Canada Believes Saddam Had WMD

The interesting point is that, hope springs eternal. Although the Limboogers have stated repeatedly that WMDs are not the reason for the war, they still hope strongly that they will be vindicated for their point not relied upon.

McG, the class of people whove searched for WMDs , arent mere repo men. They are competent scientists engineers and military weapons folks. The search has been going on intensively for almost 2 years prior to the war and is going on unfettered now that we can push our way into any compound. Weve found about 5 or 6 chemical racks, a bunch of Al Samouds. A centrifuge, some blueprints and a wish list. Now weve found one steenking shell left over from the 80s. After living my childhood under my school desk (my only protection from the Soviet nuclear threat) you think we should have even cared one pinch of **** about the "imminent" threat posed by Saddam and his crazy sons?
I guess its nice weve freed all these people from Saddams control, but was it all necessary?
I think not
Id rather we be shown some evidence that were actually trying to snag bin Laden and as a "side line" , beef up Fortress America. Look at all the dough we spent on detecting the Russians. They never attacked us. However, I dont feel weve got a national security curtain that could protect us from another attack. AND, to top it off, were over there making a case FOR bin Laden. Where is my logic off, please let me know

Logic fine. All else about you in question.

you didnt compliment me on my haircut. Did you moisturize today?

Reply
Salaam Alaikum!

Forgive my rant...

On "Meet the Press" (MTP), Colin Powell has admitted, grudgingly, that he was wrong about the "mobile" weapons that were presented to the UN.

Will those who believe in the WMD finally recant?

--Ibn

I don't know about that Solon. Science has a fair understanding of why the leader of a pride of lions will kill a challenging rival. Our "need" to kill each other stems from the same source. Admittedly it has been warped and inflated, but that's what comes from a brain that can outstrip the pace of evolution.

I don't know about mporter, but I'm surprised to find such an arrogant Canadian. I thought you folks were a self-effacing lot. Isn't that one of the reasons you feel so morally superior to your southern neighbors?

Very well, Mr. Farmerman, you do not accept my interpretation of Occam's razor with regard to the fact that it is most likely that Saddam Hussein lied about having destroyed all of his WMD's.

I fail to notice any reaction to my posting here and there of the speech by the leader of the Democratic Party in 1998. There are few, even partisan Republicans, who will attempt to denigrate the foreign affairs expertise of the man who is perhaps the most brilliant policy wonk of the twentieth century, namely, Bill Clinton.

I am sure that you know that words mean something, Mr. Farmerman. Please read the words of Bill Clinton carefully.

On December 16th 1998, Bill Clinton gave a speech in which he stated:

quote

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community--led by United States--has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday--make no mistake--he will use it again as he has in the past"

Those are not the words of Tom DeLay or Bill Frist. Those are the words of the former leader of the Democratic Party.

I hold that his comment makes it more likely rather than less likely that the shell that was found is only one of many that are still hidden. You may disagree but I have the opinion of a man who is far far more knowledgeable and informed than you, Mr. Farmerman. Refute his statement and then you may be correct. Choose not to refute it and the argument stands. Saddam Hussein did not destroy all of his WMD's.


And, Mr. Farmerman, you are quick to state that this is an international forum. Indeed it is. But I hold that there is no one on this forum who knows more about politics in Illinois than I.At least I haven't been aware of anyone like that. The fact that it is an international forum does not make every opinion and every posting of equal value.
I hold that empirical evidence is essential in the search for truth. Bill Clinton's speech is indeed empircal evidence. Gasbaggery without evidence, quotes or documentation mean little.

The point is, Mr/. Farmerman, opinions are cheap.

Informed opinions are difficult to find.

Mr. Blatham cavalierly disposed of the fine rundown made by McGentrix. Formerly, I would have paid more attention to Mr. Blatham's opinions.

But, on Friday, May14th 2004, he informed anyone reading his post that I had lied in my posting with regard to a story from Time Magazine and that I "reference a Time issue that apparently does not exist".

This is why your comment about an international forum limps. It appears that some attempt to dispose of a rundown like McGentrix gave with a nonsensical meaningless blurb.

Mr. Blatham attempted to dispose of my comment about Time Magazine's story with a pithy--"issue which apparently does not exist". His puffed up pride does not allow him to admit he has made an egregious mistake and, in effect, called me a liar.

I therefore view any of his puffery as probably wrong and, in view of the fact that he rarely gives quotes, refers to documentation or gives evidence other than his "issue which apparently does not exist", his arguments are dead in the water.

Finn D'Abuzz:

You recognize the argument, don't you?

We( Canadians) are "a lot more informed than many many Americans"

Informed about what?

many many Americans?

How many?

How can this be proven?

Finn, this is another example of the sloppy thinking that goes on North of the border. No proof, no evidence, no documentation--only pompous piffle.

Notwithstanding the juvenile use "Limboogers," this is a fair observation, except that it not so much vindication that we seek, but the opportunity to shove the revelation up the boogerholes of those who have rejoiced, from the beginning, of every perceived failure of this endeavor.

Of course it's unlikely that any true satisfaction will be obtained if WMDs are found, because this will never actually shut the handwringers up. They wailed and whined about our troops being stuck in a quagmire early on, but when that was so quickly proven false, were they embarrassed? Did it shut them up? No, they just moved on to the next perceived failure: The looting of the Iraqi National Museum. And when it was proven that the much bemoaned desecration was far far less than what they would have had us believe? Well, we can go on and on.

I thought the term limboogers a rather clever device. Im certainly not above being childish, thats most of my life, so Im glad you noticed.
However, doesnt negate my point.

I was originally squarely behind the invasion as an "informed " AMerican. I believed the bullshit. My trust in the methods and merit of this admin has been irreparably shaken. I take all that original support back and wishh this thing had not begun. I am as meanass a whiner as youd ever find.
For I find no moral imperative that we , as a nation of informed folks can hang on. So Im a handwringer. Yeh, I dont like my kids getting killed for some jingoistic ribbon fest and chest thump. Who the hell are we kidding? Im one of this admins biggest baddest dreams. Im a loud crier of "shame on you GWB"-Im a different kind of patriot, not one who blindly follows these "leaders" . You apparently feel comfortable with the status quo. I do not.

I guess you can abide a little loss of life, desecration, ill contrived plans, no exit strategy, no moral compass, no real reason for even being there, I sorta have problems with these annoying points.

Mr. Farmerman:

No comment about President Bill Clinton's position on whether Saddam had WMD's?

Is that too heavy for you or is it a tactic of the left wing to ignore that which you cannot handle?


You say you don't like your kids getting killed for "some jingoistic ribbon fest and chest thump"

You should really ask the relatives and friends of the 3,000 killed in the WTC whether they think bringing the Taliban and the AlQaeda to justice is a jingoistic ribbon fest and chest thump.

And, please, don't try to tell us that the people who murdered Michael Berg were not of the same philosophical belief as the Taliban or AlQaeda.

If you really don't understand what is going on, I urge you to read a seminal essay, written in 1990 by the USA's foremost authority on Islam- Professor Bernard Lewis.

It is called-The Roots of Muslim Rage

The subtitle is "Why so many Muslims deeply resent the West and why their bitterness will not easily be mollified"

You told me that I would learn something on these posts.

Well, if you read Bernard Lewis, you will learn something--

www.theatlantic.com/issues.90sep/rage.htm

mporter-I see, your point about Bill Clinton. He believed that Saddam had WMDs, Well apparently we were all wrong so what?
Did Bush invade N Korea?, we have forensic evidence of WMDs there.
I hope(that) youre not hoping that your Clinton non-sequitur would score any debate points. I said (see above) that I too was a believer before the invasion. "Staying the Course" does, you must admit , sound a bit Nixonian ,

As faras your seeking sympathy re: blatham's apparent preemptive strike on you., you go girl, I dont like him much either. I find him somewhat suspect. Lets review his personna
He wears a red suit
He lives in (gasp) Canada
Hes sooooo damn polite, ever notice?
He uses words like phlogistan (sic). He probably is a sorcerer in RCMP clothhes.
Hes been overlooked for chief inspector a number of times. His fitness reports are atrocious.
Hhes(horrors) Canadian
He reads

You go get im. he deserves whatever you can hand out.

again mporter, stop trying to derail the train . Clinton didnt attack Iraq. Bush attacked Iraq after we were already defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan'
The rest of the info is trumpery . I understand as much about Islam as you . Im aware of post Reconquistean and Crusade changes both by Islam and toward Islam, its a fact of history ,.
Weve come almost 13 centuries since the first disagreements were manifest.

NO ONE disagreed that Saddam used gas on his people. Your problem is you get stuck in one gear and try to apply that logic to something thats happening ten years later. Did you know that the Soviet Union is no-longer? yet we are still gonna build big ass hunter killer subs,
FACT-WMDs are really scarce in Iraq. WE knew that last year. Im not running from anything, if truth be told, you are the intractible one, withh heel s firmly stuck in the ground. You cannot admit a simple truth that we were not told the truth. But thats ok with you.

Mr. Blatham wears a red suit?
I wear a blue suit.
He lives in (gasp) Canada?
I live in (gasp) Wisconsin
He's so damn polite?
I'm polite,no damn.
He uses words like Phlogistan(sic); He is probably a sorcerer in RCMP clothes?
I use words like Philistine;( found on the same page as Phlogstan(sic); I am probably a wizard in a GreenBay Packer sweater
He has been overlooked as cheif inspector a number of times. His fitness reports are atrocious?
I have been overlooked as a professor a number of times. My thesis proposals were atrocious.
Hes( horrors) Canadian?
I'm ( horrors) from Wisconsin.
He reads?
I read.

SO WHAT?

He is still the pompous enough to have attempted to cavalierly brand me as a "liar". I never make quotes from non-existent sources.

You left something out in your list-Farmerman.

Mr. Blatham rarely gives quotes, documentation, or evidence for his statements.

You say, he reads?

He surely has read that unless one has particular expertise in an area, his word on a subject must be taken as mere opinion unless it can be corroborated with evidence or documentation.

Only the Pope( please forgive the lack of secularism here) speaks "ex cathedra".

Just as long you're ok with it undermining your point.



And Judas at one point believed Christ's "bullshit."

Now before your head fires off your neck like a 4th of July rocket, I am not equating you with Judas Escariot, simply making the point that because you once believed something and came to believe otherwise is not in and of itself proof of the fallacy of the original premise. I suppose it's an interesting personal insight on farmerman, but in no way relevant to the debate at hand.




Well how wonderful for you! Unfortunately the debate is not about you, although you clearly wish to make it a personal matter.



Returning to your childish nature I see. It would have been more clever to simply call me a booger.

well, It is about me , and you and all of us.

Judas, heeh hee have you got the wrong guy. Thats about as meaningful an insult as if you were to compare me to Lex Luthar.

Have anything substantive?

mporter. Youre not coming out with your best stuff. I think blatham, could handle all that fairly easily. You need to get tougher. Ill do what I can to help. If he shows up Ill snipe at him a bit, soften im up.

I'm glad to see your head didn't fire off of your neck, but still you took it as an insult, which is unfortunate. I don't know how I could have been more clear then "I am not comparing you to Judas Escariot," but had I, I suspect you still would have taken it personally. After all, its all about you.

farmerperson

You have me pegged. I do read. Consequently, the modern American Presidency is not available to me.

Also, I should make it known at this point that I am available, should further need arise, for comparisons to Iscariot, or even his brother Herb.

Lastly, I think I can speak for all Canadians when I say that we do experience a certain feeling of elan at the prospect of George, in this next election, maintaining the consistent pattern of failure that has marked his tenure here on the blue planet.

Finn, no, I wasnt even fazed. Religion sweeps off my feathers without ruffling. As a recovering Catholic with Russian Orthodox genes, I look at all religious references as merely someones attempts at humor.

Now Herb, was , by all serious religious scholars, one bad dude. When Juds went and hung hisself, Herb was making a down payment on a sweet bass boat. (He came into a windfall of 30 shekels)

Whoa, mporter, did you hear what blatham sez about us Merkins? Damn pompous red suited bastid.
Although he does moisturize

I believe I know what you are up to with this 'moisturizer' thing. You are implying ambiguous masculinity. I can sense this about you, using my intuition.

But I don't shy away from confessing a softer side. I've never been in a bar fight, I once owned a recording of "101 Strings" by Mantovani, I have attractive nipples, I don't get anxious when the grocery store is short of merchandice and I have to buy pink Bic razors, and perhaps most telling of all, I'm really quite happy being on the bottom.

As to lush emollients massaged tenderly into my epidermis....I'll take all of that I can get.