New York Times Confirms Iraqi Nuclear Weapons Program

[KBCraig]

Iraq could have been full of WMD's and we still had no right to invade.

You and I don't disagree on that. I'm just tired of the crowd that chants, "Bush lied! There were no WMDs!", as if that's the only thing wrong with the war, and proof of WMDs would change their minds. It won't; it doesn't even change their mantra.

Kevin

[lildog]

I have a slightly off topic question?

First off, this is NH free right?  As in New Hampshire?

Ok, assuming it is and assuming this site is made up of majority of free state members, then maybe you can tell me why so much of the conversations here are about national issues and international issues which in most cases are nothing more then liberal talking points used to slam republicans?

I can understand concerns with some republican issues as I don?t always agree with them but to continually attack and go after republicans is going to accomplish nothing but put democrats in power.  And I can tell you matter of factly, that if democrats take over NH you WILL see real ID, national healthcare, higher taxes, more government etc etc etc? in essences socialism.  And with democrats in control you will have NO power to fight back.

Is that what you really want?

[Russell Kanning]

I don't remember any of my friends demanding to see proof of WMD. Are you complaining about democrats on tv or something?

[jgmaynard]

And I can tell you matter of factly, that if democrats take over NH you WILL see real ID,

Funny, while Republican Charlie Bass came to NH to push through REAL-ID, Democrat Governor Lynch stated he would veto it...

JM

[Russell Kanning]

the NHfree part came later ..... none of us will ever be defined by labels ..... otherwise we will just change the labels.

This community changes and grows ... who knows what it will turn into.

I care about federal issues, because the feds steal money from my friends and neighbors and they like to throw people in jail .... like me. There are also bad people around the world, but I have never cooperated in their evil.

This website is also open to anyone in the world, who doesn't seek to harm others. It started with some freestaters in and out of NH, but it keeps growing.

[Incrementalist]

Iraq could have been full of WMD's and we still had no right to invade.

You and I don't disagree on that. I'm just tired of the crowd that chants, "Bush lied! There were no WMDs!", as if that's the only thing wrong with the war, and proof of WMDs would change their minds. It won't; it doesn't even change their mantra.

Kevin

It might be a good idea to really engage the WMD question.  This is, after all, just a news article, coincidentally from a source that most on the right scoff at whenever it releases information that hurts their causes.  The truth is we'll never know if there were WMDs or not, barring any completely crushing evidence released by either side.  Let the experts have at it.

[mvpel]

There obviously were WMD at some point in the past - the thousands of horribly murdered victims in Halabja bore witness to that brutal fact.

[Incrementalist]

There obviously were WMD at some point in the past - the thousands of horribly murdered victims in Halabja bore witness to that brutal fact.

Yes, there were WMDs (chemical and biological weapons, never nuclear weapons), I was being overly simplistic in my previous post because the issue is not whether Saddam has ever had WMDs, it's whether he's had WMDs since the gulf ceasefire.  The US government didn't attack Iraq because of the Halabja attack in part because after all, we're the ones who sold him the bell helicopters and the chemicals for the manufacture of mustard gas (Reigel Report from the Senate Committee on Banking, 5/25/94).  We also sold him, via the Department of Commerce and The American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), at least 80 shipments of biological agents that were not attenuated (or weakened) and were capable of reproduction, including Anthrax, West Nile Virus and Clostridium botulinum.

[Dreepa]

and the North Koreans have Nukes.  Should we invade?

[Fluff and Stuff]

And I can tell you matter of factly, that if democrats take over NH you WILL see real ID,

Funny, while Republican Charlie Bass came to NH to push through REAL-ID, Democrat Governor Lynch stated he would veto it...

JM

Of course.  And the Democrats in the Senate were more against it than the Republicans in the Senate.  And the Democrats and Republicans in the House tended to be against it.  And both Democrats and Republicans in the EC claimed to be against it.  It does not appear to be a party issue.

Back to the issue of this topic, we already know Iraq had a program.  However, push said that the program had already been used to create some WMDs; when, in fact, the program was most likely years away from creating any WNDs.  I don't support unwarrented aggression, though, so this is a non-issue (except for the false intellecent reports and related misinformation).

And lildog is right, this is not a NH or even New England related issue.  But, it is still fun to agrue with friendly folks online

[Russell Kanning]

The US government has nukes and has used them on civilians before. Maybe we should disarm them.

[mvpel]

Of course.  And the Democrats in the Senate were more against it than the Republicans in the Senate.  And the Democrats and Republicans in the House tended to be against it.  And both Democrats and Republicans in the EC claimed to be against it.  It does not appear to be a party issue.

Keith, what difference does it make if your national ID card looks like this:



... or like this, as so many Democrats including Carol Shea-Porter, advocate:



Any Democrat who opposed RealID but supports National Health Care are the rankest sort of hypocrite.  You think having your home address, height, weight, and photograph in a national database is bad?  Imagine having all your prescriptions, illnesses, and medical procedures in a national database - you want to talk about privacy issues??

[mr.apathy]

The US government has nukes and has used them on civilians before. Maybe we should disarm them.

Exactly! Who is the U.S. to say who can and can't have nukes. We've been killing innocent lives for 200+ years. Can anyone actually say that this country is a shining example of responsibility?
We need to go back to our original foriegn policy: "Mind your business."

[Objectivist]

The US government has nukes and has used them on civilians before. Maybe we should disarm them.

Exactly! Who is the U.S. to say who can and can't have nukes. We've been killing innocent lives for 200+ years. Can anyone actually say that this country is a shining example of responsibility?
We need to go back to our original foriegn policy: "Mind your business."

Yikes. You need to read up on your American history, son.

We can say who will have nukes because we don't want them used against us. its self defense. Just be glad its America with all this power, not Russia or (god forbid!) France.

America is bad, very bad, but it is the best nation in all of history, by far.

[Objectivist salutes the stars and stripes]

Objectivist.

[eques]

*scratches head*

If the United States is so bad, despite it presumably being the best of all bad incarnations, doesn't that indicate that there's something fundamentally wrong with the practice of Government?