President Bush should step down

[Jenos Ridan]

We can't deny that he had both intent and quite possibly the means to produce them. The fact is, he had to go and it should have happened sooner. It is for the best, but it will be hard.

As for Bush being and idiot, many have said that about many presidents in the past. Will Bush be forever reviled, can't tell for it is too soon. Is he now, obiviously. Still, we could have a president who simply doesn't even try, one who sat on his thumb after 9-11 and would still be. Anybody want that?

[Iz Man]

Iz Man, you're a useless Republican-Party-drone-which-doesn't-realise-its-shelf-life-is-up. I say that, because I presented a simple post which required either a rebuttal or an apology, and you've done neither. But then you went and tried to retrospectively justify Bush's justification for war, which never sits well with ME. Prepare for vengeance when I wake up in the morning (with a hangover) and can easily copy and paste my previous posts on this subject, and actually, maybe some Doonesbury cartoons, too.

I don't have to respond, rebut, or justify anything to you.
As a matter of fact, you're lucky I'm even replying to your post.

[Guiscard]

Still, we could have a president who simply doesn't even try, one who sat on his thumb after 9-11 and would still be. Anybody want that?

Wait, Saddam had something to do with 9/11???

Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. We went to war with Iraq because we believed they had WMDs. That was the reason. Nothing to do with 9/11. Don't confuse the two.

I see a great difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. I do actually believe the war in Afghanistan is a just war, in that the regime were actively harbouring terrorists and it was providing a breeding ground for their camps and training centres (although northern Pakistan has a similar situation).

I do not, however, agree with the war in Iraq because we went to war on lie and we've dealt with the situation since then atrociously.

[Backglass]

Wait, Saddam had something to do with 9/11??? Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11.

Exactly. George W. Bush, in order to justify his shaky position and save his own skin has spun Iraq & 9-11 into being about the same thing. Unfortunately many Americans believe the hype and truly believe we are fighting in retaliation for 9-11. Sad, but true.

If anyone was paying attention almost five years ago, according to our own president and government, this "Iraq Conflict" (not a war...remember? ) was ONLY about getting rid of an evil dictator who had weapons of mass destruction.

Evil Dictator - CHECK
WMD's - CHECK

"Mission Accomplished" - George W. Bush

Bring the boys home.

[Iz Man]

I do not, however, agree with the war in Iraq because we went to war on lie and we've dealt with the situation since then atrociously.

C'mon Guis, I don't agree with you on many issues, but I know you're not an idiot.
There was no lie.
There was faulty intelligence; from the CIA, MI6(SIS), U.N., everywhere.

You may not agree with Bush, you may not like Bush; but to say he lied to produce this war in Iraq is stretching it quite a bit.

I don't need to post all the quotes from the left making the same claim for WMD's.

I think its also a bit short sighted to believe they (WMD's) were never there. He's used them before, and there is pretty good evidence that many were moved to Syria (some say with the Russian's help).

I agree that the war has been very much mishandled. We need a solution to Iraq.
The problem is that instead of coming up with a viable solution (other than lets just get out) to the conflict, a solution that will lead to victory, most on the left choose to just spout hatred at Bush. Bush sucks, Bush lied, blah blah blah.
OK, fine then. What is the solution?
How is victory defined in Iraq?

[hecter]

OK, fine then. What is the solution?
How is victory defined in Iraq?

You get the f*ck out of there, which is what the people of Iraq want! You're not going to get a victory, as you see it. So, get your asses out of Iraq! NOW!

[Guiscard]

Bring the boys home.

You get the f*ck out of there, which is what the people of Iraq want! You're not going to get a victory, as you see it. So, get your asses out of Iraq! NOW!

And leave them to a bloody civil war which will either see Iran annex the country or turmoil for decades... Thousands and possibly millions dead...

It's our mess and we've got to stay the course and sort it out. We're not gonna get victory but we can sure as hell make sure that we don't leave the Iraqis to devolve into bloodshed and hatred. That will be 100 times worse than Saddam. We don't have the right to stroll into another state, take out the government (for right or wrong) and leave it to a civil war. I hate people who are closed-minded enough to think that a drop of Iraqi blood is worth less than a drop of American or British blood. I think staying the course might be one area where me and Iz agree!

I think its also a bit short sighted to believe they (WMD's) were never there. He's used them before, and there is pretty good evidence that many were moved to Syria (some say with the Russian's help).

Your government must be lying to you, then, when they produced this report:

Iraq Survey Group Report

The report states, without any doubt, that Saddam's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program." The report concluded that "we were almost all wrong" in our assessment that Saddam had WMDs.

And in the UK the Butler Review says that information regarding Iraqi production of chemical and biological weapons was "seriously flawed".

Why the hell would our governments, who more than anything need to VALIDATE the war in Iraq through proving that their original conclusions about WMDs were correct, produce these CONCLUSIVE GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS which state that Saddam didn't have WMDs, nor did he have the capability to produce them in the near future. For fucks sake, if there was any serious weight to the conspiracy nutjob bollocks that you're spouting do you not think our governments would be pushing it and pushing it as the valid reason for the war?

Who knows better? You or the CIA?

There are a million other things about the Iraq war which you can debate into the ground, but this isn't one of them.

And as for the lie question, well we know that the war was planned well in advance and I believe that even if our leaders, Blair included (of whom I am generally a supporter) were misled we should have investigated the evidence more thoroughly. The report we had in the UK before the war was based, in part, on some guys PhD and it was all very shakey stuff. To me it looks like we had an objective - invade Iraq - and we fitted flimsy evidence around that objective rather than making our objective fit the evidence. I also think we had no right to engage in hostility without a UN resolution, and that we can see in this case that when the UN weapons inspectors said they had no proof of WMDs and therefore military action should not be authorised at that stage they were 100% correct. They were right and I believe we need to apologise and perhaps America needs to learn to put more trust in the UN and stop hampering its efforts through ridiculous vetoes.

I have absolutely no reason to believe he has WMDs and I have yet to see a single scrap of evidence that tells me they did. Do you not think our governments, with the immense resources they have at their disposal, would not have done everything they could to find even a scrap of evidence? They haven't found anything. It says so in countless reports. There is no evidence they were shipped across the border, no evidence of moving nuclear plants, no underground bunkers... We've scoured every scrap of Iraq for even an incriminating footprint but found nothing. Just give this one up, guys. Your government is telling you they weren't there, so why do you not believe them? if they were gonna tell the truth about anything it would be evidence of WMDs.

[AtomicSlug]

Trying to catch up in the forum here...
I think Bush is an idiot because he doesn't listen to the People, nor his advisers.

Afghanistan: justified.
Iraq: obviously a bad move for so many reasons, I think everyone else that posted covered it, so there's no sense in my repeating anything.

'nuff said.

[Iz Man]

And as for the lie question, well we know that the war was planned well in advance and I believe that even if our leaders, Blair included (of whom I am generally a supporter) were misled we should have investigated the evidence more thoroughly. I also think we had no right to engage in hostility without a UN resolution, and that we can see in this case that when the UN weapons inspectors said they had no proof of WMDs and therefore military action should not be authorised at that stage they were 100% correct. They were right and I believe we need to apologise and perhaps America needs to learn to put more trust in the UN and stop hampering its efforts through ridiculous vetoes.

We can agree to disagree on the part of WMD's. I do, however, have to take issue with your putting trust in the U.N.
The U.N. was a good idea, but has failed as an institution miserably.
It is inept, corrupt, and nothing but a beurocratic debating society doomed for ultimate failure.
The Oil for Food program, Bosnia, Rwanda, U.N. troops abusing power in Congo, and here's a good one: Libya is the Chair of the U.N.'s Human Rights Commission. The list of U.N. failures can go back to when it faced its first international crisis in 1948. As the British withdrew from Palestine, the fledgling Israeli state was attacked by its Arab neighbors. The intentions of the aggressors were made perfectly clear by the Secretary General of the Arab League: “This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.” And yet, the Security Council refused to take sides. Instead, it assumed moral equivalence between the Arabs and the Israelis, calling for both parties to cease their military activities.
Now look what we have in the Middle East .....


If you haven't noticed by now, I am a great admirer of Winston Churchill, whom I believe to be one of history's greatest leaders. (Yeah, there have been a few decent Brits ) We need a Churchill today. He argued:
“that the United Nations’ work is fruitful, that it is a reality and not a sham, that it is a force for action, and not merely a frothing of words, that it is a true temple of peace in which the shields of many nations can some day be hung up, and not merely a cockpit in a Tower Babel.”
Until the U.N. can prove itself to be an effective organization, it will not have my support, nor should it have the U.S.'s.

[b.k. barunt]

Bush did not get us in Iraq out of stupidity. He has, and will profit from it a great deal. The stupid ones are the cow eyed yuppie republicans that believe the lies he used to get us there. Izman thinks it's "stretching things" to say that Bush lied - that is quite possibly the dumbest statement i've heard on the forums this week.

[Stopper]

Iz Man, you're a useless Republican-Party-drone-which-doesn't-realise-its-shelf-life-is-up. I say that, because I presented a simple post which required either a rebuttal or an apology, and you've done neither. But then you went and tried to retrospectively justify Bush's justification for war, which never sits well with ME. Prepare for vengeance when I wake up in the morning (with a hangover) and can easily copy and paste my previous posts on this subject, and actually, maybe some Doonesbury cartoons, too.

I don't have to respond, rebut, or justify anything to you.
As a matter of fact, you're lucky I'm even replying to your post.

Forgive me if I embarrass you with my gushing gratitude in your doing so.




That's sarcasm, by the way - I wouldn't class that statement as, er, verbal irony.

[unriggable]

I think we should all shut the f*ck up, this war is complete crap. The administration clearly does not care about it's people, and does not care that it is 'supposed' to be doing things for the better of the country. Iraq was no threat whatsoever to the country. If it was, so is Israel. And Pakistan. And China. But they are all safe. Why? No reason, really. Except maybe oil. Dick Cheney's company Haliburton was the first compay the government made a contract with when we invaded Iraq. All I can say is, why the f*ck? At least do a better fucking job keeping a secret.

The point is that our president has no idea what the f*ck is up. We are allowed to dump 451 billion dollars to the military every year, yet we are unable to provide adequate healthcare to so many of our nation's citizens? How many people have died in Iraq that belong to the US? I'm guessing 4,000 tops. How many die in the US every year of preventable disease? A lot more. I can't find the statistics online, but its in the tens, maybe hundreds of thousands. Maybe millions. Maybe more.

Why do we put up with this shit? Our Declaration of Independence clearly states that it is the nation's duty to dissent against a hostile government that does not serve its country. 32% approval rating says it all. Why do we have to follow somebody who has to lie so god damned much, and who has to rely on scaring his followers? Any good president would rally his people rather than cage them.

On a side note, Dick Cheney called Donald Rumsfeld the best secretary of state the nation has ever had, the same man who said that we must give up liberty to gain freedom. Ben Franklin said that any man who gives up liberty to gain security deserves neither.

[Iz Man]

Bush did not get us in Iraq out of stupidity. He has, and will profit from it a great deal. The stupid ones are the cow eyed yuppie republicans that believe the lies he used to get us there. Izman thinks it's "stretching things" to say that Bush lied - that is quite possibly the dumbest statement i've heard on the forums this week.

Ignorance is bliss.
Shoo fly, go back to flame wars.....

[Stopper]

Bush did not get us in Iraq out of stupidity. He has, and will profit from it a great deal. The stupid ones are the cow eyed yuppie republicans that believe the lies he used to get us there. Izman thinks it's "stretching things" to say that Bush lied - that is quite possibly the dumbest statement i've heard on the forums this week.

Ignorance is bliss

I don't recommend replying, b.k. He never does.

[Iz Man]

I don't recommend replying, b.k. He never does.

What's the point? You said the U.S. is a democracy. I said it is a Representative Republic.
Then you decided to copy & paste definitions of irony & sarcasm.
I recommend you go back to flame wars and hang out with b.k.
I'd rather debate the topic with Guiscard, Backglass, et all. I may disagree with them, but at least they provide stimulating dialog.
Now your Mom is calling, you have to finish your homework.

Goodbye.

[Wind Warrior]

Bush did not get us in Iraq out of stupidity. He has, and will profit from it a great deal. The stupid ones are the cow eyed yuppie republicans that believe the lies he used to get us there. Izman thinks it's "stretching things" to say that Bush lied - that is quite possibly the dumbest statement i've heard on the forums this week.

sigh... rulers, politicians, in general people in power lie, cheat, and deceive either to maintain their power, keep the people "happy", cause war, etc... It's called the Imperial talk they speak about peace and prosperity while sharpening their knives behind their back. Most people in power are constantly trying to keep their power or gain more.

[Nobunaga]

... Bush should step down! Lies! Lies! Lies! Bush lied while good men died! Etc... etc... Halliburton! Cheney! Oil! Where are the WMDs?! Where is Osama?! etc.. etc..

... It's frightening how little people pay attention to what's actually going on in the world. You signed up with your pals in the "I Hate Bush" club and facts become irrelevant. Just keep repeating the lines, "No WMDs!", "Halliburton is Evil!"... etc... and that will get it done.

... I dislike President Bush, to rather a large degree, but I refuse to sign on with the club and strap on the blinders. Here is some food for thought, eh...

... 1. Halliburton and Bush designed this war well in advance to take huge oil profits? .... No. The frightening fact of the matter is, the vast majority of Iraqi oil forthcoming has already been promised to the People's Republic of China, sold not through American corporations, either.
... It IS possible that this was the intent from the very beginning. China possesses enough USD and holds them ransom against the US to sway US policy. The PRC could crash the American economy on a whim, if they so chose. That is the problem with having so much US currency in foreign banks - esp. government controlled banks. At the moment, China is too valuable to the US in trade, and the US too valuable to them to actually see this kind of economic attack, but it's a huge stick (as opposed to a carrot) that moves US foreign policy a great deal more than anybody wants to admit.
... Halliburton is making a fortune on construction contracts, yes, this is true enough.

...2. No WMDs! BUsh Lied! .... yeah yeh yeah.... Saddam did in fact have WMDs, and GW Bush was not the first to warn about them. Bill Clinton also warned us about them, as did Senator John Kerry, and hundreds of other US politicians. You see, we KNOW he had them because we sold them to him.
... It was the late 70's and this upstart little country of Iraq was willing to fight those evil Iranians for us. We couldn't go fight the Iranians, in spite of the fact that they committed an act of war by taking the US embassy and hundreds of Americans as hostages... Vietnam was still much too fresh in people's memories and the very thought of any foreign war was absurd. So... the US sold Saddam the weapons to gas those Iranians back to Islamo-Heaven.
... And when the war ended, he (Saddam) used them on his own people.
... Selling Saddam those WMDs was not the best idea, and one that no doubt many have come to regret.
... It is pretty much known now that what remained of these WMD stores were trucked over the border to be hidden in Syria before the Americans arrived.
... But yet, the whole Nuclear Weapon scare was bad intelligence, I agree. It does not look like Saddam had any reputable nuclear weapons program in progress... though he surely wanted one.

... 3. Bush's approval rating is the lowest ever! Well... it IS very low, and deservedly so. Interestingly enough, the new Congress has even a lower approval rating at the moment.
... This should everybody, I don't care if you love or hate the President, this should scare you....
... Since 1822, in the United States Congress, dissenting opinions to Bills presented on the floor have taken the form of revised bills, to foster debate. These revised bills simply represent, "If THIS is what it looked like, we would go for it... can we debate this thing and find some common ground?"
... The New House Speaker has put forth a motion to abolish this activity completely. This, if it passes, will effectively eliminate 80% of debate in Congress. When your government stops being about debating ideas and finding common ground, and starts to look like power-hungry politicians doing all they can to cement their power bases... you shold worry.

... And why doesn't anybody know any of this stuff? It's not on CNN, FOX, ABC, etc... It's not "In Your Face!" enough to sell commercials, maybe? Or maybe you don't even care. I do...

[Wind Warrior]

... Bush should step down! Lies! Lies! Lies! Bush lied while good men died! Etc... etc... Halliburton! Cheney! Oil! Where are the WMDs?! Where is Osama?! etc.. etc..

... It's frightening how little people pay attention to what's actually going on in the world. You signed up with your pals in the "I Hate Bush" club and facts become irrelevant. Just keep repeating the lines, "No WMDs!", "Halliburton is Evil!"... etc... and that will get it done.

... I dislike President Bush, to rather a large degree, but I refuse to sign on with the club and strap on the blinders. Here is some food for thought, eh...

... 1. Halliburton and Bush designed this war well in advance to take huge oil profits? .... No. The frightening fact of the matter is, the vast majority of Iraqi oil forthcoming has already been promised to the People's Republic of China, sold not through American corporations, either.
... It IS possible that this was the intent from the very beginning. China possesses enough USD and holds them ransom against the US to sway US policy. The PRC could crash the American economy on a whim, if they so chose. That is the problem with having so much US currency in foreign banks - esp. government controlled banks. At the moment, China is too valuable to the US in trade, and the US too valuable to them to actually see this kind of economic attack, but it's a huge stick (as opposed to a carrot) that moves US foreign policy a great deal more than anybody wants to admit.
... Halliburton is making a fortune on construction contracts, yes, this is true enough.

...2. No WMDs! BUsh Lied! .... yeah yeh yeah.... Saddam did in fact have WMDs, and GW Bush was not the first to warn about them. Bill Clinton also warned us about them, as did Senator John Kerry, and hundreds of other US politicians. You see, we KNOW he had them because we sold them to him.
... It was the late 70's and this upstart little country of Iraq was willing to fight those evil Iranians for us. We couldn't go fight the Iranians, in spite of the fact that they committed an act of war by taking the US embassy and hundreds of Americans as hostages... Vietnam was still much too fresh in people's memories and the very thought of any foreign war was absurd. So... the US sold Saddam the weapons to gas those Iranians back to Islamo-Heaven.
... And when the war ended, he (Saddam) used them on his own people.
... Selling Saddam those WMDs was not the best idea, and one that no doubt many have come to regret.
... It is pretty much known now that what remained of these WMD stores were trucked over the border to be hidden in Syria before the Americans arrived.
... But yet, the whole Nuclear Weapon scare was bad intelligence, I agree. It does not look like Saddam had any reputable nuclear weapons program in progress... though he surely wanted one.

... 3. Bush's approval rating is the lowest ever! Well... it IS very low, and deservedly so. Interestingly enough, the new Congress has even a lower approval rating at the moment.
... This should everybody, I don't care if you love or hate the President, this should scare you....
... Since 1822, in the United States Congress, dissenting opinions to Bills presented on the floor have taken the form of revised bills, to foster debate. These revised bills simply represent, "If THIS is what it looked like, we would go for it... can we debate this thing and find some common ground?"
... The New House Speaker has put forth a motion to abolish this activity completely. This, if it passes, will effectively eliminate 80% of debate in Congress. When your government stops being about debating ideas and finding common ground, and starts to look like power-hungry politicians doing all they can to cement their power bases... you shold worry.

... And why doesn't anybody know any of this stuff? It's not on CNN, FOX, ABC, etc... It's not "In Your Face!" enough to sell commercials, maybe? Or maybe you don't even care. I do...

Oh stop your whining and do something about it already. If you hate him that much do a coup

[luns101]

... Bush should step down! Lies! Lies! Lies! Bush lied while good men died! Etc... etc... Halliburton! Cheney! Oil! Where are the WMDs?! Where is Osama?! etc.. etc..

... It's frightening how little people pay attention to what's actually going on in the world. You signed up with your pals in the "I Hate Bush" club and facts become irrelevant. Just keep repeating the lines, "No WMDs!", "Halliburton is Evil!"... etc... and that will get it done.

... I dislike President Bush, to rather a large degree, but I refuse to sign on with the club and strap on the blinders.

Stop using logic and common sense. He's evil...case closed! If you attempt to reason with us any more I shall label you part of the right wing conspiracy.

[luns101]

I'd like to take this time to talk to you all about something very important to our struggle against the Bushites. Today, I was driving down the street and to my utter disgust I noticed that all the traffic signs were in .....you guessed it - ENGLISH!! You might think that's where the tragedy ends, but not so, my friends. I decided to have a little lunch at a restaurant nearby. What do you think the menu was written in?...yes, that's right - English again!! Upon leaving the restaurant, I noticed billboards and other signs written in English. On the television there were all kinds of programs in English! Everywhere I went - English, English, English!! Is this the kind of America we want?

Now I can't accuse the Bush administration directly for this as he is against English-only programs in general. But a majority of his supporters are for this ridiculous idea of speaking English only. Is that the mark of a truly compassionate society...to force them to conform to our laws?...I think the obvious answer is no. Imagine the frustration for an immigrant as they try to order food, go to the bank, or watch American Idol. It's not a pretty picture, is it right wingers! I hope you're proud of yourselves.

But luns, President Bush speaks Spanish from time to time...BIG DEAL! I give him no credit for that as so did the little chihuahua dog in the Taco Bell commercials. So we should roll out the red carpet for Georgie Boy because he knows a little Spanish? He only speaks it in order to deflect attention away from the cruelness of his supporters' English only plans. Besides, Bush can't even hardly speak English in the first place, and Dan Quayle couldn't even spell...automatically disqualifying them from holding public office in my opinion.

Rise up, let your voice be heard against the Bushites (in whatever language you desire...don't be intimidated). I have written this post to all of you in English on purpose so that you can all experience the horror and gravity of this situation first-hand.

[b.k. barunt]

Did you really need a whole page to make that one little point? Your post was as long as Nobunaga's, and he had some things to say. Go figure.

[Stopper]

I don't recommend replying, b.k. He never does.

What's the point? You said the U.S. is a democracy. I said it is a Representative Republic.
Then you decided to copy & paste definitions of irony & sarcasm.
I recommend you go back to flame wars and hang out with b.k.
I'd rather debate the topic with Guiscard, Backglass, et all. I may disagree with them, but at least they provide stimulating dialog.
Now your Mom is calling, you have to finish your homework.

Goodbye.

You daft twat. You bring up the earlier democracy/republic thing again without answering or clarifying what the hell you meant.

Of course, you can't clarify what you meant, because your statement that "America is a Representative Republic", didn't have any discernible meaning in the context whatsoever.

The rest of what you said, I can't be bothered with.

You made two unsolicited responses to me in this thread - and you've done it in others - with idiotic statements that you then couldn't back up when I responded to you.

For God's sake, if you're ever thinking of responding to me again, please, just leave the keyboard alone, and have another beer - that's more your forte.

[Iz Man]

For God's sake, if you're ever thinking of responding to me again, please, just leave the keyboard alone, and have another beer - that's more your forte.

[Guiscard]

We can agree to disagree on the part of WMD's.

No, actually... You have yet to give me any reason for why you believe your government would either:

a) Lie in their reports when they say there were no WMDs and no capability of manufacturing WMDs in the near future

or

b) Despite all their power and resources, and with a greater need than any other party to FIND WMDs and validate the war, fail to find any evidence whatsoever when some mysterious source you will not cite can categorically prove they were taken over the border by the russians or are still hidden under a rock somewhere...

We can't agree to disagree here because I've provided evidence and proof that there were no WMDs and you have provided nothing to back up your view, be it logic or evidence.

And Luns, will you STOP with the sarcasm thing. WE GET IT! They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit... We know you hate liberals and those who don't ascribe to your world view, but its wearing really thin and it just brings you down to the level of those who either pop up in threads and say 'America Rules, you all suck and are jealous' or those who shout 'Bush is an ignorant monkey who can't speak... Iraq is stupid we should get out now!' with no real argument. I dislike both those stereotypes equally, but don't drag us all into that quagmire. Some of us enjoy debating with at least a semblance of reason and logic, and I thought you did too...

Iz, Stopper does have a point. Why bring up the whole representative republic thing? He was just picking you up on a point which you gave no explanation to.

[Guiscard]

...2. No WMDs! BUsh Lied! .... yeah yeh yeah.... Saddam did in fact have WMDs, and GW Bush was not the first to warn about them. Bill Clinton also warned us about them, as did Senator John Kerry, and hundreds of other US politicians. You see, we KNOW he had them because we sold them to him.
... It was the late 70's and this upstart little country of Iraq was willing to fight those evil Iranians for us. We couldn't go fight the Iranians, in spite of the fact that they committed an act of war by taking the US embassy and hundreds of Americans as hostages... Vietnam was still much too fresh in people's memories and the very thought of any foreign war was absurd. So... the US sold Saddam the weapons to gas those Iranians back to Islamo-Heaven.
... And when the war ended, he (Saddam) used them on his own people.
... Selling Saddam those WMDs was not the best idea, and one that no doubt many have come to regret.
... It is pretty much known now that what remained of these WMD stores were trucked over the border to be hidden in Syria before the Americans arrived.
... But yet, the whole Nuclear Weapon scare was bad intelligence, I agree. It does not look like Saddam had any reputable nuclear weapons program in progress... though he surely wanted one.

Fucks sake... Not you as well...

You do realise that you made two completely contradictory statements?

It is not in any way 'pretty much known' that they were shipped over the border. There is no proof. That is conspiracy bollocks. Your governments aren't peddling that line of idiocy so why do the American right continue to? Find me some goddamn proof before you make ridiculous sweeping statements like 'it is widely known'. I've provided proof that there were no WMDs. Prove me wrong

But then your second statement says he has no nuclear weapons program but that he wanted one. Well wanting nuclear weapons is no reason to go to war, else we'd have invaded Iran, North Korea and countless other states who have made moves to develop a nuclear program but cannot because of international law.

Whther or not EVERYONE in the past believed he had WMDs, they were all wrong. Every major academic, politician and commentator accepts that there were no WMDs. The debate is about whether the intellegence was faulty or whether it was a pre-motivated attack with evidence fitted around it.