Iraqis cheer Brit troops, shower them with garlands

[STING2]

"Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

- Bush in October 2002.

Stated that the Iraqis were "providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the Al Qaeda organization."

- Cheney in September 2003.

"Saddam had an established relationship with Al Qaeda, providing training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons, gases, making conventional weapons."

- Cheney in October 2003.







Well then I guess they lied.

No, that was from different sources of intelligence that proved to be inaccurate. A lie is not saying something and later finding out that it is not accurate. A lie is when you KNOW something is not true and you say it anyways.

 

[trevster2k]

This thread is funny.

 

[STING2]

Also, Sting how old was the latest intelligence that gave us all these great quotes?

A lot of it was brand new based on information from people inside the regime.

Regardless, the fact remains that Saddam was in violation of the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire Agreement which required Saddam to VERIFIABLY DISARM of all WMD. Saddam's regime has yet to account for 1,000 Liters of Anthrax, 500 pounds of mustard gas, 500 pounds of sarin gas, and over 20,000 Bio/Chem capable shells, according to UN weapons inspectors.

It was NEVER incubment upon the Bush administration, the Clinton administration or any other country or leader in the world to prove that Saddam had WMD. It was incumbent upon Saddam to prove that he did not. Verifiable disarmament was required by the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement and Saddam failed to completely and verifiably disarm. The criteria for whether or not there would be further military action against Saddam after the 1991 Gulf War was based on his behavior and compliance with the Ceacefire Terms and other UN Security Council Resolutions!

 

[trevster2k]

 

[BVS]

No, that was from different sources of intelligence that proved to be inaccurate. A lie is not saying something and later finding out that it is not accurate. A lie is when you KNOW something is not true and you say it anyways.

Now you're contradicting yourself.

 

[BVS]

A lot of it was brand new based on information from people inside the regime.

Regardless, the fact remains that Saddam was in violation of the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire Agreement which required Saddam to VERIFIABLY DISARM of all WMD. Saddam's regime has yet to account for 1,000 Liters of Anthrax, 500 pounds of mustard gas, 500 pounds of sarin gas, and over 20,000 Bio/Chem capable shells, according to UN weapons inspectors.

It was NEVER incubment upon the Bush administration, the Clinton administration or any other country or leader in the world to prove that Saddam had WMD. It was incumbent upon Saddam to prove that he did not. Verifiable disarmament was required by the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement and Saddam failed to completely and verifiably disarm. The criteria for whether or not there would be further military action against Saddam after the 1991 Gulf War was based on his behavior and compliance with the Ceacefire Terms and other UN Security Council Resolutions!

Way to avoid the question.

You keep shooting off about how they didn't lie, because they didn't KNOW. But if any of these quotes are based on 10 year old info, then yes they are lies. I wouldn't write a paper with a 10 year old encyclipedia. Just like I wouldn't say, I KNOW for sure that my highschool teacher's hair is long and blonde, for it's been 10 years and it could have changed.

 

[trevster2k]

 

[STING2]

Way to avoid the question.

You keep shooting off about how they didn't lie, because they didn't KNOW. But if any of these quotes are based on 10 year old info, then yes they are lies. I wouldn't write a paper with a 10 year old encyclipedia. Just like I wouldn't say, I KNOW for sure that my highschool teacher's hair is long and blonde, for it's been 10 years and it could have changed.

Once again, the definition of a "lie" is knowingly saying something that is false. I don't think that is very difficult to understand.

I don't know where your getting this "10 year old info" thing from? The administration had its sources, as well as the most important fact and central case for war which was Saddam's failure to verifiably disarm of all WMD.

No one lied, but liberals continue the rather laughable claim that the administration lied to get the United States into war with Saddam. It did not work for them in the 2004 election, nor will it ever work for them until they can actually present solid evidence.

The administration made its case for war starting at the United Nations on September 12, 2002 and continued with it up to October 13, 2002 when both houses of congress overwhelmingly authorized the use of force. In mid- November, the United Nations passed resolution 1441 authorizing the coalition to take military action if Saddam would not comply.

The only one that has been proven to have lied in regards Iraq's WMD since 1990 is Saddam's regime. Resolving this serious threat to international security has been an ongoing problem since March 1991. It did not start when Bush entered office in 2001. Those that think it did are simply uninformed about US foreign and military policy for over a decade preceding that time, in the Persian Gulf region.

 

[STING2]

Now you're contradicting yourself.

No your just failing to understand what was found recently. The administration had sources which showed that there was a relationship between Al Quada and Saddam prior to the start of the war. This information has been proven to be inaccurate though. What is not inaccurate is the fact that members of Al Quada and members of Saddam's regime did in fact meet in the 1990s, which was confirmed from recently found documents in Baghdad.

 

[anitram]

Congratulations, STING, a whopping 31% of your countrymen happen to think this president isn't full of shit.

 

[A_Wanderer]

If we are going to be in the business of justifying our positions using polls then the Iraqi opinion polls should be used to show that the idea of a majority of Iraqi's being hostile is wrong.

data here

 

[deep]

is that a current poll?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Closest I could find, there was a BBC one earlier this year.

But they have been consistent.

 

[deep]

Closest I could find,

Feb 2004??


What was Bush at then?

 

[STING2]

Congratulations, STING, a whopping 31% of your countrymen happen to think this president isn't full of shit.

Disapproval does not necessarily mean they all think he is full of dung.

4% of Democrats still approve of the job Bush is doing.

The opinion polls offer liberals solace and hope, but thats about it. Elections are what matter, and the Democrats have been solidly defeated in these for the past 6 years. Its still a Bush White House, Republican controlled Senate, Republican controlled House. Bush is still setting and implementing his policy.

 

[deep]

Closest I could find, there was a BBC one earlier this year.

Would this be the BBC one

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/12_12_05_iraq_data.pdf


Q 6
and
Q32

say that majority of Iraqis think U S Invasion was wrong
and that the coalition forces should leave

 

[A_Wanderer]

Q33 is interesting,

Basically everybody agrees US troops should leave, which is right.

 

[deep]

Q33 is interesting,

Basically everybody agrees US troops should leave, which is right.

yeah

these poor people are in a living hell

they went from a living under a repressive dictator

to living with chaos and mayhem

 

[A_Wanderer]

And through it all they are optimistic and think that life is better today than it was under Saddam, go figure.

> 70% think that life is quite good or very good (Q1).
> 51.5% think that life is somewhat or much better now than before the war, 18.6 think about the same and 29.3 somewhat worse or much worse.
> In a years time expectations for somewhat better or much better are 64.2, about the same 13.7 and somewhat to much worse 12.5%
> State of the country today compared to before the war, much better or somewhat better 45.9, 13.4 about the same, 38.7 somewhat or much worse.
> Expectations for the country in a year, much better or somewhat better 68.6, about the same 11.3 and 10.8 somewhat or much worse.

By the raw numbers many more Iraqi's are alive today than would be if Saddam was kept in power.

 

[STING2]

Would this be the BBC one

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/12_12_05_iraq_data.pdf


Q 6
and
Q32

say that majority of Iraqis think U S Invasion was wrong
and that the coalition forces should leave

Its one poll, there have been others with different results.

Still, the number who think the US was wrong in the invasion is 50.3% vs. those who think the US was right, 46.2%. This is likely within the margin of error for the poll.

In addition, 75% of Iraqi's do not want coalition forces to leave immediately, unlike most liberals in the United States.