Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

I remember when Kerry, Gore, Clintons(s), Kennedy etc. were all worried about Saddams links to terror, WMD, danger to the west etc.

I also remember Democrats like Humphrey, Jackson, Nunn...

Posted by Cecil Trotter at October 5, 2007 09:28 AM

Y'know, you could show the left that video and they'd still deny deny deny. I'll be ninety+ in my rocking chair, telling my grandkids stories....I remember when the Democrats stood on principle...wait, no I don't, it must be senility creeping in.

Posted by Mac at October 5, 2007 09:38 AM

So...
In 1992, Al Gore demands urgent action against Saddam Hussein for his weapons of mass destruction programs and his links to terrorism, programs and links that everyone knows exist, indeed were proven to exist in the coming years.

In 2003 Dick Cheney invades Iraq with much bluster and finds -- wait for it -- no operational links between SH and international terrorism or weapons of mass destruction.

I guess that means somebody was doing their job right between January 1993 and January 2001.

The wingnutosphere: better at own goals than the U.S. Women's Soccer Team!

Posted by Duncan Young at October 5, 2007 07:06 PM

Ummm... yeah.

Except that they were also saying the same thing in 1998, when they passed that little bill saying Saddam had to go, and they were still saying the same thing in 2002, when it came time to vote for actually taking him down if he didn't start living up to the ceasefire conditions imposed 11 years before.

Posted by Big D at October 6, 2007 12:00 AM

and they were still saying the same thing in 2002, when it came time to vote for actually taking him down if he didn't start living up to the ceasefire conditions imposed 11 years before.

...and as it turned out, he basically had been in compilence with the cease fire resolutions (probably to SH's surprise). That was clear before the invasion. And Al Gore, the specific target of today's two minute hate, was against an invasion at that time.

Posted by Duncan Young at October 6, 2007 12:47 AM

Al Gore, the specific target of today's two minute hate, was against an invasion at that time.

Only because he wasn't president at that time.

Posted by Rand Simberg at October 6, 2007 07:23 AM

Clinton did a good job of making Hussein comply to UN
resolutions and destroy his chemical and nuclear weapons
materials.

Truly annoying to The Neo-cons wasn't that.

Rumsfeld went over sold all these wonderful weapons
to Hussein, and then Clinton went over and destroyed
them all during desert fox leaving nothing for rumsfeld
to find in 2003

Posted by anonymous at October 6, 2007 07:38 AM

...and as it turned out, he basically had been in compilence with the cease fire resolutions (probably to SH's surprise).

Sounds like you're suggesting Saddam's underlings effectively conspired to bring about his downfall by encouraging him to refuse to demonstrate that compliance, which was also required by the resolutions you're talking about.

Not to mention the continual violations of the "No Fly" zones, targeting coalition aircraft which resulted in repeated air strikes against his anti-aircraft batteries.

Your definition of "compliance" is non-standard.

Posted by McGehee at October 6, 2007 08:59 AM

Posted by anonymous at October 6, 2007 07:38 AM

It's okay Mr. Clinton, you can sign your name here.

Posted by McGehee at October 6, 2007 09:00 AM

I can't believe there are still retards who think Rumsfield sold chemical weapons to Saddam.

The Soviets and French were the ones who sold him the precusors and equipment. That is common knowledge.

Care to apologise to Rumsfield now and show you are not a comlete loser anonytard?

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 6, 2007 04:10 PM

During the spring of 1984 the U.S. reconsidered policy for the sale of dual-use equipment to Iraq's nuclear program, and its "preliminary results favor[ed] expanding such trade to include Iraqi nuclear entities" [Document 57]. Several months later, a Defense Intelligence Agency analysis said that even after the war ended, Iraq was likely to "continue to develop its formidable conventional and chemical capability, and probably pursue nuclear weapons" [Document 58]. (Iraq is situated in a dangerous neighborhood, and Israel had stockpiled a large nuclear weapons arsenal without international censure. Nuclear nonproliferation was not a high priority of the Reagan administration - throughout the 1980s it downplayed Pakistan's nuclear program, though its intelligence indicated that a weapons capability was being pursued, in order to avert congressionally mandated sanctions. Sanctions would have impeded the administration's massive military assistance to Pakistan provided in return for its support of the mujahideen fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.)

Posted by at October 6, 2007 07:08 PM

And Iraq was using chemical weapons before Rumsfield visited them the first time. They were using them so early in Reagan's term, even a child could understand that administration could not have provided the technology. It is obvious they did not get the tech from us and the dribble you copied and pasted does not change this.

Rumsfield is a better man than you will ever be anonyomous retard. That is the only thing you have proven besides proving me right.

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 6, 2007 07:25 PM

Rumsfeld was helping transfer nuke technolog to hussein
that's what it says.

And if you believed in Dumsfeld, why didn't you reactivate?

And it's quite Clear the Reagan people financed Husseins
weapon program

Posted by anonymous at October 7, 2007 07:50 AM

"Rumsfeld was helping transfer nuke technolog to hussein
that's what it says"

It could say Rumsfield could fly with the utterance of a magic word but that would not make it any more true. An obtues, unsources reference from an obtuse unsourced website is not authorotative.

Besides, you claimed he sold them all thse 'wonderful weapons' (your words) yet you can't list them. Could that be because you are a retarded liar? Yes, it is! All you can do is lie, lick the glass and committ fallicy after fallacy.

"And if you believed in Dumsfeld, why didn't you reactivate?"

Because I have to care for my elderly parents a good bit of the time and no one could take my place. It must frost your balls that history will prove Rumsfield more right than wrong, especiallys since it is painfully apparent that things on the ground are really improving. Any more retarded marks?

Oh yes, this one:

"And it's quite Clear the Reagan people financed Husseins
weapon program"

Looks like you are caught in another lie:

http://www.answers.com/topic/iran-iraq-war

"The USSR and France armed Iraq to its teeth, while the USA provided vital intelligence support and economic aid"

It must really suck to be you.

Posted by at October 7, 2007 09:14 AM

mine^

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 7, 2007 09:17 AM

puckett

try reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program, while others were used for vaccine development.[12]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

You must really hate that video of Rumsfeld shaking hands
with Hussein. The man who to your mind has murdered
thousands of american's yet Rumsfeld cheerily is seen
encouraging him

and

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1992/h920325wp.htm

U.S. officials insisted in 1989, for instance, on playing down the importance of a scandal involving an Atlanta-based bank and more than $5 billion in unauthorized loans to Iraq, including $900 million guaranteed by the U.S. government. They even intervened in the case to prevent indictment of the Central Bank of Iraq while the Persian Gulf War was raging.

"Despite stiff opposition from some officials inside the administration, senior policymakers pushed ahead with $1 billion in fresh agricultural credits for Iraq under a Commodity Credit Corp. program. They also pressed for continued Export-Import Bank financing despite congressional sanctions and kept sharing intelligence information with Baghdad until a few weeks before Iraq's invasion of Kuwait."

Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, all financing Hussein.

Hmm.

No wonder you wanted to Attack Hussein the GOP
had armed him, you knew he had WMD's because your
guys had sold him the weapons.

Posted by anonymous at October 7, 2007 10:10 AM

More obfuscation and tap dancing on your part. When you can't defend you point, you fling shit everywhere like a frustrated monkey, in the hope that something sticks.

Water purification is a dual use technology. this dual use argument of yours is nonsense.

"You must really hate that video of Rumsfeld shaking hands
with Hussein. The man who to your mind has murdered
thousands of american's yet Rumsfeld cheerily is seen
encouraging him"

Hussien was our ally then. It must really chap your ass, all the pictures of Roosevelt and Stalin all buddy-buddy at Yalta.

"No wonder you wanted to Attack Hussein the GOP
had armed him, you knew he had WMD's because your
guys had sold him the weapons."

And yet after all of this, you still can't produce any evidence to support this assertion.

We normal people call that a lie and the people who tell them, like you, a liar.

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 7, 2007 11:02 AM

puckett

Do you Think Reagan And Bush should have sent Anthrax
to the Iraqi Bio-weapons program?

Posted by anonymous at October 7, 2007 05:20 PM

Hey retard,

How hard do you think it is to get Anthrax spores?

This stuff can be found in the soil in agricultural regions all over the world.

Weaponizing it, making it and delivering it is the hard part. There is no evidence whatsoever whe helped him do that.

Nor is there any evidence Saddam ever used weaponized anthrax.

"The anthrax spores in the soil are very tough and can live many decades and perhaps centuries and are known to occur on all continents except Antarctica."

From your beloved wiki.

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 7, 2007 05:53 PM

puckett

So should we be sending Anthrax to Iraq, Iran, North Korea,
Syria?

It's asimple answer, Yes or No.

Posted by anonymous at October 7, 2007 09:16 PM

None of those nations are allied with us now nor are we sharing agricultural assistance on a high level so that is an easy no.

Iraq was an allied nation at the time and the strain we shared was one commonly provided to our allies for reasearch into veternary vaccines.

Yet, you still fail to explain how this statemnt you made earlier is in any way true. You just keep dancing further and further away from it.

"Rumsfeld went over sold all these wonderful weapons
to Hussein, and then Clinton went over and destroyed
them all during desert fox leaving nothing for rumsfeld
to find in 2003"

Are you really stupid enough to believe clinton's wag the dog airstrikes were 100 percent effective when airstrikes in Serbia during the same time peroid were far less effective?

Since it is obvious the truth isn't in you, I don't expect an honest answer.

Posted by Mike Puckett at October 7, 2007 09:41 PM

DY wrote, "I guess that means somebody was doing their job right between January 1993 and January 2001."

Except for that unimportant detail of getting bin Laden, even though Clinton admitted he had more than one opportunity to do so.

"And Al Gore, the specific target of today's two minute hate"

That's rich, coming from the the end of the political spectrum with a 24/365 hate.

Posted by Jim C. at October 8, 2007 12:56 AM

Puckett

Excellent, You support the sending of Antrhrax to Saddam Hussein.

Now, as we are sharing high level aid with the Maliki Government,
should we be sending Anthrax to Maliki?

As for what I believe Clinton did or didn't do, I do believe
Scott Ritter and Hans Blix, who were working UNMOVIC
between 1998 and 2003.

I also believe Rumsfeld supported the funding of
Hussein's WMD program in the 1980's.

Posted by anonymous at October 10, 2007 09:32 PM

Post a comment