britain in their arguments to the UN or in the prior UNSC Chapter VII Resolutions, it is and always was a straw-man by a sloppy MSM meant to confuse rather than to edify...
On Dec 22, 5:49 pm, lef <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't know where you get all your urban myths. I think when people > say that Saddam had no wmd they mean Saddam had no such wmd as > described by Colin Powell to the security council, wich was the > official reason to invade Iraq. > > On 22 Dec, 22:39, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You ask what WMD was found... I answered it... And in 1996 the UNSC > > was told by Saddam's son-in-law about some hidden WMD programs... > > > No the Urban myth is Saddam had NO WMD and gave the UN unfettered > > access... Both are lies.. > > > On Dec 22, 4:09 pm, lef <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > All of this was known to the weapon inspectors. > > > > On 22 Dec, 22:05, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Per the defination UNSC, WMD includes stockpiles, components, > > > > precursors, manufacturing capacity, delivery systems, research into > > > > all the above... > > > > > What was found was > > > > > 1) delivery systems > > > > > 2) components and precursors > > > > > 3) manufacturing capacity > > > > > 4) research programs... > > > > > On Dec 22, 3:57 pm, lef <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > What kind of WMD was found in Iraq post 2003? > > > > > > On 22 Dec, 21:21, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Mark Russia sent its soldiers into Georgian territory and > > > > > > unilaterally > > > > > > declared part of Georgia Independent... I note the unwillingness > > > > > > on > > > > > > your part to DISCUSS ideas... For example > > > > > > > If one insisted on facts, talking to most of those who opposed Bush > > > > > > in > > > > > > Iraq would be impossible... Why.. They insist not WMD was found > > > > > > in > > > > > > Iraq post 2003... WMD was found in Iraq, as defined by the > > > > > > UNSC... > > > > > > > But I understand this tactic is meant to NOT DISCUSS ideas while > > > > > > pretending to yourself you are open-minded... > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 1:16 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Russia did NOT invade Georgia. It is a lie. An opposing view point > > > > > > > that begins with an incontrovertable lie is worthless. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 12:14 PM, jgg1000a <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Perhaps your bias is why your opinions suck --- you refuse to > > > > > > > > read > > > > > > > > opposing view points... > > > > > > > > > On Dec 20, 3:06 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Won't even read it as the title contains a lie. > > > > > > > > >> One can not invade a nation one has been in legally by open and > > > > > > > >> admitted consent of that nation. > > > > > > > > >> On Dec 20, 12:44 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >http://cominganarchy.com/2008/12/20/pinned-americas-taiwan-policy-rec... > > > > > > > > >> > >>> Accordingly, the ultimate goal is preventing > > > > > > > >> > >>> hostilities—for as long as possible. That means no > > > > > > > >> > >>> independence declaration and no military invasion. The > > > > > > > >> > >>> best way to maintain this is to speak Victorian! In > > > > > > > >> > >>> other words the US must state that it will honor its > > > > > > > >> > >>> defense pledge to Taiwan in the event this small > > > > > > > >> > >>> democratic nation is attacked by an authoritarian > > > > > > > >> > >>> communist power. And it must supply Taiwan with military > > > > > > > >> > >>> hardware accordingly. But it cannot overstate its > > > > > > > >> > >>> support and push Taiwan to "pull a Georgia." The Russian > > > > > > > >> > >>> invasion of Georgia may end up having an impact on the > > > > > > > >> > >>> Far East. We must assume that Taiwan has watched the > > > > > > > >> > >>> lukewarm American response to Russia's invasion with > > > > > > > >> > >>> extreme concern, because it shows that America really > > > > > > > >> > >>> isn't willing to protect reckless leaders that may be > > > > > > > >> > >>> considered allies. Hopefully it acts to restrain > > > > > > > >> > >>> Taiwan's urges for declaring independence, and does not > > > > > > > >> > >>> inspire China about the benefits that could be reaped > > > > > > > >> > >>> from an invasion.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > >> > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Mark M. Kahle > > > > > > > Blessed are the bewildered for they don't know the difference.... > > > > > > > Me- Dölj citerad text - > > > > > > > - Visa citerad text -- Dölj citerad text - > > > > > - Visa citerad text -- Dölj citerad text - > > > - Visa citerad text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
