//
Reply With Quote
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
//
Last edited by cajuncocoa; 07-21-2016 at 10:24 AM.
Why would they have that dog and pony show by Colin Powell if they knew all along? Remember the drawings depicting the mobile weapons carriers and the "possible" yellow cake uranium? No photos...just drawings.
Of course, there were chemical weapons in Iraq. We supplied them with the materials and know-how. Now whether those weapons were (a) functionally maintainable over the years and (b) theoretically usable by a rogue force would be an entirely different conversation completely.
Last edited by AuH20; 10-15-2014 at 08:14 AM.
I read the NYT/Drudge version of this last night and it was a good read. I remember small reports for years of them finding sarin and mustard munitions. I remember thinking that this fell short of their claimed threat of WMD's. They promised that Saddam had weapons that were much worse than these.
As always, the bombshell is the systemic, coordinated coverup from the top.
Were they found under the behind of ugly Judith "yellow cake" Miller of NYT who helped jumpstart US Iraq invasion?
Where is Judith Miller's mug shot? (Did she get one?)
Jul 26, 2005 - Question: When you're hauled off to jail for contempt of court, don't you ... I ask because we haven't seen a mug shot for Judith Miller, ...
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
This. And it wasn't kept secret, either. They said they found some, said they were old and left over from the Iran-Iraq war of the eighties, said they were unreliable, said Saddam wasn't using them and said they were going to destroy them. Someone mentioned that the U.S. had a hand in the development of them, and the story was buried six feet deep overnight.Originally Posted by AuH20
I remember that. Those weapons were common talk for a while. Why is the Times pretending it was never revealed?
If you read the article correctly you would have find out that the chemical weapons in question were those from the 80s and 90s, during Saddam's war with Iran and the Kurds. NOT the WMDs Bush was fearmongering about. Can Paulites even read?
Some $ had to be spent on that article - got to get something for it. Failure to care for the vets is good enough for me.
Out of every one hundred men they send us, ten should not even be here. Eighty will do nothing but serve as targets for the enemy. Nine are real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, upon them depends our success in battle. But one, ah the one, he is a real warrior, and he will bring the others back from battle alive.
Duty is the most sublime word in the English language. Do your duty in all things. You can not do more than your duty. You should never wish to do less than your duty.
Considering that "Paulites" already said that above you in the thread, it calls into question your very connection to reality.
They apparently were only dangerous to those who found them- they weren't in "usable" conditions. Militarily, they were worthless. From the NY Times article itself:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...pons.html?_r=0
The Times was actually complaining about the medical treatment (or lack) for the soldiers exposed to them.Then, during the long occupation, American troops began encountering old chemical munitions in hidden caches and roadside bombs. Typically 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets, they were remnants of an arms program Iraq had rushed into production in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war.
All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.
The American government withheld word about its discoveries even from troops it sent into harm’s way and from military doctors. The government’s secrecy, victims and participants said, prevented troops in some of the war’s most dangerous jobs from receiving proper medical care and official recognition of their wounds.
Last edited by Zippyjuan; 10-15-2014 at 01:20 PM.
In any case, I think it settles the question of who can--and who can't--read...
Can you? It seems the entire thread prior to your post says they were from the 80s. Guess trolls got to be trolling!!
See:
Why do you bother posting here? Seriously? All you ever do is show your own ignorance. Nobody here is supporting the "This justified the Iraq war" line. The question you should be asking yourself is why is the "liberal" New York Times pushing such a misleading article that seems to support war? Could it be because Obama is about to try to get us back into Iraq?
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
Yeah my team found some mustard shells in Anbar when I was there. They were all munitions that WE gave them decades ago and were not usable in a military sense. Why would Bush and company want to brag about 'finding WMD in Iraq' that we gave them 30 years prior? Yes I read the thread and know it's been stated already
Just sayin my piece.
-Major General Smedley Butler, USMC,There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.
Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Winner
Author of, War is a Racket!
- Diogenes of SinopeIt is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.
I love the Broken Window Fallacy. It seems to have progs who live in glass houses convinced it's their moral duty to throw stones.
And, of course, since Obama and Reid's Senate have half a dozen wars going on and are trying to start more, and have given the Department of Agriculture to Monsanto for Christmas, and are taxing and borrowing and spending but can't begin to fix the economy, and on and on, all progs live in glass houses these days.
Well that settles it, time to send in the ground troops!
I think your hatred of us has caused you to find a way to oppose yourself.
Say it with me..................SCUMBAAAAAAAAAAG
"One thing my years in Washington taught me is that most politicians are followers, not leaders. Therefore we should not waste time and resources trying to educate politicians. Politicians will not support individual liberty and limited government unless and until they are forced to do so by the people," says Ron Paul."
This is bizarre.
So, they were found, it was reported, I remember it. I feel sure the Times reported it; it would have been noteworthy if they had not. Then it was discovered that certain members of the military industrial complex might have been complicit, despite the fact that they're all in nations which signed treaties promising to have nothing to do with chemical warfare. So, it all got flushed down the memory hole. And there can be no doubt at all that the Times was complicit in that.
Now they're reporting it, and mistakenly or falsely stating that it was never reported in the first place. Is this a mistake? Are they so thorough in flushing stuff down the memory hole they don't even keep track of what they dare not talk about? Or is this a setup for--what?
Gives me a headache...
Related:
The New York Times Has Always Been Evil
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ways-Been-Evil
Based on the idea of natural rights, government secures those rights to the individual by strictly negative intervention, making justice costless and easy of access; and beyond that it does not go. The State, on the other hand, both in its genesis and by its primary intention, is purely anti-social. It is not based on the idea of natural rights, but on the idea that the individual has no rights except those that the State may provisionally grant him. It has always made justice costly and difficult of access, and has invariably held itself above justice and common morality whenever it could advantage itself by so doing.
--Albert J. Nock
Actually, I think they were just trying to give this 56k fella a reason to claim that we are all racist, or something.
'Baby milk factory' James Bamford and the "Pretext To War"
So let's continue the government propaganda by CIA embedded corporate rag print media...
The American Dream, Wake Up People, This is our country! <===click
"All eyes are opened, or opening to the rights of man, let the annual return of this day(July 4th), forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."
Thomas Jefferson June 1826
Rock The World!
USAF Veteran
Oh you'd be surprised who believes it. Baaaaaaah!
Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder. ~GEORGE WASHINGTON, letter, Aug. 17, 1779
Quit yer b*tching and whining and GET INVOLVED!!
Nothing then trying to save the failed legacy of GW Bush by creating stories by claiming that WMDs were found, i am sorry but whose a fool enough to believe this again?
A "systemic, coordinated coverup from the top" seems to be more Situation Normal than not these days.
You have to wonder if the argument is now "Saddam Hussein was evil because he took the weapons we were so eager to give him"?
The media is all over this right now. From the front page of yahoo: (notice the Bush was right caption). Que it up. Fox News will claim Bush was right as its newest talking point and pave the way for ground troops back into Iraq. And the GOP sheep will go, "umm.... baaah.... ISIS so scary.... baaahhh"
my understanding is, they found a few cases of aerosol brake cleaning fluid and wasp killer.
They kept them secret so they could sell them to ISIS.
“The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner
All the more reason to send in ground troops. Gotta secure the weapons of mass destruction and keep them out of the hands of ISIS. Wait, sending in ground troops to Iraq to secure WMD's.... Where have I heard this before?
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us