WMD Found in Iraq

WMD Found in Iraq According to the latest batch of Wikileak documents. In particular, coalition troops kept coming across numerous artillery shells filled with mustard gas.

Remember the terms of Section 8 of UN resolution 687 that ended the first Gulf War:

Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of:

(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities

Thus the instance of a single chemical weapon in Iraq violates the terms that ended the Gulf War, and thus the decision by George W. Bush to carry out the liberation of Iraq in 2003 was both legal and justifiable. (This is in addition to the other numerous instances of jus ad bellum cited by Bush in his speech on that reasons behind that decision.)

Liberals, look at yourself in the nearest mirror and repeat after me: “George W. Bush was right and I was wrong. George W. Bush was right and I was wrong.”

Bush was the President we needed at the time, and thank God Al Gore wasn’t in office.

Amen.

However, there is a higher power they will answer to one of these days. And, that includes zero.

Hear, hear!

I'm feeling lazy today.
If I may re-iterate my position from back in 2007 To:
elhombrelibre

I tried to reply but FR went down for a bit the other day. Any fair minded individual presented with the vast amount of info available would have to conclude Iraq under the Saddam regime was determined to continue many of the known wmd programs. It is sort of like beating upon a dead horse in respect of trying to somehow re-prove Saddam's intentions. The horse is dead. Saddam and his regime are simply guilty as charged. As to why this administration has been so willy nilly in protecting it's stance, regardless of how badly certain elements within the intel and state institutions, during this twenty year time frame have (past/present tense), been able to throw curve balls, I guess the jury is still out. Perhaps in the end, GWB was advised not to get into to many cat fights with the left and the L/MSM. He has/had stated his reasons (many, including UN resolutions), to justify what he decided to do with the Butcher and his regime. If the political climate had not been so twisted and cagey over the past eight years, none of this would even be an issue. So much of this stuff has been made public over a period of time for anyone with any ambition (private level, or official) to understand Saddam was a very dangerous man in many respects and did represent a distinct threat to the region's stability as well as to a high potential to aid terrorist groups in carrying out diabolical mass killings against many western states.

228 posted on Thursday, December 27, 2007 7:35:21 PM by Marine_Uncle (Duncan Hunter for POTUS)

I disagree so strongly! Had Bush told the truth in this instance, we might not have had an Obama presidency. Bush made similar really bad decisions on border enforcement and other things. I liked the man, but he wasn’t the leader I hoped he’d be. After standing by the NYC fireman in the rubble of 9/11, it was all downhill.

There is a possiblilty that the Bush Administration was subjected to nuclear and economic blackmail from our erstwhile ‘allies’, if the subject of WMD wasn’t dropped....

Well, that might explain Bush's body snatcher problem. He went from all powerful after 9/11 to an empty sack midway through. Something truly big happened to change not only him but far too many of our congressmen and supremes.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.