|
 aliasinkhorn rated 3 months ago -
Disconfirmations Disconfirmed: Saddam Had Nuke Program (Updated)
From the page: The media have been telling us for years that Saddam had no WMD, so Bush's War: was based on a lie. And those who believed Saddam did have WMD or WMD programs were delusional or worse.
But today, on July 6, ...
|
|
5 Reviews
-
-
- aliasinkhorn rated 3 months ago
-
Disconfirmations Disconfirmed: Saddam Had Nuke Program (Updated)
From the page: The media have been telling us for years that Saddam had no WMD, so Bush's War: was based on a lie. And those who believed Saddam did have WMD or WMD programs were delusional or worse.
But today, on July 6, 2008, the Associated Press reports that
* Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program
* At the Tuwaitha nuclear complex just south of Baghdad
* Which included 550 metric tons (over 1.2 million pounds) of yellowcake, or concentrated uranium
* And multiple devices that could be used in a nuclear weapon.
The AP does not say alleged nuclear program. It does not add according to military experts. It simply says Saddam Hussein's nuclear program.
Having spent time in Asia, it is evident that much of the news on Iraq in America is driven by political postures or ideologies. Democrats have had wars under Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, and a whole series of small conflicts under Clinton, as opposed to Republicans who had ... I'm confident the reader can finish the sentence. It always looks like the Rebublicans are warlike for those on the Left.
Did Bush do the right thing in Iraq? I was disturbed when it was clear the US would go into Iraq, and angry when it was decided they'd stay, both reactions for solid reasons beyond the pale of American juvenile partisan politics.
As time has gone on, it is clear that American military presence did not make problems, it exposed them. And it became clear that America's enemy was also Europe's, other Muslim countries', as well as Israel's enemy. Al Qaeda and associates had the blood of nations dripping from their lips, blood that crossed national, ethnic and religious divides.
Tho I am reluctant to concede this, what America did in Iraq was moral. How it did it was mangled in the beginning, but has clearly demonstrated significant improvement over time. There have been horrible, unintended consequences which eventually generated deliberately good outcomes overtime. But I'm still uneasy.
.
 seasandcakes rated 3 months ago- Where to begin... Sourcewatch says outright of American Wanker: "There is ample evidence to support the notion that AT serves as part of the right wing's echo chamber." So while the Associated Press and then others report on the existence of yellow cake in Iraq, which is indeed real, consider the source when that news jumps to the wild conclusion of "Saddam had WMD after all." And before you jump to that claim, consider a few facts:The yellow cake in Iraq that was just moved to Canada existed in Iraq in the same old barrels since before the 1991 Gulf War I. Saddam and Iraq actually did have a nuclear program, I do admit that. HOWEVER - since 1991 it was dismantled and completely abandoned. As part of their surrender in Gulf War I they agreed to allow inspections, which they continued to do right up until we said we had "new evidence" that justified an invasion. And while they were indeed coy at times, no attempt was ever made again to get that or any WMD program going. THAT is why the Bush administration had to come up with forged documents about Iraq buying yellow cake from Niger, to bring fresh allegations to the table, that is why none of this was brought up - the existing yellow cake was under UN control the entire time.Every single specific justification for war with Iraq has been discredited or outright proven false (that is a 'lie', isn't it, when you manufacture your own intelligence in the Office of Special Plans set up in the Pentagon under Doug Feith?) This is nothing new. Nothing new at all. The sad ironic thing about this is that the yellow cake was under UN control up until we invaded in 2003, when Hans Blix, who was trying in vain to try to find any of the "evidence" of WMD we were giving him, was told by Bush that time had simply run out, trust him, his new evidence about mobile labs was correct. So we invade, rush our troops to protect all of the oil wells (whose command could THAT have been?) and don't even protect the known remnants of old Iraqi programs. It is now believed some of it may have been looted and was used indeed in dirty bombs which may account for some of the birth defects and deformations occurring. But the point is it was contained by the UN and the IAEA as it should have been, up until we invaded. We had no justification for invading unilaterally.So in summation, American Thinker's writers are either too stupid to know the truth about the yellow cake, or they do know are are simply beginning the right-wing's attempt to re-write history. The coming Bush liebury (a shame SMU told you to fuck off, W), with its "scholars" hilariously selected for a devotion to Bush's neocon stances, will be furthering that attempt in coming years.
- topher6345 rated 3 months ago
- http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=5314609
- kahman95 rated 3 months ago
- nobody really believes this, right?
- Noremacam rated 3 months ago
- Make what you will out of it....
|
