50% of Amercians think Iraq had WMDs

Discussion in 'Pandora's Box' started by Rasta_Man, Aug 7, 2006.

  1. they probably had some....but thats only cause we sold em to them.
     
  2. Because of the word "had" it's documented proof they had WMDs... now if they still have them is the question.
     
  3. documented proof that they HAD WMD's....when?
     
  4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml
     
  5. but in terms of the u.s./iraqi conflict post-9/11... when the UN sent in weapons inspectors and bushII was raising all this bullshit hullabaloo about them having weapons and that being the reason we needed to strike...inspectors found nothing,if anything just remnants of the shit they were given by the u.s. and other allies,, we strike anyway, then bush's staff says "we never said there WERE weapons in the first place.."
     
  6. they dont have proof on crap... watch a bunch of scare tactics will once again start popping up to bring up the polls... i for one wount be fooled, wasnt the first time will not be the second.
     
  7. Public opinion polls are crap, imo. Iraq probably did have WMDs at some point, but I mean there was no proof. That guy the husband of Valeria Plame, the CIA operative who was outed, his report was that Iraq had no white phosphorus...
     
  8. who konws nobody fucking knows. everyone in the military dont even know. Ive asked so many people in the navy, marines why they are going to iraq and afghanastan every year. Most of there answers were "because its my job" I then ask are there WMD there "I dont know" lol,even the peepz fightin the war dont know shit. nobody but bush and his administration.
     
  9. The average person doesn't pay much attention to politics.
     

  10. well aparently those branches in the us military dont kno shit either that or the ppl u talk to arent high enough up... ive got a dozen or so friends in the army and every single one of them including everyone in there units knows whats going on... they know why they are in there and they bleeive that they should be in there... from what they tell me they need us over there in those other countries... unfortunatly its destroying our own but they do need us over there
     
  11. command master cheif of VAQ 141, CHeif of police, Leutenint of police, COmmand master cheif of vaq 132. I talkedd to those guys and some other people. they are as high up as you can go. the reality is whoever THINKS they know are lying or misinformed.
     
  12. they dont know whythey are there. there brainwashed to believe what they think they know. but they dont.
     
  13. My understanding of the situation is that they have/had WMDs just not hte ones our bgov't told us they did. We were told they had / were looking for nukes. They have/had biological weapons but they've had them since hte first gulf war and it's doubtful that they even work.
     
  14. but what do you know? your young and stupid.
     
  15. What was the point of that?
     
  16. May have been a play on his name, but still not cool because the intent was there -rep.

    They do have proof on the crap, it's just I'm talking Clinton-era, not Bush II era. The UN had a monitoring program in effect to verify Iraq disposed of it's WMD's in a fashionable manner. The current argument of WMD's stems from after they supposedly destroyed them all, some numbers didn't line up... so where were these extras? So yes, at one point it was proven Iraq had WMD's, just this was pre-9/11 and pre-Bush. So, I stand by my point as to why the 50% who believe Iraq had WMD's aren't stupid... infact, they're the intelligent onces. Because if someone asked me "Do you think Iraq had WMDs?" I'd say yes... why? because they did. But if someone asked me "Do you think Iraq had WMD's post 9/11?" That's a completely different questoin and warrants a completely different response.

    But, I was going of the title of the thread and the majority of the headlines I saw related to this article. So by the headlines, the operative word which makes it a "yes"answer is the word, 'had' but upon opening the article and report (which I just did for the first time) they go more indepth and include the "2003" in the article. So I do retract my previous statements. Though if you think Iraq has never had WMD's you're a fool.

    So, do I think Iraq had WMD's post 9/11? I don't know... I trully don't. So much evidence points to yes. Now is when yall play the "they just made it up" card. Well when the top five intelligence agencies all have the same information, there must be something there... so what happened to them? I don't know, they're obviously not in Iraq anymore.... convoys to Syria? Who knows. So I'm on the fence on a question like this.
     

Share This Page