U.S. Ends Fruitless Iraq Weapons Hunt

barry2952

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
0
U.S. Ends Fruitless Iraq Weapons Hunt


WASHINGTON (AP) - The search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has quietly concluded without any evidence of the banned weapons that President Bush cited as justification for going to war, the White House said Wednesday.

Democrats said Bush owes the country an explanation of why he was so wrong.

The Iraq Survey Group, made up of some 1,200 military and intelligence specialists and support staff, spent nearly two years searching military installations, factories and laboratories whose equipment and products might be converted quickly to making weapons.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said there no longer is an active search for weapons and the administration does not hold out hopes that any weapons will be found. ``There may be a couple, a few people, that are focused on that'' but that it has largely concluded, he said.

``If they have any reports of (weapons of mass destruction) obviously they'll continue to follow up on those reports,'' McClellan said. ``A lot of their mission is focused elsewhere now.''

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Bush should explain what happened.

``Now that the search is finished, President Bush needs to explain to the American people why he was so wrong, for so long, about the reasons for war,'' she said.

``After a war that has consumed nearly two years and millions of dollars, and a war that has cost thousands of lives, no weapons of mass destruction have been found, nor has any evidence been uncovered that such weapons were moved to another country,'' Pelosi said in a written statement. ``Not only was there not an imminent threat to the United States, the threat described in such alarmist tones by President Bush and the most senior members of his administration did not exist at all.''

Chief U.S. weapons hunter Charles Duelfer is to deliver his final report on the search next month. ``It's not going to fundamentally alter the findings of his earlier report,'' McClellan said, referring to preliminary findings from last September. Duelfer reported then that Saddam Hussein not only had no weapons of mass destruction and had not made any since 1991, but that he had no capability of making any either. Bush unapologetically defended his decision to invade Iraq.

``Nothing's changed in terms of his views when it comes to Iraq, what he has previously stated and what you have previously heard,'' McClellan said. ``The president knows that by advancing freedom in a dangerous region we are making the world a safer place.''

Bush has appointed a panel to investigate why the intelligence about Iraq's weapons was wrong.

McClellan said the Iraq experience would not make Bush hesitant to raise alarms when he deems it necessary.

``But we're also going to continue taking steps to make sure that that intelligence is the best possible,'' he said.

``Our friends and allies had the same intelligence that we had when it came to Saddam Hussein,'' McClellan said. ``And now we need to continue to move forward to find out what went wrong and to correct those flaws.''

At the State Department, spokesman Richard Boucher said Wednesday about 120 Iraqi scientists who had been working in weapons programs were being paid by the U.S. government to work in other fields.
 
They didn't exist in the first place, and Bush's unconcerned reaction seems to show that he didn't care if they were found or not. He definitely had other reasons for going there. Personally, I'd like for him to just tell the truth. If it was for revenge for his father, oil, whatever, I don't care. I'd just like to know the real reason why. I don't understand why you would lie about the reasons for going to war, when you intend on going to war regardless of the rest of the world's opinion.
 
Yep..they were never there. I remember them interviewing several of the senior scientists who were charged with making WMD (nuclear and otherwise) and they said themselves that they LIED to Saddam about being "close" to having the WMD done. They were to scared to tell Saddam they couldn't make the WMD with the materials and facilities they had. They knew failure was not an option, so they lied instead. The only WMD they had were the ones they bought from the US and Britain....
 
Hey nice hearing from you Barry!!! hope your new year is going good!!

Hmmmm...... they didn't have any!!! Oh that's right they had them hid in the dessert! No, they are in Syria!
 
barry2952 said:
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Bush should explain what happened.

``Now that the search is finished, President Bush needs to explain to the American people why he was so wrong, for so long, about the reasons for war,'' she said.

``After a war that has consumed nearly two years and millions of dollars, and a war that has cost thousands of lives, no weapons of mass destruction have been found, nor has any evidence been uncovered that such weapons were moved to another country,'' Pelosi said in a written statement. ``Not only was there not an imminent threat to the United States, the threat described in such alarmist tones by President Bush and the most senior members of his administration did not exist at all.''

Well, that's all nice and fine, but we already KNOW the real reasons we invaded Iraq. :Bang

BuSh apparently likes to exercise the old adage, "Its easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission." Except in BuSh's case, the arrogant bastard isn't even going to ask for forgiveness. He and all his croonies are arrogant, self-serving LIARS who feel that they do not have to be held accountable for anything. The fact he was "re-elected" is beyond any reasonable belief. Obviously this country is full of gullible, easily mis-guided people. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see through all of BuSh's corrupt and deceptive propaganda.

Hey, at least Michael Moore won the People's Choice award for F-9/11!! :dancefool
 
Well, damn, you guys figured it out. The truth is there is a secret conspiracy out there on the part of President Bush and the military to destroy the lives of peace loving people. We tried our best to hide it but Michael Moore managed to look up while eating two dozen doughnuts and catch us in the act. And we were so close to exacting the second half of our plan...to rape and pillage every American city and drink the blood of the first born in every family...so close...so close...

Please, When I was in Iraq I did not see Nancy Pelosi in a HMMWV alongside me. I did not see Sean Penn helping distribute food to starving people who know nothing but oppresion. I did not see Michael Moore on patrol witnessing what the absence any knowledge of personal freedom can do to a society.

So go ahead and watch Farenheit 9/11, go ahead and believe all the people whose expertise is limited to a few hours of watching CNN and a speech by Barbara Streisand. Because when I handed a WFP packet and a teddy bear to Barirah (who couldn't have been more than 8) and she said in her best broken english "thank you Bush, thank you America" I knew we had done the right thing.
 
FreeFaller said:
Please, When I was in Iraq I did not see Nancy Pelosi in a HMMWV alongside me. I did not see Sean Penn helping distribute food to starving people who know nothing but oppresion. I did not see Michael Moore on patrol witnessing what the absence any knowledge of personal freedom can do to a society.

So go ahead and watch Farenheit 9/11, go ahead and believe all the people whose expertise is limited to a few hours of watching CNN and a speech by Barbara Streisand. Because when I handed a WFP packet and a teddy bear to Barirah (who couldn't have been more than 8) and she said in her best broken english "thank you Bush, thank you America" I knew we had done the right thing.
As grateful as we are that you served for us in Iraq, attempting to protect us from what could have been a tragedy waiting to happen, I'm sure you must have or are due to ask yourself...

"Why did I have to leave my family to do this?"

Is it at all possible that "Barirah" did not need that teddy bear before we ambushed a country that had no real threat to us?

It's unfortunate that countries, such as Iraq, live daily the way they did, pre-war, post-war, inbetween war, but they live there, it's natural to them.

Is our "Next Stop" going to be Punjab, just because it's somewhere near Pakistan? I don't think so. Bush was wrong. You can't escape a lie. Period.

Don't take it the wrong way, once again, anyone who served in Iraq is TOP in my book... but WHY did you have to go? Tell us your opinion on WHY you went and left your family, risked your life, and saw things that some of us could probably not imagine. Why?
 
As posted by Skutter previously with color changes by me for effect.

Why don't we start with explanations and apologies from these illustrious flaming liberals and after we have dissected all their b.s., we can move on to Bushy. Deal?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep.. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 1! 9, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ...... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and an! y nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapon stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec.! 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

I simply don't understand the sentiments of many out there that say that BUSH LIED! If he lied, so did more than half the world. Get off the guys back. He did what was right. He did what needed to be done. If he didn't act, none of us would be getting any sleep, worrying all the time what was next., so stop second guessing.

Remember: The best defense is a good offense!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
hottweelz said:
Don't take it the wrong way, once again, anyone who served in Iraq is TOP in my book... but WHY did you have to go? Tell us your opinion on WHY you went and left your family, risked your life, and saw things that some of us could probably not imagine. Why?
Typical Liberal thinking. The reason 'why?' because freedom isn't free and some people understand the need to make the sacrifices that most of us aren't able or willing to make. Period.
 
Oh well some good debating again in the political section!!!

Looks like Bryan picked up an ally.:Beer

Not that he needs one. Bryan always has his i's dotted and t's crossed!

LOL.
 
Bryan,
Thanks for that long list of quotes, however the ONLY two that really matter are those that come from the President of the United States:

MonsterMark said:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

WHY? Because the BUCK STOPS AT THE OVAL OFFICE! All of those other people cannot be held accountable for actions by the US.

We know now as FACTS, that Saddam's WMD programs have essentially been DEAD since '91. All of those other assertions in the quotes are based on the same flawed intelligence so clearly identified by the 9/11 Commission.

Did Clinton lie? In retrospect, YES. Did BuSh lie? In retrospect, YES. BUT, the BIG DIFFERENCE between Clinton and BuSh that seems to escape the comprehension of most conservatives, is that BuSh not only ACTED on the flawed intelligence, but he "cherry picked" the intelligence reports that supported his hidden agenda to make his case, whereas Clinton did NOT. Clinton has been criticized over and over for not acting on Iraq earlier. But the reason he held back is because the conflicting intelligence reports did not make a clear-cut, no-doubt-about-it case. YES, Clinton gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt. In contrast, BuSh had access to the same flawed intelligence, but he CHOSE to be selective, and CHOSE to IGNORE the conflicting reports. This goes way beyond lying. This is ignorance at the highest level attainable by any US official. And beyond that, once the facts do come to light, instead of taking responsibility for the mistakes, BuSh simply makes excuses, displaces blame and denies any accountability. Sorry, but this, in my opinion, is totally unacceptable. Unlike you, I have much higher expectations for our CIC.
 
"Why did I have to leave my family to do this?"

I didn't leave my family...my family was beside me all along...carrying a weapon and watching my back...while I watched theirs.

Is it at all possible that "Barirah" did not need that teddy bear before we ambushed a country that had no real threat to us?

She needed that teddy bear cause no one else was there to give her one...her family was murdered by Saddam's regime...you see, he didn't much like the shia'a people and systematically slaughtered them to keep them in line.



Don't take it the wrong way, once again, anyone who served in Iraq is TOP in my book... but WHY did you have to go? Tell us your opinion on WHY you went and left your family, risked your life, and saw things that some of us could probably not imagine. Why?

If people who serve in our nations military are tops in your book that's great...I applaud you. But don't sit back and applaud someone (Michael Moore) who created a work of fiction that only portrays servicemen as ignorant brutes, high on adrenaline and heavy metal music with a blatant desire to kill.

I also did not "have" to go to Iraq...I volunteered...twice. I volunteered to defend this nation and it's interests the day I signed on the dotted line. I also volunteered (read: begged) to go to Iraq. That is where my job was...that is what I train for. I went there so somone else would not have to. So sombody's daddy could come home. I went there FOR MY FAMILY.

P.S. I don't take anyone's opinions the wrong way. Sometimes I may seem a little inflammitory but this is not my intent. Only the ignorant use anger as a tool to change someones mind...and this is the least ignorant site I've ever been a part of.
 
FreeFaller said:
Only the ignorant use anger as a tool to change someones mind...and this is the least ignorant site I've ever been a part of.
Our registration page effectively eliminates all 'morons' from participating on the site. But I knew we should have installed a 'lib filter' feature, but then things wouldn't be half as fun.

Seriously, thank you for your comments and your service to our country. People like you are what make and keep this country the greatest in the world.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
YES, Clinton gave Saddam the benefit of the doubt.
This is in essence where we differ Johnny. I am not prepared to roll the dice with innocent American lives because we wanted to give somebody the benefit of the doubt.

I sleep better knowing Saddam is in jail. Hopefully he has a bubba keeping him nice and warm.
 
For the record, I didn't agree with Fahrenheit 9/11 and have not seen it, unless it's free on NBC i'm not paying to see it in any fashion either
-Sincerely Yours,
A Real NY'er.
 
As like always what's good about being an American is the freedom to be able to have your own opinion!!

What's great about this site is that we are able to voice our opinion debate issues with other members and still remain friends even if we disagree.
:Beer way to go :V
 
MonsterMark said:
This is in essence where we differ Johnny. I am not prepared to roll the dice with innocent American lives because we wanted to give somebody the benefit of the doubt.

I sleep better knowing Saddam is in jail. Hopefully he has a bubba keeping him nice and warm.

Well, GW certainly "rolled the dice" w/ our soldier's lives invading Iraq. 1300+ American lives lost due to GW's roll, ZERO as a result of Clinton's roll. Had something actually POSITIVE have come out of it, I might say GW's roll was worth it. However, nothing truly positive has come about. I'd be sleeping much better had Osama Bin Ladin had been captured instead of Saddam. All your argument is doing is giving you a false sense of security.

Free Faller, from your statements ("a work of fiction that only portrays servicemen as ignorant brutes, high on adrenaline and heavy metal music with a blatant desire to kill") I'm guessing you've never seen F-9/11. American soldiers are not portrayed as you have described. After you get done patting yourself on the back, take off your blinders and watch the movie. $4 on PPV, is that too much to spend for enlightenment?

hottweelz, how can you disagree w/ something you have not seen firsthand? Please don't pass blind judgement, spend the $4.

Am I the only one who is bothered by the name "Bin Ladin" on signs on the outside of buildings in Texas? Folks, the fox is watching the hen house!
 
MonsterMark said:
Our registration page effectively eliminates all 'morons' from participating on the site.
I got news for ya Bryan, that filter didn't work on me . . . nanny nanny boo boo!!

Thanks for referring to F911, I needed a good laugh today. As for me, I'm holding my breath waiting for the Iraqi election. Hopefully the fighting will subside afterwards and it will be considered a legitimate election by the Iraqis and the world, but we'll see.
 
JohnnyBz00LS said:
Well, GW certainly "rolled the dice" w/ our soldier's lives invading Iraq. 1300+ American lives lost due to GW's roll, ZERO as a result of Clinton's roll.
I guess if Clinton HAD "rolled the dice" with Bin Laden when he had the chance to take him off the streets, 3000 Americans in New York would still be alive, and we wouldn't be spending additional trillions of dollars in the aftermath. And I wouldn't be on the TSA hit list and have to drop my trousers everytime I want to board a plane to make a sales call.

That was a hell of a price to pay, wouldn't you say, because Clinton didn't have irrefutable proof and therefore didn't act?
 
Bush is a liar. I believe Bush to be a pathological liar. He doesn't know the truth, so he makes it up. We are going to be in Iraq for the next 20 years. What a waste. Debate that MonsterMark.
 
barry2952 said:
Bush is a liar. I believe Bush to be a pathological liar.
I believe in the Holy Father, the Lord and giver of Life... Is that the same???

barry2952 said:
He doesn't know the truth, so he makes it up.
Whew! I thought you were going to say he makes up lies. Making up the truth is sooo much better.
icon12.gif


barry2952 said:
We are going to be in Iraq for the next 20 years. What a waste.
60 Years later, aren't we still in Japan and Germany and going on 50 in Korea and 40 in Vietnam? Sounds par for the course. 20 would be a deal.

barry2952 said:
Debate that MonsterMark.
With myself? I hate picking on myself.
icon10.gif


Barry, just rais'n your blood pressure. It's been a while since we had some fun.
 
You are a sick man if you think that mortgaging your children's future is worth getting rid of one madman.

What makes my blood pressure go up is that you are trying to transfer blame to Clinton when Bush clearly lied to the American public about his intentions.

How could he have entered into this without an exit plan?
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top