Quote:And again, no one ever proved that Iraq didn't have WMD. By definition, you can't prove that something doesn't exist. Just because no one has found anything doesn't mean that they didn't have them at some point.
this is just sad. we also havent found bags of fairy dust and oompa loompas, doesnt mean he didnt have them at some point.
My main problem is, we all know that WMD's were not the reason to go to war. Bush didnt have to play the WMD card. It hurts his credibility to make statements he doesn't know he can back up.
I'm not using that argument saying that there were WMDs. I'm leaning towards no. If we were able to find Sadam, it shouldn't be more difficult to find a giant warchest of nuclear weapons.
My point was that someone in this thread said that it has been proven that there were no WMDs. That's just wrong. You can't prove something doesn't exist.
Can Bush prove that God is on his side?
How anyone could vote for Bush in light of this shit is truly beyond me.
Galt Wrote:My point was that someone in this thread said that it has been proven that there were no WMDs. That's just wrong. You can't prove something doesn't exist.
exactly the reason i say we continue to look for the oompa loompas.
DADDY I WANT AN OOMPA LOOMPA NOW!
Galt's opinion is retarded.
Question: if Sadam didn't have WMD what exactly is he under arrest for?
You can't cite sources of opinions.
Black Lazerus Wrote:Question: if Sadam didn't have WMD what exactly is he under arrest for?
I guess using gas on the kurds and running a tyranical dictatorship aren't enough
My gas could get me locked up.
Velociti Wrote:Black Lazerus Wrote:Question: if Sadam didn't have WMD what exactly is he under arrest for?
I guess using gas on the kurds and running a tyranical dictatorship aren't enough
China runs the same kind of govenment, i don't see us invading them and asking for the leader to be arrested.
Quote:I guess using gas on the kurds and running a tyranical dictatorship aren't enough
I would have been fine if the president was more honest about his reasons for going to war.
Quote:And again, no one ever proved that Iraq didn't have WMD.
The way the UN worded it over 10 years ago, and cited in every resolution since, no one but Iraq ever had to prove Iraq had weapons. In fact, the burden of proof was put upon Saddam Hussein to prove that he didn't have any weapons, and he couldn't do that.
I don't understand why the administration lied about the threat posed by Iraq, nor do I understand why they had to make it seem like Iraq had all these weapons.
Quote:I don't understand why the administration lied about the threat posed by Iraq, nor do I understand why they had to make it seem like Iraq had all these weapons.
because the best way to get a post-9/11 america behind war is to make it seem like it was linked to terrorism