The New York Times says that Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program

[Shining Arcanine]

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/...&en=d6e60f288e881789&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The New York Times has discovered information in the documents captured in Iraq that the federal government put online, detailing how to build a nuclear bomb. They are blaming the Republicans for having potentially given Iran information from Iraq's nuclear program, but I think that the more important information is that Saddam Hussein had this information in the first place. Since the New York Times published it, they just validated the intelligence that said that Iraq had a weapons of mass destruction program before the 2003 re-invasion of Iraq, which means that President Bush was right this whole time.

Since the New York Times published this, there is now bi-partisan agreement over Iraq's nuclear program. So, who still refuses to believe it?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I have never doubted the fact that Mr. Hussein had worked with nucs. But this is really a development in the war in Iraq. Maybe now, some people will lay off President Bush because Mr. Hassein was planning a nuclear program.

 

[Guest123_x1]

*moans in agony*

So, this unconstitutional, unecessary "noble cause" operation resulting in 3000+ American troops and hunderds of thousands of Iraqi civilians dead-AND Osama bin Laden STILL ON THE LOOSE is JUSTIFED after all!?!?!?!?

*screams in hope that WMD BUSH will eventually be impeached and tried for war crimes*

 

[Shining Arcanine]

If you read UN Resolution 687, which provided the cease-fire agreement for the Persian Gulf war under the condition that Saddam Hussein dismantle his weapons of mass destruction programs among many other things, you will find plenty of reasons, each of which mandated the return of coalition forces to Iraq.

Here is a link; you can read it yourself:

https://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm

By the way, the United States Senate authorized the Persian Gulf war, and it ratified UN Resolution 687, agreeing to all of its terms, including the one that stated that coalition forces would return to Iraq if Saddam Hussein did not dismantle his weapons programs within forty days. Given that the Congress, or more specifically the Senate, has war power, the return of coalition forces to Iraq is perfectly constitutional, as Saddam Hussein violated the treaty. Unfortunately, most people today do not seem to know the meaning of the terms "constitutional" and "unconstitutional." If you want to talk about unconstitutional programs, you should talk about No Child Left Behind, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Education, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Central Bank, etcetera. All of which are forbidden by the Constitution and the majority of which (all except for No Child Left Behind) were instituted by the Democrats after FDR changed the Democratic party platform in 1932 from liberalism to socialism.

 

[Guest123_x1]

here we go again

Since when it is the busniess of the United States Of America to be meddling aruond in other countries when they are not even a threat to security here?

(all except for No Child Left Behind) were instituted by the Democrats.

More Democrats voted for NCLB initially than Republicans.

UPDATE: I printed out the article and read it, and I am still very pi$sed-that the HIGHLY sensitive, HIGHLY DETAILED weapons information obtained from the Middle East was made globally public like this in the first place! Just another way of the GOP Culture of Corruption claiming they're "making us safer" when in fact they're doing the exact opposite!

 

[Shining Arcanine]

Since when it is the busniess of the United States Of America to be meddling aruond in other countries when they are not even a threat to security here?

Since the establishment of the federal government it has been the business of the United States of America to defend those in its alliances. Failing to do so would irreparably damage the credibility of the United States of America.

More Democrats voted for NCLB initially than Republicans.

As I would have guessed, but President Bush still signed the bill, despite its unconstitutionality, and he is in the Republican party, which is sad in context of the Republican Party platform.

UPDATE: I printed out the article and read it, and I am still very pi$sed-that the HIGHLY sensitive, HIGHLY DETAILED weapons information obtained from the Middle East was made globally public like this in the first place! Just another way of the GOP Culture of Corruption claiming they're "making us safer" when in fact they're doing the exact opposite!

Culture of corruption? That is pretty strong language. It appears to me that you have attributed a negative quality to that word and thus you use it as a means to relieve anxiety caused by your subconscious desire to prevent your conscious from realizing what is true, as it fears what would happen afterwards. True progress does not come from using a bunch of words that appear to have the quality your subconscious prefers that you use at that given point in time, rather it comes from true intellectual thought and questioning, and not an acceptance of what some news paper wants you to believe.

You must develop your five faculties: will, intellect, emotion, memory and imagination. Your will enables you to take action. Your intellect allows you to discern things. Your emotions put force behind your actions. Your memory grants your intellect a knowledge of the past so that it can understand the present. Your imagination allows you to create. Unless you develop and control these five faculties, you will never accomplish anything. You read an article in the New York Times and you lacked the will to think of things on your own, your intellect's discernment was outsourced, your emotions sculpted like play-dole by the person who wrote the article and your creativity was precluded by your other faculties being out of your control.

Just a few months ago, the Democrats were all saying that Iraq never had a weapons of mass destruction program, that it was harmless in every possible way and that President Bush and the Republican party lied because of that, and I am sure that you went along with it. Now, the Democrats are saying the exact opposite, and are blaming the President Bush and the Republican party for having done something that according to the Democrats a few months ago, was impossible. The Democrats said that there were no documents in existence and that the notion of Iraq even pursuing weapons of mass destruction was a lie. That has been shown to be a lie, and yet for some reason, you lack the memory to know what they said then, you lack the will to use your own powers of reasoning and you lack any expression of your own intellect, making it appear that it has been outsourced.

People talk about Nineteen Eight Four quite frequently, and they say the Republicans are moving the country towards it, yet you and many other people all believed that these documents did not exist and blamed the Republicans for having and now you and many other people are saying that the documents do exist and are blaming the Republicans for having disclosed them, despite two years of insisting that they never existed. This happens, and none you blame the Democrats. Does the scene in Nineteen Eight Four where the enemy changes from Eurasia to Eastasia during a Politician's sentence, and despite the fact that the enemy had always been Eurasia, everyone is amazed that someone had replaced the enemy's flags with an ally's flags right in front of them without them ever noticing, not seem familiar? The Democrats did this two days ago with Iraq's nuclear program and yet it is all the fault of the "the GOP Culture of Corruption claiming they're 'making us safer.'" You are being manipulated. Your faculties are not under your control; and you do not even realize it.

Anyway, if you are going to understand the full implications of a statement made in an article designed to slander the Republican party, you will have to learn what the Republicans think of the statement, as the attempt of the article to slander has precluded the possibility of discerning what is true simply by reading it for a great many people. Here are two articles that explain in detail the full implications of it; I suggest you read them carefully:

https://michellemalkin.com/archives/006267.htm
https://rayrobison.typepad.com/ray_robison/2006/11/nyt_article_on_.html

 

[Drifblim]

Points well made, Shining, but you can just as well lay off the 'you' statements with which your screed is proliferated.

But now we've done enough to warrant these countries trying to build nuclear weapons, and now it seems they've actually tried. Let me just say, I knew Saddam Hussein was working with nuclear weapons as far back as the early 1980s, and I figured Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and that Islamic cleric above him were doing the same since it rejected Russia's offers to enrich the uranium for little cost to him.

I think this all could have been avoided if we invested energy in creating oil artificially or went to the Pacific or the Norwegian Sea for oil. But now we've instilled ourselves in the Middle East, and now we've got these bloody dictators profiting off our necessities. Gah. Start searching, but lay off the troops until we really need them, send the UN in and put Saddam in front of the World Court regardless of how long it'll take.

 

[Lord Mike]

The world is coming to disaster. I can smell World War III somewhere in the next few years.

We have Hussein at the moment, but that doesn't mean the this nuclear program he has ceased to exist. Chances are he had allies himself. And chances are those people that he was allied with are finding some way to continue it.

In general, Iran, Iraq, and Syria are screwed over at the minute. Thank god we have quite a bit of Middle Eastern allies. And by this I mean Israel, Afghanistan, Pakastan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Jordan. Iran, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea are real meances at the moment.

That's all.

~LM~