Point. Set. Match.

[mreye]

  winodj said:

Well, damn. This story just keeps getting more and more confusing.

 

Apparently a soldier will be talking about how he removed 200 tons of weaponry from Al QaQaa within the hour. If true, its a definite relief. But still a concern that the Pentagon came up with four other stories before this one.

 

So if true, I was wrong.

I'm watching the guy now. This is so sorted that either way, it's too confusing to the average voter to amke a difference one way or the other.

[Rex Kickass]

I just don't know anymore.

 

I want Wednesday here now so we can forget all this noise and my head can stop hurting.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

  winodj said:

Well, damn. This story just keeps getting more and more confusing.

 

Apparently a soldier will be talking about how he removed 200 tons of weaponry from Al QaQaa within the hour. If true, its a definite relief. But still a concern that the Pentagon came up with four other stories before this one.

 

So if true, I was wrong.

Which is exactly why Kerry has no business making a big political issue out of this thing. Nobody has all the facts one way or the other.

 

Untill I see Zarqawi with drums of RDX and HMX in a videotape I'll not be inclined to believe this.

[jackie hayes]

The human rights offenses in Iraq were awful in the past, but if they weren't bad in spring 2003, then there was little reason to invade at that time.

 

Personally (and I know a lot of people will disagree), I wouldn't have been opposed to invading Iraq a year later, had all due diligence been completed, all diplomatic channels been pursued. I think a good case can be made that some sort of invasion would have eventually been required (on grounds of violating sanctions). But there was no evidence that Iraq was an "imminent threat".

 

And mreye, I wasn't referring to you, just to the administration. I don't think anyone got the impression before the war that human rights was the main reason for invading.

[mreye]

  jackie hayes said:

And mreye, I wasn't referring to you, just to the administration.  I don't think anyone got the impression before the war that human rights was the main reason for invading.

No, and like I said. IMO that was a major f*** up by the administration. I said it then and I continue to say it now.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

If this soldier moved them, then where the f*** are they? I mean, the Bushies said they don't know where they are.

 

And if we're to believe those DoD photos -- then they were supposedly moved before the war (except the IAEA debunked those)

 

And wouldn't a commanding officer remember giving this order? And why trot this poor guy out after a week after making up a bunch of bunk stories?

 

 

http://www.kgw.com/iraq/stories/kgw_102904...ns.4da9b88.html

 

  Quote

Two U.S. aid workers, including one from Oregon, said they reported the looting of an Iraqi weapons depot to U.S. military officials in October, 2003, but were told that there were not enough troops to seal off the facility, The Oregonian reported in its Friday editions.

 

"We were outraged," said Wes Hare, city manager of La Grande, who was working in Iraq as part of a rebuilding program. A colleague, Jerry Kuhaida, told the newspaper it appeared that the explosives at the Ukhaider Ammunition Storage Area had found their way to insurgents targeting U.S. forces.

 

"There's no question in my mind that the stuff in Ukhaider was used by terrorists," Kuhaida said from his home in Tennessee.

 

The men said they informed Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, but were told that the United States lacked the troops to guard the facility, which had more than 60 bunkers packed with munitions.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

  sideshowapu said:

If this soldier moved them, then where the f*** are they?  I mean, the Bushies said they don't know where they are.

 

And if we're to believe those DoD photos -- then they were supposedly moved before the war (except the IAEA debunked those)

 

And wouldn't a commanding officer remember giving this order?  And why trot this poor guy out after a week after making up a bunch of bunk stories?

 

 

http://www.kgw.com/iraq/stories/kgw_102904...ns.4da9b88.html

How many times must this be said.

 

 

General Sanchez was right when he said he didnt have enough troops to guard every weapons cache in Iraq. I dont think the combined armies of the entire U.N. security council members do either.

 

The point is that the amount of ordinance this whole hissy fit is about is less than 1 tenth of 1% of the ordinance secured or destroyed by coalition forces and even then nobody can definitively say when they were taken.

[WSoxShuf]

strange it took so long to talk about how the troops actually moved the weapons.

 

Bush is being a desperate putz.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

  WsoxShuf said:

strange it took so long to talk about how the troops actually moved the weapons.

 

Bush is being a desperate putz.

Is Bush the desperate one or is Kerry by making a political issue out of something he cant prove.

 

[LowerCaseRepublican]

  NUKE_CLEVELAND said:

Is Bush the desperate one or is Kerry by making a political issue out of something he cant prove.

 

Kay and the IAEA already proved that the weapons were there on April 18, 2003. The army failed to secure them and now Bush has to eat a giant s*** sandwich.

[WSoxShuf]

  NUKE_CLEVELAND said:

Is Bush the desperate one or is Kerry by making a political issue out of something he cant prove.

 

give up, your boy f***ed up.

 

 

hopefull history will show its happy way, and Dub can go home and cry in his craddle in Crawford.

[Rex Kickass]

What I read about the conference, and I don't know for sure, mind you because I'm at work was that the guy specifically said he did not remove the barrels in question on the video and didn't look for or remove HMX. So what does this prove?

 

I don't know if its "making political hay" to ask the administration tough questions about their claims on what happened to the 380 tons but here are a few.

 

Why didn't you record what you destroyed or moved?

Why didn't you notice IAEA seals?

If you destroyed it, why did you say the Russians took it?

If you destroyed it, why did you say the Iraqis moved it?

If you knew all this stuff was here, why didn't you secure it?

[Texsox]

  NUKE_CLEVELAND said:

How many times must this be said. 

 

 

General Sanchez was right when he said he didnt have enough troops to guard every weapons cache in Iraq.  I dont think the combined armies of the entire U.N. security council members do either. 

 

The point is that the amount of ordinance this whole hissy fit is about is less than 1 tenth of 1% of the ordinance secured or destroyed by coalition forces and even then nobody can definitively say when they were taken.

I think this is the one step forward, two steps back problem. It seems to a civilian to be a problem to let any munitions fall in the enemy hands. I wonder how many lives were lost to these weapons.

 

Supporting our Troops would seem to me to involve protecting them from weapons we had in our command and control.

 

One of the justifications we used to enter this war was

 

If Sadaam did destroy his WMD, why didn't they document it? Now we find out we may have committed the same mistake.

Edited October 29, 2004 by Texsox

[mreye]

  winodj said:

Why didn't you notice IAEA seals?

I'm at work as well, but I did hear them discussing this at least. Idon't know the specific answers, though.

[sox4lifeinPA]

  winodj said:

What I read about the conference, and I don't know for sure, mind you because I'm at work was that the guy specifically said he did not remove the barrels in question on the video and didn't look for or remove HMX. So what does this prove?

 

I don't know if its "making political hay" to ask the administration tough questions about their claims on what happened to the 380 tons but here are a few.

 

Why didn't you record what you destroyed or moved?

Why didn't you notice IAEA seals?

If you destroyed it, why did you say the Russians took it?

If you destroyed it, why did you say the Iraqis moved it?

If you knew all this stuff was here, why didn't you secure it?

Why didn't the Russians, Germans, French and who knows who else didn't join this coalition to remove Saddam Hussein despite countless violations of UN resolutions?

 

$

 

and I'm not being sarcastic.

 

 

if we had the unadultered support from our "allies" this wouldn't be an issue.

 

now I'm being sarcastic.

 

And to blame any of this on Bush is a pathetic election attempt from a man who's clearly sees his campaign as heading south.

 

not sarcastic, again....

[kapkomet]

  mreye said:

Just defending myself here:

 

I said prior to the war that the human rights abuses were enough evidence for me, personally. It isn't "all of a sudden" with me. Just saying.

I don't know why this is so hard for everyone to figure out, so let me say it this way.

 

SADDAM HUSSEIN HIMSELF was a WMD. He ain't no more.

 

'Nuf said.

[Rex Kickass]

Things aren't muddy enough in this story yet, so here's another angle from the International Herald Tribune.

 

Looting at AlQaQaa in Nov 2003

[sox4lifeinPA]

  winodj said:

Things aren't muddy enough in this story yet, so here's another angle from the International Herald Tribune.

 

Looting at AlQaQaa in Nov 2003

you know, of the 400,000 tons of munitions already destroyed, I don't really blame our US soldiers for not working above the call of duty.... I, for one, being of eligible age for service, am greatful to every veteran and currently service soldier. Here's to you PVC Morton, PVC DeJesus, and PVC Mooney!!!

 

This ain't about Bush... it's about former allies not doing their part to join the US. They're too busy catching Saddam's fastballs up the pipe to do some real good in the world.

 

here's to 25 million people with the chance at freedom!!

 

 

 

and here's to the f-ing misanthropes that would rather see Bush fail, democracy fail, and freedom fail, Just at the hope "their" guy would win. :fyou :fyou :fyou :fyou

[MurcieOne]

I cant wait till all this bulls*** is over... so we can focus back on whats important, supporting those men and women who are over there fighting to protect you and me. protecting us so that we can sit on here, on a website, and speak our minds.

 

 

Im voting bush... but Im supporting my brothers and sister in Iraq.

 

God Bless America

[sox4lifeinPA]

  MurcieOne said:

I cant wait till all this bulls*** is over... so we can focus back on whats important, supporting those men and women who are over there fighting to protect you and me. protecting us so that we can sit on here, on a website, and speak our minds.

 

 

Im voting bush... but Im supporting my brothers and sister in Iraq.

 

God Bless America

 

I'm with you on that!

[jackie hayes]

  sox4lifeinPA said:

and here's to the f-ing misanthropes that would rather see Bush fail, democracy fail, and freedom fail, Just at the hope "their" guy would win. :fyou  :fyou  :fyou  :fyou

I take more than a little exception to this statement. I'm guessing that this is directed at all Kerry supporters, and I support Kerry in this election, but to call him "my guy" is laughable. In fact, I've never supported a Dem prez candidate before in my life. But I feel that Bush has already failed. On the weapons, it seems clear from the video that some weapons were left unguarded. If they had just been missed, that's one thing, but soldiers are shown going in and looking at the stuff. (The video is from Apr 18, the soldiers who claimed to destroy weapons removed them on Apr 13, so it apparently isn't the same stuff, anyway. Not to mention the IAEA seals.) On everything else, the only summary I can give is that I've never felt more disappointed in a prez -- I won't be happy if Kerry is elected, only relieved.

 

And I don't want to see democracy and freedom fail, that's just f***ing gibberish nonsense rhetoric. It pisses me off when supporters of one candidate claim that 'We're just better Americans and better people' and that's all the f*** you're doing. Bulls***.

[FlaSoxxJim]

  jackie hayes said:

that's just f***ing gibberish nonsense rhetoric.

Jackie, meet PA.