The Iraq Thread 2

[Placebo 29]

placebo

Quote[/b] ]Many American people financially supported the IRA for many many years, would you call that supporting terrorism?

Yes.

I'll second that.

Hopefully Israeli justice will be harsher than British justice.

[Tamme 0]

Why are muslims wrong? Becuase killing people is wrong if you do it just becuase they do not believe in your religion, or becuase you are so worried about going to hell you go kill somebody who is not a muslim.

You are generalizing, all muslims aren't terrorists! How do you know that muslims are wrong?

Have you ever read the Koran? It doesn't say: "Kill Christians or go to hell!"

Quote[/b] ]Christians dont go around killing people becuase they dont believe in God, well the shouldnt.

*cough*Crusades*cough*

Quote[/b] ]Also Saddam I do not believe is trruly hated by muslims, why? Becuase he hates America.

Generalizing again! All muslims don't hate America.

Quote[/b] ]I doubt Bush will start another war just to gain support,

War is excactly what you do to gain support. Look at the map. USA has troops in Afganistan and Irak. What's between those two countries? IRAN!! It's so good that bad guys (to you Cpt.Gumbo: muslims) live next to each other, makes attacking them easier.

Quote[/b] ]You know, you are either good or evil, there is no middle

Soooooooooo narrow minded...

You know, there is no good or evil, there is only the middle. Everyone has good and evil in them.

[denoir 0]

Denoir

Quote[/b] ]Yes. You know being unbiased doesn't necessarily mean being 100% supportive of Bush. Or are you trying to say that Blix is pro-Saddam?

Well, he's not anti-Saddam.  And I seem to remember him saying some nastilly-unprofessional things about Bush.

Not during his service. When he retired he gave an interview where he said that dealing with the Bush administration was just about as difficult as dealing with Saddam. I believe him.

The funny thing was that the inspectors were asking for more time which Bush didn't agree to. Now the Bush administration is asking for more time and has so far done far worse than the UNMOVIC.

Quote[/b] ]Not verbally reporting those drones to the UN in an obvious attempt to sway public opinion against an invasion. Plus what he's said about Bush.

Not at all.

[*]The drones were apparently for civilian use

[*]They were not assembled.

[*]It was the Iraqis themselves that found them and showed them to UNMOVIC

[*]It was not clear if they were capable of reaching larger distances than the allowed - it's possible that they were perfectly legal

So instead of complaining that he didn't present it orally in his 20 minutes presenation, you should be thankful that he even bothered to include it at all.

And Blix was neither anti-war nor pro-war. Every time he was asked to give an opinion on that he refused, saying that it was up to the UN security council to decide.

[Warin 0]

Its like the Al Samoud II missiles.

Only without a warhead and guidance package were they able to exceed the allowable range for theater missiles.

And Iraq WAS destroying them.

Good enough for Blix, but not for Bush.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]And I seem to remember him saying some nastilly-unprofessional things about Bush

Well Bush didn´t act very professional in the USA-Iraq crisis, did he ?

He didn´t even manage to lie in a smart way.

Take the things the TBA said the last year (concerning Iraq), put it on a plate and eat it with a spoon FS. The taste will be bad. Rotten food is never good for anyone and the only thing the TBA is serving the US people right now AND the iraqi people are lies, lies and lies again.

Oh well let´s see... let´s execute some terrorists in Guantanamo and have a little terrorist snack and all will be forgotten.

IF YOU WANT TO TELL ANYONE THAT AN INTENTIONAL ERROR CAUSED A WAR AND YOU GO FINE WITH IT YOU SHOULD RETHINK YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY.

[FSPilot 0]

Denoir

Quote[/b] ]Not during his service. When he retired he gave an interview where he said that dealing with the Bush administration was just about as difficult as dealing with Saddam. I believe him.

Of course you do.  And I don't care that he retired, he still meant what he said and he still let it get in the way of his jobs.

Quote[/b] ]The funny thing was that the inspectors were asking for more time which Bush didn't agree to. Now the Bush administration is asking for more time and has so far done far worse than the UNMOVIC.

UNMOVIC had 12 years and didn't disam Saddam.  the coalition has had a few months and has had to fight a war and rebuild the country.  Real fair comparison there.

Quote[/b] ]The drones were apparently for civilian use

lol, yeah, attacking civilians

Quote[/b] ]They were not assembled.

Irrelevant

Quote[/b] ]It was the Iraqis themselves that found them and showed them to UNMOVIC

In a desperate attempt to buy time.

Quote[/b] ]It was not clear if they were capable of reaching larger distances than the allowed - it's possible that they were perfectly legal

Thats not what Blix said.

Quote[/b] ]So instead of complaining that he didn't present it orally in his 20 minutes presenation, you should be thankful that he even bothered to include it at all.

Why?  According to what you said he did a bad job.  It makes me wonder what else he did poorly.

Quote[/b] ]And Blix was neither anti-war nor pro-war. Every time he was asked to give an opinion on that he refused, saying that it was up to the UN security council to decide.

Sure, when he was on duty.  Once he retired his true feelings came out.

Warin

Quote[/b] ]Its like the Al Samoud II missiles.

Only without a warhead and guidance package were they able to exceed the allowable range for theater missiles.

And Iraq WAS destroying them.

Good enough for Blix, but not for Bush.

The only reason they were destroying them was to buy time, they weren't disarming.

Balschoiw

Quote[/b] ]Well Bush didn´t act very professional in the USA-Iraq crisis, did he ?

He didn´t even manage to lie in a smart way.

Take the things the TBA said the last year (concerning Iraq), put it on a plate and eat it with a spoon FS. The taste will be bad. Rotten food is never good for anyone and the only thing the TBA is serving the US people right now AND the iraqi people are lies, lies and lies again.

Oh well let´s see... let´s execute some terrorists in Guantanamo and have a little terrorist snack and all will be forgotten.

IF YOU WANT TO TELL ANYONE THAT AN INTENTIONAL ERROR CAUSED A WAR AND YOU GO FINE WITH IT YOU SHOULD RETHINK YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY.

Wow, a whole post and not a single point.

[denoir 0]

Denoir

Quote[/b] ]Not during his service. When he retired he gave an interview where he said that dealing with the Bush administration was just about as difficult as dealing with Saddam. I believe him.

Of course you do.  And I don't care that he retired, he still meant what he said and he still let it get in the way of his jobs.

His job was not to please Bush but to verify and assist the destruction of WMD. Since no WMD have been found I think we can conclude that he did a good job.

It's funny how people have short term memory. When Blix presented his first report he got very much support from Bush since the report declared that Iraq wasn't cooperating properly.

It's first after the second report, when he said that the Iraqis have begun to cooperate and to change their attitude, that Blix became unpopular with the Bush administration who then did their uttermost to pressure him, feed false information to him and tried to discredit him. And all the little sheep followed.

I think Blix is being too nice. I'm sure the Bush administration was far more unreasonable and uncooperative than Saddam was. I mean you can clearly see now that the lack of WMD was not going to stand in Bush's way of him getting his little war.

Quote[/b] ]UNMOVIC had 12 years and didn't disam Saddam. the coalition has had a few months and has had to fight a war and rebuild the country. Real fair comparison there.

Did they not? So where are the weapons then? Did they evaporate?

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]The drones were apparently for civilian use

lol, yeah, attacking civilians

No, as in aerodynamical test designs. (sarcasm:) You know that in Iraq not everybody rides camels. They developed and constructed airplanes too.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]They were not assembled.

Irrelevant

Since they were not operational then it is indeed relevant. Due to their state the drones were not a violation of the sanctions. They were included in the report because the question was should they or should they have not been included in the initial Iraqi declaration.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]It was the Iraqis themselves that found them and showed them to UNMOVIC

In a desperate attempt to buy time.

Buy time for what? Apparently they wanted to do with them what they did with the WMD in the mid 90's - destroy them.

You know, apart from bits and pieces of the old Iraqi WMD program there have been no discoveries that would indicate that Iraq was in violation of the UN resolutions imposed - at least not since the inspectors returned to Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]It was not clear if they were capable of reaching larger distances than the allowed - it's possible that they were perfectly legal

Thats not what Blix said.

Appendix three of the march report. Use google, I can't be bothered to find it for you.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]So instead of complaining that he didn't present it orally in his 20 minutes presenation, you should be thankful that he even bothered to include it at all.

Why? According to what you said he did a bad job. It makes me wonder what else he did poorly.

When and where did I say that he did a bad job? He did an excellent job. He and his team found much more than the coalliton has found so far. They have been in Iraq now as long as Blix and the insperctors were. And they have no Saddam to interfere. You tell me who is doing a bad job.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]And Blix was neither anti-war nor pro-war. Every time he was asked to give an opinion on that he refused, saying that it was up to the UN security council to decide.

Sure, when he was on duty. Once he retired his true feelings came out.

No. All he said was that TBA was just as uncooperative as Saddam. The rest of his statements in the interviews were leaning slightly towards the pro-war side. He is critical of the lies that Bush & Blair have fed the world and he is critical that it didn't go throught the UN. He is however very appriciative of Saddam being gone.

[Tovarish 0]

LMFAO

Someone just e-mailed this to me:

1) Go to Google.com http://www.google.ca/

2) Type in (but don't hit return): weapons of mass destruction

3) Hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button, instead of the normal "Google search"

4) READ what appears to be a normal error message carefully.

[FSPilot 0]

denoir

Quote[/b] ]His job was not to please Bush but to verify and assist the destruction of WMD. Since no WMD have been found I think we can conclude that he did a good job.

Since he obviously let his political bias get in the way of his job I disagree.

Quote[/b] ]I think Blix is being too nice. I'm sure the Bush administration was far more unreasonable and uncooperative than Saddam was. I mean you can clearly see now that the lack of WMD was not going to stand in Bush's way of him getting his little war.

If there's anybody on this forum who still thinks denoir is anti-American, there's your proof.

Quote[/b] ]I'm sure the Bush administration was far more unreasonable and uncooperative than Saddam was.

Quote[/b] ]Did they not? So where are the weapons then? Did they evaporate?

I think it was Donald Rumsfeld who pointed out that we haven't found Saddam yet, but nobody's saying he doesn't exist.

Quote[/b] ]No, as in aerodynamical test designs. (sarcasm:) You know that in Iraq not everybody rides camels. They developed and constructed airplanes too.

If you really believe that these drones were not for military use then I'm just about done talkign to you.  You're too deep in your personal bias to look at any facts clearly.

Quote[/b] ]Since they were not operational then it is indeed relevant. Due to their state the drones were not a violation of the sanctions. They were included in the report because the question was should they or should they have not been included in the initial Iraqi declaration.

They had something they weren't allowed to have.  I don't think the UN resolution states whether or not they're immediately operational.

Quote[/b] ]Buy time for what? Apparently they wanted to do with them what they did with the WMD in the mid 90's - destroy them.

Which is exactly why they didn't destroy them in the mid 90's, right?

Quote[/b] ]You know, apart from bits and pieces of the old Iraqi WMD program there have been no discoveries that would indicate that Iraq was in violation of the UN resolutions imposed - at least not since the inspectors returned to Iraq.

Again, the coalition has had one or two months to find these things.  Give them time.

Quote[/b] ]Appendix three of the march report. Use google, I can't be bothered to find it for you.

Oh, so they were legal?  That explains why he put them in his report.

Quote[/b] ]When and where did I say that he did a bad job? He did an excellent job.

Well, either the drones were legal and he was wrongly half-reporting them or the drones were illegal and he was wrongly half-reporting them, make up your mind.

Quote[/b] ]No. All he said was that TBA was just as uncooperative as Saddam. The rest of his statements in the interviews were leaning slightly towards the pro-war side. He is critical of the lies that Bush & Blair have fed the world and he is critical that it didn't go throught the UN. He is however very appriciative of Saddam being gone.

I seem to remember him saying particularly nasty things about Bush and his administration.  I can't be bothered to look them up for you.

Tovarish

Quote[/b] ]LMFAO

Someone just e-mailed this to me:

1) Go to Google.com http://www.google.ca/

2) Type in (but don't hit return): weapons of mass destruction

3) Hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button, instead of the normal "Google search"

4) READ what appears to be a normal error message carefully.

That's old.  Try the same thing with "French military victories".

[bonko the sane 2]

mmm...ill risk my opinion here.

I really dont believe Bush and his administration...i dont think no one does really,they are in it for the money and power,so was Saddam,so is every government in any country.

The hypocrisy is unbeliavable,everybody knew there was no WMD; and now the UK and USA are blaming each other for faulty intelegence reports about those elusive WMD...this is ridiculous, but what i find really crazy is that this attitude is acceptable!!

Just feed lies to the people, and even if they dont believe them....who cares...they got the guns the oil and $$$,so they do as they please...it has always been like this from time immemorial...dont pretend there was a noble purpose on that silly war; cos there wasnt any "moral" grounds to it

One thing ill never forget was seeing a bunch of barefoot farmers with AK47's being slaugthered by M1A2's...reminds me a lot of fascism/communism totalitarian regimes...or Im I wrong?

[bonko the sane 2]

That's old.  Try the same thing with "French military victories".

Well...Im not french at all, and im well aware the french were the ones making more $$$ with Iraq's oil before the USA/UK...etc invaded,but if my memory doesnt fail me what about: The French Contribution to the American War of Independence Dont get me wrong,I dont like Bush,Chirac,Berlusconi,Blair,Aznar etc etc im not biased at all its just a matter of setting the record straight...

[Warin 0]

Warin

Quote[/b] ]Its like the Al Samoud II missiles.

Only without a warhead and guidance package were they able to exceed the allowable range for theater missiles.

And Iraq WAS destroying them.

Good enough for Blix, but not for Bush.

The only reason they were destroying them was to buy time, they weren't disarming.

War is Peace.

Destroying weapons, as requested by the UN Weapons Inspectors is not disarming

I am taking a class in critical thinking this fall (I dont need it, I am just using it for credits ) If you would like, I can send you my textbook.

[bn880 5]

LMFAO

Someone just e-mailed this to me:

1) Go to Google.com http://www.google.ca/

2) Type in (but don't hit return): weapons of mass destruction

3) Hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button, instead of the normal "Google search"

4) READ what appears to be a normal error message carefully.

What's funnier is I sent that off from Ottawa to Guelph a few days ago, I think some of the Univ. students finally got it back into Ottawa schools. (would be funny if that's precisely what happened, message in a bottle type of deal)

[denoir 0]

denoir

Quote[/b] ]His job was not to please Bush but to verify and assist the destruction of WMD. Since no WMD have been found I think we can conclude that he did a good job.

Since he obviously let his political bias get in the way of his job I disagree.

What political bias? For crying out loud, Blix is a conservative.

And what exactly are you accusing Blix of doing wrong?

Quote[/b] ]If there's anybody on this forum who still thinks denoir is anti-American, there's your proof.

Quote[/b] ]I'm sure the Bush administration was far more unreasonable and uncooperative than Saddam was.

Are you sure you are not a member of the Bush-jugend?

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Did they not? So where are the weapons then? Did they evaporate?

I think it was Donald Rumsfeld who pointed out that we haven't found Saddam yet, but nobody's saying he doesn't exist.

If you are comparing one man in hiding with alledged tons and tons of chemical and biological weapons that could alledgedly be fired within 45 minutes, then I really have a bridge to sell you.

Quote[/b] ]If you really believe that these drones were not for military use then I'm just about done talkign to you. You're too deep in your personal bias to look at any facts clearly.

According to the experts that examined them they were probably for civilian use. It's all in Blix report. I have no bias here, I'm just restating what the experts said. You on the other hand show extreme bias by making a statement about things you don't know a shit about. Have you looked at the drones? Did you inspect them?

Well, I should not be surprised. You are FSPilot after all

Quote[/b] ]They had something they weren't allowed to have. I don't think the UN resolution states whether or not they're immediately operational.

Of course they do and the ban was not on drones altogether but on UAVs that had a larger range than the maximum allowed. Since they were not assembled, this could not be readily ascertained. Therefor it was mentioned in the appendix as a possible violation along with a ton of others uncertain things.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Buy time for what? Apparently they wanted to do with them what they did with the WMD in the mid 90's - destroy them.

Which is exactly why they didn't destroy them in the mid 90's, right?

Apparently they did. All the interviews with captured Iraq officials point to that. In the mid 90's Saddam came to the conclusion that the political cost of developing WMD was too high so the programmes were dimantled.

Quote[/b] ]Well, either the drones were legal and he was wrongly half-reporting them or the drones were illegal and he was wrongly half-reporting them, make up your mind.

He didn't half report them. He fully reproted them in the written report that is over 300 pages long. Since the discovery of them was not in any way significant he didn't bring it up in his 20 minutes oral presentation.

I understand that Bush is half-illiterate and that reading a report might be difficult for him. But ffs he has employees that can do it for him.

Quote[/b] ]I seem to remember him saying particularly nasty things about Bush and his administration. I can't be bothered to look them up for you.

You mean this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/story/0,12674,979920,00.html

[Major Fubar 0]

Why are muslims wrong? Becuase killing people is wrong if you do it just becuase they do not believe in your religion, or becuase you are so worried about going to hell you go kill somebody who is not a muslim. Christians dont go around killing people becuase they dont believe in God, well the shouldnt. Anyways this is not a religious discussion, if we want of those lets open another thread, but Ill try to stay on topic at this point. Also Saddam I do not believe is trruly hated by muslims, why? Becuase he hates America.

------

You know, you are either good or evil, there is no middle.

Here we have a perfect example of someone who has been programmed by the media, probably all of life, not just post-S11, to regard mulisms as "the bad guys". In everything from news reports to hollywood movies and TV series, we in Western society have been told that muslims are "evil, money grubbing, Christian hating terrorists". I would suggest that anyone that disagrees with this should read a book called "Reel Bad Arabs" by Jack G. Shaheen (link).

-----

Quote[/b] ]You know, you are either good or evil, there is no middle.

I really hope that's a joke...of course there is a middle - shades of grey, as it were. With the possible exceptions of Jesus, Ghandi, Adolf Hitler and Charles Manson, nobody in the world is so polarized as to be 100% "good" or "evil".

[FSPilot 0]

Warin

Quote[/b] ]Destroying weapons, as requested by the UN Weapons Inspectors is not disarming

I am taking a class in critical thinking this fall (I dont need it, I am just using it for credits ) If you would like, I can send you my textbook.

guh, i'm having the thoughts i'm just not wording them right

they were getting rid of some weapons, but they weren't complying with the resolution which states they need to get rid of all the weapons.

And just send me your tuition, I'll... uh... sign up for more interesting activities.

denoir

Quote[/b] ]What political bias? For crying out loud, Blix is a conservative.

And what exactly are you accusing Blix of doing wrong?

Well he was biased. And like most biased people I think he let it got in the way of his job.

Quote[/b] ]If you are comparing one man in hiding with alledged tons and tons of chemical and biological weapons that could alledgedly be fired within 45 minutes, then I really have a bridge to sell you.

If you think the coalition can find weapons, fight a war, and rebuild a country in a fraction of the time UNMOVIC had, without the wars or country building, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Quote[/b] ]According to the experts that examined them they were probably for civilian use. It's all in Blix report. I have no bias here, I'm just restating what the experts said. You on the other hand show extreme bias by making a statement about things you don't know a shit about. Have you looked at the drones? Did you inspect them?

I've heard otherwise. Actually, I remember seeing pictures of these drones, fully assembled.

Quote[/b] ]Apparently they did. All the interviews with captured Iraq officials point to that. In the mid 90's Saddam came to the conclusion that the political cost of developing WMD was too high so the programmes were dimantled.

Source? And why didn't he publically announce this?

Quote[/b] ]I understand that Bush is half-illiterate and that reading a report might be difficult for him. But ffs he has employees that can do it for him.

That's not the point. The general public doesn't read blix's 300 page report, they listen to his 20 minute speech, or they read the 5 word headline about it.

Quote[/b] ]You mean this:

Yeah that's pretty bad.

[FallenPaladin 0]

/me bangs head against wall

[WhoCares 0]

LMFAO

Someone just e-mailed this to me:

1) Go to Google.com http://www.google.ca/

2) Type in (but don't hit return): weapons of mass destruction

3) Hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button, instead of the normal "Google search"

4) READ what appears to be a normal error message carefully.

What's funnier is I sent that off from Ottawa to Guelph a few days ago, I think some of the Univ. students finally got it back into Ottawa schools.  (would be funny if that's precisely what happened,    message in a bottle type of deal)

What is even funnier, I posted this already on 3rd July, on page 15.

In this time, I could have send it from Germany to Canada by snail mail

[FallenPaladin 0]

Well, George W. will have a hard time from now on. The media has even given the current actions taken a name: "Bush-Bashing" .

Finally! He should have been bashed out when he stole his election, but a late bashing is better than no bashing at all.

Give`im hell, he surely deserves it!

[Longinius 1]

"If there's anybody on this forum who still thinks denoir is anti-American, there's your proof."

Being anti american and being anti Bush is not the same. You can disagree with Bush and his minions without being anti american. Oh, sorry, forgot. If you are not with him, you are against America. Real nice sense of democracy and freedom of opinion there, FS.

"If you really believe that these drones were not for military use then I'm just about done talkign to you. You're too deep in your personal bias to look at any facts clearly."

And you arent??!

"If you think the coalition can find weapons, fight a war, and rebuild a country in a fraction of the time UNMOVIC had, without the wars or country building, then I've got a bridge to sell you."

Since they said they knew that Iraq had and were developing WMD's, its safe to assume they would know where to look for it as well. Otherwise, how would they know anything at all?

[FallenPaladin 0]

It makes no sense. He won`t get it. Debating with a 18 year old guy from Kansas who thinks of himself he`s eaten wisdom with spoons is like fighting windmills with lance and sword.

[denoir 0]

denoir

Quote[/b] ]What political bias? For crying out loud, Blix is a conservative.  

And what exactly are you accusing Blix of doing wrong?

Well he was biased.  And like most biased people I think he let it got in the way of his job.

You say that he was biased and yet you are unable to say how he was biased and what he is supposed to have done wrong. Are you sure it's not your pro-Bush bias that influences you?

Quote[/b] ]If you think the coalition can find weapons, fight a war, and rebuild a country in a fraction of the time UNMOVIC had, without the wars or country building, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Let's see. Blix and his team came to Iraq in january and were forced to left the end of March. The coallition came mid-April. Now it's mid July. So they have been in Iraq just about as long as Blix's team was.

Let's compare the sizes:

Blix's team: 100

Coallition troops: 400,000 (2,500 exclusivly dedicated to the WMD hunt)

Not to mention that according to you both Saddam and Blix' bias obstructed UNMOVIC's work.

Quote[/b] ]And why didn't he publically announce this?

He did. All the time.

Quote[/b] ]That's not the point. The general public doesn't read blix's 300 page report, they listen to his 20 minute speech, or they read the 5 word headline about it.

Do you understand that 300 pages can't be summarized in 20 minutes if you are going to include all the information of minor importance. The drones were deemed to be of minor importance by Blix and the 20 minutes were spent describing more urgent findings and estimates of Iraqi cooperation.

[Tamme 0]

Well, George W. will have a hard time from now on. The media has even given the current actions taken a name: "Bush-Bashing" .  

Finally! He should have been bashed out when he stole his election, but a late bashing is better than no bashing at all.  

Give`im hell, he surely deserves it!  

Bush is being accused for everything. I don't want to defend the guy, but there are people in his governmet that are feeding Bush the same bulllshit that they feed to the people.

So instead of: "Give`im hell, he surely deserves it!  "

Why not:"Give 'em hell, they surely deserve it! "

[FallenPaladin 0]

I can live with that, too, when it includes Paul Wolfowitz and his gang.

[NurEinMensch 0]

I know its a futile attempt, but I just have to say something....

Well he was biased.  And like most biased people I think he let it got in the way of his job.

He was biased? How was he biased? Did he think Saddam is a nice guy and needs help?  

Did he think Bush is a bad guy and whatever he tries should be sabotaged?  

In what way was he biased? Did he ever say something like "I dont think Iraq has WMD"?

Quote[/b] ]If you think the coalition can find weapons, fight a war, and rebuild a country in a fraction of the time UNMOVIC had, without the wars or country building, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

According to what the hawks said prior to the war they knew where it is hidden, they had sources they didnt want to compromise etc.

So why, why did they in the same time the Blix team had find less?? Are they not cabable of doing so? If yes get the real experts back into Iraq and let them do their job like they did before the US kicked them out.

Or maybe, only maybe there is nothing to find. No hidden stockpiles of tons of WMD, delivery systems (45 minutes remember), uran... you name it.

And if that is the case make up your mind: Did your government get your beloved country in a war with false evidence, lies and fake? Do you like to be treated like sheep?

Or will you stand up and say "NO"?

Quote[/b] ]I've heard otherwise.  Actually, I remember seeing pictures of these drones, fully assembled.

Hearsay on FOX news doesnt count. Read what the experts said about the drones. Until you don't know the real facts stop making accusations.

Quote[/b] ]Source?  And why didn't he publically announce this?

Google is your friend. FOX news is not.

Quote[/b] ]That's not the point.  The general public doesn't read blix's 300 page report, they listen to his 20 minute speech, or they read the 5 word headline about it.

TBH that's the general public's problem. The general public is not not what I'd call a shining example of intelligence. If you don't want to be part of the dumb masses stop reading headlines only, read the whole thing.