Should we be better than this

[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?