Not surprisingly, a new Harris Poll found many Americans gloomy about the long-term prospects for a stable, democratic Iraq (56 percent) and doubtful that invading Iraq has reduced the risk of more terrorist attacks in the United States (58 percent). But what to make of this: 64 percent still say that Saddam Hussein had strong links to al-Qaida (unchanged since February 2005, and still untrue), and 50 percent believe Saddam had weapons of mass destruction when the United States invaded (up from 36 percent in February 2005). On the WMDs, the best guess is that last month’s declaration by Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., that hundreds had been found now has entered public consciousness. Never mind that the weapons were badly degraded and pre-1991, or that intelligence officials said the old shells weren’t the WMDs that we went to war over.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
38 Comments
But Ronda, even if they are old and useless they are still WMDs that Saddam said he did not have anymore! He lied and now we know he lied and now the cost of invading Iraq and the deaths of over 2000 American service personal is worth every penny and ever drop of blood! And…And this proves that President G.W. Bush is not the traitorous, lying. War profiteering, hand puppet of Cheney and the P.N.A.C. who thinks the Constitution of the United States is as old and out dated as the WMDs that were found!
My eyes are open now thanks to the finding of several hundred artillery shell left over from the war between Iran and Iraq. How could I and all those silly name calling, baby fit throwing Democrats have been soo wrong? About the greatest leader since Jesus Christ himself, Oh how I owe the President and all his followers in the Pharisee club an apology. You know what? I think in Nov. I will just have to vote for anyone that said that God told them to run and are willing to just throw away that worn out piece of parchment in Washington. Those guys that wrote it had to be on drugs anyway, no I will now trust every single thing that Bush will say! They know best what this country needs, rights, liberty, who needs them? I trust the Administration to take care of me while I set and watch “So you think you can dance!”.
So please if any of the Religious right or Neo-Cons are reading this, would you send me a list of those candidates I will need to vote for? Why who even needs an election? I hear by name Bush emporior of America and he can name anyone he want to rule over me….Just do not interrupt my T.V. Programs with those boring press conferences.
Ya, and all the TFM’s out there who decided to not vote for bush in 2008, send us your candidates name so we too can vote the next republican genius into office.
You know! We could have bought Saddam off. It was actually proposes before the war to do it.
It would made a lot of people upset, but we could have paid Saddam and allow him to keep a few hundred million dollars of his own money and exiled to Syria where he could live out the remainder of his life. Syria would have taken him also.
Then we could have helped form a new government in Iraq, just as we did, but not dropped a single bomb and costing a whole hell of a lot less. There would have been a few scrimishes, but the insurrgents wouldn’t have been near as popular or large as they are now.
Fool us once, fool us twice, you can fool us again and again!
I agree Joe – and wonder today if something similar couldn’t be developed for Kim il Idiot in N Korea.
More fun from BushdaBum:
“Detainee abuse charges feared
Bush administration seeks shield from 1996 War Crimes Act
An obscure law approved by a Republican-controlled Congress a decade ago has made the Bush administration nervous that officials and troops involved in handling detainee matters might be accused of committing war crimes, and prosecuted at some point in U.S. courts.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14067214/
Be careful, Writer Dog, someone may think you actually mean all of that.
The average American citizen is so busy watching the latest reality show or catching the latest gossip about Anjolie and Brad’s baby to be bothered about some WMD’s found in Iraq. We have dumbed down our country and turned them into consumers who will buy anything if it is marketed to them. I’m afraid our country values money more than anything else and wars make certain people rich!
Thanks Steve for the warning, possibility the same people that bought into the shells as proof of WMDs. Wait let me grasp for some more straws! You know Saddam would have used those shell had he remember just which hole in the sand he had buried them! But you know how the memory fades after over twenty years! Really it was a plot to embarrass the U.S. yeah that was it! After it was declared that there were no WMDs, Saddam was going to dig them up and say “ Hah Hah I had them all along, I fooled You!”He really is a sneak, it is a good thing we had such a wise and intelligence President to think to invade!Why if he had not then Saddam would still have those shell rusting in the ground and we might have never known.
We should charge Saddam a finder’s fee, I am sure he would gladly pay it since he forgot where the shell were buried!
Joe, I just hate it when you post something I agree with. Capitolism is what we do best. We should have bought the SOB off.
Santorum broke that last little stunt on the Hannity show. And he and Hannity are not done yet!
Just yesterday Santorum was in the same venue. He NOW claims that there is further information CONFIRMING that Iraq had WMDs. He and Hannity comiserated “Why doesn’t the White House release this? Why don’t they show that bush was right?” Santorum says the administration “wants to look forward and not back. That they want to “get above the fray”.
So NOW the lie has transformed AGAIN. “Iraq had WMDs and its provable. But going into that proof would only re-open old wounds.”
And the sad thing is as the above menioned poll shows, there are any number of stupid people who will buy this latest lie as well.
JR – didn’t Iraqis fly the planes on 9/11? Wasn’t OBL born in Iraq?
If Sanitorium claimed Iraqi teenagers throwing Moltaff Cocktails were undeniable proof Saddam had Chemical weapons, the bushbots would be onboard.
And didn’t bin Laden swear fealty to Saddam? Wasn’t bin Laden the Muslim equivalent of a Godfather to Uday and Qusay? I hear that Saddam and Osama get their beards trimmed at the same shop! And, they play the Arab version of golf togeher on alternate Friday afternoons – when they should be in prayer meetings at the mosque.
JR,”And the sad thing is as the above menioned poll shows, there are any number of stupid people who will buy this latest lie as well.”
Right you are, JR. And those legions shall be forever known as total f***ing morons. Why, I’ll bet they vote for Bush in 2008, again, and he will take Floriduh and Ohiko. Why, I’ll also bet that if bush called on all of them to join the army, they’d flock there in record numbers. Hmmm . . .
The poll does not speak well for democracy, there clearly are people who should not be allowed to vote.
I had read once that the majority is always right, that even if the majority is not they are because they are the majority. Two battling factions maybe in play, one being that most people hate to be wrong even more so if the outcome is bad. You can not get much worse then what has happen with the re-election of G.W. Bush.
The second faction that is in play is the people tend to be somewhat fickle, if the majority suddenly turn. Then it become that the prior view was not ever a real view and so it is not their fault. It is kind of like with President Reagan, he would win by a landslide but yet I rarely came across someone here that admitted to having vote for him?
Since the majority re-elected Bush (2000 will be subject matter in future Government classes for centuries to come) Any revelation that shows that it was a disaster to have re-elected Bush will be hard to swallow.Many will still grasp for any straw that would counter act the revelation. No matter how weak, a good case in point is what I have noticed on the reduced book tables. You would swear G.W. is running again! Books that talk about how great G,W, far out run any that are critical of him or his policy. I counted six books that are positive to two that in some fashion are critical. One of the two is about the war in Iraq and it does not touch on the behind the scene actions of the administration but rather how it is a military blunder.But I feel it is more to try and save the GOP rather then to save face for G.W. It is the fingers in the dike trying to stave off the upcoming flood. The number of Republicans running for the 4th Congress seat shows that Teihrt is in trouble. Or at least perceived to be by the GOP, it could be or simply Party politic tend to be blind at time to the reality in which it operates. Remember people tend to be fickle and that fickle goes sometimes without any real course.
How about this VERY STRONG LINK between Saddam and the WTC bomging?:”Three weeks after the bombing, on August 31, bin Laden reaches out to his friends in Iraq and Sudan. Iraq’s vice president arrives in Khartoum to show his support for the Sudanese after the U.S. attack. ABC News has learned that during these meetings, senior Sudanese officials acting on behalf of bin Laden ask if Saddam Hussein would grant him asylum.”The above ABC News quote was before 9-11, concerning the FIRST WTC bombing.Saddam figured prominently in assisting and giving aid and comfort to many terrorist groups, and was very sympathetic towards the First WTC bombers.http://www.archive-news.net/Articles/SH040923.html
Spin me a softball Paul?
The folks who actually carried out the WTC bombing…….aren’t they in custody? Didn’t I hear that the Clinton administration caught them? w might want to ask them a little assistance! he has been playing “where’s Osama” for what 5 years now? But he didn’t find HIM in Iraq either.
Maybe Osama and the WMDs are in the same place? YOU know, like in the back of bush’s mind?
JRWe did NOT catch all of the people involved in the first WTC bombing.And of course, my point here is that Saddam was actively warring against the United States even during the so-called cease-fire.Follow the argument JR, I know it is hard for you, but try to stick to the point.The point is that we went to War with Saddam under Bush 1.That war never ended.Clinton was also at war with Saddam.Clinton, Clinton, Gore and Kerry all said Saddam had WMD’s.They all said so back when Clinton was still President!Operation Iraqi Freedom was part of the same War fought by 3 Presidents.The UN resolution lists several reasons for that war, as does the Congressional Resolution.WMD’s are a part of that reason, but not the major part.And, WMD’s were found in Iraq, and many WMD’s were moved to Syria before Operation Iraqi Freedom.Saddam had been causing us trouble for a very long time.George W has said absolutely nothing about WMD’s that wasnt said previously by Clinton Clinton Gore and Kerry.
Paul,What MWD? Spirited away to Syria? First I’ve heard of it. Maybe you’ve got your ear tuned to the ethreal rush network.And they wern’t the major reason? Please tell us, Paul, what the other reasons were. O, right, Osama and Saddam were in bed together. That’s been pretty much proven wrong.
Clinton Clinton Gore and Kerry did not start the war in Iraq; Bush did. And for all the WRONG reasons. Like oil.
Paul, all you conservatives like to accuse liberals of being for terrorism if they don’t agree with you. Well, I am getting to the point where I think all conservatives agree with the cold blooded killing of innocent men, women and children in the name of democracy, as well as the deaths of our military men and women. You have an unatural view of what is taking place in this country, and you really need to stop and think about what democracy, and this country, should stand for.
Paul
Blah blah Rushism blah Hannityism blah spin blah
There is a lot to chew up in that post Paul! Someone else will be along to have a bite I’m sure. From that little buffet you prepared I choose:
“WMDs were found in Iraq”
Uh no Paul they were not. Old forgotten useless shells were found. Since we’re on a buffet here, the “WMDs” that were found would be like saying ravioli was found because you found an empty can!
So I’m still hungry!
“and many WMDs were moved to Syria….”
They were? A statement like that requires proof! Will it be forthcoming from you? Or
No points this round Paul. You don’t even win a copy of our home game!
Colin Powell in Cairo February 24, 2001:”He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”
Condoleeza Rice, July 2001:”We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”
2 years later…MARCH 30, 2003: Donald Rumsfeld:
We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. [ABC This Week, 3/30/03]
http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=3937
Iraq wmd’s were moved to syria
WOW – a neo-con website quoting an Israeli military spokeman. Must be true!
Suggestion: we controlled the skies over Iraq. Any attempt to move them would have been interdicted.
http://www.nysun.com/article/26514
Iraq weapons were moved to syria
I typed “Iraq wmd’s moved to syria” and I got 255,000 hits on yahoo browser.I realize that a few of these stories minimize the amount that was moved.However, scroll up and you will find some people on this thread who think I made up this point.
So now we have a guy with a book to sell making the claim.
If I were selling a book claiming that saddam moved them to Mars would that make it so?
Paul – I have also seen all sorts of web sites claiming that the WTC was brought down by Mossad. I don’t believe them either.
When Syria starts using those WMD’s against Israel I’ll believe it. I may have just given the excuse for Israel to attack Syria. “We knew they had Saddam’s WMD’s and were planning on using them”!
I think the “WMDs were shipped to Syria” myth Paul posted here has been effectively destroyed.
I’ve an idea. Israel’s world public image is in the toilet with their actions in Lebanon.
What say Israel gets in front of a humanitarian relief effort for the suffering in Darfur? They have the means the military do they have the motivation? Hell the US will do anything Israel asks for. Israel gets out front on Darfur and the US will follow!
I typed in google Ann coulter is a man and got nearly 4,000,000 hits, does that mean she’s a he?
Face it, you folks dont like Bush and there is absolutely NOTHING he could possibly do that would get a compliment out of you.WMD’s WERE in Iraq, we know this because the UN, Clinton, Clinton, Gore and Kerry said so!WMD’s are still in Iraq, but most of the “good stuff” was moved to Syria.
When I was in High School and WSU debate, there were lots of people who thought “quantity” of quote cards meant “quality” in debate. There were also those who thought that simply shopping for any rebuttle quote would win the day.Of course, there is ALWAYS a rebuttle to every quote.For example, I tell you that WMD’s were moved to Syria.You call me a liar, and worse, you say I made it up.I show you links and instruct you on how to find more quotes and sources, and you say all those sources are wrong and that the “WMD’s moved to Syria”argument is a “myth.”LOL, those of you who said “First I heard of it” to the Syria connection are obviously out of touch, even if you had now proved me wrong.But you HAVENT proven me wrong have you?Its the old, “my dog couldnt have bitten you, he was inside, he was sick, and besides, I don’t own a dog” argument.Those of you who had never heard the Syria argument are not up to speed here, if you first heard of that argument from me.At this point, that disqualifies several of you from this debate until you do more homework.Again, type “Iraq WMD’s moved to Syria” into the browser of your choice.
I don’t hate to disappoint you Paul but you are not the FIRST shill to try and sell this load about the WMDs in Iraq beign moved to Syria. Sean Hannity has been spinning and spitting this myth for years. It has no more credibility from you than it does from him.
You are starting to resemble your revered Ann Coulter. I note in the last 2 of your posts a disctint touch of ego.
But ego is not facts. And the fact is that there were no WMDs in Iraq. At least not anytime near to our invasion of that country to find them. Was george bush the first person to be wrong about this? No. Did he overhype and oversell more than ANYONE ELSE this now known to be imaginary threat to launch a war in Iraq. Yes.
It does not matter if WMDs were found or not. Saddam told the world many times that he had WMDs and he was going to use them. That should be enough. That is why we should take out Iran. Now!
“That is why we should take out Iran. Now!”
Gee Mark, how’s that working out? Please tell me about all the good things that are happening in Iraq.