I dont care who stated it. I didn't and dont believe it at all. Its my opinion that Iraq posed no threat to the US population.
Your opinion? So you are not basing any of this on facts? Then the debate is worthless since unless you are willing to look at the facts rather than your feelings which base your opinions nothing will change.
Your opinion says that there was no threat. The facts are that Saddam publicly stated on more than one occasion that he would sell or even give his stockpiles of WMD to any “freedom fighters” willing to use them on Israel or the United States. That is a threat to the United States and its friend Israel.
So when I claim false pretences what am I referring too??
Statements such as these:
August 26, 2002—Vice President Dick Cheney told the Veterans of Foreign Wars, “There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us.”
I won’t list them all because the same answer applies to all of your fallacy.
There was no doubt because Saddam and his people submitted a list of what they had to the UN at the end of the Gulf War. The UN went into Iraq to verify the list and they stated the list was correct. So a third party verified that the stockpiles exist. 12 years later not all of the stockpiles had been destroyed and Saddam kicked out the inspectors. The remaining stockpiles that were not verified destroyed by the UN are what we have no doubt that he had. He never provided proof that the remaining WMD was destroyed, there was no evidence that he had destroyed anything. The remaining stockpiles is what Saddam was offering to freedom fighters like Al Qaeda who had already attacked the United States three times and made no secret that they were planning to do it again. That sir is a threat to the United States. Not false pretenses. He had the stuff, he admitted he had the stuff, we verified he had the stuff, then he stated he would give the stuff to our enemies. Should we wait until people are dead before we step in?
People complained that the government did not connect the dots to stop AQ from the attack on 9/11, here we had someone saying they were going to aid our enemies in attacking us and you say we should ignore those dots because in your opinion he poses no threat.
The Brits said they had intelligence that Iraq was seeking material that can only be used to build nuclear weapons. The President stated this in his speech and the democrats left out the words so it seemed that he had made it up. It was not our intelligence agencies that found this out, the next lie was that the Brits sexed up the report in order to go to war. This was also disproved but the slogan remained that Bush lied and people died. So all of your protestations only prove that you choose to believe a lie even when faced with facts. This is not a political debate it is a religious debate. Religion is the belief of things unseen. Your beliefs fly in the face of facts which is more properly in the realm of religion.
a) "I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied - finally denied access, a [report] came out of the Atomic - the IAEA that they were [six months away from developing a weapon]. I don't know what more [evidence] we need." (Bush speaking at a news conference Sept. 7 with Tony Blair)
This is just a flat out lie. As per :
"There's never been a report like that issued from this agency," Mark Gwozdecky, the IAEA's chief spokesman, said. ... "We've never put a time frame on how long it might take Iraq to construct a nuclear weapon in 1998."
Hence my use of the term false pretence Paladin.
Good point, what you leave out is that the IAEA put out a report and based on that report our intelligence agencies put an estimate of how long it would take to build the weapons. So it is not false pretenses just choosing to look at things honestly. Does the President need to make a full disclosure of classified information just to satisfy your conspiracy theory? After we failed to find the WMD people wanted to know why? How could we be so wrong? Even former ambassador Wilson admitted that the British report was true, and the Iraqis were trying to buy Yellowcake. Oops publicly he stated the exact opposite.
