[...] [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

For all the McClatchy green environment we must suffer

just Google ‘ 500 tons Uranium ‘

and for this and John Roberts we have a lasting legacy
to thank “W” for

Ken

Like or Dislike: 0  0

If you want The Mega Book of Quotes, just send me an email at smalensek@neo.rr.com
-no charge

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ditto:

” I figured the quotes . . . were sufficient to make the point.”

They were, and it was well done and just right as it was.

I just used it to segway into my own attack on their perfidy. Hope you don’t mind.

Regards.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ yonason

Thanks. I came across quotes by other Democrats, also recognizing that Iraq had WMD’s, but I figured the quotes in 1998 (pre-Bush, during Clinton’s Presidency) were sufficient to make the point.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@ditto:

One of their favorite “proofs” for “Bush lied” is that David Kay allegedly said there were no WMD, even though he not only didn’t say that, but confirmed that there were at least some, though not as many as we thought.

Also important is David Kay’s actual testimony, in which he said about Iraq,…

“I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized. Saddam was not controlling the society any longer. In the marketplace of terrorism and of WMD, Iraq well could have been that supplier if the war had not intervened.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4066462/

(I wonder how Larry Weisenthal thinks he can debunk the “rat facts” of experts like Kay. Maybe by saying, “It’s just not true, so there.”?) Larry, stop reading DailyKos, CommonDreams, and the rest of the loony Left. They’ll rot your brian.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry should also listen carefully to what his side had to say:

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@openid.aol.com/runnswim:

“For me, it’s always been simple. I listen carefully to what George W Bush has to say “

Typical Lefty, don’t focus on facts, but instead do something more akin to reading tea leaves. Good one, Larry.

“I’ll need about 4 hours of time that I don’t have right now to address the various arguments made by others on this blog in a prior debate on this issue”

I won’t be holding my breath, but I am now looking forward to a very good laugh. If you do actually put something together, I doubt that I will dissappointed. (of course, I doubt you will put it together, so if you don’t mind, I’ll do my laughing now.)

Oh, and remember, Larry, the Al Qaeda connection and the WMD were only a couple of the MANY reasons we needed to take him out.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Hang the “UN”, Scott. Merely refer to the Harmony/ISG documents from Saddam’s own regime (which our troops confiscated in 2003, and took years to translate) that tie him to Zawahiri back to Somalia days in 2003. What’s more troubling is that Zawahiri and Bin Laden were already working together. Saddam ordered assault on US troops in Somalia. Bin Laden trained the troops that carried out the assault on our troops.

The only difference between Zawahiri then, and Zawahiri now is that he merged his EIJ into AQ a few years later.

Larry, if all you want to depend upon is Bush’s PR mouthpieces, you are unqualified to comment on reality. Sorry guy. Genuinely like you, but that don’t fly in the face of reality.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry, that might be true re WMD, but you’ll notice I almost never-EVER cite Bush’s claims on that. Instead I cite the UN’s and then list what was found (preferably with pics).

In terms of regime ties to Al Queda, I’m sorry. I truly and honestly am sorry, but I can’t recall Bush or his admin stepping back from that claim. If you’ve got some examples, I’d love to see em. In the end, however, you and other FA readers will recall that my claim re regime ties is predominately INdirect, and that this indirect blowback reborn Al Queda in 1992, forced its alliance with Egyptian Islamic Jihad in 1996 (of which 2/3 of AQ leaders were co-members in EIJ), and led directly to AQ attacks against the US including 911. Interestingly enough, the 911 Commission agrees with me.

In the end, does it matter if AQ groups were in Iraq working w Saddam before the invasion-does it matter any more than German forces in Morocco in 1942, or Japanese forces in New Zealand in 41? You go where the fight is, and when possible…you choose your fight. Given the choice of focusing the fighting in the Graveyard of Empires or in Iraq where ties had been reported in the msm since 1996….I gotta say Iraq was the easier nut. Today’s generals in Afghanistan agree.

Like or Dislike: 0  0