Ho hum....

Squiggy

ThunderDick
But we had pictures of the installations...Remember? Powell showed them to us at the UN...:confuse3:

Chief of Weapons Hunt in Iraq May Leave
1 hour ago
By DAFNA LINZER, Associated Press Writer

CAMP SLAYER, Iraq - Weapons hunters are spending more time on base, intelligence experts have been reassigned to work on the counterinsurgency and the man leading a so-far unsuccessful search for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons is thinking of stepping down.

A nine-month search for the weapons of mass destruction President Bush said he went to war to destroy has been conducted by a succession of U.S. teams that have all failed to find any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal. Since the war, White House officials have at times claimed weapons were found, or that evidence of programs, rather than actual weapons, would be enough for them.

Still, nothing substantive has materialized and after an exhaustive search, the weapons hunt appears to have slowed.

"For a while this place was really active, but that's changed in the last month," said Charles McKay, a member of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency who has been involved in the search since May.

"Now we're lucky if there's a mission once a week around here," he said at Camp Slayer, the nickname weapons hunters have given to their base on the grounds of one of Saddam Hussein's former Baghdad palaces.

David Kay, a former U.N. weapons inspector, was named by the CIA in June to lead the search for weapons of mass destruction. His appointment, and the creation of his operation, the Iraq Survey Group, was supposed to be the key to finding the weapons Iraq long denied having.

Kay returned to the United States last week and on Thursday, a U.S. intelligence official in Washington said he was considering quitting his post. Kay did not return an e-mail message seeking comment and recently turned down a request for an interview.

During a visit Wednesday to Kay's headquarters at Camp Slayer, a senior military officer with the weapons hunt tried to offer assurances their work was continuing. "We're still here," Roland Mulligan said.

U.S. intelligence officials in Washington said the search would continue. New leads could come from the interrogation of Saddam, who was captured Saturday.

The weapons hunt is staffed by more than 1,000 intelligence analysts, interrogators and translators who pore over documents, investigate suspect sites and conduct interviews with Iraqis.

The work hasn't been easy and there was recently a large staff turnover, those involved with the search said on condition of anonymity.

Some people went home and others were reassigned to work on the counterinsurgency the U.S. military is waging in Iraq, U.S. officers said.

Kay's teams have complained about everything from logistical and transportation problems to an inability to find and keep track of Iraqi scientists. One top Iraqi missile maker who was believed to have gone to Iran in May was actually working the entire time with British military officers in Iraq. Only recently was he questioned by team members, he said.

So far, Kay's teams have talked to hundreds of Iraqis. Some have been detained, but the overwhelming majority have been cleared. In many cases, they were rehired for their old jobs; others will be eligible for U.S. government-funded projects.

Currently, fewer than 10 former weapons scientists, with expertise in biological weapons or missiles, are in custody for suspected work or knowledge of proscribed programs. None have led inspectors to any weapons.

"It's probably time to call it quits," said Hans Blix, the former chief U.N. weapons inspector, whose teams were given one-third of the time the United States has already spent looking for weapons.

"The U.S. and the U.K. are so wedded to the idea that the Iraqis were hiding things that they are not willing to explore the possibility that they're wrong," Blix said.

In October, Congress approved $600 million for the weapons hunt to continue. Kay predicted then that definitive conclusions would be reached within six to nine months _ by spring 2004.

"I just can't understand the figures, given how little they're finding," said David Albright, a former weapons inspector, noting the U.N. operation cost far less.

While money is clearly being used for testing equipment, data entry, facilities and transportation, it is also going to big-name U.S. contractors working at Camp Slayer.

Kellogg, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Vice President Dick Cheney's former company Halliburton, has a large operation at Camp Slayer, running a fueling station, a new dining hall and portable lavatories.

The base, which was bombed out and looted after the war, was littered with broken glass, unexploded ordnance, and the remnants of Saddam's regime. There was little electricity or running water in June.

Today, it has a volleyball court, a barber shop, a country store, laundry and alterations services; it is stocked with sports utility vehicles and pickup trucks the weapons hunters use to get around.

Fluor Daniel, a subsidiary of the California-based Fortune 500 company Fluor, is putting in new windows at Camp Slayer, turning palace suites into office space and helping repair damage around the grounds. Other subcontractors include Egyptian and Jordanian engineers and construction workers.
 
The lack of evidence has led critics to suggest the Bush administration either mishandled or exaggerated its knowledge of Iraq's alleged arsenal.

do ya THINK? :tardbang:
 
Yeah Hex...Thats why I posted this. :rolleyes: Or maybe i'm just a little tired of the right posting bogus bendable figures claiming the economy is great or posting bullshit innuendo about proof of the WMDs that they swore would be there. You think just because saddam fell that all the lies and bullshit were worth it? Our country lost its credibility over this. Our integrity is gone and won't be back any time soon. And you think this made us safer. Now we're legitimate targets. We've shredded the Constitution, the Geneva Convention, and the right to claim this as part of the war on terrorism. We are moving more like Hitler and the third riech everyday and i don't like it. The fat cats are sucking any and all wealth from this country and the world and you're content as long as you can run down the street wrapped in a US flag chanting USA! USA! USA! By the time Bush is done there will only be two classes in the US. The destitute and the uber elite. And hes handpicking the members of the latter. I'll bet you still believe Custer was a great American hero too...:disgust2:
 
Holy Smackerol Squigs. lolol :rofl2:

I feel like i just watched a soap opera! I swear between you and Ch putting words in my mouth i just don't know who i am anymore.
The fat cats are sucking any and all wealth from this country and the world and you're content as long as you can run down the street wrapped in a US flag chanting USA!

I'm sorry, here's the crown. I officially dub you the drama queen. :D

Yup that's me, runnin down the street rapped up in my flag...
 
Putting words in your mouth? You're the one who wants to pretend I'm saying to put Saddam back in power. You don't dispute when false info is posted about the search for WMDs but you get uptight if the truth is posted. I stated early on, long before the war that I was concerned about our integrity and credibility. I also made it clear that I didn't mind the idea of taking Saddam out. But I was not then and I am not now happy with trading our integrity and credibility for that purpose.
 
There's no question that Saddam had WMDs in the past. The debate is whether he had them when we went into Iraq. So if he had them in the past (even Clinton agrees to that), and he apparently didn't have them when we entered... where did they go? He never told us. Did he hide them in a bunker in Tikrit? Did he sell them to Syria? Did he genuinely destroy them? If he'd done what the UN wanted, don't you think he would have said so? He never said so, so it's logical to conclude he was hiding something, whether he was hiding the weapons or hiding the fact he sold them to someone even worse. A man with nukes that you don't know the whereabouts of is extremely dangerous.

And before I hear any more of that "oh, the US has so many more WMDs" horseshit from anyone, remember this: you know about them, don't you? If you know about them, so does the rest of the world. Other nations can therefore consider any worst-case scenarios and take precautions as they see fit. If some nation you never prepared for sends a nuke your way, doesn't that pose a greater danger than a nuke headed your way that you have contingency plans for?
 
Squiggy said:
Putting words in your mouth? You're the one who wants to pretend I'm saying to put Saddam back in power.

I never said you wanted to put Saddam back in power. I was asking why you were playing that broken record again. You complain about it without even saying just what you want to do about it. It's yesterdays news. He lied, they all lie, remember. Get over it.

You don't dispute when false info is posted about the search for WMDs but you get uptight if the truth is posted.

Honest Squig, i'm not even the slightest bit uptight.

I stated early on, long before the war that I was concerned about our integrity and credibility. .

So did i.

I also made it clear that I didn't mind the idea of taking Saddam out. .

So did i.

But I was not then and I am not now happy with trading our integrity and credibility for that purpose.

Neither am i. I'm admitting right now that much of what you said is true and i've never said anything otherwise. I'm not however going to totally lose composure because our president lied to get his way(big shock there). Regardless of what you think Squig we have not lost all credibility. As far as integrity well...that was lost during Clintons term. The fact is we did the right thing under the wrong circumstances. Fuck it. Worse things have happened. If we had gone your route (Attacked Saudi Arabia) we'd be at war with the entire middle east including Iraq so i don't see any logic in your complaints whatsoever other than to Bash Bush(like he doesn't do it enough to himself already every single time he opens his mouth).
 
Inkara1 said:
And before I hear any more of that "oh, the US has so many more WMDs" horseshit from anyone, remember this: you know about them, don't you? If you know about them, so does the rest of the world. Other nations can therefore consider any worst-case scenarios and take precautions as they see fit. If some nation you never prepared for sends a nuke your way, doesn't that pose a greater danger than a nuke headed your way that you have contingency plans for?


By that statement it would have been easier for us to just assume the intel that Bush lied about was true and create a contingency plan. No one would have died. Saddam told us and everyone else he didn't have weapons. The UN inspectors were looking and found nothing. We blamed their ineptitude and called them silly names for not succeeding. But now we've looked ...And we haven't found them. Even though we had those irrefutable satelite photos that told us exactly where they were. We both know the WMDs were a smoke screen. Why can't you admit it now? You put your blind faith in a liar and people died. You got your way. His oil cronies got their prize. How long do you figure you can pretend it wasn't lies?

"The message of this war seems to be that as long as you
wave the flag convincingly enough, it doesn't matter
whether you tell the truth."
 
Hex, thats not the first time you suggested i was wanting to put saddam back in. And my problem is that you seem to attack when truth is posted and you let the BS float right by. I don't see you jumping in and challenging Gonz when he posts some worthless inuendo like the "Missed during the CAPTURED news". Rather strange that you would offer opposition to my post and not that one.
 
Inkara1 said:
There's no question that Saddam had WMDs in the past. The debate is whether he had them when we went into Iraq. So if he had them in the past (even Clinton agrees to that), and he apparently didn't have them when we entered... where did they go? He never told us. Did he hide them in a bunker in Tikrit? Did he sell them to Syria? Did he genuinely destroy them? If he'd done what the UN wanted, don't you think he would have said so? He never said so, so it's logical to conclude he was hiding something, whether he was hiding the weapons or hiding the fact he sold them to someone even worse. A man with nukes that you don't know the whereabouts of is extremely dangerous.

Erm - don't you think Bush should have considered that before disregarding the requests of the UN weapons inspectors that they be allowed to complete their work and investigations re the WMD's BEFORE he sent troops in there? Yeah, so we all know they existed in the past. But Bush's reason for invading Iraq was his insistence that the weapons were still present there - something he has not been able to prove.

And before I hear any more of that "oh, the US has so many more WMDs" horseshit from anyone, remember this: you know about them, don't you? If you know about them, so does the rest of the world. Other nations can therefore consider any worst-case scenarios and take precautions as they see fit. If some nation you never prepared for sends a nuke your way, doesn't that pose a greater danger than a nuke headed your way that you have contingency plans for?

Yeah, we know about the US weapons.....just like Bush KNOWS there are WMD's in Iraq.....guess we should all jump in a couple of planes, invade your country and bomb the shit out of the place - seems to be the accepted way of dealing with world problems these days.

Saddam's links (and those of his network) to certain countries in Africa and the Middle East aren't exactly secret, have those ties been thoroughly investigated to see if the WMD's have been redistributed to them?

And I think any country has a contingency plan for nuclear attack - regardless of whom it comes from. I don't think SA would act differently if the agressor was Pakistan or Syria or Greece or Sudan or Somalia or Australia or whoever. Somehow I can't see the leaders of any country saying 'if country A attacks we do this....if country B attacks we shall go to plan Z.......but oh shit, we shall just fall to pieces if country C attacks because we won't know what to do'
 
What Squig, you don't think that between you Luis, Ch, Leslie and A.B.Normal you weren't handling Gonz already? Gimme a break, Gonzo's the only other right-winger i have around to keep me company, i can't go chasing him away. :D

Seriously, i'll tell you what i believe. I believe that Bush believed we would find wmd. Was it a smokescreen? Yes of course but not to gain control of the worlds oil supply or anything so sinister and i certainly don't believe that chainy lead us in so that his ex-company could have more business. He's getting paid regardless. The Bush administration went in(i believe) to begin a revolution in the middle east. We went in the wrong door but it's too late, were already in and to be frank i get frustrated hearing people bring up the same mistakes repeatedly. It doesn't help.
 
I still don't get it. You think I'm wrong for bringing up the 'same mistake' but his bringing up the same lies was ok? And I'm supposed to be content with that? Just let the right wing post whatever they want and the left should just STFU? Um...I don't think so...:shrug:
 
HeXp£Øi± said:
What Squig, you don't think that between you Luis, Ch, Leslie and A.B.Normal you weren't handling Gonz already? Gimme a break, Gonzo's the only other right-winger i have around to keep me company, i can't go chasing him away. :D

Seriously, i'll tell you what i believe. I believe that Bush believed we would find wmd. Was it a smokescreen? Yes of course but not to gain control of the worlds oil supply or anything so sinister and i certainly don't believe that chainy lead us in so that his ex-company could have more business. He's getting paid regardless. The Bush administration went in(i believe) to begin a revolution in the middle east. We went in the wrong door but it's too late, were already in and to be frank i get frustrated hearing people bring up the same mistakes repeatedly. It doesn't help.

I don't try to handle Gonz (or for that matter anyone else). Gonz and I disagree about the way the situation is being handled. Sometimes that disagreement gets a bit, umm, vocal. I also pick on him about being right, but I think we agree on more issues than we disagree on.

I believe that Bush believed we would find wmd.

Just like he never received any intel about al-qaeda and using planes as weapons befre 9-11??? I believe he took office with the firm intention of attacking Iraq no matter what.
 
Yeah, but 'losing' integrity means that there should have been some to start off with......bit of a conundrum that - integrity in politicians.

Almost the same as claiming that Madonna's a virgin innit?

(BTW Nat - wazzup with yer PM's?)
 
Ms Ann Thrope said:
I don't agree. It was lost, in my mind, during the Nixon era. Remember? a little burglary at the Watergate Hotel?
Have you forgotten the Cliinton is the root of all evil????????????????

BTW, I think it happened long before that.
 
Back
Top