New Information

[damion18d]

The information in this link provides light on a shadowy situation those of us in SpecOPs on the ground in Iraq have believed all along.
HTTP://www.frontpagemag.com/articles...e.asp?ID=15458

[Drifter]

The information in this link provides light on a shadowy situation those of us in SpecOPs on the ground in Iraq have believed all along.
HTTP://www.frontpagemag.com/articles...e.asp?ID=15458

NEW Information!!! It turns out not only did Hussen and Iraq have "Established Ties" to bad people in 1993, but from 1979 until 1990 they were buying WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION from one of the worlds biggest supper powers!! Really! we should treat this just like the drug wars... go after the druglord!!! oh... wait...

ya mean...

Oops...

Nevermind.

[noodle]

yeah, right.

president acknowledged the fact that there was no substantial connection already. what about that? maybe the president didn't read this article, huh?

[damion18d]

Did either one of you read the entire article? Or did you just stop once you thought you had enough info for a quip?

Drifter, I guess we can just forget about it that there is evidence that WMD was bought as recently as 2000. Just a quick adjunct for those that love to swing the WMD stick. I pose a question. If I hid a quarter in your own home and told you to find it, how long do you think it would take. Now mind you, you still have to work, cook, clean, sleep, shower you know all the other stuff aside from look for this thing. WMD don't have to be big to be terriblely destructive, this is their nature. Now imagine looking for that thing in a COUNTRY that is a veritble wasteland outside of urban centers. You could look forever and never find anything.

Noodle, apparently you missed the fact that this was just the tip of the iceberg as to the amount of papers to be translated. Did you look at the date this was released?

Not to mention the direct ties and apparent funding of many of the people who became leaders of the people we are fighting.

I don't mind if you have different opinions. That is to be expected. But don't be so partisan it blinds you to at least consider info before you disguard it.

[noodle]

i did read the whole thing and all i see is transparent statements.

where is this information in the rest of the media if its such a big deal? maybe you didn't notice the guy in charge of this page has authored a book: Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left. think his views are a little skewed? i think so. maybe what he said is false and any credible news source wouldn't touch it?

[Soldier]

Does it matter what else he wrote? Unless you are suggesting he is blatantly lying about the content (verified by acknowledged scholars, including a former Clinton-ite) of these papers.

Damion, what is that you and Inq have been saying for a while about the average person not having access to the same intelligence as those making the decisions?

[Drifter]

Did either one of you read the entire article? Or did you just stop once you thought you had enough info for a quip?

Drifter, I guess we can just forget about it that there is evidence that WMD was bought as recently as 2000. Just a quick adjunct for those that love to swing the WMD stick. I pose a question. If I hid a quarter in your own home and told you to find it, how long do you think it would take. Now mind you, you still have to work, cook, clean, sleep, shower you know all the other stuff aside from look for this thing. WMD don't have to be big to be terriblely destructive, this is their nature. Now imagine looking for that thing in a COUNTRY that is a veritble wasteland outside of urban centers. You could look forever and never find anything.

Noodle, apparently you missed the fact that this was just the tip of the iceberg as to the amount of papers to be translated. Did you look at the date this was released?

Not to mention the direct ties and apparent funding of many of the people who became leaders of the people we are fighting.

I don't mind if you have different opinions. That is to be expected. But don't be so partisan it blinds you to at least consider info before you disguard it.

Uhh... apparently you're not up on your Middle-Eastern history so the sarcasm I dropped into that post was missed on you. Sorry I should have known better.

You see the post that I made starts by mentioning that the documents that are referenced in your "New Information" post are from roundabout 1993 (hardly new). The point I was attempting to make is that if data from 1993 is so damning then MAYBE we should look at who sold Iraq all these weapons, they didn't make their pre-1992 factories of death from the abundant sand and oil they have ya know.

There is of course one problem with being angry at the country that helped Iraq become a major user of "banned" chemical weapons. Between the periods of 1980 (the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war) until 1990 THE USA SOLD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION TO IRAQ. At a tasty profit I might add. Billions of dollars were made by us being the main backer of Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. Does that have much relevance today? I'd say about as much as documents dated 1993.

As a side note... gee whom could have made certain that such "daming evidence" of Iraq's ties with the "unholy terrorists" were never even created in the first place... Hmmm... let's see... well if we'd never supported a dictator in the early 80's and that actor guy you know "Bonzoo" or something had never agreed to sell him such a vast array of weapons and technology... or maybe if that guy... let's see it was George something... you know in the early 90's the one who invaded Iraq.... I suppose he could've committed to the full deal of a war and provided reconstruction... or maybe instead of spending so much time bonking his interns that Bill guy could have done something but.. I guess maybe I'm just being too partisan...

These people were also clearly too partisan to be beleived, that's why there's so few foot notes:

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/u...90s.html#three

[Soldier]

But the documents were just unearthed; hence, new information to us. If you tell me that Archimedes was really gay, that's new information to me, regardless of how long he's been dead.

Now, instead of saying "Bad America!" for what happened before, why don't we just clean up? Analyze the history of it all you want, and tell us who the bad guy is; that doesn't matter right now.

[Drifter]

You put into such a very nice black and white perspective I'm saying "Bad America" and you're saying "America is great let's make it better Now!" You are aware that the true patriots of the American revolution were the ones standing on soap boxes (or at least the colonial equivalent) passionately pleading for the population to stand up a take a look at what had really been happening around them don't you?

Don't you think it is kind important to know HOW something started before vowing to resolve the issue?

Again in case you missed it, I did edit my previous post late:

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/u...90s.html#three

[Drifter]

But the documents were just unearthed; hence, new information to us. If you tell me that Archimedes was really gay, that's new information to me, regardless of how long he's been dead.

You'll also find if you follow that link I posted that there is nothing in those documents that we didn't know LONG before 9/11 ever happened. Hussen has been a terrorist backer since the early 80's

[Inquartata]

Between the periods of 1980 (the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war) until 1990 THE USA SOLD WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION TO IRAQ.

Have you some documentation of that?

[achilleus]

Wow, I thought this was all old news.

I was pretty sure that it was widely known that the US backed Iraq, and gave them many WMD's to use on Iran. Of course Saddam showed us, using them on his own people.

Thus the joke from before the Bush sent us to war, was:

How does Bush know that Saddam has WMD's? He's got the receipts that his dad saved...

In fact, I dug up this old photo, that Jon Stewart used on the Daily Show a couple of years ago. 1983, Rumsfield with Saddam to, most likely, close a weapons deal...

[jeff]

For instance: Rumsfeld flew to Iraq to try to get the oil pipeline business for Bechtel (remember the Bechtel connection with him, Jim Baker, Bush I). Didn't quite work out, but Bechtel signed contracts with Saddam in 1988, after "Chemical Ali" gassed thousands of Kurds, to build a huge dual-use chemical plant on the outskirts of Baghdad. Saddam named Bechtel as one of the corporate suppliers of technology for chemical weapons in its U.N. declaration last year. Construction stopped only after Saddam's troops invaded Kuwait, and his police held Bechtel employees in confinement. The last Bechtel employee left Iraq in December 1990.

[noodle]

But the documents were just unearthed; hence, new information to us. If you tell me that Archimedes was really gay, that's new information to me, regardless of how long he's been dead.

Now, instead of saying "Bad America!" for what happened before, why don't we just clean up? Analyze the history of it all you want, and tell us who the bad guy is; that doesn't matter right now.

i typed this out but computer crashed. i'm lazy and so i'm going to summarize:

why has this not surfaced as late breaking news on any other reputable information stream? you'd think that someone finding proof of an iraq and al quada link or an proof of WMD would toot that horn ASAP.

[Soldier]

You'll also find if you follow that link I posted that there is nothing in those documents that we didn't know LONG before 9/11 ever happened. Hussen has been a terrorist backer since the early 80's

Okay, tell that to everybody else here on the board who have been saying over and over again that there was no connection between Hussein and Al-Qaeda.

[Soldier]

You put into such a very nice black and white perspective I'm saying "Bad America" and you're saying "America is great let's make it better Now!" You are aware that the true patriots of the American revolution were the ones standing on soap boxes (or at least the colonial equivalent) passionately pleading for the population to stand up a take a look at what had really been happening around them don't you?

Don't you think it is kind important to know HOW something started before vowing to resolve the issue?

Again in case you missed it, I did edit my previous post late:

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/u...90s.html#three

I'm not saying America's always great. Everybody has skeletons in their closet. Point me to any nation on earth, they've had their share of mistakes, bad judgment, unethical decisions, and outright atrocities. What I'm saying is that I think we're doing the right thing now. If nothing else, we're cleaning up from a past mistake. In any case, the point is irrelevant right now. We're talking about newly revealed documents which clearly demonstrate ties between Hussein's regime and Al-Qaeda, among other terrorists. This flies in the face of the stance Kerry and his backers have been taking. What America did with Iraq in the past is, in this thread, irrelevant.

And I have no idea what point you intend to make with your comment about patriots.

[achilleus]

Okay, tell that to everybody else here on the board who have been saying over and over again that there was no connection between Hussein and Al-Qaeda.

Dang, is Bush wrong again!?! After all he and his administration have stated that no link exists...

He's got a pretty low batting average in the War on Terror...

[Soldier]

Can you give me a quote for that, when they said no link exists?

[jeff]

Rumsfeld *did* just say it last week, though he backed away from it fast when it became an embarrassment. See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6180176/ or http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3715396.stm

[achilleus]

Can you give me a quote for that, when they said no link exists?

Here's a CNN article that tells of the Bush Admin's changing tone on the Iraq/Al Qaeda connection. From strong obvious ties, to this quote from Rumsfield (10/4/04):

When asked about any connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, Rumsfeld said, "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two."

To Rumsfield, 2 days later, saying that the above quote was misunderstood, and then saying that Saddam had links to terrorists that had similar aims to Al Qaeda, but they were not Al Qaeda...

Really, there aren't too many ways to take the above quote. They should really get their facts straight. I mean, it's not like it's the freaking FIE rule book on RoW.