[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
As a person with Iranian heritage, I can assure you that I have heard more ‘western’ people talk about bombing Iran with lust than I have ever heard an actual Iranian living in Iran talk about doing anything remotely similar to a western country. Sure the government has it’s agenda but so do other countries.[/quote]
Does “western country” include Israel, or are the Jews fair game?
After all, that is the stated target of Mr. Members Only Jacket is to nuke Israel.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Well, there is a fair amount of circumstantial evidence: Saddam’s two top generals, plus the convoys and planes leaving Iraq do paint a kind of convincing picture.
What I want to know is why? He had to realize that either way his rule was over and thus his life was forfeit either way, so why bother hiding his most powerful weapons instead of using them, especially since he had to know that it is easier to find WMDs when they are being transported from secret facilities to another country? Plus, if the CIA and other agencies knew about the convoys like they claim to, why did they not follow up and find out what was being transported? They somehow managed to find hidden facilities where the weapons were stored and produced without anybody noticing, but they couldn’t find out if they were being transported somewhere instead of used in a war against an army that was not prepared to fight the US? At least those weapons would have evened the field a little bit.
Even if the WMDs were on those convoys, why would the CIA not put two and two together and not look into what was on the massive convoys leaving Iraq just before the launched an invasion whose main purpose was to find and neutralize WMDs? The logic is simple enough, if you assume they were right that the WMDs were there in the first place:
Now, there are two possible decisions to make here:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
How about Obama’s new Director of National Intelligence?
Or, if you prefer, you can ask the Israelis who bombed the hell out of a nuclear breeder reactor that suddenly appeared:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
How exactly do you see the IAEA as having no legitimacy?
[/quote]
Institutions which derive their influence from the threat of violence should be considered illegitimate.
All forms of violence need to be deligitimized - even the violence we are told is done “only for our own good.”
I don’t accept being told what to do by arbitrary forms of violence.[/quote]
What threat of violence are you talking about? There was no threat of violence for not signing the IAEA treaty or the NPT. There was no punishment for not signing the NPT or not becoming a member of the IAEA at all outside of not being allowed access to member nation’s knowledge and technology. In fact, there is no violent punishment for withdrawing from either treaty, as evidenced by North Korea.
The only reason violence is an option in the Iran matter is because the treaty allows other members to use violence under certain conditions as a result of other member nation’s violation of the articles of the treaty. The Iranian government signed both treaties fully knowing that violence was one of the possible repercussions for violating articles of those treaties.
It is not like most of the world’s nations were forced to sign this treaty without knowing that violating it could lead to war, the treaties spell out the possible repercussions of not following the articles of the treaties and every nation that signed them agreed to those repercussions. Iran is now and was then fully aware of what would happen if they used the information and technology gained from being a signatory to those treaties to produce nuclear weapons, in fact they agreed by signing those treaties not to do so, knowing that war was a possible and likely penalty. If they decided to do so regardless, it is on them.
If they had not signed the treaties or backed away from them at an appropriate time, then this would be a non-issue and there is nothing any nation could do without violating international laws and treaties, just like for North Korea.
[/quote]
Any law, treaty, regulation, or order from government inherently comes with the threat of violence.
How else can people who choose not to obey be controlled?
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
How exactly do you see the IAEA as having no legitimacy?
[/quote]
Institutions which derive their influence from the threat of violence should be considered illegitimate.
All forms of violence need to be deligitimized - even the violence we are told is done “only for our own good.”
I don’t accept being told what to do by arbitrary forms of violence.[/quote]
What threat of violence are you talking about? There was no threat of violence for not signing the IAEA treaty or the NPT. There was no punishment for not signing the NPT or not becoming a member of the IAEA at all outside of not being allowed access to member nation’s knowledge and technology. In fact, there is no violent punishment for withdrawing from either treaty, as evidenced by North Korea.
The only reason violence is an option in the Iran matter is because the treaty allows other members to use violence under certain conditions as a result of other member nation’s violation of the articles of the treaty. The Iranian government signed both treaties fully knowing that violence was one of the possible repercussions for violating articles of those treaties.
It is not like most of the world’s nations were forced to sign this treaty without knowing that violating it could lead to war, the treaties spell out the possible repercussions of not following the articles of the treaties and every nation that signed them agreed to those repercussions. Iran is now and was then fully aware of what would happen if they used the information and technology gained from being a signatory to those treaties to produce nuclear weapons, in fact they agreed by signing those treaties not to do so, knowing that war was a possible and likely penalty. If they decided to do so regardless, it is on them.
If they had not signed the treaties or backed away from them at an appropriate time, then this would be a non-issue and there is nothing any nation could do without violating international laws and treaties, just like for North Korea.
[/quote]
Any law, treaty, regulation, or order from government inherently comes with the threat of violence.
How else can people who choose not to obey be controlled?[/quote]
There are 151 out of about 196 countries that are members of the IAEA, and even fewer that have signed the NPT and there has been no violence against any of the countries that have not signed them, even the ones that have developed nuclear weapons, so how is there an “inherent threat of violence” for not signing the treaties? The only way for violence to result is for a nation to specifically agree to that punishment by signing the treaty and then violating it, like Iran has.
Iran and all other countries signed both treaties knowing that the treaties allowed for the use of military force if a country that signed the treaties did not abide by the articles of those treaties, so my question is this:
Iran signed two treaties, and was not forced in any way to do so, that laid out guidelines and procedures regulating how it would conduct nuclear research and development knowing that violating those treaties carried a penalty of war, and decided to violate the treaties knowing the penalty it had agreed to, so why should Iran not suffer the consequences of its actions that it itself agreed to?
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
As a person with Iranian heritage, I can assure you that I have heard more ‘western’ people talk about bombing Iran with lust than I have ever heard an actual Iranian living in Iran talk about doing anything remotely similar to a western country. Sure the government has it’s agenda but so do other countries.[/quote]
Does “western country” include Israel, or are the Jews fair game?
After all, that is the stated target of Mr. Members Only Jacket is to nuke Israel.[/quote]
What do you think?
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
As a person with Iranian heritage, I can assure you that I have heard more ‘western’ people talk about bombing Iran with lust than I have ever heard an actual Iranian living in Iran talk about doing anything remotely similar to a western country. Sure the government has it’s agenda but so do other countries.[/quote]
Does “western country” include Israel, or are the Jews fair game?
After all, that is the stated target of Mr. Members Only Jacket is to nuke Israel.[/quote]
What do you think?[/quote]
If I knew, I wouldn’t ask.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
How about Obama’s new Director of National Intelligence?
Or, if you prefer, you can ask the Israelis who bombed the hell out of a nuclear breeder reactor that suddenly appeared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard[/quote]
I see… a DNI who ‘supported’ the view, and ‘intel’ from the Israelis , who have a vested interest in foisting a particular agenda against a regime that denies their (Israels)right to exist.
Not one whit of any evidence other than some at best, circumstantial evidence. I’m slightly underwhelmed and now know why that particular story never gained any traction. Especially when you take into account that relations between Assad and Hussein were tense at best. So then he decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship?
So no. Still not even remotely convincing.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.[/quote]
Nice straw man.
Don’t be retarded. Syria has their own WMDs, point out where I said otherwise. You’re the one who can’t prove his claims…but thanks for playing and take your own advice, learn a bit of history before spouting off and upgrade your reading material.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
How about Obama’s new Director of National Intelligence?
Or, if you prefer, you can ask the Israelis who bombed the hell out of a nuclear breeder reactor that suddenly appeared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard[/quote]
I see… a DNI who ‘supported’ the view, and ‘intel’ from the Israelis , who have a vested interest in foisting a particular agenda against a regime that denies their (Israels)right to exist.
Not one whit of any evidence other than some at best, circumstantial evidence. I’m slightly underwhelmed and now know why that particular story never gained any traction. Especially when you take into account that relations between Assad and Hussein were tense at best. So then he decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship?
So no. Still not even remotely convincing.
[/quote]
Apparently, you missed the story of yesterday where the Syrians said they intended to use the WMDs you claim do not exist, not to mention the story of a rather large crater in Syria (courtesy of my country) that has been confirmed to be an illegal nuclear breeder reacator by the IAEA. Both stories are linked above.
Your willful blindness is uniquely American leftist.
The entire world, excepting leftist in the USA, knows that Saddam’s entire weapon system was shipped to the Bekaa Valley in Syria. The reason the story has “no traction” in the USA is your media edits anything that does not fit its agenda.
Oh, regarding “decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship” – Assad and Saddam were part of the same political party, the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party (incidently founded by the Nazis in WWII). They certainly had their differences, but they were as close as this type of cutthroat can be.
You were presumably thinking of Iran — but Iraq actually flew its airforce, en masse, to Iran on the theory it was better for them to have it, than to let the USA destroy them.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.[/quote]
Nice straw man.
Don’t be retarded. Syria has their own WMDs, point out where I said otherwise. You’re the one who can’t prove his claims…but thanks for playing and take your own advice, learn a bit of history before spouting off and upgrade your reading material.
[/quote]
I got the same thing from your post. But if you want direct evidence, here:
Article has photos, along with interview of Syrians.
"Syrian journalist and human rights activist Nizar Nayouf told the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in 2004 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smuggled his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons into Syria just prior to the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003.
In the interview, Nayouf claimed that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were stashed in three separate sites in Syria, including an underground military base beneath the village of AlBaida, one kilometer south of Masyaf. Nayouf was imprisoned by Syrian authorities for 10 years. In 2001, he was granted political asylum in France. "
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
How about Obama’s new Director of National Intelligence?
Or, if you prefer, you can ask the Israelis who bombed the hell out of a nuclear breeder reactor that suddenly appeared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard[/quote]
I see… a DNI who ‘supported’ the view, and ‘intel’ from the Israelis , who have a vested interest in foisting a particular agenda against a regime that denies their (Israels)right to exist.
Not one whit of any evidence other than some at best, circumstantial evidence. I’m slightly underwhelmed and now know why that particular story never gained any traction. Especially when you take into account that relations between Assad and Hussein were tense at best. So then he decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship?
So no. Still not even remotely convincing.
[/quote]
Apparently, you missed the story of yesterday where the Syrians said they intended to use the WMDs you claim do not exist, not to mention the story of a rather large crater in Syria (courtesy of my country) that has been confirmed to be an illegal nuclear breeder reacator by the IAEA. Both stories are linked above.
Your willful blindness is uniquely American leftist.
The entire world, excepting leftist in the USA, knows that Saddam’s entire weapon system was shipped to the Bekaa Valley in Syria. The reason the story has “no traction” in the USA is your media edits anything that does not fit its agenda.
Oh, regarding “decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship” – Assad and Saddam were part of the same political party, the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party (incidently founded by the Nazis in WWII). They certainly had their differences, but they were as close as this type of cutthroat can be.
You were presumably thinking of Iran — but Iraq actually flew its airforce, en masse, to Iran on the theory it was better for them to have it, than to let the USA destroy them.[/quote]
Show me where I claim the the syrians don’t have chemical weapons and other wmd’s. I’ll wait.
As for jumping to conclusions about what media I read or don’t read, while I’m currently in Canada on business, I live in SA. So once again, no.
I was not thinking of Iran. Believe it or not, some us do know the difference.
As for your claim of where the Iraqi wmds ended up, I’ll also wait for some proof other than your say so if you don’t mind. The ‘everyone but the US leftists know it’ crap doesn’t wash.
And where in the hell did I say that they didnt have the reactor that was blown up???
I ask for some proof on a statement that the Obama administration now admits that the WMDs were shipped to Syria and I get this tangential ‘you’re a denialist’ BULLSHIT?
What the hell is wrong with the reading comprehension here???
[quote]shorty_blitz wrote:
As a person with Iranian heritage, I can assure you that I have heard more ‘western’ people talk about bombing Iran with lust than I have ever heard an actual Iranian living in Iran talk about doing anything remotely similar to a western country. Sure the government has it’s agenda but so do other countries.[/quote]
The Iranian people got goatfucked by a bunch of lunatics that took over their government.
Too bad that so many of them have to die. Once again, religion shows itself for what it is…death worship.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.[/quote]
Nice straw man.
Don’t be retarded. Syria has their own WMDs, point out where I said otherwise. You’re the one who can’t prove his claims…but thanks for playing and take your own advice, learn a bit of history before spouting off and upgrade your reading material.
[/quote]
I got the same thing from your post. But if you want direct evidence, here:
Article has photos, along with interview of Syrians.
"Syrian journalist and human rights activist Nizar Nayouf told the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in 2004 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smuggled his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons into Syria just prior to the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003.
In the interview, Nayouf claimed that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were stashed in three separate sites in Syria, including an underground military base beneath the village of AlBaida, one kilometer south of Masyaf. Nayouf was imprisoned by Syrian authorities for 10 years. In 2001, he was granted political asylum in France. "[/quote]
That is not direct evidence, that is just someone claiming something happened without providing any evidence to back up his story, and some photos of 5 installations whose purpose is unclear, which is stated no less then 2 times in the article
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.[/quote]
Nice straw man.
Don’t be retarded. Syria has their own WMDs, point out where I said otherwise. You’re the one who can’t prove his claims…but thanks for playing and take your own advice, learn a bit of history before spouting off and upgrade your reading material.
[/quote]
I got the same thing from your post. But if you want direct evidence, here:
Article has photos, along with interview of Syrians.
"Syrian journalist and human rights activist Nizar Nayouf told the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in 2004 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smuggled his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons into Syria just prior to the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003.
In the interview, Nayouf claimed that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were stashed in three separate sites in Syria, including an underground military base beneath the village of AlBaida, one kilometer south of Masyaf. Nayouf was imprisoned by Syrian authorities for 10 years. In 2001, he was granted political asylum in France. "[/quote]
Once again, I see ‘claims’, from one source,that the stuff was smuggled across. Hardly any form of the ‘proof’ that it went down that way. The pics can certainly be of chemical weapons dumps or stores.
Since I have never denied their existence or that Syria have manufactured or have them, it’s a moot point. I have now read 4 or 5 frankly weak links that purportedly furnish ‘proof’ of the move of wmds from Iraq to Syria and have found them all sorely lacking in any fact. Maybe it happened , maybe it didn’t. I would have thought after the failure to find any on Iraqui soil that these leads would have been EXHAUSTIVELY hunted down by the Bush admin in order to prove their existence. Or did I perhaps manage to miss the finding of those stockpiles in my alleged left wing media reading frenzy?
As for the Obama administration now admitting it went down that way…pull my other leg , it plays Jingle Bells in Swahili.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
Oh, and here is where Assad threatens to use the WMD:
You really need a news sources other that Mother Jones or whatever crap you read.[/quote]
Nice straw man.
Don’t be retarded. Syria has their own WMDs, point out where I said otherwise. You’re the one who can’t prove his claims…but thanks for playing and take your own advice, learn a bit of history before spouting off and upgrade your reading material.
[/quote]
I got the same thing from your post. But if you want direct evidence, here:
Article has photos, along with interview of Syrians.
"Syrian journalist and human rights activist Nizar Nayouf told the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf in 2004 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein smuggled his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons into Syria just prior to the United States’ invasion of Iraq in 2003.
In the interview, Nayouf claimed that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were stashed in three separate sites in Syria, including an underground military base beneath the village of AlBaida, one kilometer south of Masyaf. Nayouf was imprisoned by Syrian authorities for 10 years. In 2001, he was granted political asylum in France. "[/quote]
That is not direct evidence, that is just someone claiming something happened without providing any evidence to back up his story, and some photos of 5 installations whose purpose is unclear, which is stated no less then 2 times in the article[/quote]
I think you are using the lay definition of “direct evidence.” “Direct evidence” is testimony of a person stating a certain fact is true. Direct evidence is provided by Mr. Masyaf.
Regarding your larger point, I am not going to hunt down the 1,000s of stories confirming this. I do have a life.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]Cuso wrote:
Sorry, but I’m not for the USA starting another war based on flimsy NSA/CIA gathered intel. If anyone here can post links presenting solid, undeniable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear weapons material, I’ll change my position.
[/quote]
You are aware that the Obama administration now admits that the Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria – an admission made necessary because Assad just threatened to use them on his own people if attacked from outside?
They do? Please, point out ONE credible source/article that states this…there is nothing on that google search you posted. I call BS.
[/quote]
How about Obama’s new Director of National Intelligence?
Or, if you prefer, you can ask the Israelis who bombed the hell out of a nuclear breeder reactor that suddenly appeared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard[/quote]
I see… a DNI who ‘supported’ the view, and ‘intel’ from the Israelis , who have a vested interest in foisting a particular agenda against a regime that denies their (Israels)right to exist.
Not one whit of any evidence other than some at best, circumstantial evidence. I’m slightly underwhelmed and now know why that particular story never gained any traction. Especially when you take into account that relations between Assad and Hussein were tense at best. So then he decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship?
So no. Still not even remotely convincing.
[/quote]
Apparently, you missed the story of yesterday where the Syrians said they intended to use the WMDs you claim do not exist, not to mention the story of a rather large crater in Syria (courtesy of my country) that has been confirmed to be an illegal nuclear breeder reacator by the IAEA. Both stories are linked above.
Your willful blindness is uniquely American leftist.
The entire world, excepting leftist in the USA, knows that Saddam’s entire weapon system was shipped to the Bekaa Valley in Syria. The reason the story has “no traction” in the USA is your media edits anything that does not fit its agenda.
Oh, regarding “decided to just send all his WMD to Syria, given their acrimonious relationship” – Assad and Saddam were part of the same political party, the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party (incidently founded by the Nazis in WWII). They certainly had their differences, but they were as close as this type of cutthroat can be.
You were presumably thinking of Iran — but Iraq actually flew its airforce, en masse, to Iran on the theory it was better for them to have it, than to let the USA destroy them.[/quote]
And for the record, I missed no story. Just sayin’ .And I know the Origins of the Baathists, as well. And I stand by my statement.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
As for the Obama administration now admitting it went down that way…pull my other leg , it plays Jingle Bells in Swahili.
[/quote]
You have me confused with the other poster.
I don’t doubt, however, that Obama knows full well that the WMDs are in Syria.
I similarly don’t dount that Obama is a liar and most desireous of power above all, and so would never make such a politically-damaging admission even if they detonated in NYC.