Would Finding WMD in Iraq Change Your Opinion On the War?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Changeyourlatitude, May 17, 2004.

  1. I heard a news snippet today that a large underground possible WMD storage site is being investigated in Iraq.

  2. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Like I've already said, at this point, if we find a major stockpile of WMD's, it's because we planted them. Bush is far down in his approval ratings, so what would be a better time to just suddenly stumble upon a stockpile of WMD's than now?

    But the media has everyone so fucking doped, so many people would not even question such a scenario. It's beyond them.

    What we witnessed today on the news regarding the Sarin bomb is only the tip of the iceberg in this government scandal. I think it's just a precursor to what the administration has planned for the coming days/weeks, so when they do find this planted stockpile, it won't look so suspicious.
  3. LuciferSam

    LuciferSam Member

    Well, if it was proven beyond a doubt I think it would redeem us a bit in that our original premise for going there would be actually true. But it wouldn't change my opinion that we shouldn't have gone and gotten stuck in there.
  4. cutelildeadbear

    cutelildeadbear Hip Forums Gym Rat

    Nope, I'm with rat on this one. I have been saying so since the begining, they won't find anything until closer to election time. Oh how convenient. :rolleyes:
  5. charredacacia

    charredacacia Member

    isnt it sick how they manipulate the minds of the masses?
  6. Ok, these WMD's (which are there) are about the size of footballs. It makes perfect sense that it took us this long to find them.

    In December 2003, we found 40 of Saddam's jet planes buried in the Iraqi desert. I'll say that again... we found 40 of Saddam's jet planes buried in the Iraqi desert. It took us 9 months to find that. Don't you think it would take a little while to find these football sized objects?

    If Saddam didn't have WMD's, why did he give the weapons inspectors such a hard time for 12 years?? (i.e.: restricting the places they could look, and the ammount of time they could)

    If Saddam didn't have WMD's why did he say so himself in January of 2003?

    Don't say Bush made all this up. Up until the election year, (coincidentally) Kerry, Kennedy, the UN, and EVERYONE thought the same thing. Turns out everyone was right.:cool:
  7. charredacacia

    charredacacia Member

    It isnt really a question of whether there are WMDs in Iraq, it is a matter of when it will be convenient for the prez to "find" them. They are most certainly there. The CIA sold them to everyone
  8. The CIA hasnt sold any WMDs...
  9. charredacacia

    charredacacia Member

    no Heroin either i suppose. Open your eyes dude.
  10. lol, source?
  11. charredacacia

    charredacacia Member

    for which?
  12. charredacacia

    charredacacia Member

    For the weapons: the USA sold weapons to Iraq starting in 1982, (it officially ended in 1988) because they wanted to help them fight against (encouraged them to fight against) Iran, which was building ups its armory with help from the Soviets. This should be common knowledge. Look it up in a good history book.

    For the Heroin: Oh, soory. I guess i meant crack. Erm...close enough, it makes the point. http://www.guerrillanews.com/crack/
  13. Peace-Phoenix

    Peace-Phoenix Senior Member

    Not really no. It's quite clear by this point that the central purpose behind the drive to war was not to rid Saddam of WMD or else the 'indisputable' evidence they had would have born fruit by now and the weapons would have been found. I was opposed to the war to begin with and I remain so. I can't see that thus far much good has come of this except for the capture of Saddam Hussein....
  14. minjeig

    minjeig Member

    mmm I think if they were to find WMDs now it would just be a little too convenient, the kind of thing you'd expect to see in a cheesy movie...
  15. Jozak

    Jozak Member

    No, that's not true. You have yet to prove that assertion, and I seriously doubt you can.

    That is not a legitimate source. That is like a republican on here pulling data from Ann Coulter or the weekly standard, come on man.
  16. I guess you all forgot that Iran-contra affair.

    we gave weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages.

    at that same time...we sold weapons to Iraq because Iran and Iraq were bitter enemies...Iraq was also helping fight the Soviets in Afganistan..remember the Soviets and the cold war?

    at the time of the Gulf War..Iraq's military was comprised nearly 80% of US weapons that we sold them.All those fancy missiles and planes? american.

    and all of Iraq's military scientists were either US-schooled or British-schooled. our schools taught them how to create virul weapons and nerve-gas weapons.

    there is no doubt in my mind that in the 70s or 80s..there was a shady deal made between the US and Iraq that included WMDs.

    I believe that even if there are WMDs that still doesnt give us the right to blow their country to shit....last time I checked...the US is not the only country allowed to have powerful weapons.

    and the last time I checked...North Korea has a nuke aimed right at us. yet we ignore them.

    I bet the next 9-11 that happens..wont be committed by Al-Qaeda...it will come from some strong asian country like North Korea and maybe even China. they have nukes too.

    France has WMDs..they could wake up tomorrow and decide to nuke the US..why dont we invade them aswell??

  17. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Oy vay!

    I am not saying Iraq never had WMD's, people, but I highly doubt they have them now. They're probably somewhere in Syria now, in the hands of somebody just as evil as Saddam.

    The reason Bush invaded Iraq isn't because of WMD's, it's because he could, and get away with it. Invading France wouldn't be so easy, though I am sure if Bush could get away with doing it, he would.
  18. booshnoogs

    booshnoogs loves you

    A girl scout troop could invade France.[/sarcasm]

    I find it disturbing that so many of you just assume that if WMD's are found, they were planted by our government. You're letting your political desires override your good judgement.

    If you were thinking objectively, you would be forced to admit that the US government planting WMD's is one possible scenario, but it's not necessarily truth.
  19. Balbus

    Balbus Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Boo is right evidence should be looked at on its own merit, but perception counts for a lot at most people are going to think after such a long time that it is planted.

    As to France they have nuclear weapons and the means of delivery.
  20. We'll either convieniently find WMD's or Osama within a month before the elections. But I don't think Saddam had WMD's and went down as easily as he did. I'm sure he wouldn't have gone and hidden in a hole somewhere (wich I also think is bullshit) if he had some big bombs left for protection...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice