DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 18, 2017, 01:45:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
277667 Posts in 26442 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  ChristiansUnite Forums
|-+  Entertainment
| |-+  Politics and Political Issues (Moderator: admin)
| | |-+  I thought Iraq had no WMD's ???
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: I thought Iraq had no WMD's ???  (Read 5749 times)
sincereheart
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4832


"and with His stripes we are healed." Isaiah 53:5


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 19, 2004, 03:46:08 PM »



 Standing ovation for the lady folks!!!  Cheesy

Bronzesnake

LOL!   Cheesy
Logged



Marv
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: October 26, 2004, 01:55:46 AM »

See:  http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/news/news_2004_1025.html

For a reprinted New York Times article about the 380 tons of high explosives which would have fit into the category mentioned earlier.  It also mentions the machine tooling is gone.

We failed to secure the site in the article and some considered even more important after the invasion.

So are we safer?

Marv
Logged
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: October 26, 2004, 09:41:11 AM »

Terrorism has been doubling every year since our invasion, and will only get worse.
Logged
Bronzesnake
Guest
« Reply #18 on: October 26, 2004, 09:49:41 AM »

See:  http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/news/news_2004_1025.html

For a reprinted New York Times article about the 380 tons of high explosives which would have fit into the category mentioned earlier.  It also mentions the machine tooling is gone.

We failed to secure the site in the article and some considered even more important after the invasion.

So are we safer?

Marv


 Come on Marv...

 Do you honestly believe these psycho brainwashed Islamic fanatics would have simply dropped the twin towers, and then left you alone? Don't you realize that your president had no choice but to go after these dangerous, American haters wherever they might be? Would you rather have taken a purely defensive or diplomatic position with these animals?

 Stop with all the "he did/said this and he did or didn't do this,and are we safer, second guessing. These killers didn't start with the twin towers Merv, they bombed many, many buildings which were full of innocent people all over the world - and many other targets such as the Cole.  President Clinton took a cautious approach, and his most offensive tactics included lobbing bombs and missiles without an invasion force...look what good that did. There comes a time when strong willed men must push aside those without the will to act, or re-act. There comes a time when we must face those who would try to destroy us, and instead destroy them - we can not bow to the protests of our enemies friends - we can not be all things to all people - we must protect ourselves Merv, we didn't start the war, but with the grace of God, we will finish it, or die trying. I would rather did fighting to protect my country than die at my desk at work...how about you?

 Ecc 3:1 To every [thing there is] a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:  


 Ecc 3:2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up [that which is] planted;  


 Ecc 3:3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;  


Ecc 3:4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;  


 Ecc 3:5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;  


 Ecc 3:6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;  


 Ecc 3:7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;  


Ecc 3:8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Bronzesnake
Logged
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: October 26, 2004, 10:03:46 AM »

Quote
Do you honestly believe these psycho brainwashed Islamic fanatics would have simply dropped the twin towers, and then left you alone? Don't you realize that your president had no choice but to go after these dangerous, American haters wherever they might be? Would you rather have taken a purely defensive or diplomatic position with these animals?

THEY WEREN'T IN IRAQ. Why is that so difficult for some of you. The Ba'athist state, Syria and Iraq, where THE WORST EMEMIES OF ISLAMIC FANATICS IN THE MOSLEM WORLD.
Logged
Bronzesnake
Guest
« Reply #20 on: October 26, 2004, 10:31:42 AM »

Quote
Do you honestly believe these psycho brainwashed Islamic fanatics would have simply dropped the twin towers, and then left you alone? Don't you realize that your president had no choice but to go after these dangerous, American haters wherever they might be? Would you rather have taken a purely defensive or diplomatic position with these animals?

THEY WEREN'T IN IRAQ. Why is that so difficult for some of you. The Ba'athist state, Syria and Iraq, where THE WORST EMEMIES OF ISLAMIC FANATICS IN THE MOSLEM WORLD.


 I disagree. I believe they were there. The entire U.N. Security Council believed they were there. The evidence is overwhelming that the weapons existed. Stockpiles that were tagged by inspectors following the first war disappeared - however, Saddam either couldn't, or wouldn't disclose where they went. Saddam used them in the past against the Kurds and Iranians. I believe the WMD were shuttled across the boarder and into Syria.

 Ask yourself this question...
 Why would Saddam keep screwing the inspectors around? Why wouldn't he have simply said, "ok, I don't want to have my country attacked and occupied - I don't want to die or be captured - I like my job with all the riches and killing of anyone who looks at me the wrong way - I really don't have any WMD, so I will allow full access and disclosure."
 It would have been that simple Tim. He would still be in power today, his sons would still be alive and free to torture and murder whoever they chose. Saddam, Russia, France, and Germany would still be secretly leeching millions off of the oil for food program.

 I am not naive enough to believe Saddam had no connection or interaction with America's most viscous enemies. Saddam had the weapons and the technology, and he most likely handed some of it over to those who would kill your family Tim.
To believe this guy (Saddam) was just an innocent victim (slight exaggeration on my part) is ludicrous. Now the Americans are right beside Iran, and have a fighting force smack dab in the Middle east. That was brilliant strategy.
Would you honestly have attacked Iran first? Any military tactician worth his salt would never have attempted that under the same circumstances Tim. Sorry about your luck Saddam, but you reap what you sew. Goodbye evil dictatorship - hello democracy!

 Is it just coincidence that Iran is now backing down from their nuclear ambitions? Do you honestly believe this would have happened if Saddam was still in power and the Americans weren't parked next door?

 Dems and Republicans alike were all for the war Tim, and now that the election is on, the Dems are pretending they were clueless.

 Take care...I love your plant and bee collection.
Where are you at Tim?

Bronzesnake
Logged
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2004, 10:34:04 AM »

I was talking about terrorists. Those that were responsible for 9/11 were not in Iraq.

I'm on the Central Coast of California, 6 years back from developing large irrigated farms in South Africa for 9 years.
Logged
2nd Timothy
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2706


Resident Meese Master


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: October 26, 2004, 10:49:03 AM »

Quote
Do you honestly believe these psycho brainwashed Islamic fanatics would have simply dropped the twin towers, and then left you alone? Don't you realize that your president had no choice but to go after these dangerous, American haters wherever they might be? Would you rather have taken a purely defensive or diplomatic position with these animals?

THEY WEREN'T IN IRAQ. Why is that so difficult for some of you. The Ba'athist state, Syria and Iraq, where THE WORST EMEMIES OF ISLAMIC FANATICS IN THE MOSLEM WORLD.


They're not attacking us on our own soil anymore either!  I'd much rather us be fighting them in their backyard than our front yard.....wouldn't you?   If they werent there before, they sure are now.   Wink

Grace and Peace!
Logged

Tim

Enslaved in service to Christ
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: October 26, 2004, 10:52:53 AM »

Quote
They're not attacking us on our own soil anymore either!  I'd much rather us be fighting them in their backyard than our front yard.....wouldn't you?  If they werent there before, they sure are now.


Was that supposed to make any sense? Why can't you get it through your head that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists attacking us?

Logged
2nd Timothy
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2706


Resident Meese Master


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: October 26, 2004, 10:56:42 AM »

Quote
They're not attacking us on our own soil anymore either!  I'd much rather us be fighting them in their backyard than our front yard.....wouldn't you?  If they werent there before, they sure are now.


Was that supposed to make any sense? Why can't you get it through your head that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists attacking us?



I guess the same reason you are unable to see they are attacking us there instead of here now.   Cool
Logged

Tim

Enslaved in service to Christ
Sulfurdolphin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 209


I'm a llama!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: October 26, 2004, 10:57:19 AM »


 Actually Iraq  did have ties to other terriost organizations when they attacked USA.
Logged
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: October 26, 2004, 11:01:57 AM »

You haven't a shread of evidence for that.

The only logical person on this board who supports the invasion is Roger, who justifies it by the good Samaratan argument. He also feel we Americans are obligated to stop evil in China and else where. This is a philosophy a thousand times more dangerous than that held by Al quada, but at least he's consistant.
Logged
Sulfurdolphin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 209


I'm a llama!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: October 26, 2004, 11:04:12 AM »


 I heard on the radio the other day that Iraq had ties to islamic terriost in Uganda.
Logged
2nd Timothy
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2706


Resident Meese Master


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: October 26, 2004, 11:09:25 AM »

You haven't a shread of evidence for that.

The only logical person on this board who supports the invasion is Roger, who justifies it by the good Samaratan argument. He also feel we Americans are obligated to stop evil in China and else where. This is a philosophy a thousand times more dangerous than that held by Al quada, but at least he's consistant.

Some people just can't see the forest for the tree's Sulfurdolphin.    Its not hard to find documentation to back this up.

Have a nice read Mr. Vaughan

IRAQ
Iraqi Ties to Terrorism

Archived: April 29, 2003


--------------------------------------

Has Iraq sponsored terrorism?
Yes. Former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein provided bases, training camps, and other support to terrorist groups fighting the governments of neighboring Turkey and Iran, as well as to Palestinian terror groups. The Bush administration said it believed Saddam could pass weapons of mass destruction to Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network or other terrorists. In the first few weeks after Saddam’s fall from power, though, convincing proof of an Iraq-al-Qaeda link remained lacking.

Was Iraq the world’s most active state sponsor of terrorism?
No, according to the State Department, which gives that title to neighboring Iran. The State Department has listed Iraq as one of seven states that sponsor terrorism, but experts say Iran, Syria, and, at least in the past, Pakistan, all surpassed Iraq in support for terrorists.

What types of terrorist groups did Iraq support?
Primarily groups that could hurt Saddam’s regional foes. Iraq has helped the Iranian dissident group Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a separatist organization fighting the Turkish government, and several far-left Palestinian splinter groups that oppose peace with Israel. Iraq also hosted the mercenary Abu Nidal Organization, whose leader was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002. Saddam was a secular dictator, and his regime generally tended to support secular terrorist groups rather than Islamists such as al-Qaeda, experts say. But Iraq also supported some Islamist Palestinian groups opposed to Israel, and before the 2003 war, the CIA cited Iraq’s increased support for such organizations as reason to believe that Baghdad’s links to terror could continue to increase.

What kind of support has Iraq given terrorists?
Safe haven, training, and financial support. In violation of international law, Iraq has also sheltered specific terrorists wanted by other countries, reportedly including:

Abu Nidal, who, until he was found dead in Baghdad in August 2002, led an organization responsible for attacks that killed some 300 people.
Palestine Liberation Front leader Abu Abbas, who was responsible for the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship in the Mediterranean. Abbas was captured by U.S. forces April 15.
Two Saudis who hijacked a Saudi Arabian Airlines flight to Baghdad in 2000.
Abdul Rahman Yasin, who is on the FBI’s “most wanted terrorists“ list for his alleged role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
Iraq has also provided financial support for Palestinian terror groups, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Palestine Liberation Front, and the Arab Liberation Front, and it channeled money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. In April 2002, Iraq increased the amount of such payments from $10,000 to $25,000. Experts say that by promoting Israeli-Palestinian violence, Saddam may have hoped to make it harder for the United States to win Arab support for a campaign against Iraq.

Was Iraq involved in the 9/11 attacks?
There is no concrete evidence linking Iraq to the attacks, and although Iraq never expressed sympathy for the United States after the attacks, it denied any involvement. In late 2001, Czech intelligence officials reported that the 9/11 ringleader, Muhammad Atta, had met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague in April 2001, but many American and Czech officials have since disavowed the report and say they have no evidence that such a meeting occurred.

Did Iraq cooperate with al-Qaeda?
This is a subject of heated debate. U.S. intelligence officials say they have reports of links, and President Bush has cited Iraqi ties to al-Qaeda as a reason for confronting Iraq. Still, many of the alleged connections remain tenuous, and because U.S. intelligence agencies must protect their sources and methods of intelligence gathering, few specifics have been offered publicly. Most intelligence on Iraq and al-Qaeda draws on sources of unknown reliability, including al-Qaeda detainees.

What ties have been alleged between Iraq and al-Qaeda?
In October 2002, CIA Director George Tenet announced that the CIA had received uncorroborated reports that:

Senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda stretch back a decade.
Iraq and al-Qaeda have discussed the provision of safe havens and reciprocal nonaggression.
Iraq has provided training to al-Qaeda members in chemical weapons and conventional explosives.
Al-Qaeda leaders have tried to cultivate contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire weapons of mass destruction.
Some al-Qaeda members who fled Afghanistan took refuge in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq.
In October 2002, President Bush said that among those who found refuge in Iraq was a “very senior al-Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks“—apparently a reference to a Jordanian operational commander named Abu Musab Zarqawi, who subsequently left Iraq. A second alleged al-Qaeda operative, the Iraqi national Ahmad Hikmat Shakir, was also thought to have returned to Baghdad after fleeing Afghanistan.

Other charges center on possible ties between al-Qaeda operatives and Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish extremist group that Saddam used as a proxy to combat his Kurdish foes. Some al-Qaeda members who fled Afghanistan were reportedly helping—and receiving shelter—from the group, which operated in a remote corner of northern Iraq’s no-fly zone before being routed by U.S. forces. It remains unclear whether mutual ties to Ansar indicate any sort of active cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaeda.

Why would Iraq help al-Qaeda?

It’s hard to say. Al-Qaeda and Saddam would seem to have incompatible goals. Al-Qaeda is committed to overthrowing secular Muslim rulers like Saddam; for his part, Saddam historically regarded Islamists as a threat to his leftist Baath Party regime and was wary of groups he couldn’t easily control.

Still, Saddam demonstrated signs of selectively cooperating with Islamists—or at least co-opting them. In the 1970s and 1980s, he backed the fundamentalist Syrian Muslim Brotherhood; he also on various occasions adopted Islamist rhetoric; and he supported Palestinian Islamist terror groups. And whatever their differences, Saddam and bin Laden shared a deep hatred of the United States.

Has Iraq used terrorism against the United States in the past?
It has tried. During the 1991 Gulf War, Iraq trained several hundred operatives for planned terrorist attacks on U.S. targets, including bombings of American facilities in Southeast Asia. But these efforts weren’t particularly successful: although Iraqi operatives pulled off small-scale shootings and grenade attacks in the Middle East, they bungled efforts to use explosives. Outside intelligence and law enforcement agencies thwarted more significant plots, including a 1993 attempt to assassinate former President George H.W. Bush during a visit to Kuwait.

Would Iraq have given weapons of mass destruction to terrorists?
Experts disagree. The Bush administration played up this possibility, but some experts doubt that Saddam would have been so reckless, as his goal was to avoid a U.S. invasion. In October 2002, CIA Director Tenet said that the CIA thought Saddam was unlikely to conduct terrorist attacks against the United States—unless a U.S.-led attack appeared imminent. In that case, Saddam might “decide that the extreme step of assisting Islamist terrorists in conducting a [weapons of mass destruction] attack against the United States would be his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him.“ Such an attack failed to materialize.
Logged

Tim

Enslaved in service to Christ
Tim Vaughan
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


I'm a llama!


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: October 26, 2004, 11:15:46 AM »

If you didn't write that, you need to provide a source.

Quote
I guess the same reason you are unable to see they are attacking us there instead of here now.

Now I see!!

So, we spend 80 billion dollars destroying a country which killed Islamic terrorists when ever they were caught, just to bring the type of Chaos that attracts Islamic terrorists, so we can kill them. Sort of like a very expensive piece of bait.

You are a real master strategist!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2016 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media