Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor

Thanx Sam, I think it's a safe bet that JT won't be back to this thread however. Immediately after posting my response, JT started his "Ann" thread. This wouldn't be the first time he has run from a thread that patently proves that the Bushies lied.

I do have to say, JT... I'm sorry about the name calling, it's really not my style... but dude... come on... stop reading coulter-esque crap and dig for the facts. Stop letting others interpret things for you and take an objective look at the facts. Without opinionated narratives. Just the facts. Do your homework mister...

Originally Posted by johnnyturk!

What is wrong with you people? I was happy that members of Al-Quiada seemed to be discouraged by the new government in and their inability to drive us away. I was not happy that I didn't see this story on ABC nightly news. That is it! You guys turn everything to into a "Bush Lied" thread. You want facts? Okay here goes, and try not to let the truth warp your mind or get in the way of your conspiracy thoeries:

Saddam Hussein had already violated sixteen UN resolutions.

Yes, which is why it was a UN problem to deal with, not a unilateral US problem. In addition, Saddam had agreed to full and unfettered access to all sites in an 11th hour deal with former UNSCUM inspector chief Scott Ridder. The inspectors had indeed returned to Iraq, but Bush told them to get out because we were invading. How many resolutions does the US thumb it's nose at? How about Israel? There are any number of countries that are in violation of UN resolutions. Hell, we don't even pay our UN dues.

Saddam Hussein had a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons that he had used against his own people. The Khurds? Remember them?

His arsenal mysteriously disappeared after Desert Storm and had never been accounted for.

Sure, a full arsenal that we gave him. Also, by the time we invaded, his stocks (had there been any) were well over a decade old, which is past their useful life. But that wasn't really the issue, the Bushies insisted that he had reconstituted his weapons programs, which was of course A LIE! Not one shred of evidence has surfaced to date indicating that ANY weapons program had been revived (aside from a very meager missile program which was permitted under the UN resolutions). In addition, the first inspection regime (UNSCOM) oversaw the destruction of 90% of Iraq's known stocks. So no, they didn't mysteriously disappear.

Ansar al-Islam, a terrorist group with ties to Al Qaeda, was operating in Northern Iraq.

Northern Iraq was under Khurdish control for 11 years and we had control of the skies through the no fly zone. But hell, if all that is required to be attacked is to have an active cell in your country, we had better bomb Germany, Spain, Florida, NY, Minnesota, etc.

Saddam Hussein was rewarding the families of suicide bombers who carried out attacks against Israel with money from his own account, sometimes offering as much as $200,000.00 for a successful attack.

There are several Muslim states that do the same thing. Also, your figure is inflated by a factor of ten. The most Saddam ever offered was $25k, and it's unclear if he ever paid up. That is not a justification for three going on four years of war. Trust me, if that were an issue for Israel, they would have handled it themselves.

Saddam Hussein had allowed Taliban fighters wounded in Afghanistan to receive medical treatment in Iraq. Knowing this, I too would have come to the conclusion that Saddam was sponsoring terrorism.

OOooh, medical treatment for the injured, big deal. Pakistan virtually controlled and definitely defended the Taliban, but we didn't invade them. Sorry, but just because you lack the ability of critical thought, it doesn't justify tens of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousand injured to stop Saddam from giving muslim fighters bandages.

The burden of proof was on him. It was up to him to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was playing by the rules. He failed to do this.

Saddam was not exactly without enemies in the middle east, namely Iran. You remember them don't ya? The country he waged war with for ten years, the one we gave him the bio-chem tech to fight against...? You know, the guys we're afraid of having too much political pull in the new Iraqi government. Saddam had no choice but to maintain a certain level perceived military preparedness to keep from being invaded by those that coveted it's resources. Any intel operative worth his salt would have known this, and indeed most did.

As far as the Coulter thing goes....I get my information from a variety of sources. I even listen to that stupid Air America nonsense. Coulter just happens to be one of many people that I agree with. I asked you what you thought of that article and all I got was "Oh my God! Coulter evil cause she said Muslims were bad! Oh my God!"

Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor

Here's an idea, maybe you should seek sources that aren't so polarized. You're trying to come to factual conclusions by looking at what the most jaded sources have to say (Air America included). You do know how to do independent research don't you? I mean, you must if you have a degree.

As far as the article goes, I still haven't read it for the simple reason that YOU PROVIDED A LINK THAT DOESN"T GO ANYWHERE... genius.

As for Coulter, again... every single respected member of this site, right or left, has trashed Coulter. Sam is right, it's the one issue that we have all agreed on. Do you know how to use the search function on this site? Find all the threads dealing with Ann and you will see that this it a FACT. Don't just stop at the first thread you read DO YOUR HOMEWORK!!!

Originally Posted by robster

Turk you should stop taking your own advice.