Bush Failed In Iraq

[AOFrozenCity]

Bombshell for Bush: 350 tons of explosives go missing in Iraq

Bush LOST 350 tons of explosives because U.S. soldiers don't guard them and U.S. military organization is very poor.

350 tons of explosives = nuclear bomb

Possibly, terrorists have them and use them for other strike in the United States.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=576048

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-10-25-missing-explosives_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/26/1098667728052.html

 

[VamPyroX]

I knew it! Damn you Bush! :fu2:

 

[Reba]

What Did The Democrats Say About Iraq's WMD

JANUARY 30, 2004
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

.

 

[AOFrozenCity]

reply

Bush DID FAIL IN IRAQ many times like RUSH, lost many bombs (350 tons), no WMD, no terrorist links, not training soldiers well, U.S. military organization is very poor and more. Kerry didn't FAIL IN IRAQ because he isn't president of the U.S....Your brain is STILL foggy. How can you read Kerry's mind that he will FAIL in Iraq and FAIL on other ways? Which Kerry or Bush did FAIL in IRAQ? Did Clinton attack Iraq?

 

[Boult]

reba, you fail to recognize that John Kerry and all those officials that you listed were MISLED BY BUSH and CIA! Bush continued to misled the nation and world. Bush went to UN and in his speech, he blurted this offensive remark "Either you are with us or against us!"

Coalition of Willing? my ass! they were not willing.. Turkey was supposed to be "Willing" but look what happened few days before Invasion started.. It turned out that Turkey wanted to be bribed MORE $$$$ to let them thru their country to Iraq but Bush Admin was not bribing them enough! so they give up and rerouted their forces around to Kuwait !!! Bush Admin silenced the media afterwards that's why we don't hear much of Turkey fiascos!

All those countries that was "Coalition of Willings" are in for $$$$ Bush Admin had to make deals with Patakins and all other countries before Afghans war and Iraq war. Not by simply asking "Can you help us put end to this?" GHWBush did the right things and had a true Coalitions! Bush didn't listen to his dad but higher up! sheesh!

in regard to tv show "NOW with Bill Moyers" they mentioned "Book of Revelation" when they discussed Bush's religions.. I am like thinking back when I read the bible.. and said oh shit.. that Bush wants Prophecy to happen in Iraq because that's where Armageddon is! (http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp07172004.html) Remember Bush said "God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East."

First he told world it is WMD then it is God then it is Saddam then word word word (like ann coulter used it on her speech lol) now Bush said not winable but he claim that God told him to strike Saddam but HE failed to STRIKE but arrest! sheesh! He failed GOD!!!

well anyway.. I was led to believe (keep in mind I am currently agnostic but raised in episcopalian culture) that Bible is used to teach you the good and bad and that the purpose of "book of revelations" was to teach you to avoid the Armageddon from happening because If we don't do the right way then it will happen. Bush wanted it to happen as if he wants to see prophecy fulfilled! Do you?

since I mentioned that I am agnostic so I have to say that Bush is wacko!


AOFrozenCity:
Bush's Dad did the right thing because his Admin knew that if continue further into Iraq we will see the same thing we see today! Dick Cheney was Sec. of Defense which he told "Meet the Press" Tim Russert that (something to that effect) it would be grave danger if we invaded Iraq. We will see lots of casualties in Iraq. Now fast forward to 2003, Cheney as VP, he supported Bush on Iraq Invasion and misled us! see where we are now! he was right the first time and wrong the second time! and many of Bush I's Admin all agreed that they all does not want to go further into Iraq and signed treaty with Saddam. Of course, Saddam's men suppressed the uprisings... but Bush I and Clintion Admin kept the "box containment" strategy which worked for years till Bush II opened it up and all hell broke loose!

Saddam GAVE UP on wmd after Kuwait invasions because of containment and sanctions. Never mind the UN's Oil for food which won't help Saddam acquire WMD either..

Anyway, remember before Bush II became president, he does not want US to be a Nation Building country and now we are doing right at this moment!

What Clintion did was not a nation building! He simply ended the ethnic cleansing and injected democracy in Bonsia and Kosovo and brought in peacekeeping forces.. that's it. Bush II wants to occupy and rebuild and inject demoracy while fighting insurgents which invites terrorist to make Iraq a haven!

time for Bush II to go home! He's so out of touch with reality! that's sad! and that Reba needs to wake up from Bush's bubble which Bush has been in too long!

***stepping down from soapbox*** whew!!

 

[Kalista]

time for Bush II to go home! He's so out of touch with reality! that's sad! and that Reba needs to wake up from Bush's bubble which Bush has been in too long!

Encourage him to eating more pretzels. Stay out of oil business !! It is time for all of the troops going home with their families !!

STOP WAR NOW !!!! :madfawk: Bush !!

 

[Reba]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Sen. Cornyn: Kerry's 'Explosive' Charges Baseless and Ironic
Susan Jones, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2004
Some Republicans note that Sen. John Kerry is complaining about 380 tons of missing explosives in Iraq - but if Kerry had his way, those explosives would still be under the control of Saddam Hussein, they say.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a frequent defender of President Bush, issued a statement Tuesday blasting Kerry's New-York-Times-fueled attacks over missing explosives that once were stored at Iraq's Al-Qaqaa facility. The weapons, according to an NBC report on Monday, had been moved from the site before coalition forces arrived in April 2003, Cornyn noted. NBC said it had a reporter embedded with coalition forces when they arrived at the site, only to find the explosives already gone.
"When U.S. and coalition troops secured more than 400,000 tons of the Hussein regime's explosives, John Kerry said nothing," Cornyn noted. "But when less than one tenth of one percent of that amount was reported missing by the New York Times, John Kerry suddenly found his voice.

"But now, after calling the administration incompetent and blundering, it turns out that John Kerry's charges Monday, as usual, were based on false assumptions," Cornyn said.

"I hope my colleague will now apologize to the brave men and women in Iraq who are working every day to secure Hussein's vast arsenal. And I hope that I am not the only one who sees the irony in the Kerry campaign complaining about the dangers of weapons that, if John Kerry had his way, would still be under the hair-trigger control of Saddam Hussein.

"Sadly, John Kerry is all too quick to criticize our men and women in uniform for short-term political gain before he has the facts. This is not a quality America needs in a commander-in-chief during a time of war."

Sen. Cornyn serves as co-chairman of the Bush campaign's Texas leadership team.

Copyright CNSNews.com

.

 

[Reba]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

NBC News: Explosives Were Gone When U.S. Troops Arrived
Susan Jones, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, Oct. 26, 2004
NBC News reported Monday night that 380 tons of missing explosives were already gone when U.S. troops arrived at the Al-Qaqaa weapons installation in April 2003 – one day after Saddam's government was toppled.

NBC should know. It had a reporter embedded with the U.S. troops when they arrived at Al-Qaqaa in April 2003. While the Kerry campaign blasted the Bush administration for "stunning incompetence" on Monday, many Bush supporters questioned the timing of the New York Times' report Monday about the missing explosives, just eight days before the presidential election.
NBC News correspondent Jim Miklaszewski suggested a political motive as well: In his report on the missing explosives Monday night, he quoted one official as saying, "Recent disagreements between the administration and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency makes this announcement appear highly political."

According to the Times, the IAEA said it had warned the Bush administration about the need to secure the Al-Qaqaa facility before and after the war.

Times' Bias Caught Again

In a follow-up report on Tuesday, the Times did not mention the fact that NBC had an embedded reporter on the scene when the missing explosives were discovered - the day after Baghdad fell.

Tuesday's report in the Times, headlined "Iraq Explosives Become Issue in Campaign," covers how the Bush administration "sought to explain the disappearance of 380 tons of high explosives in Iraq that American forces were supposed to secure."

Bush's aides, Tuesday's article said, "tried to explain why American forces had ignored warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency about the vulnerability of the huge stockpile of high explosives, whose disappearance was first reported on Monday by CBS and The New York Times."

The Times' report portrayed the Bush administration as being on the defensive, trying to "minimize the importance of the loss" of the military explosives.

The report noted that President Bush "never mentioned the disappearance of the high explosives during a long campaign speech in Greeley, Colo., about battling terrorism."

"There are certainly some questions about when the explosives were missing," Kerry campaign adviser Howard Wolfson admitted on "Fox & Friends" early Tuesday. But Kerry's campaign is not expected to let the matter drop.

In a press release late Monday night, the campaign accused Bush's campaign of trying to cover up its "failure" to secure the explosives.

"Instead of distorting John Kerry's words, the Bush campaign is now falsely and deliberately twisting the reports of journalists. It is the latest pathetic excuse from an administration that never admits a mistake, no matter how disastrous," Kerry-Edwards senior adviser Joe Lockhart said.

Copyright CNSNews.com

.

 

[Cheri]

*Yawning* Reba you always seem to have a way of posting something related to Kerry, when you know darn well Bush screwed things up for us, Go ahead make ur vote on election day. Let me vote mine.

 

[Reba]

*Yawning* Reba you always seem to have a way of posting something related to Kerry, when you know darn well Bush screwed things up for us, Go ahead make ur vote on election day. Let me vote mine.

Well, I figured if it was OK for people to accuse Bush of lying, it must be OK to accuse Kerry of lying. You do want to be fair, right?

 

[Cheri]

Well, I figured if it was OK for people to accuse Bush of lying, it must be OK to accuse Kerry of lying. You do want to be fair, right?

Hello? Bush did Lied it not accusing. When are you gotta wake up and smell the coffee?

 

[AOFrozenCity]

reply

Reba...Which Kerry or Bush DID FAIL IN IRAQ? Which Kerry or Bush DID not ALLOW U.N. help us for guarding 350 tons of explosives? Which Kerry or Bush DID mess in Iraq? Which Kerry or Bush DID NOT solve the health problem (million people don't have health insurance for 99 years.)? Which Kerry or Bush DID NOT make airport more security before Sept. 11 (Notice: Bush did receive warning information from terrorist plans last two weeks.)? Which Kerry or Bush DID NOT prepare U.S. military organization for Iraq war well? Bush DID ALL. Kerry DID NOT DO ALL because he is not president of the United States. If you still support Bush then he will create more problems in the future than before.

Not only Kerry accused Bush of lying. The other countries in the around world accuse Bush of lying too. People accuse Bush of lying. Workers in white house accuse Bush of lying.

Don't offense my opinion. In my opinion, Bush didn't do his job well and create problems in the around world. Possibly, Bush can create serious problems than hilter does. Today U.S. military has very powerful bombs, brought them in Iraq and they were stolen by terrorists. Those weapons, 350 tons of HMX and RDX, are very powerful explosive like C4. One pound of C4 can destroy a classroom (about 150-200sq ft). Terorrists have 350 TONS of HMX, RDX and other bomb type. How can you image how big bomb is and many people will be killed if terrorists put 2 tons (4,000LBS) of HMX and RDX in a truck and drive in New York City?


Now the around world is fear of GIANT BOMB in terrorist's hand.

 

[DreamDeaf]

First Bush says WMDs, then Saddam, now its the food for oil issue?


*sigh*... right now my company has contractors in Iraq - we've lost two good men, one from St. Louis... beheaded by insurgents. We have had to tell the men to pull their families out of Iraq, asked them over and over if they really do want to work there (their answer? they believe they can do some good) and if yes, then they had to sign waivers saying that they know what they are doing, out of their own free will, and will not allow the company to be sued... then we have a party for them...to wish them luck...and pray they come back home safe and sound.

The company will take a big loss on this project - but we are doing it. Why? Like these brave men, we believe we can do some good there too.

You should hear (see) my boss complain about Cheney...why? His company, Halliburton, has made a BIG profit inflating their prices and gouging good people over there, with no regard for the welfare of the Iraqis and others over there.

Who would I rather have? Kerry - he is the lesser of the two evils...and I HOPE he can do some good.

 

[VamPyroX]

Well, I figured if it was OK for people to accuse Bush of lying, it must be OK to accuse Kerry of lying. You do want to be fair, right?

Actually, all you're doing is posting articles without adding your own comments to point out which of the article you're referring to. It would be nice to know what you're trying to point out what you're saying instead of just shoving articles in everyone's face and saying nothing.

 

[TiaraPrincess]

What did Bush lie about? People say he lied, but what about? I'd like documentation.

Oh, and I do give Bush credit for being a brave man to get into the root of the shyt. Clinton wasn't gonna do it, and we are all affected by the world's resources. We need everyone. We can't focus on ourselves like selfish idiots. Everything is affected, and I do think Saddam should have been captured by someone, or no one would have. We always heard shyt about what Saddam was under. Now he's gone for good. We just need to see that they build up their government from scratch now.

I don't trust Kerry to be a great President. He doesn't know crap what he's gonna do. In the middle of a war? Jeez, no. He doesn't sound sure of anything about Iraq. I am sick and tired of Kerry talking about how bush is wrong and whatever. Why doesn't he just talk about himself because talking about Bush makes me think that he's just adding words for people to hear because doesn't know what else to say!

 

[Beowulf]

Kerry knows a LOT more about combat than Bush does.
Kerry is a decorated Vietnam veteran.
Bush is a deserter.
"Nuff said.

 

[TiaraPrincess]

lol beowulf. That ain't gonna help, but if you wanna be brief then let the rest be unknown and vague.

Anyway, I am always turned off when Presidents talk about the other. I don't really care what they think of each other. All I care about is what they have to say that they will do, so the more they say about each other, the more it turns me off.

 

[Boult]

Finally Alldeaf is back up... It went down last night around midnight while I was typing this and couldn't post this:

Clinton and Kerry told Larry King on CNN that Bush has MORE intels than they have. they only have briefings Bush has more informations.. remember "the infamous PDB title "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside United States," such like that long before 9/11/01 and ignored it. It was only for Bush not Kerry or Clinton! 9/11 uncovered that! Rice tried to dimiss it and go on tv afterward to "word word word" to US viewers!!! stupid!~!

Bush wanted to invade Iraq in first place but 9/11 interrupted his plan and he wanted to skip the attack on Afghan but has to make good with his promise to US to go after bin laden in Afghan.
see this: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml

there you go! Iraq Invasion was not necessary... but should have taken out Abu Musab Zarqawi first before he settled in Iraq!( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/ ) but Bush cancelled that and went for Iraq Invasion!


There you go reba! how do you defend Bush Admin for his stupid management!

Let's kick Bush Admin out!! and bring in JOHN KERRY'S NEWEST ADMIN and do it the right thing! he want to focus the preemption on terrorist wherever they are! Like I showed you the two urls in other threads!

 

[Cheri]

What did Bush lie about? People say he lied, but what about? I'd like documentation.

Oh, and I do give Bush credit for being a brave man to get into the root of the shyt. Clinton wasn't gonna do it, and we are all affected by the world's resources. We need everyone. We can't focus on ourselves like selfish idiots. Everything is affected, and I do think Saddam should have been captured by someone, or no one would have. We always heard shyt about what Saddam was under. Now he's gone for good. We just need to see that they build up their government from scratch now.

I don't trust Kerry to be a great President. He doesn't know crap what he's gonna do. In the middle of a war? Jeez, no. He doesn't sound sure of anything about Iraq. I am sick and tired of Kerry talking about how bush is wrong and whatever. Why doesn't he just talk about himself because talking about Bush makes me think that he's just adding words for people to hear because doesn't know what else to say!

Where were you when Bush had lied for the whole four years? U act like u all sudden is new to all this? There are so many threads in this forum had provide information that Bush had lied about, Look at America right now and the past 4 yrs? U think the war is gotta make the terrorist stop? Keep dreaming cuz it won't. we are not trying to be selfish thinking about ourselves Bush is the selfish one all he cares about is himself not us. " He even said "You with me or without me!" Wtf! that is some screw up comment coming from him... I'm already sick of repeating about Bush over and over again because, Some of you people do not get it. So likely I am going to say "Find it out on ur own". It annoyed me when people do not get it, It's like can you read?

 

[TiaraPrincess]

Whoa, cool it Cheri. Have some cool Guacamole....

Cheri, people have said that he lied, but they never really say anything. I ask them and they just say he did and mumble about off-topic things. I admit, I don't know everything because it's so overwhelming to learn all the news information. Okay, have some guacamole again and don't point fingers. People have their own opinions and that's what we seem to forget. How people view things, does not mean that others will view it exactly the same, so "do not get it" is not really an appropriate statement to use really. We don't get everything the same way. We need to remember that.

I don't really like Kerry anyway. I just don't click when he talks at these debates. I have to admit that both of them have pro and cons. None of them agree with me 100 percent, but I find myself agreeing with Bush and not Kerry who seem not to make up his mind or be firm on many things.

We are never going to stop wars. I am never dreaming anything. Anything is possible to happen. I don't know if 10 years from now we will be at peace, but it' not happening ever for now. I believe that terrorism won't even stop not doing anything about it either. Either way, we aren't right or wrong. Clinton did nothing, and look at the terrorism that happened. You can't do anything just focusing on America. It's not gonna stop either way.