you might be a Republican if,,,

Not sure if Mongo actually likes me or not (I know he likes very few people so the chances of him liking me are slim), but I think he likes messing with me when he's bored.

 

On the other hand, if Hitler had been stopped in the mid/late thirties he wouldn't have invaded anyone. Also, if he had developed nukes, like Saddam was intending to do, he would have never been stopped at all. Believe me, Saddam was one sob that needed to be taken out. I don't necessarily think we did it at the correct time but we did it anyway. (The dumbasses in Washington didn't call and ask for my opinion on the matter. I was highly insulted.)

I keep hearing about Saddam having permission from the US to invade Kuwait but I've never heard any proof on that claim. Do you believe this to be actually true?

 

Ya just had to go there, didn't ya Mongo...

 

Don't bet your life on it...

 

Speaking of proof, where's the proff that Sodamn Insane intended to develop nukes? I thgought the yellow cake carp and the aluminum tube tales both turned out to be bunkum.

 

Ok now, both of these threads are ghey. Can someone start one titled "You might be an Independent if..."? That way the BBS will have it all.

 

i'm not a dem but, i can bet my life on it cuz i wouldn't be lookin' for uninvited handouts in someones else's castle...even if it were owned by a dem.

 

you might be a republican if the best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

 

You already said that on page 1 homeboy....

 

You might be a republican if you were smart enough to remember what you posted.

 

where did you come up with this? Guess you haven't heard of the Army Advantage Fund, or the Tax Exempt status for those, unlike YOURSELF, who serve in a Combat Zone.

 

I'm sure you won't like my sources, but here is one of them.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0103-55.htm

http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?threadid=728451

Now where is your proof that Saddam was building WMD's especially nukes? Seeing as the whole war was based on that premise and nothing has been found, and they have even given up looking I'm guessing that you have no proof, just propaganda and rhetoric taken from the ever trusting MSM.

 

I could be wrong but my guess is the same place these folks got there 'proof'???
http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

Also, something that you may not know...sometimes proactive military/LE action needs to be implemented before gathering every shred of evidence on any given threat. If you wait till all your ducks are in a row you're heading towards failure....imo.

 

Seen the video and that doesn't PROVE crap, besides lots of people said the same B.S, that and none of those people started a war over the B.S. Bush did. There is a difference between having all the evidence and making statements like "The smoking gun being a mushroom cloud" or "we know he has them and we know right where they are". especially when all is said and done you can't produce anything to prove it.

Since when is attacking a nation that has not attacked you or not a threat to you in any way a good thing? I thought only communist, nazi, or horrible dictator ran nations did that. What good has come out of us invading Iraq? Is AQ smaller and less known now? Do they have more or less people running to join their fight? Is America any safer today than before we invaded Iraq?

 

We know, from information obtained during inspections in the early years, and from information obtained from some of his scientists after he was taken out, that Saddam had aspirations of building a nuclear program. Don't forget that also, a supply of yellow cake was found, in Iraq, just a year or so ago. This was a supply that Saddam had for several years. I think it was finally determined that the aluminum tube thing fell apart. (cheap tubes were made in China)

 

A sure sign of insanity ( or senility) is when you start repeating yourself. :up:

 

Say again?

 

Are you sure that you want to use a source that is promoted by Enver Masad?

Below is a link to a reliable source on Iraq's Nuclear programs. Happy reading.:up:


http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/act1298.html



Iraq has provided few credible indications that its nearly three-decade quest for nuclear weapons has ended. Since its invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, however, Iraq has had an extremely difficult time making any progress in building nuclear weapons. The economic sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council after the invasion disrupted many vital imports, particularly for Iraq's uranium enrichment program. The allied bombing campaign destroyed many of its key nuclear facilities.

The subsequent, highly intrusive inspections mandated by the Security Council and carried out by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Action Team in cooperation with the UN Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) exposed and destroyed vast amounts of nuclear equipment and materials. In the process, the inspections uncovered a long-standing and determined clandestine nuclear weapons program, despite Iraqi denials until 1995 that such a program existed. Currently, essentially all of Iraq's pre-Gulf War nuclear facilities and equipment have been eliminated or converted to non-proscribed purposes under periodic Action Team inspections. But Iraq retains its nuclear cadres and its extensive knowledge and experience built up before the Gulf War. Moreover, some key unanswered questions remain about Iraq's effort to build the nuclear weapon itself-called "weaponization" here-and to build a gas centrifuge enrichment program t!!o enrich uranium for weapons purposes.

Since the war, Iraq is suspected of having made progress on a number of bottlenecks in its weapons program, at least those which could be done with little chance of detection by inspectors. These activities include design work, laboratory efforts, subcomponent production, and the operation of test machines. If the inspection system becomes ineffective, Iraq could reconstitute major aspects of its nuclear weapons program that would likely be discovered under the current inspection regime, a combination of historical investigations and an on-going monitoring and verification (OMV) system. Even under the OMV regime, Iraq's illicit acquisition of plutonium or highly enriched uranium (HEU) from the former Soviet Union would be very difficult to detect. Because of this and other weaknesses, the OMV system needs improvement to be effective in deterring and detecting Iraq's banned activities.

There are few alternatives. A nuclear-armed Iraq would be extremely dangerous. Nuclear weapons would aid Saddam Hussein in ensuring his own survival and increasing his regional power. If he detonated a nuclear explosive underground, the international community, and in particular the United States, may not risk intervention, particularly if definitive information about the size of Iraq's nuclear arsenal is lacking.

Essential to any discussion about about Iraq or the OMV system are estimates of the time needed for Iraq to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. Such an assessment requires a thorough understanding of Iraq's pre-war program and reasonable inferences about its activities after the war. This article attempts to summarize this discussion and outline some of the most important scenarios of how Iraq may reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. In addition, this article looks at a neglected part of the entire inspection process, namely improving methods to reduce the risk posed by the Iraqi nuclear scientists. There is wide agreement about their central importance to any Iraqi attempt to reconstitute its nuclear program. Yet, little has been done to reduce the threat they pose.

 

All of that yellowcake had been previously documented by the UN. It was stored since before the 1991 Gulf War and had nothing to do with the Niger yellowcake Bush cited as justification for invading Iraq. The DoE said all along the aluminum tubes were for artillery rockets and had nothing to do with centrifuges (but the DoE's advice was ignored. what do they know about reactors anyway?)

Your source is a 1998 article co-written by Khidir Hamza, whose opinions are based on what he saw in Iraq before he defected in 1994, and whose claims were completely discredited in 2002. Even Dick Cheney has accepted that Saddam didn't try to restart his nuke program after the 1991 Gulf War. Iran is the new Iraq. Do please try to keep up