Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: Gee, would Saddam have wanted NUKES?

  1. #1

    Gee, would Saddam have wanted NUKES?

    [url]http://tks.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTJjYzYzYmMwNjY3N2YwNWE5NDQ3ZTQzZDczZWU5N2Y=[/url]

    Simply put, the NY Times is divulging Iraqs super WMD plans.

    [I]No threat, no threat, no threat...[/I]

    (right)

  2. #2
    [QUOTE=sackdance][url]http://tks.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTJjYzYzYmMwNjY3N2YwNWE5NDQ3ZTQzZDczZWU5N2Y=[/url]

    Simply put, the NY Times is divulging Iraqs super WMD plans.

    [I]No threat, no threat, no threat...[/I]

    (right)[/QUOTE]


    Interesting you didn't post the Times article but a spin on the Times article.
    [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?hp&ex=1162616400&en=8326da2ccc77699e&ei=5094&partner=homepage[/url]

    [QUOTE]U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer
    Sign In to E-Mail This Print Single Page Reprints Save

    By WILLIAM J. BROAD
    Published: November 3, 2006
    Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. [B]The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.

    But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb[/B]...[/QUOTE]

    Documents that are dangerous and were classified that Republicans in Congress forced the government to post on a public web site to help them get re-elected.

    A little more from the article.

    [QUOTE]Last night, the government shut down the Web site after The New York Times asked about complaints from weapons experts and arms-control officials. A spokesman for the director of national intelligence said access to the site had been suspended “pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing.”

    Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, fearing that the information could help states like Iran develop nuclear arms, had privately protested last week to the American ambassador to the agency, according to European diplomats who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. One diplomat said the agency’s technical experts “were shocked” at the public disclosures. [/QUOTE]

    Anybody who thinks National security comes before personal power needs to get a grip. Cynically I believe the Dem's would do the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot but this is just disgraceful and the spin is just more political noise.

    Essentially powerful Republicans put their own reelection ahead of national security and have given aid to our enemies including Iran by providing them with a road map, including the successes, pitfalls and failures that Iraq had in failing to get their Nuke program off the ground.

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Interesting you didn't post the Times article but a spin on the Times article.
    [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?hp&ex=1162616400&en=8326da2ccc77699e&ei=5094&partner=homepage[/url]



    Documents that are dangerous and were classified that Republicans in Congress forced the government to post on a public web site to help them get re-elected.

    A little more from the article.



    Anybody who thinks National security comes before personal power needs to get a grip. Cynically I believe the Dem's would do the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot but this is just disgraceful and the spin is just more political noise.

    Essentially powerful Republicans put their own reelection ahead of national security and have given aid to our enemies including Iran by providing them with a road map, including the successes, pitfalls and failures that Iraq had in failing to get their Nuke program off the ground.[/QUOTE]


    I understand your arguement but this is another example the blatant agenda of the NY Times and the media....

    Those documents were given more play on this political forum then in the NY Times, which categorically dismissed them....

    Now the Times, who refused to admit Hussien had any weapons programs that could be a danger, is blaming the Bush administration for posting evidence on the very thing they said Iraq never had....a potentially leathal weapons program.....

    F*ck the Times; had they given these doucements or this story its' rightfull coverage from the start then I could understand their "outrage".....

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Interesting you didn't post the Times article but a spin on the Times article.
    [/QUOTE]
    Interesting or appropriate? I physically can't link to them, my fists start banging the keyboard.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=sackdance]Interesting or appropriate? I physically can't link to them, my fists start banging the keyboard.[/QUOTE]

    or one cannot finish reading the article until the puke is wiped off the computer screen....it is an involuntary action that cannot be controlled..

  6. #6
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,941
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Those documents were given more play on this political forum then in the NY Times, which categorically dismissed them....

    Now the Times, who refused to admit Hussien had any weapons programs that could be a danger, is blaming the Bush administration for posting evidence on the very thing they said Iraq never had....a potentially leathal weapons program.....[/QUOTE]

    Exactly. This is the type of "prrof" they (and Democrats) have demanded time and time again. When it comes out, it both not good enough AND a danger. Then why did they demand it publicly in the first place?

    And second, the Times is not really one to talk when it comes to releasing dangerous secret information. They clearly take newspaper sales over National Security.

  7. #7
    flushingjet
    Guest

    The MSM & Left Are Traitors

    Bush lied! People died for.....

    Oh wait there was an atomic capability

    No connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq!

    Oh wait...Dang!

    Dont take my word for it --- take it from the NYT

    Also buried in ABC News from[b] 1999[/b]:

    [url="http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram"]http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram[/url]

    Engraved Apologies for Naive Apologists?

    Dont think so

    Take your self-hate/Christophobia and hit the road-you'll
    get us all killed

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]I understand your arguement but this is another example the blatant agenda of the NY Times and the media....

    Those documents were given more play on this political forum then in the NY Times, which categorically dismissed them....

    Now the Times, who refused to admit Hussien had any weapons programs that could be a danger, is blaming the Bush administration for posting evidence on the very thing they said Iraq never had....a potentially leathal weapons program.....

    F*ck the Times; had they given these doucements or this story its' rightfull coverage from the start then I could understand their "outrage".....[/QUOTE]

    Most of those documents on his nuke program were pre 91 war documents and documents that were given to weapons inspectors prior to the war. There is no smoking gun we knew exactly what they had and most of it of any signifigance was destroyed by the first gulf war and the inspections.

    The Times was in lock step with the Administration on the WMD's prior to the war because the Times reporter was using the same sourcing the adminstration was.

    Why you guys aren't outraged that high ranking Republicans would put classified documents that jeopardize the security of the entire world is beyond me. I understand your hatred of the Times but conservative Republicans selling out the US for political gain seems a little more important than the Times attacking the Republicans. That's what liberal and conservative editors do they attack the opposition.

    The real outrage by most Americans regarding the war is not the WMD issue anyway, it's our failure on the ground. Why undermine our security on something like this? If the Times had released those documents you would be calling for them to be tried for treason let see how many conservative opinion makers call for the resignation of chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 11-03-2006 at 11:08 AM.

  9. #9
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Interesting you didn't post the Times article but a spin on the Times article.
    [url="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?hp&ex=1162616400&en=8326da2ccc77699e&ei=5094&partner=homepage"]http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03documents.html?hp&ex=1162616400&en=8326da2ccc77699e&ei=5094&partner=homepage[/url]



    Documents that are dangerous and were classified that Republicans in Congress forced the government to post on a public web site to help them get re-elected.

    A little more from the article.



    Anybody who thinks National security comes before personal power needs to get a grip. Cynically I believe the Dem's would do the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot but this is just disgraceful and the spin is just more political noise.

    Essentially powerful Republicans put their own reelection ahead of national security and have given aid to our enemies including Iran by providing them with a road map, including the successes, pitfalls and failures that Iraq had in failing to get their Nuke program off the ground.[/QUOTE]

    Winston, c'mon.

    France handed Iraq nuclear capability it didnt require decades ago,
    before Israel thankfully blew it up in 1981.

    Once you have a capability to use it , you can learn how uranium can be enriched, as the Norks proved with Halfbright's giveaway.

    Between China & the AQ Khan network - which was available to
    the entire caliphate - how Libya got it also - this is no surprise at all

    And furthermore, in some clumsy attempt to prove sloppiness by Bu****lerhalliburton & Co., not only are all the links previously hotly denied disclosed fully,
    but Iran's "peaceful" use categorized as what it is-extremely dangerous.

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=flushingjet]Winston, c'mon.

    France handed Iraq nuclear capability it didnt require decades ago,
    before Israel thankfully blew it up in 1981.

    Once you have a capability to use it , you can learn how uranium can be enriched, as the Norks proved with Halfbright's giveaway.

    Between China & the AQ Khan network - which was available to
    the entire caliphate - how Libya got it also - this is no surprise at all

    And furthermore, in some clumsy attempt to prove sloppiness by Bu****lerhalliburton & Co., not only are all the links previously hotly denied disclosed fully,
    but Iran's "peaceful" use categorized as what it is-extremely dangerous.[/QUOTE]

    Please if the Times had put out that information you would be calling it an act of treason. This at best should have been a direct violation of the release of classified information that hadn't been properly culled through. It was done for purely partisan political purposes. The President approved it after he was directly lobbied by Conservative press and Congress. Very stupid and very dangerous.

    If you want to make the argument that no secrets are worth keeping than open up all the archives. This was sloppy and done for purely political reasons.

  11. #11
    flushingjet
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Please if the Times had put out that information you would be calling it an act of treason. This at best should have been a direct violation of the release of classified information that hadn't been properly culled through. It was done for purely partisan political purposes. The President approved it after he was directly lobbied by Conservative press and Congress. Very stupid and very dangerous.

    If you want to make the argument that no secrets are worth keeping than open up all the archives. This was sloppy and done for purely political reasons.[/QUOTE]

    Please, no more dissembling, I almost cant take it anymore
    Im gonna bust a gut laffing
    *chuckle*
    Clinton and Dems for years, regime change, Saddam bad etc etc.
    But no action more than taking out an aspirin factory

    Then spinning like a top for years denying WMDs in bids to regain power
    (psst theyre referred to as "UNCONVENTIONAL ARMS" like its something else
    altogether
    )

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]Most of those documents on his nuke program were pre 91 war documents and documents that were given to weapons inspectors prior to the war. There is no smoking gun we knew exactly what they had and most of it of any signifigance was destroyed by the first gulf war and the inspections.

    [/QUOTE]

    and many of them were recent....

    [QUOTE]The Times was in lock step with the Administration on the WMD's prior to the war because the Times reporter was using the same sourcing the adminstration was.

    [/QUOTE]


    Read many of the editorials and stories in the Times on their views about Iraq/Hussien prior to 2000...they are not much different than their views prior to 3/03 (and many of them have been posted on this forum)...

    [QUOTE]Why you guys aren't outraged that high ranking Republicans would put classified documents that jeopardize the security of the entire world is beyond me. I understand your hatred of the Times but conservative Republicans selling out the US for political gain seems a little more important than the Times attacking the Republicans. That's what liberal and conservative editors do they attack the opposition.
    [/QUOTE]

    I see minimal comparison in claiming a few designs/drawings, which can be found just about anywhere on the internet these days (never mind from Russia and China), that helped Iran build a nuclear bomb opposed to the Times revealing the NSA, Swift and other programs...

    [QUOTE]The real outrage by most Americans regarding the war is not the WMD issue anyway, it's our failure on the ground. Why undermine our security on something like this? [/QUOTE]

    So this "Bush lied...." that we hear from the left and lib politicians on a daily basis is just a ploy???
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 11-03-2006 at 12:10 PM.

  13. #13
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE]If the Times had released those documents you would be calling for them to be tried for treason let see how many conservative opinion makers call for the resignation of chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan.[/QUOTE]

    If the Times had given an ounce of coverage to the documents I would've passed out...

    It's funny you mention Hoekstra....

    there was a letter, which PlumberKhan posted on this forum, that he (Hoekstra) wrote to the President...in it he talks about investigating certain "secret" programs to check for thier constitutionality....the press ran with it like wildfire...

    but a larger part of the letter pertained to rogue elements in the CIA purposely leaking secrets to undermine the President...he specifically points out the Valerie Plame/Joe Wilson affair....that part did not get two seconds of coverage...in fact if that letter had not been posted here and I not read the whole thing I nveer would've known about it....

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]
    So this "Bush lied...." that we hear from the left and lib politicians on a daily basis is just a ploy???[/QUOTE]

    The Bush lied is not what this election is about. The hard right and the hard left smear each other, that's what they do. The center Republicans, Democrats and Independents for the most part are feed up with the failure in Iraq not the WMD's. Every sensible person knows that almost everyone felt Sadam had WMD's, once a decision was made to go in everyone with a brain knows that selling and over selling is part of the political deal. The Bush lied is just noise and I don't think has a major bearing on the general electorate. The hard base of both parties always believes the other side was bad intentioned, the moderates on both sides primarily look at results and competence.

  15. #15
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]The Bush lied is not what this election is about. The hard right and the hard left smear each other, that's what they do. The center Republicans, Democrats and Independents for the most part are feed up with the failure in Iraq not the WMD's. Every sensible person knows that almost everyone felt Sadam had WMD's, once a decision was made to go in everyone with a brain knows that selling and over selling is part of the political deal. The Bush lied is just noise and I don't think has a major bearing on the general electorate. The hard base of both parties always believes the other side was bad intentioned, the moderates on both sides primarily look at results and competence.[/QUOTE]

    let's leave the hard left and hard right out of it for a second...

    let's talk about high ranking members of the democrat party...let's talk about people like Russ Fiengold wanting to censure the president and begin impeachment hearings...


    this is not Moveon.org- I expect it from them...

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    ...or simply how can one get something from "nothing"?

    When that website was posted, in an attempt to prove saddam was tinkering with WMDs, all the liberals touted it as a BS propaganda move.

    To this day, they all claim saddam was no threat because he didn't have any WMD programs.

    So now the nyt is claiming that this information is helping iran develop their WMD programs. In effect, they're telling us that info from a non-existant program (with bogus information) is helping another enemy develop a program that's a major threat to America.

    Liberals are selling America a bill of goods that is going to get us all killed.

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]let's leave the hard left and hard right out of it for a second...

    let's talk about high ranking members of the democrat party...let's talk about people like Russ Fiengold wanting to censure the president and begin impeachment hearings...


    this is not Moveon.org- I expect it from them...[/QUOTE]

    I happen to think Fiengold is a decent guy but on this issue he is nuts.

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]
    The real outrage by most Americans regarding the war is not the WMD issue anyway, it's our failure on the ground. [/QUOTE]
    [SIZE=4][B]??? [/B] [/SIZE]

    Are you freakin' kidding me? So we should be there, but we're failing? For appearances sakes, couldn't you defend the years of where's the WMD and NO THREAT and all that just a little bit? Didn't those arguments mean anything to anyone? Yeesh.

  19. #19
    [QUOTE=sackdance][SIZE=4][B]??? [/B] [/SIZE]

    Are you freakin' kidding me? So we should be there, but we're failing? For appearances sakes, couldn't you defend the years of where's the WMD and NO THREAT and all that just a little bit? Didn't those arguments mean anything to anyone? Yeesh.[/QUOTE]


    We got Sadam, we wiped out there weapons program, what are we doing there right now?

  20. #20
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,941
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs]...what are we doing there right now?[/QUOTE]

    Trying not to let the Nation fall into the control of Iran, while trying to form an Allied Democratic Govt. for years to come.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us