Posted on 04/11/2008 8:33:43 AM PDT by drzz
An upcoming joint US-Israel report on the September 6 IAF strike on a Syrian facility will claim that former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein transferred weapons of mass destruction to the country, Channel 2 stated Monday.
(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...
bttt
SIMPLE really...since the wmd’s were blown up, there’s no proof of their existence!
I actually had a liberal blame Rummy for selling Saddam wmd’s then said they never existed, IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH!
Thank you for giving me some insights!
There is a very very recent report that does that....
I have to admit that I am fairly skeptical of this story. It reminds me to much of the stories from the Balkan’s where we found no mass graves and therefore stated that the bodies must have been moved (since we obviously couldn’t have been wrong about the massacres in the first place /s). So, unless I see hard evidence that WMD’s were moved to Syria then I see no reason to give this story much credibility.
Like Lyndon?
We can’t rely on Fox. Keep bumping it until Drudge runs with it, then FNC will be forced to cover it.
Look, there have been dozens of stories confirming the FACT that Saddam had an aggressive weapons programme. And we know for a FACT that he had relations with terrorists, Sunni and Shiite alike, including al Qaeda.
The bottom line is, we had every reason to fight to this war, and we need to win it. The American people get stupid and lazy from time to time, especially when their trusted media sources inundate them with bad news from the front lines. We have to combat those media sources. We have to keep bringing this information to the forefront, as tedious as it may seem. New lies trump old facts. We have to make the old facts new again to trump the new lies. Over and over again, if need be.
This story is the whole ball game. We know Saddam was a terrorist enabler. We know he had weapons capable of destroying American cities. Those two facts are the only things that matter, which is why the left so relentlessly attacks them.
Keep proving those facts to be true and the American public will support the war. They’ll have no choice.
We can’t let this report fly under the radar. It’s way too important. We need to keep fighting and winning this war. And to do that, we need to keep justifying why it’s being fought. Saddam was a terrorist. Saddam had strong connections to terrorist, including those who attacked us on 9/11/2001. And Saddam had weapons capable of doing far worse than anything we’ve ever seen.
Don’t stop saying it. Don’t stop proving it. The left has been relentless in their efforts to dismiss those fact. We have to be every bit as relentless in proving them... over and over again, if need be. This is the war at home. We have to do our part.
How about the fact that he killed tens of thousands with them, spent hundreds of millions of dollars to produce them for decades (all completely verfiable), and then -- all of sudden, after we gave him an 18 month head-start before the invasion -- they all disappeared.
Only a leftist could believe he never had them. And even leftists don't believe that. They say it because it benefits then politically. Nobody with half a brain honestly believes he never had these weapons. Nobody.
So he had them. That's a fact, documented by UNSCOM and his financial records. So where did they go? If not the neighboring Ba'athist regime in Syria, where?
We have not had a competent domestic war President since FDR.
He knew full well that full press censorship and 24/7 government propaganda were essential victory requirements, he accomplished both by EO, and he was right to do so.
They should have shouted from the rooftops about this until it was heard. That's how the DNC turns fiction to fact every day of the year.
Or someone very dense.
I believe that he had them but so far the evidence that I have seen suggests that most of them were destroyed in the aftermath of the first Gulf War. He certainly tried to maintain programs enough that he could return to building them without much delay and some small amount of WMD’s were found. However, I believe that most of the stuff that was found turned out to be of first gulf war vintage. So, unless we find solid evidence that he had the sort of ongoing weapons program then I think we have to admit that we may have misjudged what weapons he had. This isn’t a crime - intelligence work is largely intelligent guessing and Saddam certainly acted like he had such weapons. But the theory that Saddam acted like he had a large WMD program in order to deter Iran makes sense to me. I don’t see how we could have been in control of Iraq for as many years as we have now and not have found solid evidence and reliable witnesses if Saddam was running the sort of extensive program that we thought he was before we went into Iraq.
I’m not at all surprised as I’ve had the same experience. When I called the guy on his inconsistency he attempted to change the subject to “war for oil”. When I pointed out that we could have had Iraqi oil for cheap were we to just buy if from Saddam instead of removing him he shut up.
Rarely does a moonbat just shut up, congrats! ;)
Usually they began ranting that you’re just a tool of the vast right wing conspiracy and so forth.
They’re convinced Bush flew the planes into the WTC and pentagon.
If ObamaNATION OF ISLAM declared he was the anti-Christ, they’d say Bush was hodling his family hostage or something.
How do you answer this question: If the goal was to invade Iraq to stop WMD going to terrorists, then was the war failure?
How can we claim a victory in Iraq, if we let WMDs get into the hands of the Syrians and terrorists?
I have the rare experience and pleasure of having shut one up them. That feels good. I tend to wear these moonbats down with facts until they go away.
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.