IRAQI WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION: The Poll!

So, with the revelations about WMDs today, and the abject failure of the 'allies' to prove this 'reason' for going to war, what do you think the truth is?
I didn't ad a 'need more time' option, as I think the survey group have pretty much ruled that out with todays shock resignation (and its sort of covered in the 'Do exist' option).

Since I don't pay any attention to the news on the weekends, can you post a link to the resignation story?

linky

Just looking for the David Kay story.....
Heres some reaction on the BBC


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3425529.stm

Blair 'must admit WMD defeat'


Opposition MPs have called for a public inquiry
The prime minister must admit defeat on the issue of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, Robin Cook has demanded.
The ex-foreign secretary spoke out after US official David Kay quit as head of the search for WMD in Iraq, saying the weapons do not exist.

Mr Cook told the BBC he believed Mr Blair had been driven to war by "missionary zeal" and the desire to show loyalty to US President George Bush.

But Downing Street said Mr Blair is confident of finding WMD evidence.

It is very important that Tony Blair does concede that there were mistakes made

Robin Cook
Mr Cook told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "It is becoming really rather undignified for the prime minister to continue to insist that he was right all along when everybody can now see he was wrong, when even the head of the Iraq Survey Group has said he was wrong.

"It is very important that Tony Blair does concede that there were mistakes made, maybe in all good faith, probably he believed them genuinely, but there were mistakes.

'Dangerous doctrine'

He added: "We have got to drop this very dangerous doctrine under which we went to war of the pre-emptive strike.

HAVE YOUR SAY
They won't be found because they don't exist.

Rob, Liverpool, UK


Send us your comments

"If there was no threat from Iraq and we obviously had no right to carry out a pre-emptive strike to remove that threat. And we better drop that doctrine before somebody else in the world uses it in their own back yard."

Mr Cook continued: "I have always believed that the difficulty was not that Tony was behaving in a way which was deceiving the world. He was behaving in a way which had a missionary zeal, an evangelical certainty...


Robin Cook resigned in protest at the prospect of war in Iraq
"The reality of course is that Number 10 was keen to get into the war, not frankly because they were particularly concerned about WMD - I suspect by March they also knew that the September document had over-egged the case - they were keen to get in to impress President Bush that they were a reliable ally.

"That is not a good basis on which to run British foreign policy."

Mr Cook said Mr Blair should use the opportunity of the publication of the Hutton report on Wednesday to set the record straight.

Shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram told Today Mr Kay's resignation and accompanying comments were a matter of concern.

Mr Ancram said: "It raises very serious questions about the prime minister and indeed why he told us what he did last year... about weapons of mass destruction.

"It is important if we are to be able to rely... on the word of the prime minister in relation to intelligence, that we now find out what the basis of his comments were, and we need a public inquiry to do that."

The Liberal Democrats Foreign Affairs spokesman Menzies Campbell said: "It is pretty extraordinary that first Hans Blix... David Kay and now David Kay's successor have all effectively said the same thing.

"There needs to be an inquiry to consider whether we went to war on a flawed prospectus."

Meanwhile, Downing Street has said the prime minister is still confident that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and that, in time, evidence of them will be found.

A spokesman said people needed to be patient to let the Iraq Survey Group complete its work.

"Our position has not changed," said a Number 10 spokesman. "There is still more work to be done and we should await the conclusion of that work."

here it is!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3425429.stm


US chief Iraq arms expert quits


Mr Kay cast doubt on Iraq's weapons programmes
The head of the team searching for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, David Kay, has resigned.
Mr Kay said he did not believe Iraq possessed large stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons.

He is being replaced by a former deputy head of the United Nations weapons inspections team, Charles Duelfer.

Mr Duelfer said earlier this month he believed the chances of finding chemical or biological weapons in Iraq were now "close to nil".

Mr Kay gave no reason for leaving, but the BBC's Jon Leyne in Washington says sources there speak of a mixture of personal reasons and his disillusionment with the weapons search.

His resignation had been expected for a few weeks.


'No stockpiles'

The Iraq Survey Group (ISG) team leader was appointed by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) last June to head the post-war search for chemical, nuclear and biological weapons in Iraq.


No WMDs have been found in Iraq
The issue of banned weapons was the central element of the US case for invading the country.

In an interview with Reuters news agency after his resignation was announced, Mr Kay said he did not believe there had been large-scale production of chemical or biological weapons in Iraq since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991.

"I don't think they existed," Mr Kay said.

"What everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production programme in the 90s."

"I think we have found probably 85% of what we're going to find."

Our correspondent says these are powerful remarks from someone who once strongly believed Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) represented a major threat.

Democrat criticism

In his recent State of the Union address, US President George W Bush quoted the conclusion of Mr Kay's interim report, which said only that WMD-related programme activities had been found in Iraq.

The Bush administration has not officially reacted to Mr Kay's latest remarks but correspondents say this is a serious embarrassment for the White House. On Thursday, Vice President Dick Cheney said he still had not given up hope of finding WMDs in Iraq.


Mr Duelfer is widely respected in the arms control field
Leading Democrats have seized on Mr Kay's remarks.

"It increasingly appears that our intelligence was wrong about Iraq's weapons, and the administration compounded that mistake by exaggerating the nuclear threat and Iraq's ties to al-Qaeda," said Senator John Rockefeller, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

"As a result, the United States is paying a very heavy price."

Jane Harman, of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, said Mr Kay's comments pointed to a massive intelligence failure and could not be ignored.

On Friday, the new ISG group head, Mr Duelfer, distanced himself from his comments on US television earlier this month in which he expressed doubts that banned weapons would ever be found.

"I have now been given the responsibility of being in charge of the investigation and I don't know what the outcome will be. I don't want to pre-judge that," he said.

Mr Duelfer, 51, served as deputy executive chairman of the UN Special Commission on Iraq from 1993 to 2000.

Any WMD that the Iraqis did have were destroyed before or during the 1st gulf war.

If I remember correctly, they were employed in their war with Iran, so they did have them at one time. I just don't think they had them at any time after the Gulf War. As much as I dislike the Bush regime, I still believe that they genuinely believed the Iraqis had WMD. I don't think someone like Powell would have argued so strongly if he knew he was lying through his teeth.

Another stupid ass Bush-hating conspiracy thread - like we need another one.

Powell is the secretary of state, he knows nothing of military intelligence in his job. He is a diplomat.

And yes Galfordo...apparently most of the country is Paranoid.

I wholeheartedly believe, however, that Blair has little to nothing to do with any of this, I think he was just sucking my country's cock.

galfordo said:

Another stupid ass Bush-hating conspiracy thread - like we need another one.

Click to expand...

Actually, its completely even-handed, with three options actually supporting/agreeing with, the 'allied position'.
Guess that makes you the 'stupid ass'?

GW and TB lied to the world to try and justify a war for 'other' reasons.

...reasons that involve his original statement, that he and the USA were waging war on terrorists all around the globe, and that if the people weren't with us, they were against us. It started with Bin Laden (still on the loose) in Afghanistan... and then got exported to IRAQ because the USA will use IRAQ as the staging grounds in which to later invade Syria more than likely, who has been known for decades to help in the Islamic Extremeist Terrorist groups. Some of Saddam's henchmen are probably there as well. They'll play their cards right, but eventually we'll be there too. I didn't vote for the asshole, and GBW pisses me off on a daily basis with his domestic bullshit... but he's gearing up the miltary to commit to the protracted war against terrorist encampments and what not. Meaning we're on the offensive while setting up the neccessary elements for a war that keeps any non-sleeper terrorists in their own neck of the world. We're not waiting like sheep to be eaten by wolves. Doesn't make it right, but that seems to be the route we're taking. ---Then if you want to get into Biblical reasons, err.... well that's another story, but I'll just leave it at that. Muslim Jihad vs. "the great western Satan" as the free world is viewed as. That's what it's really all about in the end.

Mercenary X99

I think the Iraquis hid/destroyed them.

But I also feel that the cowboy that GB thinks he is, was trying to impress his 'Daddy', and the republican party that he could have the balls to oust Saddam when his 'Daddy' and Bill Clinton could not.

Sure as muthafuckin shit I am not voting for him in November. And its people like him that make me want to foresake my "anti-partison politics ethic", and leave my 'Independant' status and switch to Democrat.

It was all a 'BULLSHIT LIE!' (damn, that expression comes in handy everywhere )

I think one of many masterly performed charades in the struggle of getting the US economy up to it's former glorious self.
I mean just look at all the contracts going to american companies. Do you d00ds know what it takes to rebuild a 'bombed back to the stoneage' country? Insane fucking ammounts of money taken straight from the iraqi economy and plugged into the US economy.

I think Iraq is a longtime investment that just like Japan will prove to be a wise choice for the US allthough I totally despise the idea and the execution.

Mercenary X99 said:

GW and TB lied to the world to try and justify a war for 'other' reasons.

...reasons that involve his original statement, that he and the USA were waging war on terrorists all around the globe, and that if the people weren't with us, they were against us. It started with Bin Laden (still on the loose) in Afghanistan... and then got exported to IRAQ because the USA will use IRAQ as the staging grounds in which to later invade Syria more than likely, who has been known for decades to help in the Islamic Extremeist Terrorist groups. Some of Saddam's henchmen are probably there as well. They'll play their cards right, but eventually we'll be there too. I didn't vote for the asshole, and GBW pisses me off on a daily basis with his domestic bullshit... but he's gearing up the miltary to commit to the protracted war against terrorist encampments and what not. Meaning we're on the offensive while setting up the neccessary elements for a war that keeps any non-sleeper terrorists in their own neck of the world. We're not waiting like sheep to be eaten by wolves. Doesn't make it right, but that seems to be the route we're taking. ---Then if you want to get into Biblical reasons, err.... well that's another story, but I'll just leave it at that. Muslim Jihad vs. "the great western Satan" as the free world is viewed as. That's what it's really all about in the end.

Mercenary X99

Click to expand...

Dude, that's really gay.

These fucking ragtag hooligan terrorists are such a weak ass threat compared to the big business terrorists of Phillip Morris, mcdonalds, exxon mobile, shell, etc. Bush is a fucking pussy whipped pussy when it comes to standing up to the people that line his pockets with campaign contributions and help his staff stay happy and well endowed.

If bush had balls, he'd stand up to Bechtel, Halliburton, and all the other people trying to make a quick buck on the rest of the world and the American people (through the incredibly large war chest budget which you and your kids will pay for over the next millenia in taxes which you don't even pay attention to because to almost all americans, taxes are just taxes. all the same.)

No, standing up to the crippled cavemen terrorists of the middle east is like superman fighitng the special olympics version of the legion of doom. Big fucking whoop.

Yeah, kick ass and take names - but make sure to kick some serious ass and not just beat up on pansies. That just makes you look like a cowardly bully with a big mouth.

EvilWasabi said:

Dude, that's really gay.

These fucking ragtag hooligan terrorists are such a weak ass threat compared to the big business terrorists of Phillip Morris, mcdonalds, exxon mobile, shell, etc. Bush is a fucking pussy whipped pussy when it comes to standing up to the people that line his pockets with campaign contributions and help his staff stay happy and well endowed.

If bush had balls, he'd stand up to Bechtel, Halliburton, and all the other people trying to make a quick buck on the rest of the world and the American people (through the incredibly large war chest budget which you and your kids will pay for over the next millenia in taxes which you don't even pay attention to because to almost all americans, taxes are just taxes. all the same.)

No, standing up to the crippled cavemen terrorists of the middle east is like superman fighitng the special olympics version of the legion of doom. Big fucking whoop.

Yeah, kick ass and take names - but make sure to kick some serious ass and not just beat up on pansies. That just makes you look like a cowardly bully with a big mouth.

Click to expand...

Dude, I'm not saying that I AGREE with their twisted "Agendas", but that's my take based off the information at hand, and what is hinted at between the lines, and of course the study of that sector of the world. ---And if you think we didn't allow it to happen for whatever the perverted reasons, you're kidding yourself man. In the end all those politicos are corrupt. But I'm not in the mood to have an argument. Like I said, the ultimate truth about it all will be released to the public upon the time that no one involved, or those left behind in the aftermath would be alive or too old to do anything about it. *Looking at how the government treated the whole BONUS ARMY after World War 1 should've told the ppl the truth "Back Then." But then that's international politics/business shenanigans for you. Sure, something good MIGHT come out of it, but who's really reaping the benefits. Sure as shit ain't me and you man. *But if things continue the way they are with all this Homeland Gestapoism... the powers that be, might not have to release squat about what happened, because everyone will be living under the system, and the few who have an opinion or a history book with documented differences from before will be hunted down along with people with religious convictions, because the regime at that time will see them as "Dangerous".

Enough said on my part.

Mercenary X99

Maybe we should all just sit down and read:

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

nothingxs said:

Maybe we should all just sit down and read:

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

Click to expand...

I've never driven a Delorean into the future or anything, but I'd say if any kind of Revolution/Civil War occurs it be more likely to start towards the end of the decade, but that's just theory. But the USA will fall from grace... Yeah, I love my country and would die for it, but no one stays on the top forever, and eventually the apathy will indeed give way to more enroaching freedoms, and you'll have factions of Liberals vs. Conservatives fighting amongst themselves, along with the perfect excuse for internal "Religious" fighting, while the powers that be continue to line their own pocket books, and hunt down those they feel are "Subversive" to their ideaologies. The common man who's a law abiding citizen of today will be labled a "Terrorist" or a "Heretic" more than likely, and time is ending anyhow... but when the shit DOES hit the fan, it'll be better than trying to keep up with the Jones' and doing the 9-to-5 bullshit. It'll be about survival, and upholding what's inherently RIGHT. But so many will be askewed to BAD it'll be hard to pick sides. I don't believe it would be some all out war however... more of a social/political protracted conflict comparable to the religious antics of Ireland between the Protestants and the Catholics.

{Sarcasm Mode On:}

But then again in 1987 I answered the call of Captain (Johnathan) POWERS from the year 2147, during a botched "Cake Mix" commerical to fight LORD DREDD and Zoron... a flying cyborg bird man capable of "Digitizing" humans into raw data for the Borg like hives. Luckily for me, I had the POWER JET XT-7... and on some campaigns on Saturday morning I helped liberate the future, so ... you know... WHATEVER!

{Sarcasm Mode Off:}

Mercenary X99

nothingxs said:

Maybe we should all just sit down and read:

http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

Click to expand...

muha hahahaha

we're actually stuck in a time warp and it the year 1000

The evil forces that be have set the illusion of progression, in reality we're in our personal hell.

I think the idea of a civil war in the US is highly unlikely. We don't have the right mindset for a civil war.

Maybe if the tv networks keep pumping out shitty reality tv programs, then the people will become restless and begin infighting.

But really, there are a lot of places that are ripe for civil war. Most of them are in eastern europe or the middle east.

Why? Because people are dissatisfied.

galfordo said:

Another stupid ass Bush-hating conspiracy thread - like we need another one.

Click to expand...

Is there anything good that Mr. Bush has done for the US?

EvilWasabi said:

I think the idea of a civil war in the US is highly unlikely. We don't have the right mindset for a civil war.

Maybe if the tv networks keep pumping out shitty reality tv programs, then the people will become restless and begin infighting.

But really, there are a lot of places that are ripe for civil war. Most of them are in eastern europe or the middle east.

Why? Because people are dissatisfied.

Click to expand...

You never know man. Im mean my fiance and i are often pissed cos of all the shit the US has become.
She was laid off this jan 9th (no money) and now is out of a job.
Everything sucks. Foods, health care, insurance, bills, frauds on a mass scale. Dam! WTF! trying to kill us then get it overwith.

Many here prolly dont care since they got money to burn but its true.

Think about it. How worse can it get? If it does will people just cope with it? Wont it seem like we are deliberately being destroyed?

Whenever I'm bored I come here and read the political discussions, most of the posts are good for a few laughs.

TriShield said:

Whenever I'm bored I come here and read the political discussions, most of the posts are good for a few laughs.

Click to expand...

I knew nobody takes anything seriously no more. No wonder its so easy to fuck us over.

What will you tell your teen when he/she cant get a job for extra cash?

Just laugh? Oh well i cant get neo geo so ima hafta ask mommy or daddy.

EvilWasabi said:

I think the idea of a civil war in the US is highly unlikely. We don't have the right mindset for a civil war.

Maybe if the tv networks keep pumping out shitty reality tv programs, then the people will become restless and begin infighting.

But really, there are a lot of places that are ripe for civil war. Most of them are in eastern europe or the middle east.

Why? Because people are dissatisfied.

Click to expand...

I wouldnt totally rule it out, man. Civil Wars just dont break out overnight; the seeds were planted in the past, and as we know, a seed is a tiny thing, that just grows and grows. I'm pretty sure George Washington and the early Americans didnt fathom the possibility that the new nation would be divided and fighting amongst themselves as opposed to say the British. But at the same time I see what you're saying -- there are alotta comfortable people who have no reason to want to fight -- but I think there are a body of people of there who are really, really feeliing disenfranchised. Haves vs the Havenots is the war thats been fought since the beginning of time.....

jaydubnb said:

Ibut I think there are a body of people of there who are really, really feeliing disenfranchised.

Click to expand...

You said it man. I love my country, but I'm watching mostly everyone around me help piss away that in which our forefathers bled for. We walk in the shadow of "The Greatest Generation" or so it's called, but most don't care about anything as Lord Ill put it. Sure, things might not be Ragnarok overall... no worries about ethnic cleansings, no smart bombs being dropped on us, but that does not change the fact that people are getting lazier, have very little to no resolve (unless it disturbs their self interested Super Bowl watching, beer drinking lives of course)... and people today even have children for the wrong reasons. Thus yeah, there are more than just a body of people feeling numb and/or disenfranchised with what the collective majority (good people at that) who help perpetuate the sugar coated bullshit everyone takes for granted will continue forever. BAH!

Mercenary X99

EvilWasabi said:

I think the idea of a civil war in the US is highly unlikely. We don't have the right mindset for a civil war.

Maybe if the tv networks keep pumping out shitty reality tv programs, then the people will become restless and begin infighting.

But really, there are a lot of places that are ripe for civil war. Most of them are in eastern europe or the middle east.

Why? Because people are dissatisfied.

Click to expand...

"A hungry man will fight, but a well fed man will worry about where his next meal will be coming from" Kinda sums up what you're saying. (I can't @#$%ing find the cite because google is sucking right now)

We are currently in a transition phase, sliding ever deeper into an American "dark age" (in the Roman sense) from the (economic) golden age of the 1960's. We may not be there yet but we wil be getting there eventually.

32 people have voted for the conspiracy theory choice. Whats the success rate on conspiracy theories? About 0% from what I've found. Lots of paranoid people on these boards, geez!

Look at that choice too..."Bush lied.. oooohhh..there's that evil word...Bush...just makes the hair stand up on the back of your neck. If Bush lied about the WMD, then so did the Clintonistas, Tom Dashcle, John F Kerry, Wesley Clark, THE UN, Joe Lieberman, Dick Gephardt, John Edwards...all your serious presidential candidates....better make sure you cast that vote for HOWARD THE DEAN in the primaries boys and girls!