If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(OC register)   Powell, Rice say Iraq's arms will surface. Head and torso probably won't   (www2.ocregister.com) divider line 441
    More: PSA  
•       •       •

1824 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jun 2003 at 2:14 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



441 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-06-10 01:21:17 PM  
This is probably a more accurate characterization of Iraq's future than the headline writer realized.
 
2003-06-10 01:42:20 PM  
Condoleeza Rice - attractive, smart and talented. I need her to spank me while wearing a leather teddy.
 
2003-06-10 01:46:46 PM  
 
2003-06-10 01:47:06 PM  
Albo:

which one is wearing the teddy?
 
2003-06-10 01:50:51 PM  
we should now attack Iran and North Korea.
 
2003-06-10 02:15:28 PM  
Great Headline!
 
2003-06-10 02:15:31 PM  
Best. headline. Evar.
 
2003-06-10 02:15:57 PM  
I have to admit, funny headline.
 
2003-06-10 02:16:27 PM  
bleh, I'm too tired.
 
2003-06-10 02:17:18 PM  
Vroomazoom,
<sigmund_freud>the chuxtaposition of your posts indicates a deep zeated zexual dysfunctioning zat is neverzeless very funny to witness. I will change your name in ze book...</sigmund_freud>
 
2003-06-10 02:17:50 PM  
Duhhh... because all of the "head and torso" supply has already been depleted in the fight against Iraqi dandruff.
 
2003-06-10 02:18:33 PM  
LongDuckDong:

That is true, Iran is pointing fingers at Iraq right now claiming that they had a weapons program. May be a ploy to keep America from attacking Iran, but Clinton, Bush, and the UN all believe that weapons exist there. I saw democrats on tv yesterday agreeing with Bush's claims.
 
2003-06-10 02:19:12 PM  
I agree with Dennis Miller. Anyone who doubts they have/had anything should go back to the day the war started and take a little sip from the Euphrates river. (Assuming of course the river was remotely clean from other pollutants.)
 
2003-06-10 02:19:15 PM  
Shame is they'll keep putting it off 'til they can get some old russian nukes and plant them somewheres to be "discovered".


Hint- when "WMD"'s are finally found, look for reports from the UN and previous US search teams that they already cleared the area in question.
 
2003-06-10 02:19:30 PM  
06-10-03 01:21:17 PM HumbleGod
This is probably a more accurate characterization of Iraq's future than the headline writer realized.


wow, that's deep man. and wtf is with your screen name, are you trying to be ironic?
 
2003-06-10 02:20:23 PM  
Just like massa told 'em to say.

At first I thought Harry Belafonte was all wet with his "house slave" comments. Now I'm starting to believe him.
 
2003-06-10 02:21:00 PM  
Maybe everybody's intelligence was based upon what two guys were saying, and those two guys were just wrong.

At the very least they didn't have enough real justification to go to war, not based on the reasons they gave anyway.
 
2003-06-10 02:21:09 PM  
It takes time to manufacture evidence. Just ask Tim McVeigh.
 
2003-06-10 02:21:28 PM  
Of course Iraq has WMD. The are being flown in from Langly on a C-130, as we speak. The CIA is great at phonying evidence.
 
2003-06-10 02:22:03 PM  
Man just when the flames get ready to fly, I gotta leave to go golfing! Oh well have fun. Fight nice and don't do anyone I wouldn't do.

-BTW - I would like to place a curse on the Farker who put that damn "Mandy" song in my head in the MMoore post! Damn you!!!
 
2003-06-10 02:23:27 PM  
Cliff_Yablonski:

I thought you were to tired. HumbleGod was really moved by the headline. He had a momment. tee hee hee.
 
2003-06-10 02:24:36 PM  
Vroomazoonazoom:

I'm spent now. Time to fall asleep with my mouth open and drool.
 
2003-06-10 02:25:53 PM  
Irving47
"I agree with Dennis Miller. "


I used to appreciate Dennis Miller, but ever since his retoric has shifted to the right I like him just as much as a spurious arachnid from Mesoptamia would copulate with a humanoid Proteus Greek god from the embankment of a metronoid beast from Mount Chimaera.


In other words, Dennis Miller is an ass.

 
2003-06-10 02:27:31 PM  
anyone think Big_Bad_Dad is alot cooler than Sad_Dad?
 
2003-06-10 02:27:45 PM  
And the Bush apologists still haven't jumped in. Listening to the Bush Administration is like listening to OJ Simpson, who we all know will find Nicole's kller, sooner or later.
 
2003-06-10 02:28:01 PM  
I think most people (Dems and Repubs) agree that it was likely that Saddam had WMD. Does that make it OK to invade? Maybe they have to have WMD AND they are not an ally? What is it? China has WMD and is not an ally. Same with N. Korea. What about India and Pakistan? We can't have them both. I just don't think that we can go to war becasue a country has WMD and is not an ally. It is setting a precedent whether we want to or not. Just my (largely) uneducated opinion!
 
2003-06-10 02:28:17 PM  
06-10-03 02:21:28 PM Therealscrodd

Of course Iraq has WMD. The are being flown in from Langly on a C-130, as we speak. The CIA is great at phonying evidence.


hahaha....

Rice went on to say that her thugs are just finishing up planting WMD's of all types in Iraq. She was quoted as saying, "Rumsfeld wants to blow up more stuff."
 
2003-06-10 02:28:29 PM  
Revscat:

what, oh wise one, was the reason?
 
2003-06-10 02:29:11 PM  
This is like the cop who shoots the unarmed man and then points to his criminal record and says "well, see, he WAS a bad guy, and he DOES have a rap sheet."

Would you want that cop in your neighborhood?

(not to mention the cop's boss was in on the crime spree when they were boys back in the day, and the cop who shot him is doing the same thing the perp got arrested for.)
 
2003-06-10 02:30:24 PM  
Tunicoco:

India and Pakistan dont want to nuke us. China is becoming an ally. You cannot cut off funding to Iraq. they sell oil. NK can be cut off from funding. they are hoping that will work.
 
2003-06-10 02:30:55 PM  
Dennis Miller just saw what happened to Bill Maher and decided he'd rather be rich than right. Or is that the people we elect...can't remember...
 
2003-06-10 02:31:46 PM  
Anyone else get the feeling that any time anyone in the administration says anything about Iraq now they always wisper the word 'suckers' after finishing a sentence?
 
2003-06-10 02:33:58 PM  
SpaceCoyote:

no
 
2003-06-10 02:34:13 PM  
"No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored," Rice said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

What were those pictures Powell showed the UN? Those pictures showed some rather large buildings. Did they forget where the pictures were taken? Did Saddam do a really good job of hiding the buildings? I am still having trouble trying to get the things the administration said before to jive with the things it says now.
 
2003-06-10 02:34:42 PM  
Great headline.

Rice is a pathetic fool.
 
2003-06-10 02:35:51 PM  
"In other words, Dennis Miller is an ass."

Yes he is. An old quote from him-

"A recent conversation: Dubya: Look at the clock, time is racing! Cheney: That's the second hand, George!"

Ah, that was before he decided to start whoring for the right. He used to be non-partisan for the most part. Shame really.
 
2003-06-10 02:36:54 PM  
wake up people, it doesn't matter if Iraq has/had WMD or not. We needed to make an example out of some country, an established, organized arab country, to send a message: Don't even try that terrorist bullshiat on us, because we will march over there and just end you. Period. No more Bill Clinton style finger-wagging, "hey guys, you better stop it! Quit blowing up our embassies/naval vessels, I'm serious guys!"

get a clue.
 
2003-06-10 02:37:00 PM  
06-10-03 02:25:53 PM Skinink

Well, you're correct that Miller has shifted to the right... which is a shame... but did you see him interviewed on The Daily Show about a month ago? Still damn hilarious.
 
2003-06-10 02:37:05 PM  
Isn't it interesting that when comedians get lured in by the charms of the elephant, they almost immediately lose their ability to be funny?

Oh, well, there will always be Branson MO (and the GOP conventions gigs).
 
2003-06-10 02:37:35 PM  
An important distinction to make is that these days Dubya refers to it as the WMD "program". Iraq had a "program" to develop WMDs. Of course, in the old days, he said that Iraq had the actual weapons and were ready to deploy, hence the need to go on in and destroy them. Those days are gone, obviously, so now it is the "program".....
 
2003-06-10 02:37:40 PM  
Irving47I agree with Dennis Miller. Anyone who doubts they have/had anything should go back to the day the war started and take a little sip from the Euphrates river. (Assuming of course the river was remotely clean from other pollutants.)

I'm thinking that dumping tons of chemicals into the river just might have been noticable. You do realize that they test the air/soil/water there, right? Dennis Miller isn't exactly the place anyone should rely on as a news source. He is a comedian.
 
2003-06-10 02:37:52 PM  
Rice said the justification for war was based on information from CIA director

Both Rice and Powell said this. I agree we should have gone to war, and I support the troops that went. But damn people! Stop pointing fingers and find something. Anything.
 
2003-06-10 02:37:59 PM  
Vroomazoom

India and Pakistan both have very hardliners in there who do not like the US (I am Indian by origin, US by birth). China is becoming an economic trading partner not an ally. Cutting of NK has resulted in this whole "I have nukes now" BS. We actually did cut off funding from Iraq through emargo and the "food for oil" program. It was mildly successful, but apprently not successful enough. I personally thing that we have set a precendent that everybody else needs to keep on their toes or we might use military force. Some people agree with that stance but I am not one of them.

Sudy
 
2003-06-10 02:38:12 PM  
06-10-03 02:36:54 PM Cliff_Yablonski
...
get a clue.


You first.
 
2003-06-10 02:38:57 PM  
If We Knew Where It Was -- Why Don't We Know Where It Is?


By John Cory in Saudi Arabia
*******************
Monday 09 June 2003
*******************
I am not an educated man, and there are plenty of folks who will tell you that I am not all that smart either. But I have a few questions about this WMD thing over in Iraq.

Now I know a lot of smart people are writing about this, but I thought I would ask my questions in the hope that some of those real smart media people and congressional types would provide some answers. I am fairly certain that they must be asking these same questions. Right?

Here goes:

1.) How is it that if the administration knew that the order had been given to deploy chemical weapons, they did not know where these WMD would be stored?

When the US bribed senior military officers not to defend Baghdad and gave them safe passage out of Iraq, why was the location of these chemical weapons not provided to the US as part of the payoff plan? Could the Iraqi officers deploy WMD without knowing where to go and get them? And remember, it has been reported that Iraq had the capability of deploying WMD within 45 minutes of that command. Someone had to know where to go to obey that command. Didn't they?

2.) If the Collin Powell telephone intercepts presented to the UN were authentic, why couldn't the intelligence community trace the location of these intercepts and secure those sites after the invasion of Iraq? And whatever happened to those big missiles he showed us?

3.) How is it that the administration was able to know the whereabouts of Saddam and launch the initial bunker attack that started the war, and yet this "source" within the inner circle of power never provided WMD location data that was crucial not only to safety of the world but to the safety of our military personnel who were about to invade Iraq?

4.) The administration said that the UN could not resume inspections because the threat was imminent and delay was dangerous. Now this same administration says we must be patient because it will take time to find these WMD that they used to know the whereabouts of, but must now guess and search. How is that possible?

Ahmed Chalabi and other sources insist that Saddam Hussein is still alive and hiding in Iraq. It seems to me if that is true, then surely he and his surviving supporters know where to get the remaining WMD and use them against the occupying forces. Or hasn't that occurred to anyone but me? Are our soldiers in danger?

5.) How is it that a nuclear waste site was left unguarded and subject to looting without regard to possible contamination, even as the US military previously found and guessed this site was part of the "secret" nuclear weapons program?

6.) After the capture of various Iraqi high officials and scientists, how is it that no WMD locations have been revealed thus far? Are these officials so uncooperative and able to resist all interrogation that there is no hope of getting answers?

7.) If as Rumsfeld now claims, Iraq may have destroyed the WMD at the last possible moment in order to embarrass the US, how is it that satellite photos and other intelligence technology failed to notice such large scale efforts? Wouldn't it take major activity and trailers, and Lord knows what else, to destroy the vast quantities of chemical weapons supposedly in stock? And how were these destroyed? Burned and incinerated? Would not the air quality samples around Iraq reflect these chemicals and toxic substances? What about soil and water samples? Didn't we have air sensors deployed with our troops to detect and warn about poisons in the air?

8.) Why is the US not interested in casualty statistics in Iraq?

It would seem to me that the large numbers of Iraqi military personnel unaccounted for would be of prime interest in the occupation - I mean- reconstruction of Iraq. Knowing how many dead soldiers subtracted from the initial troop strength reports should provide an idea of the size of possible resistance to the proposed US interim government. It might also indicate the length of continued US involvement and the necessary troops needed to maintain the peace. But I could be wrong.

Like I said in the beginning, I'm no brain, just a guy with questions. And who knows, maybe the really smart guys like Rove and Rumsfeld will explain everything at the GOP convention. By then I'm sure they will have their act together.

Still, I have to ask: If we knew where it was, why don't we know where it is?
 
2003-06-10 02:39:23 PM  
Of course Iraq HAD WMD.
We know that to be true because we have the receipts.
Whether or not what they may or may not have had in the months leading up to the war was ever a danger to us and therefore required THE FIRST PREEMPTIVE STRIKE IN OUR HISTORY remains to be seen.
Frankly, it doesn't look good. Information coming out of England which is being used to fry Tony Blair's ass is the same information we used to push this war. If Tony's fries, someone here's gotta fry too.
I find it extremely ironic that the same people who pushed this war felt the threat of Saddam's WMD was so immiment that they wouldn't let the UN inspectors do their jobs, are the same people now asking that we give their inspectors time to do their job.
 
2003-06-10 02:41:07 PM  
SpaceCoyote:

yes.

although they probably whisper other things as well that are much more insidious.
 
2003-06-10 02:43:28 PM  
Tunicoco:

India and Pakistan will attack eachother before they attack the US. they dont have the capability to reach the US. China, becoming a trading partner, is a step to increasing good relations with the US. NK should be attacked, but they can be cut off from the rest of the world alot better than iraq, because they do not have oil. Plus, if they do have nukes that can reach the US, than the situation becomes diplomatic.

the country that should be mentioned in conjunction with Iraq is Iran. We should also attack Iran, and it is hypocritical not to.
 
2003-06-10 02:43:34 PM  
Well, if the WMDs they can't find never turn up and they get caught planting evidence, at least they have the vague threat announcement they made recently that the evil terrorists are going to use WMDs on Little Red Riding Hood in the next two years.
 
2003-06-10 02:44:12 PM  
Again, I gotta mention this. Iraq is as big as California. There's a lot of places to hide things.

They had WMDs, the UN said they still had them, the Clinton Administration said they had them, we will find them if they haven't been dumped or buried in a deep mine or bunker.

It's only been a couple of months. patience, my pretties.
 
Displayed 50 of 441 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report