So Clinton signs a bill giving him the right to regime change in Iraq and your response is a Senate Intelligence Report from 8 years later. Are you claiming that Clinton did not sign the bill he signed?
Mark wrote: > Here is something reliable and empiracal senate intelligence report, > 2006 http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775 > written by republicans while Bush was president. > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:17 PM, dick thompson > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Here's another link, this time from the Democratic Underground > > Mark wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:45 PM, dick thompson >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> It was built by the Germans. The US was not the big donor to >> Iraq during that period. In fact we were ranked 11th in what >> we supplied to them with our supplying less than 1% of their >> materiels, less than Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, and on >> a level with Luxembourg. That figure came from Jane's >> studies on war materiels and from the UN studies also. >> >> >> No, tammuz 1 and 2 wsere built by the french and destroyed by >> aircrat fire >> >> This is a pool type reactor of 500 kW thermal power supplied by >> France. The reactor was mainly designed as neutronic mock-up for >> Tammuz 1 reactor. [Tammuz 1 was destroyed by air-raid in 1981 >> prior to operation]. As a result, the role of Tammuz 2 was >> changed and it was used for training, neutronic radiography and >> for research purposes. The reactor was totally destroyed in the >> 1991 Gulf War and has been de-fuelled. The expected wastes to be >> generated by the decommissioning activities are about 50 tons >> solid wastes and 35 m³ of liquid wastes. The same radionuclides >> as IRT-5000 are expected to be present in the wastes. >> >> regardless of who "built" it..... hese people... the SOLE EXPERTS >> say it did not exist in 2000 >> http://www-ns.iaea.org/projects/iraq/tuwaitha/tamuz-2.asp >> >> >> He used gas on his own people and then was "falsely" accused >> of having gas for 25 years? What in the world does that even >> mean. It is less than 20 years since he used the gas on the >> Kurds. You really need to do some more checking on your >> stories. Way off!! >> >> >> 20 years...25 years kinda splitting hairs. what did the ONSITE >> UN and US inspectors say. >> >> >> As to the story of his WMD's that info was passed on to the >> country by a whole slew of Dems from Clinton on down (there >> was a list of quotations from over 20 of them right up until >> 2002 that was passed around on the websites a couple of years >> ago). I don't see you calling them on lying. They got their >> info from the same sources that Bush did. And he also got >> some from our allies as well. >> >> >> stories are just that stories..... there was and is no proof. >> >> >> You also don't seem to have anything to say about Bubba >> asking for and getting permission to force a change in >> government in Iraq in 1998. He, as with most things, did >> nothing about it but he asked for and got the permission from >> Congress. Why was that? What made him ask for permission >> to force that event. There must have been some reason for >> it. I realize that it rather goes against the Dem talking >> points but it did happen. After all History did not start in >> 2001. >> >> >> link please. >> >> >> >> THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: >>> I didn't think he ahd gas or wmd's or nukes (though I Knew he was >>> sitting on a research reactor and a mountain of yellow cake) The >>> difference in time from having used and being falsely accused of >>> having gas was 25 years..... >>> >>> as far as building that reactor in Iraq... the US supplied and built >>> it AND donated the yellow cake as well..... You are right the US is >>> a >>> danger even to itself. The only deluded person/people seems to be >>> you >>> and Gringolandia. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 18, 12:07 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>> If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did. >>>>> >>>> We thought he had poison gas. Our soldiers were equipped to >>>> confront >>>> it. >>>> >>>> Everybody thought he had WMDs, mostly because he not only HAD them >>>> but >>>> because he used them against his enemies. >>>> >>>> Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state >>>> >>>> Actually, they were. Iraq had completed construction of a nuclear >>>> reactor (That makes you a nuclear nation state) but Israel >>>> immediately >>>> blew it up. (Thank you Israel). >>>> >>>> Some people would say that a leader who builds a nuclear reactor >>>> despite worldwide protests and has and uses poison gas on >>>> neighboring >>>> countries and his own people was a dangerous guy. Other people like >>>> deluding themselves. >>>> >>>> On Jul 18, 1:42 pm, Frederick The Moderate >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> If there had been WMD, we wouldn't have gone in the way we did. >>>>> Large, >>>>> tight formations are easy targets and we know that. Not to mention >>>>> that we would have sent a least one division to sweep and search >>>>> the >>>>> area where we "knew" the WMD's were for residual (or any other) >>>>> evidence they ever existed. We never did. Not one peek. I'm former >>>>> navy intel and i can assure you, even though Bush screwed our >>>>> Humint >>>>> network fro some time to come, we still would have been able to >>>>> find >>>>> evidence - if believed it was ever there. >>>>> But I get it. You really, really, really want to believe there >>>>> were >>>>> WMD's there. Okay. >>>>> >>>>> Oh and btw, Iraq is not now and never was a nuclear nation state >>>>> but >>>>> again, if you really want to believe it is or was, okay dokey. >>>>> >>>>> Talk about wanting to believe lies. >>>>> >>>>> I've lost five friends in Iraq. All of them Psy-Ops and a couple >>>>> Force >>>>> Recon. They've made it clear for years that Iraq will never >>>>> appreciate >>>>> what we've done and no matter how long we're there, they'll >>>>> regress >>>>> shortly after we leave. Two thousand years of culture. >>>>> Iraq has already made clear they view US as outsiders and went >>>>> out of >>>>> the way to spit in Bush's face before he could get out of office. >>>>> But >>>>> you believe what you want to believe. >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 18, 7:23 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> We also had the certainty that there really were no WMD's >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Not true. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Urban warfare, their commitment to keep fighting people they >>>>>>>>> viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any kind of >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> exit strategy, created a no-win situation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Once again you show little understanding... Both AQ and the >>>>>> Americans are outsiders... As is the harsh form of Radical >>>>>> Islam... >>>>>> As is the lowland Pakistani... The question here is not >>>>>> fighting the >>>>>> outsider BUT WHICH OUTSIDER... The exit strategy? Stability >>>>>> and a >>>>>> non Radical Islamic government in a nuclear nation-state... >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border >>>>>>>>> them. They had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics & >>>>>>>>> technology have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful >>>>>>>>> only at blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's >>>>>>>>> a mess >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and a mistake and we should get out. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tactics and technology make a huge difference... As the fact >>>>>> the our >>>>>> WILLINGNESS and desire to be a long term occupying power is far >>>>>> less >>>>>> than the Russians or the Pakistanis as makes a difference... >>>>>> The >>>>>> Russian border aided in supplying their troops but harmed the >>>>>> "Soft >>>>>> Warfare" in being seen a a long term occupying power... >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The only upside is at least we're actually going after people >>>>>>>>> we have truthful cause to go after. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Once again you proclaim Urban Lies... >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 18, 3:58 am, Frederick The Moderate >>>>>> >>>>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree with you about Iraq. We had so many sanctions on Iraq >>>>>>> before >>>>>>> invading, they couldn't import dental equipment (because it >>>>>>> could >>>>>>> possibly be modified for weapons use - go figure). We also had >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> certainty that there really were no WMD's. So it was nothing to >>>>>>> storm >>>>>>> right in. Like you said, cakewalk getting there. It was >>>>>>> afterward the >>>>>>> problems started. Urban warfare, their commitment to keep >>>>>>> fighting >>>>>>> people they viewed as invaders, and the complete lack of any >>>>>>> kind of >>>>>>> exit strategy, created a no-win situation. >>>>>>> I also agree with you on Afghanistan. The Russians border them. >>>>>>> They >>>>>>> had easier access and more troops. No success. Tactics & >>>>>>> technology >>>>>>> have done squat for us. Thus far, we've been successful only at >>>>>>> blowing up weddings and killing civilians. Lots of them. It's a >>>>>>> mess >>>>>>> and a mistake and we should get out. >>>>>>> The only upside is at least we're actually going after people >>>>>>> we have >>>>>>> truthful cause to go after. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 17, 11:40 pm, "d.b.baker" <[email protected]> >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Iraq was [almost] a cake walk, compared to what we face in >>>>>>>> Afghanistan. Even with enough troops (500,000 +/-), it'll take >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> generation to pacify Afghanistan - a mountainous moonscape the >>>>>>>> size of >>>>>>>> Texas covered with 70-million ants (nomads, warring tribes - >>>>>>>> barefoot, >>>>>>>> illiterate villages). There's nothing there to "rebuild," it's >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>> from scratch. The people are suspicious of everything, even a >>>>>>>> simple, >>>>>>>> local hydro-pump to generate electricity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then there's Pakistan, blood-brother to Afghanistan; we'll >>>>>>>> never >>>>>>>> subdue one without subduing the other. And by that time we'll >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>> broke, no longer a viable nation - which makes the whole surge- >>>>>>>> strategy a lethal mistake.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Mark M. Kahle, , >> www.filacoffee.com <http://www.filacoffee.com/> >> >> > > > -- > Mark M. Kahle, , > www.filacoffee.com <http://www.filacoffee.com> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
