Saddam Wanted Out, Bush Lied About It

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#2
I'm sure that we can really trust that site.:icon_roll
 

fuckwit

He loves you, and he needs money.
Jul 27, 2006
0
#3
the site didnt publish the story they are just blogging it and hosting the video from CNN where it originally aired
 

Fruit Monkey

Don't stare at it eat it! P-1 In trainning
Oct 4, 2004
216
#5
the spaniards always get the story first it seems :icon_roll
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#6
I hate to tell you this, but Saddam was tried and convicted in an Iraq court of law. Bush didn't hang him, the people of Iraq did.
 
Sep 13, 2005
0
#7
I hate to tell you this, but Saddam was tried and convicted in an Iraq court of law. Bush didn't hang him, the people of Iraq did.
that has nothing to do with this

the point is that this whole war could have been avoided if he was just allowed to leave
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#8
that has nothing to do with this

the point is that this whole war could have been avoided if he was just allowed to leave
Bush didn't stop him. All Saddam had to do was let the UN inspectors in. Are you saying the UN inspectors lied for Bush? That's just stupid.
 

fuckwit

He loves you, and he needs money.
Jul 27, 2006
0
#9
Bush didn't stop him. All Saddam had to do was let the UN inspectors in. Are you saying the UN inspectors lied for Bush? That's just stupid.
no colin powell did
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#10
no colin powell did
Before Powell gave that speech, every country already said that Saddam had the weapons. But still, all Saddam had to do was say “I'll let in the inspectors”. But he didn't do that.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Nov 17, 2006
0
#11
Before Powell gave that speech, every country already said that Saddam had the weapons. But still, all Saddam had to do was say “I'll let in the inspectors”. But he didn't do that.

The thing is most countries didn't think that any weapons he might have had were a problem. Saddam had nerve gas, blistering agents, and probably anthrax in the past. Not stuff that could take out a city or cause a plague. Also Saddam didn't have ties to groups like Al Qaeda. He wasn't a radical, he was a thug. He'd never used those weapons on anyone except his own people, who tried to revolt against him, and Iran, which we approved of.
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#12
The thing is most countries didn't think that any weapons he might have had were a problem. Saddam had nerve gas, blistering agents, and probably anthrax in the past. Not stuff that could take out a city or cause a plague. Also Saddam didn't have ties to groups like Al Qaeda. He wasn't a radical, he was a thug. He'd never used those weapons on anyone except his own people, who tried to revolt against him, and Iran, which we approved of.
Even the French said he was trying to get nukes.
 

fuckwit

He loves you, and he needs money.
Jul 27, 2006
0
#13
Before Powell gave that speech, every country already said that Saddam had the weapons. But still, all Saddam had to do was say “I'll let in the inspectors”. But he didn't do that.
saddam did. there were inspectors in iraq. and they were pulled out so that we could have a war. the ultimatum bush gave wasnt about weapons inspectors. the ultimatum was for saddam to step down as president of iraq
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#14
saddam did. there were inspectors in iraq. and they were pulled out so that we could have a war. the ultimatum bush gave wasnt about weapons inspectors. the ultimatum was for saddam to step down as president of iraq
Where do you get you info? That's not the news i remember watching.
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#15
I think he did let them in, but they couldn't just go where ever they wanted. That's the same as not letting them in at all.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Nov 17, 2006
0
#16
Even the French said he was trying to get nukes.
Sure. Trying. Since when has a nation been invaded for trying to get nukes. Last time he tried the Israelis simply blew up his reactor. Iran is trying to get nukes, and they're a known state sponsor of terrorism. Still nobody's attacked them. Nobody attacked North Korea either. Why did Bush think Iraq was such a special situatuion?
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#17
Sure. Trying. Since when has a nation been invaded for trying to get nukes. Last time he tried the Israelis simply blew up his reactor. Iran is trying to get nukes, and they're a known state sponsor of terrorism. Still nobody's attacked them. Nobody attacked North Korea either. Why did Bush think Iraq was such a special situatuion?
Are you in love with this Saddam guy?:icon_conf
 

fuckwit

He loves you, and he needs money.
Jul 27, 2006
0
#18
Where do you get you info? That's not the news i remember watching.
theres a bunch if you google iraq weapons inspectors timeline

this story is about the UN inspectors pulling out pre war.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/17/iraq/main544280.shtml

here a quote that pertains to this new claim from the video.

After failing to secure U.N. authorization to use force to disarm Iraq, President Bush gave Saddam 48 hours to step down or face war in a speech Monday night.

Iraq rejected the Bush ultimatum, saying that a U.S. attack to force Saddam from power would be "a grave mistake. Saddam warned that American forces will find an Iraqi fighter ready to die for his country "behind every rock, tree and wall."

I think he did let them in, but they couldn't just go where ever they wanted. That's the same as not letting them in at all.
i dont remember restrictions but that idea just hit me. im trying to find a story that says something about restrictions on them. all the links i found say iraq agreed to all the UN demands
 

Glenn Dandy

THE ONLY WHITE PRESIDENT LEFT.
Mar 21, 2005
298
#19
Saddam Wasnt The Reason For The War... Terrorism Was... Hejust Was In The Way... Seeya Later Scumbag... Next... Keep Killing Gw.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Nov 17, 2006
0
#20
Are you in love with this Saddam guy?:icon_conf
I think that for our purposes he was the best possible leader of Iraq. He wasn't a religious fundamentalist, he was corrupt enough to be manipulated into keeping Iran in check, and he knew that if he moved against us we could destroy him. I'd much rather have a dictator like him running Iraq than have a democratically elected Shi'ite theocracy that will buddy up to Iran in power.
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#21
If you guys want to suck off Saddam some more, you will have to argue with someone else. I have to go shoot some video.
 

Treat_Yourself

Registered User
Nov 17, 2006
0
#22
If you guys want to suck off Saddam some more, you will have to argue with someone else. I have to go shoot some video.
Condeming Bush's stupid move isn't sucking Saddam off. Quit it with the strawman arguments.
 

Glenn Dandy

THE ONLY WHITE PRESIDENT LEFT.
Mar 21, 2005
298
#23
I think that for our purposes he was the best possible leader of Iraq. He wasn't a religious fundamentalist, he was corrupt enough to be manipulated into keeping Iran in check, and he knew that if he moved against us we could destroy him. I'd much rather have a dictator like him running Iraq than have a democratically elected Shi'ite theocracy that will buddy up to Iran in power.
i THINK YOUR RUBBER SUITE HAS AFFECTEDTHE BLOODFLO TO YOUR BRAIN.

he was a murderer. killed and injured thousands of innocent people....
 

martianvirus

READY THE ANALPROBES!!!!!!!!
Nov 20, 2005
268
#25
Saddam Wasnt The Reason For The War... Terrorism Was... Hejust Was In The Way... Seeya Later Scumbag... Next... Keep Killing Gw.
i THINK YOUR RUBBER SUITE HAS AFFECTEDTHE BLOODFLO TO YOUR BRAIN.

he was a murderer. killed and injured thousands of innocent people....
Before I go, Quote for Truth