Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

We knew those were there the entire time.

Really, the war was about undeclared WMD's, because apparently it's fine as long as you're not hiding them from anyone.

((TBF, these are leftovers from the Iran-Iraq war, I don't think they're going to work.))

[Loud Whispers]

As long as they've got the chemical they're fine. When the Murricans found 500 corroded leftovers from the Iran-Iraq war they still destroyed them because the chemicals could still be used in spite of the aged condition of their delivery. If they could work then, they could work now.

[smjjames]

I thought we invaded because we thought Saddam had nukes (according to Bush)?

Still, if the terrorists actually did get their hands on some chemical weapons (old and of questionable quality or not), then that's bad.

The terrorists stealing and using chemical weapons isn't going to start WWIII, if anything, it's just going to make Iraq get invaded again. Though possibly by other Arab countries or Iran since we tried once already and screwed up, we'd just screw it up further if we invaded again.

[burningpet]

I don't think even Bush was rude enough to imply saddam had nukes.

[stabbymcstabstab]

We invade because of this little silly thing about Saddam Gassing the Kurds, So it's slightly possible there might be a canister or two out in the desert with stuff in it, but that close to impossible

[RedKing]

I don't think even Bush was rude enough to imply saddam had nukes.

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly Saddam can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."
--Condoleeza Rice


So yeah, they were implying that. Or at least implying that if we didn't invade, he'd get them.

C'mon, am I the only that remembers the kerfluffle over aluminum tubes? They were totes implying that he was on the way to building nukes.

[burningpet]

Really?! heh 

And i was naively thinking they at least had the decency to imply only possible lies.

[Zangi]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.
Every other reason was a drop in the bucket, media-wise anyways...

[smjjames]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.
Every other reason was a drop in the bucket, media-wise anyways...

Yeah, it was something about WMDs that Saddam never had. We know he used chemical weapons, but we never found any working WMDs, or at least the ones that Bush and his crew expected to find.

I think there was also an anti-terrorism angle to it though.

[RedKing]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.
Every other reason was a drop in the bucket, media-wise anyways...

Yeah, it was something about WMDs that Saddam never had. We know he used chemical weapons, but we never found any working WMDs, or at least the ones that Bush and his crew expected to find.

I think there was also an anti-terrorism angle to it though.

That was sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy addition that got added in circa 2005 or 2006.

"We think Saddam is connected to al-Qaeda" (despite the fact that he regularly jailed and killed Islamists, just like Gaddafi and Assad, and that al-Qaeda communications denigrated Hussein)

*invades Iraq*

*Jihadists flock to Iraq to get a chance to kill American troops*

"See! We were right! Just look at all these terrorists here! And that's why we had to invade. If you were against the war, you're retroactively supporting terrorists."
_{(since we can't find those pesky WMDs that we said we knew where they were.....)}

[smjjames]

You know, I wonder why we didn't destroy the chemical weapons complex, which is now in extremist hands. It'd be Al Quaedas dream come true to own a chemical weapons complex.

If we're gonna bomb anything, that's the one place we should absolutely bomb.

Also, how much effort would it have taken to destroy the chemical weapons complex in the first place? (nevermind the chemical decontamination and release issues)

[SalmonGod]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.

There are people around who sadly still believe it, too...

[RedKing]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.

There are people around who sadly still believe it, too...

And some of them are in Congress.

[SalmonGod]

I do distinctly remember the war being about WMDs, ones that never existed, but people were damn sure it did.

There are people around who sadly still believe it, too...

And some of them are in Congress.

Makes me want to gibber and cry.

[10ebbor10]

You know, I wonder why we didn't destroy the chemical weapons complex, which is now in extremist hands. It'd be Al Quaedas dream come true to own a chemical weapons complex.

If we're gonna bomb anything, that's the one place we should absolutely bomb.

Also, how much effort would it have taken to destroy the chemical weapons complex in the first place? (nevermind the chemical decontamination and release issues)

It's largely underground, so It'd be rather hard. Then again, the facility itself has been mostly dismantled, it's merely still used to store the old weaponry.