SwiftVets.com

[sdpatriot]

sillyrabbit,
i respectfully disagree about the waiting a few more months.

i believe that was precisely why no WMD were found - we waited
too long as it was. and now we are left to wonder.. if there were
WMD - where are they? and who has them? and what do they
intend to do with them? did anyone happen to notice all the Cuban
cigars in Saddam and his sons' homes when our troops arived?
that makes me nervous.

don't know if these will hold any water with you or not, but i
found them pretty thought provoking.
Investigative Report
Saddam's WMD Have Been Found
Post April 26, 2004
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
http://www.insightmag.com/news/670120.html

and

Iraqi Weapons in Syria
Post April 26, 2004
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
http://www.insightmag.com/news/670123.html

and i think part of the International pressure to hold off
was nothing more then fear of what the US troops and
inspectors would find. and that isn't 20/20 hindsight, i
actually had an old Korean Marine Vet tell me before the
war started that there would be some major players in the
UN with their fingers caught in the cookie jar before this
was all over. he is one smart guy. he was dead on.
Investigative Report
Documents Prove U.N. Oil Corruption
Posted April 13, 2004
By Kenneth R. Timmerman
http://www.insightmag.com/news/657739.html

sdpatriot
_________________
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism."
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

[sillyrabbit]

Thanks for those articles. I'll admit, though, that the last year has made me suspicious of articles that have flimsy evidence and "unnamed sources". Think about if that article, written in the same language, was in the NYT. I just can't bring myself to believe it, as much as I want to. For every tidbit of info Timmerman has, I have to believe that Secretary Rumsfeld has five. In that respect, I would believe that if the Pentagon legitimately thought that the WMD was in Syria, there'd be an aircraft carrier group headed for that part of the Mediterranean in a new york minute. I mean think about it: WMD discovery = blowout victory for President Bush. And I disagree strongly with Timerman's assertion that it is unrealistic for the press and public to be waiting for 'stockpiles in warehouses'. In point of fact, warehouses full of stockpiles was exactly what the war was predicated on:

Tell me how many of these remarks have proved correct:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm
"Second, as with biological weapons, Saddam Hussein has never accounted for vast amounts of chemical weaponry: 550 artillery shells with mustard, 30,000 empty munitions and enough precursors to increase his stockpile to as much as 500 tons of chemical agents."

"While we were here in this Council chamber debating Resolution 1441 last fall, we know, we know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was dispersing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agent to various locations, distributing them to various locations in western Iraq."

"One of the most worrisome things that emerges from the thick intelligence file we have on Iraq's biological weapons is the existence of mobile production facilities used to make biological agents."

Secretary Powell is unwilling to stand by the presentation he made at the U.N. in February 2003, blaming it on bad CIA intelligence and Free Iraqi Congress disinformation.

Here's one from Asst. Sec. Wolfowitz:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-07-22-wolfowitz-iraq_x.htm
"I'm not concerned about weapons of mass destruction," Wolfowitz told a group of reporters traveling with him. "I'm concerned about getting Iraq on its feet. I didn't come (to Iraq) on a search for weapons of mass destruction."

Plus, as to Israel...Isreal is Syria's sworn enemy. Realpolitik dictates wariness even of one's allies when they speak of their enemies.

IF the WMDs are in Syria that means two things:

One, we were too incompetent to watch the Syrian border in the months prior to the war. (Remember, Secretary Powell cited "tons" of smallpox and anthrax. "Tons" of anthrax moving across the Syrian border in the dead of night would have made a mark, and we would have acted appropriately.

Two, Syria would literally have to be suicidal. It's one thing to leave the borders open to terrorists streaming into Iraq (which they're doing) and another thing to knowingly hide Iraq's WMD. I mean, that wouldn't be a very good idea for Damascus. We're talking 'shock and awe' bad idea.

For those two reasons I have a hard time believing thats where they are, but hey. I'd love to be proven wrong, and we may yet see vindication. My gut tells me if they were there, we'd have found them. We don't even have people really out there looking anymore....they're focusing on the insurgency.

[ASPB]

That's Silly, Silly

[sillyrabbit]

ASPB, the war was predicated on that faith. If I can't have faith in our intel ability to track the shipments of tons of WMD out of the border of a country we're about to go to war with, how can I trust that they were ever there in the first place?

[ASPB]

[sillyrabbit]

Right. Why not?

You claim "how can you have faith in the CIA with their record the last twenty years"...but it was CIA intelligence that led us into Iraq!

So which is it, cause you can't have it both ways.

And my experience with debating issues is that when someone says "thats not worthy of a response" its because they're unable to respond to a challenge.

[sdpatriot]

sillyrabbit,
ok. i have checked into Mr Timmerman's record as a investigative
reporter and he seems pretty impecable to me. but you don't
have to believe him i guess.

i do wonder what else could be in that huge sand box besides
the occasional cat terd though.. well, besides the airplanes
i mean. (no disrespect in calling the ME desert a cat box, just
quoting from a soldier who has been there)
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/foxbat.htm

another thing - i have a cd of pictures.. hundreds of them
that a soldier who served in Iraq gave me. some of the pics
are of gold bars found inside a semi tanker trailer. they were
scooting west with it when our troops discoverd it at a check
point. as the soldier told me - this was the one that DIDN'T get away.

this happened very early into the war... a few weeks after Baghdad was
taken.

makes me wonder what got away - or buried.

sdpatriot
_________________
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism."
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796

[ASPB]

CNN Viewers and NPR Listeners Overwhelmingly
Favor John Kerry Hattip to: Media Research Center

If the fact than conservatives are drawn to FNC proves the network has a conservative tilt, then CNN and NPR are at least as liberal as FNC is conservative judging by a Rasmussen survey which discovered, that by more than two-to-one, CNN viewers (63 to 26 percent) and NPR listeners (68 to 27 percent) favor John Kerry over George Bush -- about the same margin by which FNC viewers prefer Bush over Kerry (65 to 28 percent).

Rasmussen didn’t bother with trying to locate MSNBC viewers and found that 85 percent of listeners to Rush Limbaugh support President Bush, with 11 percent backing Kerry.

An excerpt of a June 17 Rasmussen Reports press release which the Cable Newser Web site ( www.cablenewser.com ) highlighted on Monday:

Among fans of the Fox News Channel, George W. Bush is winning by a landslide -- 65% to 28%. Those who prefer CNN also prefer Kerry by an almost identical margin (63% to 26%).

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey documents a similar split on the radio dial. Those who listen to National Public Radio prefer Kerry by a 68% to 27% margin. However, those who listen to Christian radio stations on a regular basis prefer Bush, 71% to 23%....

The gaps go deeper than simply the presidential election. In the race for Congress, Fox fans will vote for GOP candidates by a 56% to 25% margin. The CNN audience will vote Democratic by a 54% to 27% margin....

CNBC, while hosting a smaller audience, also has more bi-partisan appeal -- 47% of their audience will vote for Bush while another 47% express a preference for Kerry.

Rush Limbaugh, however, has an entirely different audience -- 85% say they'll vote for Bush and 11% for Kerry.

The national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports June 15-16, 2004. Margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

And Another Thing:

[MikeWinn]

SR,

I believe the point that ASPB was making was that to even jokingly insinuate that WBD were NEVER in Iraq begs the silliness, no bizarreness,
no amazing, no I don't know what the hell it begs!! Tell it to the Kurds. Tell it to Gulf War vets. Damn, next thing you're gonna tell us is that there were no concentration camps in Germany, Poland, etc. during WWII.

Please tell us all that you were only joking so we can even begin to try to believe anything you ever tell us again!

geeeez
_________________
LOCK & LOAD!


GunnerMike
Spectre Gunner and 141 FE
Dedicated to Rico. KIA March 14, 1971.
Love ya man.

[GoophyDog]

[ASPB]

[sdpatriot]

sillyrabbit,

I still have to agree with these statements by Bush given in 2002.

[ASPB]

SillyRabbit,

I am deleting your post as you did not provide, which I knew you couldn't find, ANY statement directly referencing the Iraqi National (INC) I, for one, will not tolerate leftwing distortions and misquotations in this forum.

As Moderator
_________________
On Sale! Order in lots of 100 now at velero@rcn.com Free for the cost of shipping All profits (if any, especially now) go to Swiftvets. The author of "Sink Kerry Swiftly" ---ASPB

[sillyrabbit]

Deleted by Moderator - War Dog

Sillyrabbit, see the PM I just sent to you!

[ASPB]

Hattip to the Washington Dispatch