The most reliable intelligence in the situation was the intel provided by the UN weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq, Hans Blix and his boys. Of course, Bush and Co. wanted nothing to do with the truth, so they disregarded the fact that Blix did not believe that Iraq had an active nuclear program, but would rather jump up and down about "UN resolution number blah-blah-blah" that Saddam had violated.
Republican revisionist history is sickening.
Republican revisionist history is sickening.
So tell us why the UN issued condemnation after condemnation against Iraq in your world?
Since you think the UN believed Saddam did not have weapons, why on earth did they issue a final resolution ordering him to comply with previous resolutions or suffer severe consequences?
"Democratic lack of reasoning skills is sickening", and sad too
Read what the Democrats were saying then and now, and then lets talk about "revisionist history".
hno:
Mind listing condemnations Willie. I bet most are from when they woudn't let the inspectors in.
Johnny Mac was talking about the inspectors that Dubya made the UN remove from Iraq so he could bomb there.
You keep running out your red herring and then calling people that are useing good sense "sickening" so you can guess what you look like.
Johnny Mac was talking about the inspectors that Dubya made the UN remove from Iraq so he could bomb there.
You keep running out your red herring and then calling people that are useing good sense "sickening" so you can guess what you look like.
You're chasing your tail with your reasoning Punter.
Resolutions condemning Iraq for not letting inspectors do their job while Bush kicks inspectors out keeping them from doing their job so he could bomb? You do realize the dots don't connect, right?
Gee, why did the UN fall for that three-card monte?
Resolutions condemning Iraq for not letting inspectors do their job while Bush kicks inspectors out keeping them from doing their job so he could bomb? You do realize the dots don't connect, right?
Gee, why did the UN fall for that three-card monte?
Outright lies...Blix made it very clear in his message to the UN that Sadaam would not cooperate with his inspections despite the threats in the UN agreement that doing so broke the cease fire agreement.
Which not only made the invasion the right thing to do...but it made it perfectly legal under the swinging Global Lefty's rules!
You people need to look at the actual facts on the matter.
hno:
Here's the cliff notes version of the final resolution
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
<!-- start content --> United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284). [1]
Wikisource has original text related to this article: UN Security Council Resolution 1441
<table id="toc" class="toc" summary="Contents"> <tbody><tr> <td> Contents
[hide]
[edit] Resolution Statement
Resolution 1441 specifically stated:
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
<!-- start content --> United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a resolution by the UN Security Council, passed unanimously on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284). [1]
Wikisource has original text related to this article: UN Security Council Resolution 1441
<table id="toc" class="toc" summary="Contents"> <tbody><tr> <td> Contents
[hide]
- 1 Resolution Statement
- 2 Passage of resolution
- 3 The Security Council Vote
- 4 Implementation of resolution
- 5 Aftermath
- 6 References
- 7 See also
- 8 External links
[edit] Resolution Statement
Resolution 1441 specifically stated:
- That Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops in 1991.
- That "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations".
The written history from Blix is the history.
You can't deny it...and history won't deny it either.
Facts are facts. Blix made it clear Sadaam would not cooperate with UN inspections.
Case closed...fini...done.
YOu lose.
The UN had continuously maintained without room for debate that Iraq was not complying with their resolutions, was not allowing weapons inspectors to do their jobs, was not disarming.........................................
To suggest otherwise is "revisionists"
BTW: in case you didn't notice, Resolution 1441 was passed November, 2002.
To suggest otherwise is "revisionists"
BTW: in case you didn't notice, Resolution 1441 was passed November, 2002.
aaahhhh so now neocons deduced themselves to fabricating even more bullshit. or how shall we say....SPIN. Now its all about "dumping" WMD's??? So you mean to tell me the worlds "most powerfull and mighty" military got its intelligence wrong??? Then now they aren't just incorrect; they're incompetent. Is that what your saying?
Last edited:
Outright lies...Blix made it very clear in his message to the UN that Sadaam would not cooperate with his inspections despite the threats in the UN agreement that doing so broke the cease fire agreement.
Which not only made the invasion the right thing to do...but it made it perfectly legal under the swinging Global Lefty's rules!
You people need to look at the actual facts on the matter.
That is another of your lies that you are trying to recycle.
If any body chooses to read the history of events just google Blix with UN or with Iraq.
MJ you are the most consistant spreader of blatant bullshit that I have ever encountered.
:nohead::nohead::nohead::nohead:
pleading ignorance? I know this stuff cold dude
you are either suffering from memory lapses or you never knew the truth to begin with.
I'm killing you with FACTS BOY...now don't cry about it like one of Funks little girls.
Sorry, but even Hans Blix disagrees with you.
According to the wording of UNSC 1441, compliance was to be IMMEDIATE. No more games. Not in 3 months..or 4 months...or 12 more years,but IMMEDIATE.
"Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all, including underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of transport which they wish to inspect"
<A href="http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm" target=_blank>http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm
Here is what Blix had to say after 3 months of 1441:
Friday February 14, 2003
If Iraq had provided the necessary cooperation in 1991, the phase of disarmament - under resolution 687 (1991) - could have been short and a decade of sanctions could have been avoided. Today, three months after the adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short, if "immediate, active and unconditional cooperation" with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming.
<A href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895882,00.html" target=_blank>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895882,00.html
Willie and Mistermj what is the deal with the 2 of you.
I'm not really sure how to put this but 2 of you are so one sided in favor of the republicans you believe or support anything they do and say. And anything the dems do or say is always wrong.
Seriuosly if you believe that your government thought there really were WMD's and they were a direct threat to America then that would mean your republican government was completely inept and stupid.
And that dont say much for the so called greatest country in the world does it.
How come every other county that dont listen to the UN is'nt getting attacked. Bush and the boys wanted a war with Iraq so bad they were willing to do and say anything to get it and they did.
I'm not really sure how to put this but 2 of you are so one sided in favor of the republicans you believe or support anything they do and say. And anything the dems do or say is always wrong.
Seriuosly if you believe that your government thought there really were WMD's and they were a direct threat to America then that would mean your republican government was completely inept and stupid.
And that dont say much for the so called greatest country in the world does it.
How come every other county that dont listen to the UN is'nt getting attacked. Bush and the boys wanted a war with Iraq so bad they were willing to do and say anything to get it and they did.
