The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Political Ammunition => Topic started by: Chris_ on October 24, 2010, 11:24:45 AM
-
The WikiLeaksters seem to have inadvertently done history a bit of a favor in the their obsession, with the help of heavy-breathing media mouthpieces like the New York Times, to release classified military documents.
It seems that some of those documents reveal the utter untruthfulness of a core claim of Iraq War opponents, namely that "We now know that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."
This contention, not nuanced in any way (i.e., not "no stockpiles" or "not that many," but instead absolutely none), is part of leftist folklore. Here are just a few example of so-called "mainstream" or "respected" liberal sources found to have made that exact contention in a brief Internet searches this morning.
(more...)
NewsBusters (http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2010/10/24/imagine-wikileaks-docs-show-there-were-wmds-iraq)
-
This will make headlines across all the MSM. :whatever:
-
OHHHSSSS NOOOEESSSS!!!!! :evillaugh:
-
This has legs Bush is toast!!!!!1111111
Oh wait.
-
Lets see, I remember 2 incidents.
1) They found a couple of loaded chemical shells that someone had rigged up as IED's.
2) When they busted the chemistry chick that was in charge of something or another for Sadam they dug up a half dozen loaded shells out of her backyard flower garden.
Not massive stockpiles by any stretch but still proof they'd been working on them and they damn sure existed.
-
*crickets chirping*
did anyone else get the impression that george bush really didn't give a damn that there weren't (or didn't seem to be) any WMD in iraq? he felt very strongly that deposing saddam was the right thing to do, and that was it for him; decision made. convictions set. end of thought process.
you have to respect that sort of determination.
or maybe he just knew things that we didn't. whatever the case, he certainly didn't seem to put up much of a public fight over the subject.
-
If a madman waves a gun at a crowd of innocent people, SWAT is gonna take him out. Doesn't matter if the gun had no bullets. Same thing with Saddam. He was PROVEN to be dangerous and had every intention on doing more. Good riddance and good on Bush for sticking to the plan.
-
If a madman waves a gun at a crowd of innocent people, SWAT is gonna take him out. Doesn't matter if the gun had no bullets. Same thing with Saddam. He was PROVEN to be dangerous and had every intention on doing more. Good riddance and good on Bush for sticking to the plan.
great analogy. and SWAT couldn't tell that there weren't bullets in the gun until after they took him out.
-
yeah just try telling that to a DUmmie. :-)
-
I figured he had weapons but was still against the war. The question is was he really a threat to us over here? I have seen drug dealers in my ex-wifes complex where my 9 and 14 year old sons play. I can just tell one of these bastards will try and sell meth to my kids and it really bugs me. Do you think the LAPD will understand if I do a pre-emptive strike and **** one of these guys up?
Just because you think someone is going to do something is not enough to blast an entire country because of one man.
-
I figured he had weapons but was still against the war. The question is was he really a threat to us over here? I have seen drug dealers in my ex-wifes complex where my 9 and 14 year old sons play. I can just tell one of these bastards will try and sell meth to my kids and it really bugs me. Do you think the LAPD will understand if I do a pre-emptive strike and **** one of these guys up? Just because you think someone is going to do something is not enough to blast an entire country because of one man.
I'm sure they will. Problem is, it's one of you, and 10,000 of the dead dealer's homies.
And yeah, he was still a threat to the region and beyond. The husband of one of the regular posters here was involved in Southern Watch. Ask those guys who had SAMs lobbed at them on a daily basis if Saddam wasn't a threat.
-
I figured he had weapons but was still against the war. The question is was he really a threat to us over here? I have seen drug dealers in my ex-wifes complex where my 9 and 14 year old sons play. I can just tell one of these bastards will try and sell meth to my kids and it really bugs me. Do you think the LAPD will understand if I do a pre-emptive strike and **** one of these guys up?
Just because you think someone is going to do something is not enough to blast an entire country because of one man.
give it a try. just make sure that obama will let you borrow the US military first. you should be fine. :whatever:
seriously, that was a pretty dumb comparison.
-
What if there was no LAPD or any other PD and the thugs had been peddling drugs and assaulting your kid's classmate and occasionally taking pot-shots at you or hiring people to shoot at your house?
Re-read the AUMF vs Iraq. It mentions terrorism 3:1 over WMD.
-
I figured he had weapons but was still against the war. The question is was he really a threat to us over here? I have seen drug dealers in my ex-wifes complex where my 9 and 14 year old sons play. I can just tell one of these bastards will try and sell meth to my kids and it really bugs me. Do you think the LAPD will understand if I do a pre-emptive strike and **** one of these guys up?
Just because you think someone is going to do something is not enough to blast an entire country because of one man.
Go for it man! Let us know how you make out. :evillaugh:
-
give it a try. just make sure that obama will let you borrow the US military first. you should be fine. :whatever:
seriously, that was a pretty dumb comparison.
Yes, it was a dumb comparison.