You can't see this, but I'm waving good-bye to Kerry's foriegn policy as it flies out the window. What are he and John Edwards along with the media saying about the Duelfer report? Ha!- There absolutely are no WMD's in Iraq. Really? We' ll see in ten or so years when they can actually do a thorough search. And who says Saddaam's weapons are even in Iraq? Anyway, I digress. John Kerry is in trouble, but you won't hear about it from the liberal media who are hungry to see Bush's head on a chopping block The only story on the Duelfer report that we are hearing is the shocking news that stockpiles of nukes were not found. The Dem's will act like this was the only reason Bush had for invasion. What we won't hear much of is the reported corruption of the United Nations and the "oil for food" program headed by Saddaam. Or of the charge that French nationals and businesses took bribes from Iraq. Saddaam allegedly paid millions of dollars in cash and petrol vouchers to France in exchange for their help in ending the U.N. sanctions there. These are the organizations Kerry wants us and the Iraqis to trust and to align ourselves with. And now France and Germany have declared that they would not join the coalition even if Kerry is elected. What's your "secret plan" now, Senator? I guess we will never know.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Why must liberals always corrupt every bit of information they receive. Yes, we all thought that we would find WMDs. No we did not find stockpiles. But, the situation is more complicated than that. Again this is an example of simplex et multiplex. The decision to go to war was simple (in nature, not difiiculty) the total situation involving WMDs was complicated and so is this report. Here are some interesting points and comments from http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/
"[Saddam] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction when sanctions were lifted,"
Chairman John Warner, R-Virginia, called the findings "significant." "While the ISG has not found stockpiles of WMD, the ISG and other coalition elements have developed a body of fact that shows that Saddam Hussein had, first, the strategic intention to continue to pursue WMD capabilities; two, created ambiguity about his WMD capabilities that he used to extract concessions in the international world of disclosure and discussion and negotiation.
U.S. officials said the Duelfer report is "comprehensive," but they are not calling it a "final report" because there are still some loose ends to tie up. One outstanding issue, an official said, is whether Iraq shipped any stockpiles of weapons outside of the country.
It is interesting that this CNN piece does not quote the Dems from when they were agreeing that Saddam actually possesed the WMDs. Further, as you said, the WMDs themselves were only one reason. As the report notes Saddam was the danger himself since he was planning on making more.
Perhaps most importantly, as a matter of international security and civility we had to go to war beacause of his refusal to submit to the resolutions. Just like with Clinton, where it was not the sex but the felonious purgery, it was the deceit and obstruction, not the WMDs alone.
This report does prove that we were wrong to some extent: no stockpiles lying around easy to find. Duh. We all already know that. But what the Dems are saying about it is misleading.
Oh, here is the quote from Tony Blair
As Tony Blair said, "Just as I have had to accept that the evidence now is that there were not stockpiles of actual weapons ready to be deployed, I hope others have the honesty to accept (SET ITAL) that the report also shows that sanctions weren't working
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/8/84123.shtml
Post a Comment