Author Topic: WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz (Read 5188 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #60 on:** May 31, 2003, 05:23:19 AM »

"BTW u cant win a war on terrorism."

Absoultely true! So lets do nothing, let there be peace in our times....

Duedel · « **Reply #61 on:** May 31, 2003, 05:34:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Absoultely true! So lets do nothing, let there be peace in our times....

If this is the consequence what U read out of Wolfowitz statement ... why not.

Man Grunherz this is not an issue between left and right or democrats and republicans.

Blitz said "GWB and his Bunch of Liars betrayed the UN, the Nato, American people and the world." and he is right regardless if a war vs. Iraq was ok or not, regardless if they'll find any WMD.
They are liars thats all that counts and in liars i dont trust.

And here comes Mrs. Rice and begins to start the same thing with Iran. A country thats in a slow but steady process to evolve to a democratic nation. If I would post what i feal about these 3 persons (Rice Wolfowitz Cheney) i would get banned forever.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #62 on:** May 31, 2003, 05:39:31 AM »

Yes must do nothing, if we stay quiet, weak and figuratively small (like europe) the bad people will leave us alone... Yes, yes they will - yep I'm sure of it!

Duedel · « **Reply #63 on:** May 31, 2003, 05:49:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yes must do nothing, if we stay quiet, weak and figuratively small (like europe) the bad people will leave us alone... Yes, yes they will - yep I'm sure of it!

Is this the answer on my post? Well ...

Steve · « **Reply #64 on:** May 31, 2003, 05:59:53 AM »

10Bears, this thread is a bullchit LIE. I read the article... there was no admission by Wolfowitz saying anything close to what you claim.
Again, go to Iraq... a job as information minister awaits.

Here is the transcript, show me this admission or retract, LIAR.

TANENHAUS: Was that one of the arguments that was raised early on by you and others that Iraq actually does connect, not to connect the dots too much, but the relationship between Saudi Arabia, our troops being there, and bin Laden's rage about that, which he's built on so many years, also connects the World Trade Center attacks, that there's a logic of motive or something like that? Or does that read too much into--

WOLFOWITZ: No, I think it happens to be correct. The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason, but . . . there have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one which is the connection between the first two. . . . The third one by itself, as I think I said earlier, is a reason to help the Iraqis but it's not a reason to put American kids' lives at risk, certainly not on the scale we did it. That second issue about links to terrorism is the one about which there's the most disagreement within the bureaucracy, even though I think everyone agrees that we killed 100 or so of an al Qaeda group in northern Iraq in this recent go-around, that we've arrested that al Qaeda guy in Baghdad who was connected to this guy Zarqawi whom Powell spoke about in his U.N. presentation.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #65 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:01:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Duedel
First i thought Wolfowitz made the one of the biggest faults addmitting that WMD's where not the issue for this war.

From CNN:

Quote

According to a tape recording made by the Pentagon, the actual quote is, "The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on, which was weapons of mass destruction, as the core reason."

After a brief pause to take another phone call, Wolfowitz continues, "There have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually, I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one, which is the connection between the first two."

I am shocked!...shocked! that a Vanity Fair reporter would quote out of context.

This after all is the profession where, while an airplane is still smoldering, the reporter will ask, "What caused the accident". Just after a child is found murdered, the reporter will ask the bereaved mother, "How do you feel upon hearing that your child was brutally slain?"

One should be wary of what one reads, especially immediately after an event. While we do not have conclusive evidence, tests have only recently been performed to lend credence to the foam damage theory of Columbia, and that is a much smaller fact-gathering project than what is required in Iraq.

6 or 8 weeks is much too short of a time span to come to any conclusions yet, and there are still close to 700 sites identified pre-war that need to be inspected, to say nothing of sites that are learned of during this present phase.

For those saying we haven't found WMD's and declaring victory in the debate, perhaps some discretion may be appropriate. You may be right, but in order to find out, it will take some time. Perhaps we should turn over 700 stones or so before making a judgment.

Nash · « **Reply #66 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:05:24 AM »

ah nm.

P. Wolfowitz · « **Reply #67 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:08:03 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
From CNN:

I am shocked!...shocked! that a Vanity Fair reporter would quote out of context.

This after all is the profession where, while an airplane is still smoldering, the reporter will ask, "What caused the accident". Just after a child is found murdered, the reporter will ask the bereaved mother, "How do you feel upon hearing that your child was brutally slain?"

One should be wary of what one reads, especially immediately after an event. While we do not have conclusive evidence, tests have only recently been performed to lend credence to the foam damage theory of Columbia, and that is a much smaller fact-gathering project than what is required in Iraq.

6 or 8 weeks is much too short of a time span to come to any conclusions yet, and there are still close to 700 sites identified pre-war that need to be inspected, to say nothing of sites that are learned of during this present phase.

For those saying we haven't found WMD's and declaring victory in the debate, perhaps some discretion may be appropriate. You may be right, but in order to find out, it will take some time. Perhaps we should turn over 700 stones or so before making a judgment.

Didn't Powell in security council said they had overwelming proof of lots of iraq wmds?

And now they can't find a single 1. Roflmao

Regards P. Wolfowitz aka Blitz

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #68 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:09:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Duedel
Is this the answer on my post? Well ...

But waht kind of response do you expect when your suggestion is to do nothing... Hell what do they teach you about appeasement and ignoring a burgeoing threat in those German schools - or do they even cover the whole munich 1938 thing?

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #69 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:16:02 AM »

10Bears:

Now having read the actual interview transcript its obvious to me that you are either negligently careless in your research or wantonly dishonest and biased in your motives. Wolfowitz said no such thing as you suggested in the first post.

Nash · « **Reply #70 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:19:59 AM »

Huh?

10B's post quotes the 1st paragraph in the article verbatim:

"The Bush administration focused on alleged weapons of mass destruction as the primary justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force because it was politically convenient, a top-level official at the Pentagon has acknowledged."

He might have taken some liberties with the title of the post, but it aint too much of a stretch. Other than that, again, 10B didn't say anything that the article didn't.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #71 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:23:10 AM »

Keep laughing, WolfoBlitz. All they have to find is a few sites and they still have 700+ chances. I will withhold my judgment until we are a little farther down the road.

Iraq was proven to have used chemical against the Kurds, so I would bet they have some. And they did have some of the truck mouted stills Powell said they had.

Duedel · « **Reply #72 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:26:18 AM »

At the beginning ALL was about WMD.

Steve and Holden sure u have a point here but as i said before Wolfowitz is a liar or at least unable: "The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on, which was weapons of mass destruction, as the core reason..."

Lets assume there where always the three concerns. If so the Wolfowitz is saing that US government failed totally to make this transparent for the world and this caused by U.S. government bureaucracy - thats risible. This means ur are governed by cack-handed politicians what easely explains the inability to convince the (whole) world of the necessity of this war.
And the bad thing is some of u dont even scrutinize what those guys tell, they just follow.

Duedel · « **Reply #73 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:35:21 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
But waht kind of response do you expect when your suggestion is to do nothing... Hell what do they teach you about appeasement and ignoring a burgeoing threat in those German schools - or do they even cover the whole munich 1938 thing?

I dont suggest nothing and u dont know nothing about me. I'm against the neo conservative forces in ur country and against the silly followers thats it.
I'm in favor of preventive wars vs. dictatorships but I'm against a world ruled by one nation governed by sick humans that abuse their power.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #74 on:** May 31, 2003, 06:45:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Duedel
At the beginning ALL was about WMD.

Steve and Holden sure u have a point here but as i said before Wolfowitz is a liar or at least unable: ....

Or perhaps Wolfowitz honestly thought this would be the easiest case to make and prove.

It is possible he thought that. Lots of others did as well, after all if Hussien was not hiding weapons, why did he act as though he was? Why did he defy the UN? Why did he endure 12 years of UN sanctions, and the enormous lost profit potential from the lost oppurtunity to export oil?