Then the anti-war crowd would deny that they ever existed, even given that they were used on their own people, just like Iraq? Go Blazers
Baathists/Hezbollah and Islamic extremist/Al Qaeda elements killing one another? Why would we want to do anything but give arms to both sides? We haven't had this kind of luck since the Iran/Iraq war.
Here we go again. No one denies that Iraq had WMDs before the inspectors had them destroyed in the 1990s. Reagan had given them to Iraq. That's the time period to which you refer. Everyone (except you?) denies that Iraq had them in 2003, when Bush used that as his excuse to repair Daddy's legacy with the warmongers. The UN searched for a year, then the U.S. military spent a billion dollars searching for years. But you know this. You're just laughing that you're making us repeat it.
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040109015020.8ivyabdw.html Clinton believes Iraq had weapons of mass destruction: Portugal PM LISBON (AFP) Jan 09, 2004 Former US president Bill Clinton said in October during a visit to Portugal that he was convinced Iraq had weapons of mass destruction up until the fall of Saddam Hussein, Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso said late Thursday. "When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime," he said in an interview with Portuguese cable news channel SIC Noticias.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/23/clinton.iraq.sotu/index.html Wednesday, July 23, 2003 Posted: 3:34 PM EDT (1934 GMT) "So I thought it was prudent for the president to go to the U.N. and for the U.N. to say, 'You got to let these inspectors in, and this time if you don't cooperate the penalty could be regime change, not just continued sanctions.'" Clinton told King: "People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
I encourage everyone to sign this petition to keep us out of a military conflict with Syria. Please forward it and post it to any other message boards you participate in: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/no-war-syria/QcTV4m0F
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-sending-warships-mediterranean-report-082257880.html Russia will "over the next few days" be sending an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the Mediterranean as the West prepares for possible strikes against Syria, the Interfax news agency said on Thursday. "The well-known situation shaping up in the eastern Mediterranean called for certain corrections to the make-up of the naval forces," a source in the Russian General Staff told Interfax. "A large anti-submarine ship of the Northern Fleet will join them (the existing naval forces) over the next few days. "Later it will be joined by the Moskva, a rocket cruiser of the Black Sea Fleet which is now wrapping up its tasks in the northern Atlantic and will soon begin a Transatlantic voyage towards the Strait of Gibraltar." In addition, a rocket cruiser of the Pacific Fleet, the Varyag, will join the Russian naval forces in the Mediterranean this autumn by replacing a large anti-submarine ship. However, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency cited a high-ranking representative of the naval command who said the changes to the country's forces in the region were not linked to the current tensions over Syria and called them "a planned rotation."
I realize that the chances of this having an impact are EXTREMELY low. But the chance is even lower if nobody does anything. Instead we're going to let the powers-that-be march us into another military conflict that will only further enrich those same powers-that-be. OTOH, if the millions of Americans who are against taking military action spent a few moments clicking some buttons on the internet the White House would have to at least respond, if not change their proposed plan of attack. I find it disheartening that we've become so complacent that it's too much trouble to click a few buttons on the internet. I get the apathy - I don't see any point in voting any more. But I can't completely give up...not yet at least. If I can't take 3 minutes out of my precious S2 activities to click buttons on some other website I might as well just lie down and die.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-us-action-send-assad-strong-signal-070923744.html WASHINGTON (AP) — As the U.S. moved toward a possible military strike, President Barack Obama said even limited retaliation for Syria's alleged chemical weapons use would send a "strong signal" to its vulnerable government. The administration scrambled Thursday to convince Congress members and international allies of the case against Syrian President Bashar Assad. New hurdles appeared to be slowing the formation of an international coalition behind military action to punish Assad for the suspected chemical weapons attack that killed hundreds of civilians last week. Russia blocked British efforts to seek a resolution at the United Nations authorizing the use of force. British Prime Minister David Cameron said his country would hold off on joining any military efforts until a U.N. chemical weapons inspection team releases its findings. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said the team is expected to complete its inspection Friday and report to him Saturday; they will share their conclusions with members of the Security Council, Ban said, but he didn't specify when that might happen. "If any action would be taken against Syria it would be an international collaboration," Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel reiterated Thursday. But the United States won't wait for U.N. backing to act, administration officials said. The president said that while he had not settled on a response, the U.S. has concluded that Assad's government perpetrated a chemical weapons attack. "And if that's so," Obama said during an interview with "NewsHour" on PBS, "then there need to be international consequences." Obama did not present specific evidence to back up his assertion that the Assad regime is responsible for the Aug. 21 attack. Many Congress members were pressing Obama to explain the need for military action and address fears that such a move might draw the U.S. deeper into the Syrian civil war. Both Democrats and Republicans were among lawmakers protesting that Obama hasn't made the case for a military strike, with some arguing that the president needs congressional authorization to order an attack. U.S. officials were in search of additional intelligence to bolster the White House's case for a strike against Assad's military infrastructure. American intelligence intercepted lower-level Syrian military commanders' communications discussing the chemical attack, but the communications don't specifically link the attack to an official senior enough to tie the killings to Assad himself, according to three U.S. intelligence officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the intelligence publicly. The administration was planning an intelligence teleconference briefing Thursday evening on Syria for leaders of the House and Senate and the national security committees in Congress, U.S. officials and congressional aides said. The lineup for the call underscored the gravity of the matter. The briefers are Obama's national security adviser and intelligence chief, Susan Rice and James Clapper, alongside Secretary of State John Kerry, Defense Secretary Hagel and Adm. James Winnefeld, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, congressional aides said. View gallery." People take part in a protest organized by the Stop … People take part in a protest organized by the Stop the War coalition calling for no military attack … Officials also said an unclassified version of the report by the Office of the Director for National Intelligence would be made public this week. The White House ideally wants intelligence that links the attack directly to Assad or someone in his inner circle, to rule out the possibility that a rogue element of the military decided to use chemical weapons without Assad's authorization. That quest for added intelligence has delayed the release of the report laying out evidence against Assad. The report was promised earlier this week by administration officials. The CIA and the Pentagon have been working to gather more human intelligence tying Assad to the attack, relying on the intelligence services of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Israel, the officials said. Both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency have their own human sources — the rebel commanders and others who cross the border to brief CIA and defense intelligence officers at training camps in Jordan and Turkey. But their operation is much smaller than some of the other intelligence services, and it takes longer for their contacts to make their way overland. Britain added a hurdle to deliberations about a military strike on Wednesday when it went to the U.N. Security Council with a draft resolution that would authorize the use of military force against Syria. The British resolution would authorize "all necessary measures under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter to protect civilians from chemical weapons." Chapter 7 allows the use of international armed force to back up U.N. decisions. As expected, the five permanent members of the Security Council failed to reach an agreement as Russia reiterated its objections to international intervention in the Syrian crisis. Russia, along with China, has blocked past attempts to sanction the Assad government. Obama said he was not seeking a lengthy, open-ended conflict in Syria, indicating that any U.S. response would be limited in scope. But he argued that Syria's use of chemical weapons not only violated international norms, but threatened "America's core self-interest." "We do have to make sure that when countries break international norms on weapons like chemical weapons that could threaten us, that they are held accountable," he said.
http://www.examiner.com/article/wikileaks-saddam-s-wmd-program-existed-iraq The US gave Saddam over a month’s warning that we were coming to kick his ass and take his WMDs. There were reports at the time that Russian special forces helped move the WMDs to Syria. An Iraqi general said that the WMD’s were moved to Syria. An Israeli general said the WMD’s were moved to Syria. WikiLeaks says there were WMDs found. As Denny posted above, former President Clinton says there were WMD’s. Now Syria (or the rebels, depending on who you think is telling the truth) is using the same kind of WMD’s on their own people. So, no, I don’t think I’m the only one that thinks Saddam had WMD’s when we last invaded Iraq. But you can continue to repeat that they didn’t exist if it makes you feel better. Go Blazers
I wouldn't say the WMDs were moved, but it at least looks like Saddam fooled everyone into thinking he had them for whatever psychotic reasons...
It's not apathy, it's not complacency, it's not too much trouble. It's the fact that anyone on the planet believes that an online petition will have ANY impact on decisions made by the President. The more I think about it, the more terrified I get for the future of this country...
