"The White House has now officially acknowledged what the Washington Post first reported and what many probably assumed was the case anyway - the US search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is over, at least in any meaningful sense."
Surprised no one has posted about this now. Not to trumpet on the Bush administration so much but, what do you have to say now? Immediate threat to America via usage of WMD?
The cynical part of me expect the spin on this to be that because they invaded, Saddam was unable to develop the WMD to harm America. Or maybe, try to convince the public that all of it was transported to Syria and Iran. I don't think even Bush Jr. is stupid enough to try to liberate Syria or Iran right now though.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-13 3:07
/dons tinfoil hat/
Stupid is not what's goin' on here. Part One is the Rapture Right's quest to start the Apocalypse, Part Two is the Corporate State's quest for profit.
They never EXPECTED to find anything.
/removes tinfoil hat/
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-13 19:51
iran should be liberated those islamic buttfucks are some of the worst human rights violators evar. But by that logic, Saudi arabia should also be liberated and it doesn't look like its going to happen. Islam is like an abusive husband, yes its harsh and hurts its believers, but they "love" it because its all they know and they are also afraid to leave because it will hurt them (send them to muslim hell).
this point of view on Islam is part of what perpetuates a lot of extremists point of view. Look how general you are being. There are hundreds of millions of people who practice the Islamic way of life peacefuly and lovingly. Just because you turn on your TV and see CNN going off about "extremists" and then you hear your father coin the phrase "Islamic buttfucks" Doesn't mean you need to come on here and share your inbred ignorant views with the rest of us. While we are on the topic of human rights... instead of believing that the USA is all peaches'n'cream do a little research. Start with Co-Intel-Pro, the contra wars? Or better yet, why dont you request a formal response from the Chinese government on the BMD shield (seeing as how the information is there, but sadly overlooked by your multinational profit whoring news agencies.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-22 7:13
Bush said it right the first time he used the word "crusade" in his speech.
It could just be part of the plan for world domination by establishing bases around the world and increasing American sphere of influence. Also securing resources, most importantly oil.
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-22 12:50
>>5
Yes, America is the focus of evil in the modern world. We all deserve to die. Therefore, we should surrender and allow the Islamic buttfucks to have their way with us. Does that about cover it?
Name:
A_M_E_R_I_K_AAAA2005-01-22 17:08
IM IN UR BASE
EATIN UR FOODZ
Name:
OWNEDE!!!2005-01-26 14:28
yuo aer all retarfed fo sure ma niggah lol
Name:
Anonymous2005-01-29 18:58
IM IN UR NANKING
RAPIN UR D00DZ
Name:
N17R0!Y1cyvQBO2Y2005-01-31 8:25
Actually McDonalds probably has a behind-the-curtains control on Bush and are trying to further use him to spread their shitty burgers throughout the world.
Oh yea, and Bush's primal conquest for oil too.
Name:
Zoom2005-02-02 14:26
I still think they'll find WMDs. Seriously.
It's just a matter of time, before a massive quantity of weapons will be found in an underground bunker somewhere inside Iraq. The bunker is still being constructed, but you wait and see!
No self-respecting administration would neglect to cover it's ass, even if it has to manufacture the evidence.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-02 23:59
You forgot those nerve gas artillery shells they found jury-rigged as a roadside bomb last spring, I see.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-03 0:13
!WMD. Old and spoiled, pre-Gulf War junk. WMD is something that can kill a lot of people.
Name:
Zoom2005-02-03 5:52
Which nerve gas artillery shells?
If any FUNCTIONAL IRAQI WMDs had REALLY been found, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeldt and Wolfie would have been stomping, jumping, drooling and shouting "I told you so! I told you so!" 24/7 on CNN.
You've been watching Fox News again, haven't you?
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-03 12:40
It was all over CNN and every other news source for over a week when they were found back in March 2004. It's not my fault if you ignore everything that doesn't come from Al-Jazeera or the Daily Worker.
Name:
Zoom2005-02-03 12:59
You pathetic idiot.
I remember that case, and those were old, rusty, non-functional shells left over from the Iran-Iraq war, Anonymous. Even CNN didn't link them to the supposed weapon stockpiles threatening the world. I repeat: No WMDs have been found in Iraq, and thats the subject of this thread.
In fact the only, and I mean ONLY, network to call the rusty shells WMDs were Fox News. You fail.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-04 1:12
Ah, so nerve gas in the hands of Arab terrorists isn't a weapon of mass destruction?
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
Name:
Ecchi_garr2005-02-06 14:45
TeH AnNoym0us ignROance triUMphs ov er teh logic!!!! Leet!111!
Even the Bush administration has had to admit that Iraq had no WMDs or links to terrorist groups, and come on Rumsfeld sold them to the Iraqis so he knows what he’s talking about.
Even if they were smuggled over the boarder to Syria, that must surely be the responsibility of the Bush administration, wasn't the war meant to STOP terrorists getting their hands on WMDs, if (and may i remind everyone the if part is HUGE in the real world, as opposed to FOX News) they are now in Syria there is an implausibly larger chance that they will be used for terrorism, either way you look at it it's a failure for Bush and his coalition.
Finally why quote Orwell? a leftist commentator of the cold war era who contradicts every point you have made before hand?
If ignorance really is strength then you must be stoned up on steroids my friend.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-06 20:41
I guess Dubya must be pretty stupid, if he believed all these Democrats.
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
p.s. Orwell's novels "Animal Farm" and "1984" were his criticism of the Soviet Union.
Who said i was a democrat? Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin, one is conservative and internationalist, one is conservative and isolationist.
I'm a socialist.
Besides these quotes were based on flawed, bad and in some cases forged intelligence linked directly to the Bush Administrations push for war. and so the quotes are totally contradict your point you were trying to make in the first place.
Not quite, 1984 was actually more of a criticism of the increasing draconian measures being employed in the West to fight the soviets; Animal farm was a parody of the abandonment of socialist ideals inside the soviet union and the people who were doing it.
George Orwell was a staunch socialist and antifascist, he even fought in the Spanish civil war against the fascist forces of Franko.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-07 14:58
"Forged intelligence linked directly to the Bush administration?" In 1998?
U FAIL at reality.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-07 14:58
p.s. You also fail at reading Orwell.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-07 17:45
Intellegence was failing even in the Clinton era, that's no secret, but it failed in a most spectacular fashion during the Bush administration to an extent that good intellegence was ignored.
P.s. Maybe you should Reread Orwell, and a brief history of the soviet union so you understand what Orwell is trying to say.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-07 18:54
So, was it a Bush conspiracy, or not? Make up your mind.
p.s. My grandparents were refugees from the old USSR, and relatives of mine died in Stalin's death-camps at Uglegorsk and Kolyma, so I'm quite familiar with the history of the Soviet Union. I've also probably read more Orwell than you, not to mention more Solzhenitsyn.
Name:
Osaka2005-02-08 8:49
Which anonymous is which? I'm confused.
Name:
Ecchi_Garr2005-02-08 13:58
Yea? Well my dad was a miner, doesn’t mean that i can mine though…
You can read it all you want, it doesn't mean you necessarily understand something as complex as what Orwell tried to portray in his writings, he packed his work full of subtext and subtly and as a result it takes a great amount of reading in-between the lines to fully understand.
A Bush conspiracy? What gave you that idea? All i said was that the Bush administration was incompetent in the way it used the intelligence supplied.
"Besides these quotes were based on flawed, bad and in some cases forged intelligence linked directly to the Bush Administrations push for war. and so the quotes are totally contradict your point you were trying to make in the first place."
U FAIL at reading comprehension. Perhaps you should put more effort into understanding what you read, and less effort into maintaining your cognitive dissonance.
Name:
ecchi_garr2005-02-08 14:57
I am number 22 dipshit, thought i'd post anonymously to highlight how hard it is to keep up a discussion with idiots like you who post anonymously.
You fail at not being a twat.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-08 21:48 (sage)
U FAIL to keep up. U FAIL at reading comprehension. U FAIL to make a coherent point. U FAIL to debate civilly. U FAIL at life.
In conclusion, I would just like to say, stop trying to touch my harbl. I'm flattered, but I don't swing that way.
Name:
Anonymous2005-02-09 14:05
I fail at making a coherent point? A valid point? You still haven't addressed a single point since before >>22.
U fail at writing your name in the box marked "Name".
We should give thoes basterds WMDs that way they would use thim on the jews and the jew would use theres on thim and we would have a lot less mud to worry about!
Name:
The Dope Hitler2005-04-26 11:39
GWB, WMD? WTF!
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-26 11:44
ORLY
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-27 13:26
They did use WMDs on the Jews during the 1991 war
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-29 2:07
>>3
Hey, violations of human rights is the best reason ever to go to war!
china has killed over 1 million tibetians via starvation, torture, or just plain execution! Let's liberate the chinese from their communist goverment!
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-29 12:09
>>39
china was liberating the tibetians from their lama run feudal government and make it into a Socialist Paradise
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-02 12:54
OTZ
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-26 12:05
The whole WMD thing was a damn wild goose chase from the beginning - a thinly veiled payback mission for son-of-a-Bush, enhanced by media-led mass hyst-fEAR-ia. Pathetic America - pathetically gullible.
The Chinese have already done a pretty good job of liberating themselves from communism for all practical purposes.
Name:
Ipso2005-05-27 4:12
*This started in January? Damn! What the hell... here's my 2 cents*
>>1 Anyone who would readily and willingly believes in the BBC already has a liberal bent.
>>2 & >>6 Liberal weenies (including myself back then) also feared Reagan was going to dominate the world and start the apocalypse. He didn't. Instead, he ended up scaring Iran to free hostages that Carter couldn't do and causing the tear down of communist Soviet Union.
>>22 Actually, the nature of Democrats and Republicans have evolved quite a bit in the past 40 years. Most Republican values now more like what the Democrats were in the 60s while the Democrats have moved more towards Socialism. You are so wrong to equate Democrats as conservative and Republicans as isolationists; although, you are free to do so, and granted there are those that are. In general, I submit it would be best to sum them up thusly: Democrats = big government = more bureaucracy = socialistic tendencies = "government and foriegn nations like France knows what's best for you; we will tax you, take care of you, keep you at the racial and social status you belong to so you don't become a Republican; we will also make you believe everything is the Republican's fault"; Republicans = small government = big military = capitalistic tendencies = "work hard, learn to improve yourself, learn to save money, and figure out what's best for you and family; we will protect you, your liberty, your freedom--even if your a bleeding-heart liberal Democrat who thinks America is bad and Republicans are to blame."
>>18>>19>>20>>24>>26>>28
You all pass at reading Orwell! All of you obviously got SOMETHING out of his books, even if IMHO most of you are downright wrong. But hey, ya gotta luv books (and the media)! You get what you believe.
>>40 So are you living in Socialist Paradise now? If not, do you truly believe China to be paradise? If so, would you like a one way ticket to go there? (I couldn't help it! I had to ask!)
>>43 I agree, although I wouldn't call them liberated just quite yet. Maybe "commercialized"? hmmm...
I'd go on but I'd just be wasting keystrokes. Most everyone (except for >>20) are hypocrits, idiots, politocrits, and snits, anyways... including myself for participating in this inane discussion this late. But hey, it's been fun! g'nite.
>>44
>>>Anyone who would readily and willingly believes in the BBC already has a liberal bent.
What, for actually listening to a network which doesn't make a complete circus act out of news and actually cares about a little thing we from the rest of the world like to call "facts"?
Name:
GearheadX2005-05-31 10:23
A simple rule that not only applies to computers, but real life as well.
Hello, readers of 4chan text boards. I have recently come across some disturbing evidence. We have a traitor among us who is trying to shut 4chan down for copyright violations. I have tracked him down and discovered his Wikipedia page.