(V): I think you're trolling.

Artful Dodger: Just looking back at how peoples views change Dan.

Like when you said Saddam had WMD's.... Like when you said you like Obama..

Politics (Artful Dodger, 2009-01-25 05:37:17)

(V): News flash for ya Sherlock. Saddam DID have WMDs. Everybody knew it. He'd used them. So it wan't brain science to conclude he might still have stockpiles. Former presidents, democrats and republicans, liberal news commentators, ALL OF THEM are on record saying Saddam was a destructive force and had access to WMDs. There, now you're no longer clueless on that subject.

And as for liking Obama at one time, look at his election victory numbers and his current polls. His poll numbers indicate that much of his support has been lost. So like me, they liked him in the beginning but after seeing his true colors, they changed their minds. Open minded people do that ya know.

Artful Dodger: Yes... he did. The ones that he used on Iran supplied via the US. But at the time of the Invasion of Iraq by Bush he did not, otherwise We'd have found them.

Iraq was just an easy victory... or was supposed to be.

Are you that clueless you don't know that?

(V): I know everything about it. But you keep harping that there were no WMDs found. There are many possible explanations for this.

Artful Dodger: Please explain. I'd like to hear your theories....

But.. if you know everything, why are there so "many possible explanations"?

(V): You have no interest in my theories. You're just trolling again. WMDs is OLD NEWS and everything that can be known is known about it. So you won't surprise me with anything new here. You need to find a current issue with which to disagree.

Artful Dodger: I would like to hear. It'd be interesting to see what the right neo cons invented to back up Bush.

But I'll guess it's a big zero.

(V): If you really are interested in the various explanations for no WMDs and the possible why for that, try http://www.google.com

I'm sure you can navigate your way around there.

Artful Dodger: Yes.. just like you showed me years ago you do.

"If you really are interested in the various explanations for no WMDs and the possible why for that"

I have already looked, and it seems Bush went by gut feeling. Something you keep saying is not good enough. Maybe if he'd gone on facts... ... ..

But it seems he wanted to make up for his daddies failure on Iraq.

(V): Facts? Like you just did? Did you even know what speculation mean???

(V): We were first invited to go after Saddam by other Arab nations. It was the only time they have ever directly asked for our help. Do you really not understand what was happening over there?

Iamon lyme: and how about this:


US did find Iraq WMD
By DON KAPLAN

Last Updated: 8:57 AM, October 25, 2010

Posted: 12:44 AM, October 25, 2010


More Print There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons arsenal -- most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

Artful Dodger: I knew we found some of it after the initial search, but didn't realise how much there really was. The news of what we found wasn't exactly splashed across the headlines as most of the negative reporting was.

Just because news agencies lose interest in the story after the initial find doesn't mean everyone else has lost interest. All I saw were bits and pieces of news stories that made a few finds sound anti-climatic, so it was never front page news.

(V): The answer can be found in your statement that by the time Bush invaded Iraq we didn't find WMDs. We found evidence that there had been those devices and materials used to make them, but you are ignoring the fact (or have forgotten) that several months passed while Bush was trying to get the UN to sanction the invasion, giving Saddam ample time to get rid of them. We later stopped a ship containing those materials coming from another country after they believed we might strike there next. Can you guess (or do you know) what contry that was?

(V): lol.. Yes, there are many possible explanations, but only if you ignore the facts and let your imagination run wild.