Dixie finally admits Saddam did not have WMD when we invaded!

You did not say "I dont know" you said...

"I would say, it doesn't appear he had WMD at the time we invaded."

Which is the same as saying 'I don't know.' I also later amended the statement to say "new stockpiles of WMD's" which was the original context, it just wasn't clear enough for you. Of course, you are going to ignore the fact that I amended the comment, and stick with the original statement taken out of context. Typical.


But a couple months ago you argeued for pages and pages that you were sure he had WMD... I guess Ill have to go dig up that thread!

No need to do that, I know what I argued. The 500 Sarin bombs found in Iraq, are WMD's. So, we DID find WMD's in Iraq, it wasn't new ones, it wasn't the stockpiles we may have thought he had, but they were WMD's which weren't supposed to exist.

Let's be clear about this point, because it's very important to this debate... Neither one of us know for certain, what Saddam had or what is still under the sand in Iraq. You have assumed he didn't have WMD's because we didn't find any new ones, but that doesn't prove something definitively. I can just as easily assume he had them and shipped them out before we arrived... see how that works? Assumption is not certainty, never has been, and it won't ever be.

I don't know what Saddam had or didn't have, and neither do you, so let's stop lying to people and saying he didn't have WMD's, when we simply don't know for certain. He did indeed have degraded old WMD's, and he wasn't supposed to, they were supposed to be destroyed. We didn't find evidence of any new WMD's, but that doesn't mean there weren't any.
 
Dixie said:
You did not say "I dont know" you said...

"I would say, it doesn't appear he had WMD at the time we invaded."

Which is the same as saying 'I don't know.' I also later amended the statement to say "new stockpiles of WMD's" which was the original context, it just wasn't clear enough for you. Of course, you are going to ignore the fact that I amended the comment, and stick with the original statement taken out of context. Typical.


But a couple months ago you argeued for pages and pages that you were sure he had WMD... I guess Ill have to go dig up that thread!

No need to do that, I know what I argued. The 500 Sarin bombs found in Iraq, are WMD's. So, we DID find WMD's in Iraq, it wasn't new ones, it wasn't the stockpiles we may have thought he had, but they were WMD's which weren't supposed to exist.

Let's be clear about this point, because it's very important to this debate... Neither one of us know for certain, what Saddam had or what is still under the sand in Iraq. You have assumed he didn't have WMD's because we didn't find any new ones, but that doesn't prove something definitively. I can just as easily assume he had them and shipped them out before we arrived... see how that works? Assumption is not certainty, never has been, and it won't ever be.

I don't know what Saddam had or didn't have, and neither do you, so let's stop lying to people and saying he didn't have WMD's, when we simply don't know for certain. He did indeed have degraded old WMD's, and he wasn't supposed to, they were supposed to be destroyed. We didn't find evidence of any new WMD's, but that doesn't mean there weren't any.
Click to expand...


Please contrast above... with Below.... Tell me its not superspin!....

"Jarod, I just posted the story about the declassified report, which directly contradicts your assertion that Iraq had no WMD's. Answer my fucking questions, boy! Are you dillusional, lying, or just plain wrong?" - Dixie

"Well, there were WMD's, as the report I posted indicates. " - Dixie

"Apparently, you and Saddam lied to the American people about it, because they were discovered. I can't speak for Bush, or your careful parsing of his words to make your idiotic point, but as far as WMD's in Iraq, they were found." - Dixie

"Again, the argument was NOT whether certain specific WMD's were there, it was whether WMD's existed in Iraq or not... I think we've settled that matter, they WERE there, we found them. Now, you can argue about whether they were the right ones, or if they were dangerous, that's valid... but to try and say they didn't exist, when the reports contradict you, is absurd." - DIxie

"Again, the Pinhead argument was always... No WMD's in Iraq! Well, you were wrong." - Dixie
 
Please contrast above... with Below.... Tell me its not superspin!....

It's not superspin, or any kind of spin, I am telling you the same thing in both cases, and you are insisting something is a fact, that hasn't been proven. You, and other pinheads, continue to say Saddam had no WMD's, and that is not a fact, it is an opinion and conclusion. We have no certainty on this, there is not evidence to support your argument. Furthermore, the discovery of 500 degraded Sarin bombs, is evidence he did have WMD's, and lied about the ones he said he destroyed.

On the issue of new and potent WMD's... we don't know. He may have had them, he may not have had them, we don't know, we may never know for certain. There is no evidence to say he did or he didn't, and no way to confirm either way. For all we know, there are tons of WMD's still buried in the sand somewhere, along with the poor souls who dug the hole. Or maybe the sanctions were enough to choke him off and not allow him to produce the WMD's... maybe he really had nothing to begin with? We can't prove it either way, and we probably will never be able to prove it either way.

The issue of the WMD's was never the presence of viable potent stockpiles, capable of hitting US soil. These sort of nonsensical premises are patently ignorant of the case presented for war. It was the uncertainty, not knowing what the hell Saddam MIGHT be doing, that we DIDN'T know.

And ONE thing is for damn certain now... Saddam doesn't have WMD's, and is not a threat to anyone, anymore. That is a certainty.
 
Dixie said:
Please contrast above... with Below.... Tell me its not superspin!....

It's not superspin, or any kind of spin, I am telling you the same thing in both cases, and you are insisting something is a fact, that hasn't been proven. You, and other pinheads, continue to say Saddam had no WMD's, and that is not a fact, it is an opinion and conclusion. We have no certainty on this, there is not evidence to support your argument. Furthermore, the discovery of 500 degraded Sarin bombs, is evidence he did have WMD's, and lied about the ones he said he destroyed.

On the issue of new and potent WMD's... we don't know. He may have had them, he may not have had them, we don't know, we may never know for certain. There is no evidence to say he did or he didn't, and no way to confirm either way. For all we know, there are tons of WMD's still buried in the sand somewhere, along with the poor souls who dug the hole. Or maybe the sanctions were enough to choke him off and not allow him to produce the WMD's... maybe he really had nothing to begin with? We can't prove it either way, and we probably will never be able to prove it either way.

The issue of the WMD's was never the presence of viable potent stockpiles, capable of hitting US soil. These sort of nonsensical premises are patently ignorant of the case presented for war. It was the uncertainty, not knowing what the hell Saddam MIGHT be doing, that we DIDN'T know.

And ONE thing is for damn certain now... Saddam doesn't have WMD's, and is not a threat to anyone, anymore. That is a certainty.
Click to expand...


How is that consistant with, you saying ... "I would say, it doesn't appear he had WMD at the time we invaded." ?
 
How is that consistant with, you saying ... "I would say, it doesn't appear he had WMD at the time we invaded." ?

Because that's what I meant, after I amended it to include the context intended, WMD's being "new and potent". I would say... (in my opinion, not a certainty) it doesn't appear... (is not visibly apparent) he had WMD... (amended to 'new and potent WMD's) ...at the time we invaded (meaning the actual date at which US forces began Operation Iraqi Freedom) I don't know how much clearer I can make that! Just like, it doesn't appear you have a brain or sense enough to come in out of the rain... Maybe that's the case, maybe it's not... I don't know!
 
Ohhh, so now you have amended it... I see.

Okay, but I am talking about what you origionally said... Not what you amended it to say!
 
Dixie said:
Do you know the date of construction on these bombs?

It doesn't matter, they were supposed to be non existing. Saddam said he destroyed them. You claimed Clinton destroyed them when he launched a few missiles in '98. The inspectors did not find them, our troops found them.

I don't recall how long they had been buried and also, how were they going to deliver these that would have been a threat to the continental USA or even North America?

Did Saddam have a delivery system that could hit Israel and isn't Israel able to defend herself if attacked in this manner? What direct threat were these WMD to us?

Apparently, you didn't read my post. The issue was not about the potency of these weapons, it was about their existence. You see... this may be hard for a simple mind to understand, but... whenever someone wants to make something, they can generally figure out how to do it, if they have a few to take apart and examine. If they can find the right scientists, who know about that chem/bio stuff... they can take a pile of castor bean hulls, grind them up into a fine powder called Ricin, and load them into a new prototype bomb, created from the degraded WMD found in Saddam's desert.

Now... if a dumb ol' hick from Alabama like Dixie, can figure this out, imagine what amazingly brilliant chem/bio weapons scientists can figure out?

The ISSUE was the EXISTENCE of WMD in IRAQ! Not the potency! It was more about the technology than the potency, and considering the time frame taken, couldn't have possibly ever been about the potency of Sarin bombs, as they have a short shelf life. It wasn't the direct threat Saddam posed to US cities! Had that been the case, we would be discussing the big oil-filled fishbowl in the cradle of civilization. It was the ability Saddam had, to build and produce WMD's, and our inability to be certain about what was going on.
Click to expand...


They knew Saddam had these agents because we gave them to him.

If they weren't potent, they weren't WMD, surely a brilliant mind like your can figure that out...I can have a pitbull, but if he doesn't have any teeth, is he dangerous?
 
Dixie said:
This is why I continue to believe that getting the inspectors back in would have been the more prudent way to go.

This is because you have a simple mind, and think the "inspectors" were in Iraq to search for weapons. That was not the case at all. These were not inspectors, like Pink Panther or Gadget... they were more like USDA inspectors at a pork house. Their function in Iraq, was to verify and confirm the whereabouts of the WMD's we knew Saddam had, and the status of the programs he was involved in. He was never forthcoming with information, and without anything to "inspect" the inspectors had nothing to do, except chase their tails. They were never in Iraq to seek out and find Saddam's hidden WMD's, that is a myth you've somehow developed in your pinhead minds.
Click to expand...

We went in and found it to be all a myth...he was puffing himself up for the benefits of his neighbors. He was not forthcoming because he didn't want his neighbors to know how bad the sanctions and inspections were hurting his programs. Wishing doesn't make it so. He did not have any of the facilities that Powell warned the UN about. He fooled you!!!!! He fooled Iran and he fooled Israel and that was his intent! He wanted to be the big man in the Middle East and if he had to lie about what he had to do so, well, he did!
If he would have come clean about the weapons, where would he have been inthe eyes of his enemies.

HE didn't come clean because he never believed George Bush would be stupid enough to invade! He thought the UN would come to his rescue.

Boy was he wrong and now he is dead...
 
We went in and found it to be all a myth...he was puffing himself up for the benefits of his neighbors.

This is certainly one theory, but you have not proven this to be factually certain. This is a speculation, just like the speculation he may have hidden weapons under the sands of the desert.
 
or trucked them into Syria and buried them in long tunnels that ran from the border all the way to Damascus.

or how about loaded them onto martian spacecraft and sent them into high orbit around earth hidden by their state of the art cloaking devices?
 
Last edited:
Dixie said:
We went in and found it to be all a myth...he was puffing himself up for the benefits of his neighbors.

This is certainly one theory, but you have not proven this to be factually certain. This is a speculation, just like the speculation he may have hidden weapons under the sands of the desert.
Click to expand...

Indeed it may be, but there is a great more evidence to support my speculation.

And, again, hiding these types of weapons in the desert that lose potency in such a short time wasn't very bright of him, huh?
 
maineman said:
or trucked them into Syria and buried them in long tunnels that ran from the border all the way to Damascus.

or how about loaded them onto martian spacecraft and sent them into high orbit around earth hidden by their state of the art cloaking devices?
Click to expand...

Even if they did, they have a time limit on them...

What we were more concerned about, supposedly were all his factories producing this stuff or having the ability to produce this stuff, where they could attack us, and in what was the time frame, 45 minutes some parts of America would vaporize or that he would use these chemical weapons on Israel...wasn't that the major concern?
 
Indeed it may be, but there is a great more evidence to support my speculation.

There is no evidence to support your speculation, or it wouldn't be speculation, dear.
 
maineman said:
or trucked them into Syria and buried them in long tunnels that ran from the border all the way to Damascus.

or how about loaded them onto martian spacecraft and sent them into high orbit around earth hidden by their state of the art cloaking devices?
Click to expand...

Even if they did, they have a time limit on them...

What we were more concerned about, supposedly were all his factories producing this stuff or having the ability to produce this stuff, where they could attack us, and in what was the time frame, 45 minutes, the mushroom cloud or that he would use these chemical weapons on Israel...wasn't that the major concerns?
 
Dixie said:
Indeed it may be, but there is a great more evidence to support my speculation.

There is no evidence to support your speculation, or it wouldn't be speculation, dear.
Click to expand...

Using your words to me it is not speculation, especially after reading the books by Gerges and several others...

There were physical clues too, he dyed his hair and he was on Viagra!
 
And, again, hiding these types of weapons in the desert that lose potency in such a short time wasn't very bright of him, huh?

Wouldn't matter where he hid them, or if he completely got rid of them, with such a short shelf life. That's why the physical presence of WMD stockpiles, was not the issue regarding Saddam's WMD's. The absence of those stockpiles, is not proof that Saddam didn't have WMD's, as much as you want it to be, and think it is, this just isn't a certainty of fact.
 
Dixie said:
And, again, hiding these types of weapons in the desert that lose potency in such a short time wasn't very bright of him, huh?

Wouldn't matter where he hid them, or if he completely got rid of them, with such a short shelf life. That's why the physical presence of WMD stockpiles, was not the issue regarding Saddam's WMD's. The absence of those stockpiles, is not proof that Saddam didn't have WMD's, as much as you want it to be, and think it is, this just isn't a certainty of fact.
Click to expand...

Your reasoning truly boggles my mind...

Maybe his way of getting rid of them was to bury them in the sand.
He knew they had a self life and that they wouldn't be any good.

The only thing I know and Bush knows too, is that he didn't have anything to directly cause us to invade Iraq. There was nothing that threatened us directly and everything he did have had been detected or was in the process of being detected by the inspectors. War should have never been an option.
There was never and has never been justification for war.
Cheney knew it then, he knows it now. We had Saddam contained. He didn't have any programs... he wanted them, but he didn't have a nuclear program. Poppy Bush knew this and that is why he didn't go after the man.
 
Your reasoning truly boggles my mind...

It's the logic, it has that effect on pinheads.

Maybe his way of getting rid of them was to bury them in the sand.

Maybe so... it's a valid theory, just like yours!

He knew they had a self life and that they wouldn't be any good.

Correct, so it wouldn't matter if he hid them in the sand, or... if he decided to get rid of them completely, since the UN inspectors would have to give him a clean bill of health to have sanctions lifted... why would he need to risk that, by hanging on to weapons that were going to expire soon anyway?

The only thing I know and Bush knows too, is that he didn't have anything to directly cause us to invade Iraq.

Well, you don't know this because it's an impossible thing for you to know. You've concluded this, because it's the way things appear, but that doesn't mean that is how things always are.

There was nothing that threatened us directly

That was never the issue, had it been, we would be talking about the giant oil-filled fish bowl... remember?

and everything he did have had been detected

This is incorrect, had we been able to detect what he was doing, there would have been no need to invade.

or was in the process of being detected by the inspectors.


The inspectors were not there to "detect" anything, they were there to examine facilities and confirm what happened to the WMD's Saddam claimed he destroyed.

War should have never been an option.

Then Congress should have never given that option.

There was never and has never been justification for war.

There were a whole list of them, voted on by the House and Senate.

Cheney knew it then, he knows it now.

Cheney knows Saddam doesn't pose a threat with WMD's now.

We had Saddam contained.

We had 150,000 troops on his borders!

He didn't have any programs...

This has not been proven.

he wanted them

Damn straight!

but he didn't have a nuclear program.

He was working on it.

Poppy Bush knew this and that is why he didn't go after the man.

Poppy Bush didn't have authority to go after the man. We listened to you liberals, and allowed Saddam to remain in power, on the condition he met certain UN mandates... he NEVER did!
 
Dixie said:
Your reasoning truly boggles my mind...

It's the logic, it has that effect on pinheads.

Maybe his way of getting rid of them was to bury them in the sand.

Maybe so... it's a valid theory, just like yours!

He knew they had a self life and that they wouldn't be any good.

Correct, so it wouldn't matter if he hid them in the sand, or... if he decided to get rid of them completely, since the UN inspectors would have to give him a clean bill of health to have sanctions lifted... why would he need to risk that, by hanging on to weapons that were going to expire soon anyway?

The only thing I know and Bush knows too, is that he didn't have anything to directly cause us to invade Iraq.

Well, you don't know this because it's an impossible thing for you to know. You've concluded this, because it's the way things appear, but that doesn't mean that is how things always are.

There was nothing that threatened us directly

That was never the issue, had it been, we would be talking about the giant oil-filled fish bowl... remember?

and everything he did have had been detected

This is incorrect, had we been able to detect what he was doing, there would have been no need to invade.

or was in the process of being detected by the inspectors.


The inspectors were not there to "detect" anything, they were there to examine facilities and confirm what happened to the WMD's Saddam claimed he destroyed.

War should have never been an option.

Then Congress should have never given that option.

There was never and has never been justification for war.

There were a whole list of them, voted on by the House and Senate.

Cheney knew it then, he knows it now.

Cheney knows Saddam doesn't pose a threat with WMD's now.

We had Saddam contained.

We had 150,000 troops on his borders!

He didn't have any programs...

This has not been proven.

he wanted them

Damn straight!

but he didn't have a nuclear program.

He was working on it.

Poppy Bush knew this and that is why he didn't go after the man.

Poppy Bush didn't have authority to go after the man. We listened to you liberals, and allowed Saddam to remain in power, on the condition he met certain UN mandates... he NEVER did!
Click to expand...

Ignorance by virtue of lack of information I can understand. Not condone but understand. You on the the other hand are so willfully ignorant that it is not understandable.

Willfull ignorance in defense of an intangible opinion is shameful.

Willfull ignorance in defense of a preconceived notion that gets countless young Americans Killed, is disgusting.

Stock up on the soap Dix, you've got an awful lot of blood to wash off your hands...
 
Beefy said:
Ignorance by virtue of lack of information I can understand. Not condone but understand. You on the the other hand are so willfully ignorant that it is not understandable.

Willfull ignorance in defense of an intangible opinion is shameful.

Willfull ignorance in defense of a preconceived notion that gets countless young Americans Killed, is disgusting.

Stock up on the soap Dix, you've got an awful lot of blood to wash off your hands...
Click to expand...

I am not a regular, just getting to know personalities...
I can see this guy isn't gonna look at the evidence, so next subject Dixie.
And he thinks we are the pinheads, laughable, isn't it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top