doublegunshop.com - home Forums NY Times admits Iraq had WMD'S after all !

What else do you expect from the blame Bush crowd ?

Dave, the sarin/mustard projectiles supplied by the United States to Hussein aren't WMDs. Saying they are doesn't make them so. The US isn't into WMD proliferation. The fact Hussein used them on his people doesn't make them WMDs.

The fact Bush's invasion was supported by many countries doesn't change the fact it was a mistake acknowledged even by your generals who fought it. Our prime minister told Bush to his face that Canada wouldn't be part of it.

Result: 4,500 dead Americans, 11,000 wounded, cost a trillion dollars, plus the killing of tens of thousands of civilians. The mismanagement of the war from the beginning has sucked the US back into a civil war with no end in sight.

Those are the facts, Dave.

King,

saying Hussian did not have WMD's when its been proven time and time again-WITH FACTS,that he had them used them on his own people just because your liberal ideology FORCES you to deny what real does not work.It never has and never will.

Now once again-I know you like to play your "punks game" and blame Bush but for everthing;

And they also soon forget that they agreed and supported the War.Of course that was back in the old days when congress held votes and we had a international coalition too !

Democrats who voted for the Iraq war

Baucus (MT) Bayh (IN) Biden (DE) Breaux (LA)Cantwell (WA) Carnahan (MO) Carper (DE) Cleland (GA) Clinton (NY) Daschle (SD) Dodd (CT) Dorgan (ND) Edwards (NC) Feinstein (CA) Harkin (IA) Hollings (SC) Johnson (SD) Kerry (MA) Kohl (WI) Landrieu (LA) Lieberman (CT) Lincoln (AR) Miller (GA) Nelson (FL) Nelson (NE) Reid (NV) Rockefeller (WV) Schumer (NY) Torricelli (NJ)

The facts,AND history will show that your boy Obama is the one to blame for the current ISIS /Iraq mess by NOT agreeing with his generals to leave enough troops behind and protect what was won in Iraq.

It's your thread, Dave. You say "NY Times admits Iraq had WMDs" when it did not. You can't show where it did. No one---not the US, UN, EU, UK, NATO or anyone---has attached the term WMD to what was found except you and Jim.

Go ask the friggin Kurds if Hussein used WMDS on them. They lost at least 5000 people due to the efforts of "Chemical" Ali. *** You're as bad at distorting the truth as the idiot we have in the White House who refuses to call the friggin Islamic murderers terrorists. Everybody else knows good and well they're terrorists but the closet Mulim will never admit it.

*** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Hassan_al-Majid

Okay, okay, uncle, I give up.

Would you happen to have a handy guide or rule of thumb for when we have to fanatically cling to an acronym or brush off spoken and written words as a punks game. Were you able to check wiki's def. of wmd? Hey, I get it, that's a derogatory term hung around Bush' failed Presidency.

Sure the US is involved in the proliferation of wmd's, 50.1% of the country is dem.

[quote=King Brown]

Sure, there's lots of spin because of US embarrassment, Iraq panic with IS at Baghdad's gates, and Iraq's US-trained and equipped 300,000-military disappeared like driven smoke. They surrendered the site.

[quote]


Comrade King, your capacity for sociopathic obfuscation is boundless.

Here we go again, a denial of objective reality. I'll try to walk you through.

The failure to achieve a Status of Forces agreement enabled Al Maliki to purge the Iraqi army. Even though it was fairly professional and apolitical.When you purge an army of it's effective leaders, combat effectiveness disappears.

It was transformed from being an effective fighting force into essentially an arm of Al Maliki's political machine.

Report: Iraq�s Maliki purged military of top U.S.-trained officers
Special to WorldTribune.com
WASHINGTON � Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki has neutralized Iraq�s U.S.-trained and -equipped military, a report said.
The Brookings Institution said Al Maliki purged the Iraqi military of commanders suspected of disloyalty. In a report, the institution said those forced out by the Shi�ite Al Maliki included some of the most professional Sunni officers trained by the United States.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki. /AP/Hadi Mizban
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki. /AP/Hadi Mizban
�Unfortunately, despite the boost it gave him, Prime Minister Al Maliki
saw this largely apolitical and professional military as a threat to
himself,� the report, titled �Iraq Military Situation Report,� said.
Author Kenneth Pollack said Al Maliki�s purge began in 2009 when he
replaced Sunni commanders with Shi�ite loyalists, many of them rejected by
the U.S. military. He said the prime minister suspected Sunni commanders as
secret supporters of the former Saddam Hussein regime.
Pollack played down the U.S. training of the Iraqi military. He said
U.S. officers rewarded performance but only marginally improved the
effectiveness of Baghdad�s military.
�So, beginning in 2009-2010, he began to remove the capable, apolitical
officers that the United States had painstakingly put in place throughout
the Iraqi command structure,� the report said. �Instead, he put in men loyal
to himself, often because they had been the ones passed over or removed by
the Americans. The result was a heavily politicized and far less competent
officer corps.�
The report said Al Maliki also reversed nearly a decade of U.S. training
and mentoring of the Iraqi military. The prime minister closed
U.S.-established training facilities and used the military and security
agencies against his rivals.
�Finally, beginning in 2011 immediately after the departure of the last
American soldiers, Maliki began to use his new, politicized ISF [Iraqi
security forces] to go after his political rivals, many of them leading
moderate Sunni leaders,� the report said. �This was a critical element in his alienation of Iraq�s Sunni
community, and further demoralized the Sunni Arab, Kurdish, and other
minority personnel in the ISF.�
The report, dated June 14, said Al Maliki�s purge also disappointed many
Shi�ite officers who sought a professional and apolitical military. Instead,
the military was said to have been transformed into the prime minister
militia.
�Not surprisingly, when this force came under tremendous stress, it
fractured,� the report said. �As noted above, it is now being rebuilt, but
not as a national army: as a Shia militia. And the U.S. should only be
providing it with aid if we are given the right and the ability to turn it
back into an apolitical, national army.�

Ken,Criag,Canvasback, Dave et al:
I am going to give up as you'll get a straight answer in regard to Ebola from the idiot Friedan from the CDC before King Brown or those of his ilk will ever admit the truth.
The only positive thing I see in these threads is we've peeled back the Libtard Bullshit level by level and exposed it until there's basically nothing left.
Hopefuly enough of the intellligent pubic understand this and will vote accordingly on November 4th.
Jim

Good move, Jim: Letting go if you can't find a source to support your claim "the New York Times admitted Iraq had WMDs after all."

Kurds and Americans suffered horribly from chemicals, fertilizer and diesel fuel in Oklahoma and airborne cylinders of jet fuel in NYC.

Those tragedies were described as genocide, terrorist attacks and crimes against humanity but the means never specifically as WMD.

Libtards are having coniption fits right now....their precious Messiah has been lying to them all these years...as has been the NYT themselves....we've been saying that all along...but they always swore the NYT was noting but honest all the time.