WMD lies now confirmed by Cia

bluelight

Yesterday the Cia informed the US government that their 1200 "weaponinspectors" has found .....nothing.....also that they have found ......nothing....that indicates that WMD´s have been transported out.....of Iraq.

Thery have found civil locations...capable....of producing WMDs.......and....laundry detergent....but no sign af anything at all similar to what the Bush government gave as a reason for ru7nning over the UN .....and the American people.


Good.

I am glad to finally hear the truth.It seems also we get the truth...when it is not mirrored by Georges neoliberals or Blairs boys.


While you are at it (reading todays news paper to verify what i say)...look also for the story on how Georges boys revealed a Cia agent (because of the WMD issue) which is highly illlegal action much in the same manner as Blair did in London with the expert the later killed himself.


The democrats now wants a full survey....on this and how..it happened...and...they dont want Ashcroft to do it.

Many lies have been told.Now comes the summing up.

I see that some of the true believers are already leaving the ship and are turning to Clarke instead....

Well it will not be Clarke...Things are difficult to prognose...but..Clarke is out of the game before he even enters.

Bluelight

Smoothdrive

Sorry to say this Blue..but i just don't care...they can not find Saddam now..does that imply he was never in Iraq ?

Saddam is overthrown i'm happy about that. Only problem is that there is a new dictator in Iraq, i supported the war, i do not support the way the US is dealing with the current situation.

bluelight

No it shows that the UN inspections were successful.


The ugly useless UN with its moron chief of inspections :Blix pictured by the Us government ,Us media and rightwing believers people here and all over the net...as an idiot......was RIGHT from the beginning.

Funny thing is....i already see some of these.....denying....what Cia themselves say as propaganda..





Bluelight

Anyone who cares to sign up here can read the truth.


Commie link on WMDs

The_Neon_Cowboy

hmm...

I'd hardly call that running over the american people considering . 75% of the americans were FOR the war so i doubt you could say much there....

wha? no mention a couple of the parts/told needed to make nukes,
small traning amoutof serin ....
enough RPG's to arm every man,woman and child not to mention the guns...
or about the barrels of unenriched uranium (complete with un inspection labels),
terrorist camps, mobile chemical weapons labs. whyare you not mentioning any of this and more hmmm?


yea, sure they were ... as sucessfull as the last shuttle landing.... if it weren't for other countries helping saddam, and his hier ups... mabe they would still be there.... honz blix is an idiot.....

JavaFox

It was clear as crystal that Saddam had the intentions of defying the international community. That's enough to fight a war over. You may disagree with that; thank God neither you nor your country is charged with making the world safe.

It's been said once, and I'll say it again: Srebrenica is your model, Baghdad is ours.

bluelight

Adress the issue ...or ...dont bother replying.Read a newspaper...listen to the news your reply is irrelevant.You could waltz around with those arguments one week ago but no longer thanks to the Cia ....TELLING THE TRUTH.....Furter more...the moronic statement that Blix is an idiot...speaks for itself.

The one reason ypou write that is because im Swedish and you try to offend me by it...well forget it..Its just a moronic statment nothing else.

The one question now......is..

Did Cia lie to him about the WMD´s. to Bush..or....did people in Bush government lie about the info they got from Cia?

Well since you are a democracy.....we will eventually get the answer to that one too.

I know what the answer will be...and i will be back celebrating when it is official.

Soon very soon...we will get the result from the same issue in Britain...and...everyone capable of reading a newspaper no matter what political direction it has......knows in what direction that issue is going.......

Bluelight

bluelight

The question is not.....If it was is good to remove Saddam.

The question is if it is ok to lie.


Is it or is it not crystal clear that your government claimed already before they ran over the UN inspections that they claimed that they had evidence for Wmd`s.


Is it or isnt ir crystal clear that these so called evidence were the direct reason given for the necessity of an immidiet attack that did not allow for the UN inspections to finish?

Bluelight

Smoothdrive

How is Sebrenica Sweden's model

oh right i should shut up before Dutchbat is mentioned

JavaFox

It isn't specifically Sweden's model, it is the multilateralist's model. It is the model of the UN, and the model of Europe.

JavaFox

The question was "has Saddam been violating UN mandate?"

The world said yes.

The second question was "what can we do to make sure he stops?"

We said war, the UN said wait.

Smoothdrive

If you are saying that it was bad that the US/UK indicated to have proof of WMD's and by doing so tried to get other countries to join in the war..yeah that indeed is bad.

But i don't think anyone will even raise en eyebrow over it..it's common knowledge that you should not trust the Americans when they try to justify their agressive actions.

Not during the cold war, not during the cuba crisis, noth in their entire South-America policy..well not ever actually.

Removing Saddam from power was good, lying about evidence was bad. I'll just regard it as using the bad to do good..unfortunatelly the bad are overstaying their welcome in Iraq.

bluelight

Is Serbia today a democracy?


Bluelight

JavaFox

Yeah, well, we in America get really scared when Europeans talk about "creating peaceful solutions" -- it usually means thousands of people are dying.

Smoothdrive

Sebrenica is doing ok isn't it ?

I'ld say Afghanistan is a better comparison. US attacks and takes out who they want out, UN rebuilds the country..that's putting the right people on teh right job.

JavaFox

Did 7,000 people get slaughtered in a UN "safe zone"?

Smoothdrive

euhm.. here comes Dutchbat...i never said the Dutch army was any good..i am deeply ashamed for the losses caused by Dutch army cowards.

FuNsTeR

don't wanna say to much Java ... but you were one of the people in here saying that Iraq has WMD and the USA will find them , also you were callin g the french and the germans everything under the sun for blocking the USA in the UN last year..... America/UK were wrong ... you just cannot admit it the French and Germans have been proven right and the real reason behind the war has been uncovered .... OIL everything in Iraq has been opened up ... except OIL you are raping that country ... and you want the rest of the world to bail you out for starting this war against the wishes of the majority of the UN member states .... it is your problem ... it is of your own making ... deal with it ... the UK's only fualt is we have a weak willed leader who wants to be popular instead of dealing with the job he was elected for .. he lied and his goverment lied so he wouldn't look bad in the eyes of the USA ... bush stated Iraq did not have anything to do with 9/11 which lie Bush was pushing to the US public as the reason to go to war ... every body else the world over knew their was no link ... the US has lied one to many time .... they want to control ... but want assistance at the same time ... take a run and jump .... only your poodles in europe will help you .. not the countries with some backbone .... the yankee dollar will not buy them over


its about time Americans and the USA goverment publicly apologise to the French and German people and their respected goverments for being wrong and whipping up hatred to all things French ... i doubt if you do your goverment and people lack the class to do so

bluelight

Yeah ..and exactly how many Americans did you have in Yugoslavia under UN at the time of Srebrenica?

How many did you have situated i Rwanda?

How many resolutions about sending large amounts of troops did you to propose in the UN.....before...the massacres?

Bluelight

bluelight

How many Americans were there in that safe zone?How many were there in Yugoslavia ?

As far as i know.

None.

And dont whine about the Dutch going out.
They were outnumbered and knew they would be dead men had they not.

You have done the same yourselves over and over elsewhere.

In liberaia you didnt even gewt ashore before everything was over.

Srebrenica was a shame..to the whole international community.

INCLUDING Usa.



Bluelight

GOG

How many have died in Iraq?

JavaFox

Milosevic didn't stop the killing until we stopped him. Rest assured that no more Iraqis are being killed by Saddam Hussein.

JavaFox

You critics need to read Resolution 1441. I have never, ever said that there WERE WMD in Iraq. Nobody knew whether or not there were weapons in Iraq. France and Germany NEVER said that there weren't weapons. Resolution 1441 was a condemnation of Saddam Hussein's continued noncompliance, and it promised grave consequences.

The US, France, Germany, the UK -- we all said the exact same thing, Funster. We all said that Iraq was noncompliant. There was no disagreement there. The disagreement was HOW TO FIX THE PROBLEM. Nobody said there wasn't a problem. Like I have said time and time again, it was as clear as crystal that Saddam had no intention of brining himself into full compliance with UN resolutions. The US knew it, France knew it, and Germany knew it.

There was no disagreement over whether or not Saddam was noncompliant. Why don't you read Resolution 1441 yourself? It was passed unanimously. Nobody said Saddam was compliant, except left-wing extremists such as yourself.

Let me reiterate. Nobody said Saddam was compliant -- not Bush, not Clinton, not Kerry, not Chirac, not Shroeder. The disagreement was over HOW TO FIX THE PROBLEM, not whether or not there was a problem. There WAS a problem, and every leader knew it. We wanted to fight a war over it, and Europe wanted to wait. The disagreement was, again, over the means, NOT THE ENDS.

Read before you jump to your baseless conclusions.


At any rate, I hope the UN stays totally uninvolved in Iraq. The only reason Bush asked for help in the UN was to get Indian, Pakistani, and Turkish troops into Iraq (no support in these countries without a UN resolution). I think it was a mistake. We didn't need anyone to do what was right, and we don't the aid of an organization whose only real contribution to the world was the International Driver's Permit. The UN has never, ever made peace in a country. Unilaterally --or in small groups of like-minded countires-- is the only way to quickly fix a nation. The international method is fundamentally flawed.

JavaFox

We're supposed to have troops there to solve European problems? Should we have troops in every country, so we can fix everyone's problem? You know what I don't understand about you bluelight? You harp on and on about how the US is too internventionist, but when a European problem is ignored by the Europeans, you ask me if the US had troops there. Why should US troops have been stationed there?

We didn't have any troops there, nor should we be expected to. But when it was obvious the people were dying and that neither Europe nor the UN could be trusted to take care of it, we did it.

bluelight

Sure and who is doing the killing at the moment in Iraq?

The Japanese?


Bluelight

Judas

Why doesn't the UN inspect the US for weapons of mass destruction?

bluelight