Remember when the liberals said that there were no WMDs

Post Reply New Topic

I'm an anti-war libertarian, so I take offense to your assumption that all opponents of the war are liberals. I also take offense to your idea that it's America's job to police the world. Sorry, but Saddam was simply not threatening enough to qualify as a threat to this country. Was he a bad man? Yes. But he was also rational enough to know that attacking this country would have meant that he would have lost his power because we would have responded to the attack with more force than he would have been capable of handling. And being a selfish dictator, he would not have wanted to lose his power. Unlike a terrorist who's poor and doesn't have much to lose, a dictator is definitely not suicidal.

At least according to our own Chief US Inspector, who performed the Iraq Survey. There weren't WMD's. There aren't WMD's. There aren't going to be WMD's, unless you're refering to India who we just allowed to build more nukes.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/ ... .nirq.kay/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7634313/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq ... -wmd_x.htm

That's our own government's position, a position taken when Republicans were in charge of EVERY branch, not a Democrat position, but a US Government position. Every WMD claim made by the administration has since been retracted, begrudgingly yes, but retracted nonetheless. I'm not trying to say this to be condescending in any way, so I hope you don't take it as such. If you do not believe me, call up your Senator or Congressman if it is a Republican, or contact one that you like. They, eventually (actually probably one of their aides) will get back to you and say what I just said. Don't believe me, or the media. Go directly to either your own elected representative whom you trust.

Hey, here's a shock!

MUSTARD GAS IS NON-LETHAL

Therefore it isn't a WMD to my knowledge.

War is never a "reasonable" or "sensable" decision and I think anyone who thinks so is delusional, plain and simple.

You can sit there and justify killing another person all you want but break it down, its nothing more then "legally" murdering someone, a loop hole in a law in reference to genocide.

Whatever the case, it's a horrible, bloody war out there. It's America's Northern Ireland, only twenty times worse than that conflict with all sorts of militias and different extremist terrorist groups. Britain should have no part in it. The United States Government created this appallingly sectarian mess so it should bloody well sort it out.

I bet we have much more of a problem with Iran and their kind now than if we hadn't invaded.

Screw it. Tell the Iraqi government to sort out their own mess. Iraq was already a powderkeg, all on their own. We just lit the match. Draw out all foreign forces from the country, and leave them with the clear and simple message that they've got two choices: join the civilized world, or set themselves up for another invasion. We should have done that the day after the Ba'athists were history and left the UN and other international forces to supervise the elections.

Considering I'm extremely pro-Iraq War I hate to say this, but the liberals are right in this case. Mustard gas isn't a WMD. It's more like tear gas or mace than anything else. It was invented in WWI to incapacitate soldiers, because incapacitated soldiers slow armies down more effectively than dead ones.

Symptom-wise, it causes blisters on the skin. In high enough quantities it dries out the membranes of internal organs and causes intense discomfort and illness. But fatality rates for mustard gas are at 1%... one percent.

All that being said, mustard gas IS a chemical weapon, and Saddam wasn't supposed to have it.

Mustard Gas IS Not A Weapon of MAss Destruction.

WMDs include harmful chemical agents, harmful biological agents, and nuclear weapons. Why should the USA be allowed to have WMDs but other nations not? Double standard.

Corvus made the best point on the first page of this thread, there are leaders just as evil as Saddam, even more evil in some cases, Darfur, Iran, Sudan, all over Africa, Syria, and a hundred other tiny countries your average westerner has never heard about.

Who is makeing a fuss about them? No one, thats who. The right is to busy complaining about gay marrage and mexican immigration. But the left is no better, infact they are worse in a way. The left claims to care about the people, but they sure don't act like it. They are more concerned with complaining about bush and how wrong the iraq war is.

It makes people sound nice when they talk about war being bad and how unneccessary it is, but that is just a copout. Eveyone knows that war is bad and it is never good to have to kill or even risk killing another person, but life isn't that simple or that easy. You can talk all day about how wrong it is to harm another person, but if your neighbor is beating his why and kids and all you do is talk about how wrong it is then that makes you just as quitly as the abuser.

True there were no real WMDs. True Bush lied when he said there were WMDs in Iraq. But the fact that he lied isn't what makes me sick. What turns my stomache is that westerners didn't raise a hand to stop Saddam when we were told that he was gassing thousands of Curds. We didn't get outraged when we heard stories of Saddam and his sons personally torchering and killing clearly innocent people. We didn't scream and b***h and fight when we knew that he was running rape rooms and destroying whole families.

But a few people fly some planes into our buildings and we get wind that he might have a some weapons that can harm us and we are on board to attack. Bush lied so we spend countless hours gripping about how we were wronged by this political side or that politician. When we should have been up in arms and demanding Saddam be stopped from the first time he was being evil. We should all be demanding that we go into the Sudan and stop the slaving that is going on there as we speak. We should be picking up our own guns and flying on planes down to africa and putting an end to the tyrants that are killing thousands. We the people of the western world should stop expecting some governement to make everything better and do the right thing as people and help our fellow humans.. but what am I saying, wouldn't want to miss the new episode of lost or possible risk our own lives.

Risking our own lives to stop Saddam and close down a single rape room, to die in defense of a single child.. those alone are enough to justify removing any person from a position of power. No right of political soverignty or written word of law justifies quitely sitting by why other people are gassed, torchered, and killed on the pointless whim of a crazed dictator.

The reasons given to the public may have been a lie, but if they didn't make us fear for our own safty what do you think the chances are we would have stoped Saddam just to save others from suffering..

I am personally discussted by most of western society. We are so afraid to risk lossing or suffering a little our selves that we just sit idlely by while so much evil goes on. War and killing may be wrong, but to allow others to be killed just so you can sustain your moral superiority is the lowest form of cowerdous.

I don't ever want to kill anybody, but if I need to in order to save another human life then I will sacrifice my own peace of mind and do the right thing, even if it means that I must suffer or lose my own life. Being right doesn't make you good and being wrong doesn't make you evil.

Someone wants to get their facts straight: