Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
WMD
Topic Started: Nov 17 2003, 05:33 PM (259 Views)
nztrekkie
Lieutenant
I know this is "old hat" now - which is very sad that such a serious topic with so many ramifications can just be old hat, but apathy was what the administration was counting on all along - but I just wanted to touch base on it.

Some months ago, a few of the "moderates" here who were in the "give it more time" category said that if no WMD's were found by Xmas then that would be a cause of concern.

I think even bill would finally admit no WMD will EVER be found in Iraq because there were none. So.......what do people think about that ?

"So what" ? "it is a concern our intelligence was bad" " it is a concern we were mislead"........anything other comments ??????

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
I think I have been pretty clear in my opinion on this.

If significant evidence cannot be uncovered the first thing that has to be evaluated is whether the intel is any good. After that, if it can be shown conclusively that intel did not support the claims then you have to look at how it was interpreted, but in any investigation the first step will have to be to reevaluate the quality of the intel used...

With that said, I remain hopeful that significant evidence can eventually be obtained to show that:

1) WMD or evidence of serious programs to manufacture them are found.

2) The Hussein regime made a very bad gamble in trying to create a WMD threat using smoke and mirrors in a hope that fear would prevent them from being attacked prior to being able to resume the programs they originally had.

If I am wrong, I'll take my lumps. I am just not ready to admit defeat on this subject anymore than you are Nz.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
I believe it should be a concern if WMD are not found in the near future or evidence to say that they where there prier to the onset of the war. All though I would say X-mass is not a good died line, for me it will be much closer to the 2004 united states presidential election. I was never a strong proponent of "there must be WMD" just a strong proponent of "More time is need before drawing conclusion” and there for would not find it difficult to admit my belief that they where there was in error.

If they are not found how ever I do not believe it should be used as a really cry of defeat and wrong doing. I believe the war had merits on many more fronts then just WMD and most of them have proven or hopefully will prove to be correct and worthy. It can not be used as quick "we where lied to" evidence, as there are many other possibilities. Although an investigation should be carried out in determining this.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
Dandandat
Nov 17 2003, 04:13 PM
I believe it should be a concern if WMD are not found in the near future or evidence to say that they where there prier to the onset of the war. All though I would say X-mass is not a good died line, for me it will be much closer to the 2004 united states presidential election. I was never a strong proponent of "there must be WMD" just a strong proponent of "More time is need before drawing conclusion” and there for would not find it difficult to admit my belief that they where there was in error.

If they are not found how ever I do not believe it should be used as a really cry of defeat and wrong doing. I believe the war had merits on many more fronts then just WMD and most of them have proven or hopefully will prove to be correct and worthy. It can not be used as quick "we where lied to" evidence, as there are many other possibilities. Although an investigation should be carried out in determining this.

You make a very good point in your second paragraph Dandandat. At least here in the US, we operated on several reasons to warrant our action in Iraq. WMD was the 500 pound gorilla, to be sure, but it was only one of several reasons....
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
nztrekkie
Nov 17 2003, 05:33 PM
I think even BILL would finally admit no WMD will EVER be found in Iraq because there were none. So.......what do people think about that ?


Sorry, but you are wrong again, NZ. There are WMDs, they shall be found, and I will rub your face in it for as long as you frequent these boards.

Before coming back with a smarmy retort, go read ALL of David Kay's report.

The problem with people like you is you actually believe that holding your hands over your ears, jumping up and down, and shouting gibberish at no one in particular (this is a brief synopsis of 99% of your posts) will make events in the world shift your way. Y'know, you'd have better luck with prayer.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Cool Vulcan
Captain
Admiral, I see people like that too often. I wish peope like this would stop and smell the coffee.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Gabe, the problem is that some people only want to see the bad in things, whether for America or for President Bush. They'll scream and rant and call people names and expect that we'll slap ourselves on the forehead and curse the skies for failing earlier to see their absolute wisdom

</sarcasm>

They have sad lives, my friend.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
nztrekkie
Lieutenant
Swidden
Nov 17 2003, 06:57 PM
I think I have been pretty clear in my opinion on this.

If significant evidence cannot be uncovered the first thing that has to be evaluated is whether the intel is any good. After that, if it can be shown conclusively that intel did not support the claims then you have to look at how it was interpreted, but in any investigation the first step will have to be to reevaluate the quality of the intel used...

With that said, I remain hopeful that significant evidence can eventually be obtained to show that:

1) WMD or evidence of serious programs to manufacture them are found.

2) The Hussein regime made a very bad gamble in trying to create a WMD threat using smoke and mirrors in a hope that fear would prevent them from being attacked prior to being able to resume the programs they originally had.

If I am wrong, I'll take my lumps. I am just not ready to admit defeat on this subject anymore than you are Nz.

yes but when is "eventually " - 2015 ??

I thought, but wasn't sure, that it was you who mentioned Xmas as being the time when things would start to look bad if no WMD were found.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Cool Vulcan
Captain
Admiralbill_gomec
Nov 17 2003, 08:53 PM
Gabe, the problem is that some people only want to see the bad in things, whether for America or for President Bush. They'll scream and rant and call people names and expect that we'll slap ourselves on the forehead and curse the skies for failing earlier to see their absolute wisdom

</sarcasm>

They have sad lives, my friend.

I see your point.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
nztrekkie
Nov 17 2003, 05:10 PM
yes but when is "eventually " - 2015 ??

I thought, but wasn't sure, that it was you who mentioned Xmas as being the time when things would start to look bad if no WMD were found.

I don't recall saying Christmas, off hand. It's possible. I do think it will become a bigger issue as we get into the Primaries at the first part of the new year. Perhaps that's what you're recalling?

That being said, I also believe that as long as we are on the ground in Iraq some form of search for evidence will be ongoing. HOwever, the longer we go without locating anything significant the more likely it will be that search effort will decline and those forces redistributed elsewhere.

I do believe that the longer we go without finding any significant evidence, the more likely that representatives of both parties here will start looking for answers regarding the intel. Since some of it goes back to the Clinton era, the Democrats may not want to blame the intel as much as Republican misinterpretation of it.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
NZTrekkie:
Well, first off, it's already clear that some information was wrong. We supposedly knew exactly where the WMD were. It's already been too long for that to be true. Was the wrong information due to an intelligence issue, a lie, or something else? That remains to be established.

But if we accept that we really didn't know exactly where the WMD were, then Iraq is a pretty big country to be looking no place in particular. So what's long enough to find WMD? Who knows...?

However, if some suddenly turn up within 6 months of the 2004 election, I'll be very suspicious...
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
nztrekkie
Lieutenant
ImpulseEngine
Nov 17 2003, 09:43 PM

However, if some suddenly turn up within 6 months of the 2004 election, I'll be very suspicious...

wouldn't surprise me in the least - I mean I bet there are plenty of people who would then say " there you see, I told you they were there all the time".


Just look at the new secret memo written by one of the architects of the invasion, Mr Feith, which now surfaces all of a sudden, linking Saddam and Osama.

Just one article in the Somethingorother Post and people are already clammering to use it to justify the mess.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ANOVA
Vice Admiral
Quote:
 
I think even bill would finally admit no WMD will EVER be found in Iraq because there were none.


Okay........

Extrapolating that piece of ...er...logic, we can therefore state that since Osama and Saddam have not been found, they never existed either.

I think there are a couple thousand Kurds that would disagree with you. If their voices hadn't been silenced some time ago.

ANOVA

BTW Isn't a Kiwi a form of fruit?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
nztrekkie
Nov 17 2003, 11:02 PM
wouldn't surprise me in the least - I mean I bet there are plenty of people who would then say " there you see, I told you they were there all the time".

Oh so then we should all agree that they do not exist, because any evidence to the contrary is already by defult planted or wrong? How objective of you.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
The jury is still out on the matter of Iraqi WMD. It is the press who have lost interest in this issue (although I note that there have been some documentaries and discussions on ABC and SBS lately to deal this issue.)

Maybe some of the statements from the likes of Rumsfeld (wrt the global HIV / AIDS pandemic being a matter of national security) , and by Bush and others are a way distracting our collective attentions from the lack of success of the USA in changing Afganistan (which is still a very dangerous place and still not controlled except in the vacinity of Kabul) or in bringing peace and democracy and international respect to Iraq (seems it is becoming more and more dangerous as time goes by and where the situation seems to be an escalating cycle of tit-for-tat violence). Neither have been successes.



Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus