Should we be better than this

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I am happy to reply, but if my friend died because of spent 500 scattered non-functioning shells of mustard gas from the 1980's then f' that lying sob george bush and cheney. Hardly wmds if they can't even be used. They scared Americans with threats of imminent attack of actual usable wmds and nuclear materials, tied Saddam to 911 and Al Qaeda. They said there were functioning weapons manufactuirng facilities. They wanted the oil and to enact the plan of PNAC. A lot of American's paid with their lives and limbs. Nobody ever denied that Saddam used weapons on the Kurd's at the end of the war with Iran. We supported Iraq in that war, remember? We knew they had them. In fact, it is now declassified that the function of the Liberty ship my dad served on in the 1960's in the Pacific was to test those chemicals. He and the other sailors got to go up and clean the deck after the primates got gassed. He gets to go to the VA regularly for monitoring. Those non-functioning old weapons were not what was presented as reason for war and certainly do not fit the definition of functioning wmd's whether you want to spin it that way or not. I actually didn't know there was anyone out there still trying to spin that bs.

I can understand where your hostility comes from but if you take the time to read the links I provided perhaps you will clearly see through the bs. Once again when and if you calm down enough and open your mind you may see through the propaganda that has kept you stoked up or perhaps provide me some proof to back up what your saying, I have no problem seeing actual proof that the republicans also suck.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

I can understand where your hostility comes from but if you take the time to read the links I provided perhaps you will clearly see through the bs. Once again when and if you calm down enough and open your mind you may see through the propaganda that has kept you stoked up or perhaps provide me some proof to back up what your saying, I have no problem seeing actual proof that the republicans also suck.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You have not given one ounce of real information that supports the reasons for the war were founded. My mind is open, I am just not someone who believes war should be taken lightly. It is a republican, democrat issue. It is an issue of morality. We can't agree on this. It really goes not much farther than that you feel we should behave as our enemies do, so we really aren't going to come to any sort of middle ground. Bush was going to Iraq whether there was a legit reason or not. His own people said it. If you don't believe that... oh well.

[zimmy]

Just for fun... from your links

1991: Outstanding issues from UNSCOM "Iraq claimed it lost 550 shells filled with mustard gas, but no evidence was found of these weapons"

So they told us about these circa 1991 when we destroyed or oversaw the destruction of over 100,000 special munitions. Those 550 that we found in unusable ancient condition a decade later after we invaded again count as wmd's Bush spoke about?

"In a February 1999 report after leaving Iraq in December 1998, the IAEA declared that no evidence suggested Iraq had succeeded in producing nuclear weapons.
The same report concluded that IAEA activities 'have revealed no indication that Iraq possesses nuclear weapons or any meaningful amounts of weapon-usable nuclear material, or that Iraq has retained any practical capability (facilities or hardware) for the production of such material.'

On top of that, at the time they used it, Bush new the yellowcake story was unfounded. Great way to go to war.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Just for fun... from your links

1991: Outstanding issues from UNSCOM "Iraq claimed it lost 550 shells filled with mustard gas, but no evidence was found of these weapons"

So they told us about these circa 1991 when we destroyed or oversaw the destruction of over 100,000 special munitions. Those 550 that we found in unusable ancient condition a decade later after we invaded again count as wmd's Bush spoke about?

"In a February 1999 report after leaving Iraq in December 1998, the IAEA declared that no evidence suggested Iraq had succeeded in producing nuclear weapons.
The same report concluded that IAEA activities 'have revealed no indication that Iraq possesses nuclear weapons or any meaningful amounts of weapon-usable nuclear material, or that Iraq has retained any practical capability (facilities or hardware) for the production of such material.'

On top of that, at the time they used it, Bush new the yellowcake story was unfounded. Great way to go to war.

Now we are getting solmewhere but please bear with me.
You say Bush knew and yet provide no proof to back it up and get angry that I won't take your words as proof. Show me; the burden of proof is on you to back up your statements is all I'm saying. It is not up to me to search for your information in order to debate your supposed facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Now we are getting solmewhere but please bear with me.
You say Bush knew and yet provide no proof to back it up and get angry that I won't take your words as proof. Show me; the burden of proof is on you to back up your statements is all I'm saying. It is not up to me to search for your information in order to debate your supposed facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, I think the burden of proof was on our government. I am not angry that you don't take my words as proof. If you read up on PNAC, you should be able to see the connections yourself. I am not here to prove anything to you, sorry.

[ecduzitgood]

I would think if it could be proven that Bush lied then he would have faced impeachment, thus I consider both the no WMD's and Bush lied as nothing more than propaganda from the left.

Over the years I feel the left has been more concerned with their power smearing the republicans than they are concerned for the overall welfare of the country. One of the reasons I would like to see elimination of party affiliation so that we elect people to get together and focus on the country and minimize pandering.

It is my opinion more people vote for the letter following the name and they don't care or know what the name preceding the letter has to offer.

For those who may not know the Democrats are left and the Republicans are right.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

I would think if it could be proven that Bush lied then he would have faced impeachment, thus I consider both the no WMD's and Bush lied as nothing more than propaganda from the left.

Impeachment is a difficult process, especially with the balance of congress. Are you aware of how many presidents have been impeached? So because he wasn't impeached, you disregard every piece of information that indicates he misrepresented the reality of the situation as propaganda? You haven't looked at the whole picture, or you are more biased than you are willing to admit. Again, have you read the information on PNAC?