Iraq connection in UK bomb plot?

I have gone back, ever see a time line for Iraq? It didn't start at 9/11, but you know that and yet you keep saying it even though you know the difference. I must take it as you intentionally are trying to deceive others, not very honest don't you think? Special for an x servicemen.

No, you're right, it didn't start at 9/11 this war started in 2003, based on lies that Iraq had WMD, which is proven they didn't, and that makes the UN resolution practically worthless. As far as I am concerned anything the UN says is worthless anyway.

No, you're right, it didn't start at 9/11 this war started in 2003,

based on lies that Iraq had WMD

which is proven they didn't,

and that makes the UN resolution practically worthless.

As far as I am concerned anything the UN says is worthless anyway

Nope, you yourself have said it started way earlyer then that, shall i quote you?

If you could prove that you wouldn't have to beat around the preverbial Bush!WE did not find any, does not mean they were not there.

The causes started long before we invaded Iraq, this war was declared in 2003. You can try to hack up the truth any which way to suit whatever witless argument you think you have, but sorry, it doesn't change a thing.



No one found any, because they weren't there. I don't have to prove it, the US military, and the UN have proved it. There was never any proof he had started a WMD program after the first time we took his toys, and there were only reminents of previous WMD left. You can believe he somehow managed to sneak them out if it helps you sleep at night, but it still isn't true

Presidential Letter
Presidential Letter
Text of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and President Pro Tempore of the Senate



March 21, 2003

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

On March 18, 2003, I made available to you, consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), my determination that further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq, nor lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

I have reluctantly concluded, along with other coalition leaders, that only the use of armed force will accomplish these objectives and restore international peace and security in the area. I have also determined that the use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organiza-tions, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. United States objectives also support a transition to democracy in Iraq, as contemplated by the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).
Consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148), I now inform you that pursuant to my authority as Commander in Chief and consistent with the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), I directed U.S. Armed Forces, operating with other coalition forces, to commence combat operations on March 19, 2003, against Iraq.

These military operations have been carefully planned to accomplish our goals with the minimum loss of life among coalition military forces and to innocent civilians. It is not possible to know at this time either the duration of active combat operations or the scope or duration of the deployment of U.S. Armed Forces necessary to accomplish our goals fully.

As we continue our united efforts to disarm Iraq in pursuit of peace, stability, and security both in the Gulf region and in the United States, I look forward to our continued consultation and cooperation.

Sincerely,

GEORGE W. BUSH

this war was declared in 2003

You can try to hack up the truth any which way to suit whatever witless argument you think you have, but sorry, it doesn't change a thing.

No one found any, because they weren't there.

I don't have to prove it, the US military, and the UN have proved it.

There was never any proof he had started a WMD program after the first time we took his toys, and there were only reminents of previous WMD left.

You can believe he somehow managed to sneak them out if it helps you sleep at night, but it still isn't true

History will not account your story except in books for conspiracy.Declared? I've also inboldened another comment you are in disagreement with. So there were no plans for democracy huh? Sure shoots that theory to ****?Didn't take me long huh? Hack hack hack.Can't prove a negative with another negative.You don't because you can't?It looks rather incriminating when you agree to letting inspectors in and then throw them out. What would you think?Doesn't make it false?

silver the war in iraq has made the problem worse,alqueda wasnt a problem in iraq prior to the invasion

I think Scoob has a destiny with Radical Islam. He's probably convert like STNGfan.

Scoob needs a couple of hardcore Muslim neighbors. Maybe he'd change his mind if he could see them drool over his neck, while holding dull butcher knives and small swords.

Has anyone ever accused you of being an enemy sympathizer? Arguing with war-vets-turned-sympathizers is a very delicate matter. As a patriot, I don't want to disrespect you or your service. But, I find your sentiments disturbing. Somehow I'll work through this. After all, my son, whom I raised to be a patriot and good Catholic, is now enthralled by college radicalism, and has embraced the Muslim cause as part of that thought-process.

No, you're right, it didn't start at 9/11 this war started in 2003, based on lies that Iraq had WMD, which is proven they didn't, and that makes the UN resolution practically worthless.

The militant element was always there, well before our liberation from Saddam's "government".

The difference was they were independent, the majority of Iraq's terrorists joined Al Qaeda in an effort to ban together. It was more of a merger then anything else. Just because Payless became Rite-Aid doesn't mean you couldn't shop there before the merger. Just because they didn't go by the name Al Qaeda doesn't mean terror wasn't there before.

believe it or not iraq was actually one of the most secular muslim country's in the middle east,women doctors, lawyers,teachers etc,everthing that radical islam hates,as i said before alqueda,came to iraq after the invasion,not before.

believe it or not iraq was actually one of the most secular muslim country's in the middle east,women doctors, lawyers,teachers etc,everthing that radical islam hates,as i said before alqueda,came to iraq after the invasion,not before.

Yeah....the Iraqis were so much better of under Saddam. What a guy. He was particularly loved by his national soccer team, they whom his son tortured whenever they lost international matches. :headbang:

Yeah....the Iraqis were so much better of under Saddam. What a guy. He was particularly loved by his national soccer team, they whom his son tortured whenever they lost international matches. :headbang:

I love how some people actually still use this argument, they found over 500 WMD in Iraq, everybody knows this.

the altered liberal argument is "Well, um, they err, they didn't have enough WMD!" :beat:

if Iran nukes NYC today there will be a liberal tomorrow who will advocate that war isn't justified because "they only nuked one city"

give it up dood, the bad guy are in Iraq, and they're being backed by Iran. It's an unfortunate truth but the truth nonetheless

The difference was they were independent, the majority of Iraq's terrorists joined Al Qaeda in an effort to ban together.

Several large Iraqi Sunni insurgent groups publicly denounced Al Qaeda, saying its fighters were killing theirs and pressuring them to join the Islamic State. One group, the 1920 Revolution Brigades, has begun overtly cooperating with U.S. forces and Sunni tribal leaders to attack Al Qaeda.

He denounced Egypt, Jordan and Saudi at length. He warned Iraq's Sunni minority against seeing them as allies, saying they pretend to support the Sunni cause while allying themselves with the United States.

:eek: pino ive just pissed my pants lol i am a tasty big bastard

who said he was a great guy ? i certainly didnt,the point im making is his regime wasnt a radical islamic regime,what about the great frienf of the USA,saudi arabia,home of bin-laden and most of the 9/11 bombers,home of wahabism and extreme sharia law,what is bush gonna do about them ?

Bush is to blame for every evil that's ever befallen Man. Therefore, we should read the Bible if we want to know what he'll do next. :dunno: