US invasion of Iraq based on false report of Al-Qaeda's ties with Saddam

[Ulysses G.]

It's no wonder that so many posters openly question your credibility.

You mean the same posters who have been caught posting bold-faced lies on a regular basis with plenty of evidence of their indiscretions? I'm not too worried about their opinions on anything, but how about some proof that I "frequently post counter-factual information", before making such totally dishonest accusations? When I call someone a liar, I can always prove it.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[willyumiii]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

[Chicog]

Lies Lies and more Lies.

Secretary of State Colin Powell had told the United Nations Security Council, "We have first hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails. We know what the fermenters look like. We know what the tanks, pumps, compressors and other parts look like." The Pentagon team had been sent to investigate the trailers after the invasion. The team of experts unanimously found "no connection to anything biological"; one of the experts told reporters that they privately called the trailers "the biggest sand toilets in the world." The report was classified, and the next day, the CIA publicly released the assessment of its Washington analysts that the trailers were "mobile biological weapons production." The White House continued to refer to the trailers as mobile biological laboratories throughout the year, and the Pentagon field report remained classified. It is still classified, but a Washington Post report of April 12, 2006 disclosed some of the details of the report. According to thePost:

A spokesman for the DIA asserted that the team's findings were neither ignored nor suppressed, but were incorporated in the work of the Iraqi Survey Group, which led the official search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The survey group's final report in September 2004 – 15 months after the technical report was written – said the trailers were "impractical" for biological weapons production and were

"almost certainly intended" for manufacturing hydrogen for weather balloons

.

[Shaunduhpostman]

Perhaps I haven't got it just right but isn't it sort of an established fact that Al-Quaeda is an invention of the CIA or the U.S. military created for the purpose of making a case for funding wars against them? Seems to me there was a BBC dockoh or something on that 5-6 years ago.

Yet the whole world continues to carry on, thanks to the media and politicians, like all the Islamic terrorists are part of some kind of coordinated organization called Al-Quaeda. Again, I don't follow these things that closely so I may not have that right.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Shaunduhpostman

[Ulysses G.]

Perhaps I haven't got it just right but isn't it sort of an established fact that Al-Quaeda is an invention of the CIA or the U.S. military created for the purpose of making a case for funding wars against them?

You have got it wrong - completely wrong. That is a completely unsubstantiated conspiracy theory, but welcome to Thai Visa.

[sirineou]

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Both and much much more.

By the way I am not a Democrat

[up-country_sinclair]

I just watched former Vice-President Dick Cheney on Meet the Press, and it was fairly predictable interview, except for when he was asked about whether or not President George W. Bush was misled by the CIA on the extent of the enhanced interrogation/torture.

"This man knew what we were doing.He authorized it. He approved it."

This man?

Very interesting.

[Morch]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

[Morch]

Perhaps I haven't got it just right but isn't it sort of an established fact that Al-Quaeda is an invention of the CIA or the U.S. military created for the purpose of making a case for funding wars against them? Seems to me there was a BBC dockoh or something on that 5-6 years ago.

Yet the whole world continues to carry on, thanks to the media and politicians, like all the Islamic terrorists are part of some kind of coordinated organization called Al-Quaeda. Again, I don't follow these things that closely so I may not have that right.

[ravip]

"Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."

This says it all.

Once again, 1st vs the 3rd world - Let the Professors comment.

Which side does the rot stink most?

[Lissos]

Perhaps I haven't got it just right but isn't it sort of an established fact that Al-Quaeda is an invention of the CIA or the U.S. military/

[NeverSure]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

[Chicog]

Oh, but I thought it was the US that was guilty of war crimes and here we have the UK up to its eyeballs in it. Have any Brits on here been moaning about how badly the US treats prisoners? Hypocrites?

To answer your question, if the UK is such a puzzy that it will let a conglomeration of other countries rule it (oh I forget, yes it does starting with the EU and the UN) then that's tough for its people. The tendency of the UK to join groups that rule it will be its downfall. It is being overrun by nasty immigrants who are dangerous and who suck up public benefits. It is being outbred by those people. Now it will let an international group put the hurts to its citizens.

There used to be a UK. It's all gone. All that's left of the UK are the feathers.

Before you get on your high horse, you should know that most people call Tony Blair "Bliar", and know full well he too lied to justify Britain's involvement in the "Coalition".

So no need to go off on a tirade about the nation as a whole.

[Chicog]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Oh please, let's not go down that road. As the old adage said "We know Saddam has WMDs because we've got the receipts".

When United Nations weapons inspectors were allowed into Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, they compiled long lists of chemicals, missile components, and computers from American suppliers, including such household names as Union Carbide and Honeywell, which were being used for military purposes.

A 1994 investigation by the Senate Banking Committee turned up dozens of biological agents shipped to Iraq during the mid-'80s under license from the Commerce Department, including various strains of anthrax, subsequently identified by the Pentagon as a key component of the Iraqi biological warfare program. The Commerce Department also approved the export of insecticides to Iraq, despite widespread suspicions that they were being used for chemical warfare.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/052.html

Everyone knows Saddam used WMDs against his own people and the Iranians prior to '91.

But this thread concerns the second invasion, for which the pretext was completely fabricated.

[Chicog]

Perhaps I haven't got it just right but isn't it sort of an established fact that Al-Quaeda is an invention of the CIA or the U.S. military/

Surely the shape-shifting lizard-like globalists are to blame?

[chuckd]

Gulf War 2 is simply a continuation of Gulf War 1.

No peace treaty was ever signed by the belligerent parties...only a cease fire, which Saddam violated when he refused entry to the weapons inspectors.

Gulf War 1 action was authorized by the UNSC for you internationals and the US Congress for the US.

That was all that was required.

This should give you chest thumpers out there a new shot at the US.

[BKKBobby]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Oh please, let's not go down that road. As the old adage said "We know Saddam has WMDs because we've got the receipts".

When United Nations weapons inspectors were allowed into Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War, they compiled long lists of chemicals, missile components, and computers from American suppliers, including such household names as Union Carbide and Honeywell, which were being used for military purposes.

A 1994 investigation by the Senate Banking Committee turned up dozens of biological agents shipped to Iraq during the mid-'80s under license from the Commerce Department, including various strains of anthrax, subsequently identified by the Pentagon as a key component of the Iraqi biological warfare program. The Commerce Department also approved the export of insecticides to Iraq, despite widespread suspicions that they were being used for chemical warfare.

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/052.html

Everyone knows Saddam used WMDs against his own people and the Iranians prior to '91.

But this thread concerns the second invasion, for which the pretext was completely fabricated.

He used chemical weapons on the kurds in Halabja and in some cases on Iranian soldiers during the Iran-Iraq war. Not ok of course. But its not the kind of WMD the warmongers was using as fuel for an invasion. Scaring flagwaving ignorants that dont even get social security. Toothless bums with a rifle from the local gasoline station.

[Chicog]

Gulf War 2 is simply a continuation of Gulf War 1.

No peace treaty was ever signed by the belligerent parties...only a cease fire, which Saddam violated when he refused entry to the weapons inspectors.

Gulf War 1 action was authorized by the UNSC for you internationals and the US Congress for the US.

That was all that was required.

This should give you chest thumpers out there a new shot at the US.

More chaff from another Bush jr. apologist.

You must be so very proud of everything he accomplished.

[Donnie Brasco]

Historically. all US intervention into foreign countries is based on false or fabricated intelligence information...the decision is made to invade...they just need to come up with a "moral" justification to keep the court of world opinion from seeing the attack for what it really is...US flexing its muscle...in the name of national interest...because it can...

The lack of support by friends and foes alike is brought about by US hubris and bullying in foreign affairs...

Are you including Pearl Harbor, North Korea invading the South, Saddam invading Kuwait and the 9/11 attack, to name only a few, on fabricated intelligence information?

A rather strange comment using an awfully wide brush.

The brush is wide enough.

[up-country_sinclair]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Saddam Hussein was a evil b*st*rd, but this "against his own people" thing is ridiculous. The Kurds with the support of the Iranian Shiites had long been attempting to defeat and overthrow Saddam's Sunni regime. While those who died during the chemical attack may have lived within the same borders on the world map, they most definitely were not "his own people".

[chuckd]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Saddam Hussein was a evil b*st*rd, but this "against his own people" thing is ridiculous. The Kurds with the support of the Iranian Shiites had long been attempting to defeat and overthrow Saddam's Sunni regime. While those who died during the chemical attack may have lived within the same borders on the world map, they most definitely were not "his own people".

That's a really strange justification for the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population.

[chuckd]

Gulf War 2 is simply a continuation of Gulf War 1.

No peace treaty was ever signed by the belligerent parties...only a cease fire, which Saddam violated when he refused entry to the weapons inspectors.

Gulf War 1 action was authorized by the UNSC for you internationals and the US Congress for the US.

That was all that was required.

This should give you chest thumpers out there a new shot at the US.

More chaff from another Bush jr. apologist.

You must be so very proud of everything he accomplished.

What a great response. Fact filled with no details omitted.

A chest thumping classic.

[up-country_sinclair]

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Saddam Hussein was a evil b*st*rd, but this "against his own people" thing is ridiculous. The Kurds with the support of the Iranian Shiites had long been attempting to defeat and overthrow Saddam's Sunni regime. While those who died during the chemical attack may have lived within the same borders on the world map, they most definitely were not "his own people".

That's a really strange justification for the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population.

You've completely missed the point of my post, but I suppose that's hardly surprising.

Anyway, from the perspective of Saddam's regime, there was likely nothing strange about it at all.

Do you know anything at all about the Sunni Shia schism? I'd give you a quick primer like I did on another thread for the US Constitution, but it's late and I'm off to bed. GIYF.

[Donnie Brasco]

Please correct me if I am wrong ( and I am sure a couple of will correct me even if I am not)

But, I believe I recall the UN inspectors spent quite a while searching for WMDs, yellow cakes, chemical weapons and delivery systems and never found any.

The Cheney boys decided the invasion was a go anyway!

Eh? No one claimed Iraq did not have chemical weapons, not sure how you mean delivery systems - if that's supposed to

mean artillery shells/rockets/air bombs, then yes, they did have those. Apparently not the case when it came to the SCUD

missiles, although they were trying.

All these were in use even prior to GW1.

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Saddam Hussein was a evil b*st*rd, but this "against his own people" thing is ridiculous. The Kurds with the support of the Iranian Shiites had long been attempting to defeat and overthrow Saddam's Sunni regime. While those who died during the chemical attack may have lived within the same borders on the world map, they most definitely were not "his own people".

Well said. At best such critical distinctions are left unsaid and their worst, the vast propaganda caverns that churn out this claptrap work 24/7 to distort the historical record.

So those so-called WMD's were not ever found but rather morphed out of conventional (albeit illegal) war weapons that WERE found. The notion of "legal" war weapons is an intriguing one. We need always to consult the latest conflicts to get an understanding of those.

For example anything that the Israelis chose to do to their captives in Gaza and the Bantustan-ish West Bank is legal. White phosphorus is legal. Spraying sewage onto the resident population is legal. Enslaving them is legal. Using live kids for target practice is legal.

Anyway, everybody knows that as brutal a dictator as he was, Saddam had been Amerika's "boy" in the region. We know he used horrible weaponry on these dissidents because we kept all the receipts. We gave him anything he wanted did we not ?

Unfortunately he was so effective in keeping dissident elements under his control that along with the region's vast oil reserves he was seen as threat to Israeli regional hegemony.

Couldn't have that now could we ;-?

[Choctastic]

I don't follow these things that closely so I may not have that right.

Close enough and don't pay any attention to the tired tactics of the sitting tenants.

[Neurath]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

We also know that if Saddam Hussein had let the United Nations weapons do their jobs, there would have been no invasion. Iraq secretly maintained the intellectual and physical capacity to produce WMDs and intended to restart production once sanctions were lifted, so it is not like they were no threat at all.

Yes. They should have eliminated the intellectual capacity to do so making them read over and over again through this thread.

There are no industrialized countries that don't have the intellectual and physical capacity to produce WMDs. None.

[Ulysses G.]

We also know that if Saddam Hussein had let the United Nations weapons do their jobs, there would have been no invasion. Iraq secretly maintained the intellectual and physical capacity to produce WMDs and intended to restart production once sanctions were lifted, so it is not like they were no threat at all.

There are no industrialized countries that don't have the intellectual and physical capacity to produce WMDs. None.

There are plenty of industrialized countries that never had a fairly advanced nuclear weapons program until Israel put a stop to it. Iraq DID.

[chuckd]

Iraq (Saddam) not only had chemical weapons but used them twice against his own people killing thousands and injuring thousands more.

Halabja chemical attack and Anfal Genocide

Saddam Hussein was a evil b*st*rd, but this "against his own people" thing is ridiculous. The Kurds with the support of the Iranian Shiites had long been attempting to defeat and overthrow Saddam's Sunni regime. While those who died during the chemical attack may have lived within the same borders on the world map, they most definitely were not "his own people".

That's a really strange justification for the use of chemical weapons against a civilian population.

You've completely missed the point of my post, but I suppose that's hardly surprising.

Anyway, from the perspective of Saddam's regime, there was likely nothing strange about it at all.

Do you know anything at all about the Sunni Shia schism? I'd give you a quick primer like I did on another thread for the US Constitution, but it's late and I'm off to bed. GIYF.

The point of your message that came across was that Saddam gassed the Kurds, but it was OK because they were Kurds and therefore not citizens of Iraq.

If they were born in Iraq, raised in Iraq and lived in Iraq...why are they not citizens of Iraq?

Five years in Iran and over 30 in Saudi Arabia gives me a pretty good insight into an area you have likely only experienced on National Geographic.

I have lived and worked among Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis and everything in between. How about you?

If the Constitutional primer you claim you gave to me was all about origination of fiscal bills in the House, I have known that long before I ever had the misfortune to run across your posts. I ask again...how do you think the Democrat led Congress ever passed Obamacare?

[impulse]

And the sad thing is that they actually consider themselves informed on the issues (and they'll repeatedly tell you how informed they are), but all they're really doing is regurgitating the biased opinion pieces they came across because they were suckered by clickbait. They're worse than being uninformed, they're misinformed.

Can't say I blame them. Here's an excellent article about that very phenomena:

I'm not passing judgment on the author's politics, just his view of the media as a weapon...

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-01-081214.html

[Ulysses G.]

John Pilger writing a piece on propaganda is rather ironic, although I agree with him that we are manipulated by the media. He is more guilty of it than most.