|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 17:48:56 GMT
You have missed the obvious. If Saddam had fully cooperated with the Ceasefire agreement and with the UN Inspectors, there would have been no invasion. In Saddam not complying with the ceasefire agreement, a state of conflict still existed. Try reading UN Res. 1441. Making unproveable lying claims against Blair is a waste of space. It probably does nothing more than reflect the anger of Righties who hate the fact that Blair / New Labour kept the Conservative party out of office for the longest period in its history. You only highlight how stupid people need to be to follow Tony Blair into war. As we saw, no one else did - we were the only poodle. There isn't anything in my post that is a lie, and this is why you have invented a tangent to try and big up a lying creep. This has nothing to do with party politics. If your beloved Tony Blair didn't lie through his teeth that act of mindless destruction, which also led to ISIS in the region, may never have happened. The UN did not support the invasion. There were no WMDs in Iraq. You rely on a resolution as your smoking gun with ZERO evidence that there was a threat to the west, despite the lies YOUR lot told.
Perhaps you're just a psychopath?
The "smoking gun" was provided by both Blix and Saddam. Blix noted that the destruction of WMD and the revealing of chemicals did not match the Iraqi receipts for both Items that he had in his possession. So the hunt was on. Blix, in his reference to 1441 inspections warned Saddam to stop his "cat and mouse games" i.e. no more denial of permission to inspect an area, only to be given permission a week of more later so that when the inspectors arrived the area was completely empty. There was every reason to believe that Saddam did have WMD. According to the follow up inspection by the Iraq Survey Group "50 WMD were found". Also found after the invasion was Saddam's Missiles that had a greater range than allowed by the Ceasefire agreement. Unlike your previous post my post contained more than just opinion, it included items of truth. I'll ask you to do the same thing I have asked everyone else in your position to list proven lies by Blair. When you can't you just might begin to see just who the real psychopath might be in this exchange. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Dec 15, 2023 17:52:25 GMT
You only highlight how stupid people need to be to follow Tony Blair into war. As we saw, no one else did - we were the only poodle. There isn't anything in my post that is a lie, and this is why you have invented a tangent to try and big up a lying creep. This has nothing to do with party politics. If your beloved Tony Blair didn't lie through his teeth that act of mindless destruction, which also led to ISIS in the region, may never have happened. The UN did not support the invasion. There were no WMDs in Iraq. You rely on a resolution as your smoking gun with ZERO evidence that there was a threat to the west, despite the lies YOUR lot told.
Perhaps you're just a psychopath?
The "smoking gun" was provided by both Blix and Saddam. Blix noted that the destruction of WMD and the revealing of chemicals did not match the Iraqi receipts for both Items that he had in his possession. So the hunt was on. Blix, in his reference to 1441 inspections warned Saddam to stop his "cat and mouse games" i.e. no more denial of permission to inspect an area, only to be given permission a week of more later so that when the inspectors arrived the area was completely empty. There was every reason to believe that Saddam did have WMD. According to the follow up inspection by the Iraq Survey Group "50 WMD were found". Also found after the invasion was Saddam's Missiles that had a greater range than allowed by the Ceasefire agreement. Unlike your previous post my post contained more than just opinion, it included items of truth. I'll ask you to do the same thing I have asked everyone else in your position to list proven lies by Blair. When you can't you just might begin to see just who the real psychopath might be in this exchange. Blair lied and manipulated Parliament, which is a fact, he also murdered 100's of thousands of people backed by his lies, those are the work of a psychopath. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 17:54:26 GMT
Don't know about who but I do understand why. Read Res1441. As far as I'm aware, because Saddam refused to comply with the ceasefire agreement both the US and the UK were still having to police the 'No Fly' zones placed on the Iraqi Air Force needed to stop them from bombing the Kurds in the North and the Kuwaitis in the south. The UK and the US were still at war with Iraq. The resolution itself never mentioned a war and only required Iraq to support inspections by UNMOVIC and IAEA
Inspectors were in Iraq, they found nothing. All they had was hearsay from the US, where Blix noted that he wasn't provided with any evidence. We now know the hearsay was untrue.
The resolution clearly explained Saddam's threat to peace and security and gave Saddam "a final opportunity" to fully comply with the Ceasefire Agreement and the with UN Inspectors. He failed to comply. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 17:57:23 GMT
The "smoking gun" was provided by both Blix and Saddam. Blix noted that the destruction of WMD and the revealing of chemicals did not match the Iraqi receipts for both Items that he had in his possession. So the hunt was on. Blix, in his reference to 1441 inspections warned Saddam to stop his "cat and mouse games" i.e. no more denial of permission to inspect an area, only to be given permission a week of more later so that when the inspectors arrived the area was completely empty. There was every reason to believe that Saddam did have WMD. According to the follow up inspection by the Iraq Survey Group "50 WMD were found". Also found after the invasion was Saddam's Missiles that had a greater range than allowed by the Ceasefire agreement. Unlike your previous post my post contained more than just opinion, it included items of truth. I'll ask you to do the same thing I have asked everyone else in your position to list proven lies by Blair. When you can't you just might begin to see just who the real psychopath might be in this exchange. Blair lied and manipulated Parliament, which is a fact, he also murdered 100's of thousands of people backed by his lies, those are the work of a psychopath. No, it is not a fact it is just your opinion. If you knew it was a fact you would be able to prove it, and you can't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2023 18:00:29 GMT
You only highlight how stupid people need to be to follow Tony Blair into war. As we saw, no one else did - we were the only poodle. There isn't anything in my post that is a lie, and this is why you have invented a tangent to try and big up a lying creep. This has nothing to do with party politics. If your beloved Tony Blair didn't lie through his teeth that act of mindless destruction, which also led to ISIS in the region, may never have happened. The UN did not support the invasion. There were no WMDs in Iraq. You rely on a resolution as your smoking gun with ZERO evidence that there was a threat to the west, despite the lies YOUR lot told.
Perhaps you're just a psychopath?
The "smoking gun" was provided by both Blix and Saddam. Blix noted that the destruction of WMD and the revealing of chemicals did not match the Iraqi receipts for both Items that he had in his possession. So the hunt was on. Blix, in his reference to 1441 inspections warned Saddam to stop his "cat and mouse games" i.e. no more denial of permission to inspect an area, only to be given permission a week of more later so that when the inspectors arrived the area was completely empty. There was every reason to believe that Saddam did have WMD. According to the follow up inspection by the Iraq Survey Group "50 WMD were found". Also found after the invasion was Saddam's Missiles that had a greater range than allowed by the Ceasefire agreement. Unlike your previous post my post contained more than just opinion, it included items of truth. I'll ask you to do the same thing I have asked everyone else in your position to list proven lies by Blair. When you can't you just might begin to see just who the real psychopath might be in this exchange. When even those who pushed for war within the UN admit they were following garbage:
To this day, the Iraq War is widely viewed as a foreign policy and humanitarian disaster. The conflict dragged on for almost nine years and claimed nearly 4,500 American lives. Over 185,000 Iraqi civilians were killed, according to Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs. Some 2 million Iraqis had been displaced from their homes by the time U.S. forces pulled out in 2011.
Three years later, President Obama ordered troops back to Iraq to help combat the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS — assuring Americans he would not commit to "another ground war." U.S. forces officially withdrew in December 2021 after almost seven years of fighting.
Powell later called his U.N. speech a "great intelligence failure" and a "blot" on his record, telling NBC News' Meet the Press in 2004 he trusted the information he'd gotten.
"But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases deliberately misleading," Powell said. "And for that, I am disappointed. And I regret it."
|
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Dec 15, 2023 18:01:21 GMT
Blair lied and manipulated Parliament, which is a fact, he also murdered 100's of thousands of people backed by his lies, those are the work of a psychopath. No, it is not a fact it is just your opinion. If you knew it was a fact you would be able to prove it, and you can't. No, it is fact, read the original post. We are getting very bored with people turning up on the internet lying on behalf of psychopaths. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Dec 15, 2023 18:06:32 GMT
Who appointed you the worlds policeman? Don't know about who but I do understand why. Read Res1441. As far as I'm aware, because Saddam refused to comply with the ceasefire agreement both the US and the UK were still having to police the 'No Fly' zones placed on the Iraqi Air Force needed to stop them from bombing the Kurds in the North and the Kuwaitis in the south. The UK and the US were still at war with Iraq. Res 1441 did not authorise invasion and regime change. You should read it sometime. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 20:00:46 GMT
The "smoking gun" was provided by both Blix and Saddam. Blix noted that the destruction of WMD and the revealing of chemicals did not match the Iraqi receipts for both Items that he had in his possession. So the hunt was on. Blix, in his reference to 1441 inspections warned Saddam to stop his "cat and mouse games" i.e. no more denial of permission to inspect an area, only to be given permission a week of more later so that when the inspectors arrived the area was completely empty. There was every reason to believe that Saddam did have WMD. According to the follow up inspection by the Iraq Survey Group "50 WMD were found". Also found after the invasion was Saddam's Missiles that had a greater range than allowed by the Ceasefire agreement. Unlike your previous post my post contained more than just opinion, it included items of truth. I'll ask you to do the same thing I have asked everyone else in your position to list proven lies by Blair. When you can't you just might begin to see just who the real psychopath might be in this exchange. When even those who pushed for war within the UN admit they were following garbage:
To this day, the Iraq War is widely viewed as a foreign policy and humanitarian disaster. The conflict dragged on for almost nine years and claimed nearly 4,500 American lives. Over 185,000 Iraqi civilians were killed, according to Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs. Some 2 million Iraqis had been displaced from their homes by the time U.S. forces pulled out in 2011.
Three years later, President Obama ordered troops back to Iraq to help combat the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS — assuring Americans he would not commit to "another ground war." U.S. forces officially withdrew in December 2021 after almost seven years of fighting.
Powell later called his U.N. speech a "great intelligence failure" and a "blot" on his record, telling NBC News' Meet the Press in 2004 he trusted the information he'd gotten.
"But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases deliberately misleading," Powell said. "And for that, I am disappointed. And I regret it."
I accepted before the invasion that the US went well over the top on its accusations against Saddam, but that does not change the fact that the invasion was legal and was deemed necessary at that time. "that the (US) sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases deliberately misleading" Is apparently hindsight and does not alter the reality that Saddam was a megalomaniac and a serious threat to that area of the world. Have you ever considered what would have happened if Saddam had got his way? ISIS was partly caused by the elected Shia Iraqi government ignoring the needs of the Iraqi Sunnis. I don't think that even Blair believes it was a worthwhile invasion, but that, like much of your post, is hindsight. My own hindsight conclusion made some years ago is that Bush wasn't actually interested in res, 1441, he was using Saddam as an excuse for him to take revenge for 9/11 and for the 1998 Kenya (?) Embassy bombing that caused so many deaths. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Dec 15, 2023 20:08:57 GMT
We’re Going to Take out 7 Countries in 5 Years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran.. .GEN WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran. I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’twww.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166 |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 20:13:36 GMT
Don't know about who but I do understand why. Read Res1441. As far as I'm aware, because Saddam refused to comply with the ceasefire agreement both the US and the UK were still having to police the 'No Fly' zones placed on the Iraqi Air Force needed to stop them from bombing the Kurds in the North and the Kuwaitis in the south. The UK and the US were still at war with Iraq. Res 1441 did not authorise invasion and regime change. You should read it sometime. I have read it, and I know that Annan (the boy scout) secretary who did not have the authority to overrule the Security Council, distorted the "final opportunity" into you need a second resolution. Blair talked Bush into going for a second resolution only to find France threatening to Veto such. The Secretaries wish for a second resolution was not available, so the Final Opportunity stood. And Saddam failed to take heed. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Dec 15, 2023 20:17:49 GMT
We’re Going to Take out 7 Countries in 5 Years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran.. .GEN WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran. I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’twww.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166Big dreams by a mindless military fool. Needless to say he never even attempted it. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Dec 15, 2023 20:20:15 GMT
We’re Going to Take out 7 Countries in 5 Years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran.. .GEN WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran. I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’twww.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166Big dreams by a mindless military fool. Needles to say he never even attempted it. So you never read it then ,ok. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Dec 15, 2023 20:47:52 GMT
We’re Going to Take out 7 Countries in 5 Years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran.. .GEN WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran. I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.” So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’twww.globalresearch.ca/we-re-going-to-take-out-7-countries-in-5-years-iraq-syria-lebanon-libya-somalia-sudan-iran/5166Big dreams by a mindless military fool. Needles to say he never even attempted it. Something always needles someone — it’s a fact of politics… |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Dec 15, 2023 22:12:39 GMT
Res 1441 did not authorise invasion and regime change. You should read it sometime. I have read it, and I know that Annan (the boy scout) secretary who did not have the authority to overrule the Security Council, distorted the "final opportunity" into you need a second resolution. Blair talked Bush into going for a second resolution only to find France threatening to Veto such. The Secretaries wish for a second resolution was not available, so the Final Opportunity stood. And Saddam failed to take heed. So 'final opportunity' was code for invasion and regime change? - that is a bit of a stretch if you don't mind me saying..  |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Dec 16, 2023 0:55:32 GMT
Big dreams by a mindless military fool. Needles to say he never even attempted it. Something always needles someone — it’s a fact of politics… You're a cheeky sew and sew. |
|
