George W Bush: Was he really that bad?

Your own link says WMD stockpiles were uncovered.................

Your an idiot Timmyboy...........

Your worse than a birther if you believe NO WMDs were found in Iraq.

From your own linked story:

Chemical Weapons Recovered
On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, all are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.[116]

These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said.[117]

no, Bush went in after a team of inspectors determined Saddam didn't have any WMD's Originally Posted by CJ7

exactly

Gore made it clear he knew that Iraq had WMDs...........he made that statement while the Iraq war debate was taking place....

In other words, Gore thought it important to go on record saying he "knew" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

he probably had stock in Halliburton.

Your own link says WMD stockpiles were uncovered.................

Your an idiot Timmyboy...........

Your worse than a birther if you believe NO WMDs were found in Iraq.

From your own linked story:

Chemical Weapons Recovered
On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, all are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.[116]

These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said.[117] Originally Posted by Whirlaway

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/no-wmds-in-iraq/

Your own link says WMD stockpiles were uncovered.................

Your an idiot Timmyboy...........

Your worse than a birther if you believe NO WMDs were found in Iraq.

From your own linked story:

Chemical Weapons Recovered
On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, all are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.[116]

These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said.[117] Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Assuming you are correct....and you probably are not. Are these unuseable weapons the ones we invaded Iraq for Whirly? The ones we spent over a trillion dollars to find? The ones that cost us 32,000 US casualties? Tell me they are moron boy....go ahead. Try not to act like a drowning man, sinking in the ocean, losing the argument badly, and recognizing it.... and grasping at any paltry life-line he can find. Are these the weapons Bush was referring to in all of his speeches, his SOTU...these UNUSEABLE FUCKING WEAPONS WERE WHAT WE INVADED IRAQ FOR?

Fucking idiot.

AssUp (and yourself presumably) have made the repeated claim that NO WMDs were found; you are wrong...

Now you are finessing that argument to a more intelligent understanding of the facts...I get it .....good for you.

AssUp made the blanket statement NO Fucking WMDS were found......that is not true. Proved by your own links.

But I don't expect you to believe the very link you provided as proof of your phony assertion; I just can't decide who is the bigger fool, you or AssUp.

a smattering of degraded sarin is more than enough to satisfy the simpletons, strange enough the Bush admin didn't buy the finding of leftovers from 1991 as a threat either

AssUp (and yourself presumably) have made the repeated claim that NO WMDs were found; you are wrong...

Now you are finessing that argument to a more intelligent understanding of the facts...I get it .....good for you.

AssUp made the blanket statement NO Fucking WMDS were found......that is not true. Proved by your own links.

But I don't expect you to believe the very link you provided as proof of your phony assertion; I just can't decide who is the bigger fool, you or AssUp. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Answer my questions you halfwit. Looks like there were maybe 53 unuseable weapons that were over 20 years old. Are they why we invaded Iraq? Don't dodge the question while trying to pat yourself on the back because you think you've weasled out. Answer.

Straight from the horse's mouth. Bush states publicly "there were no WMD's"

Argue with your moron president Whirlyturd:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSN-Kku_rFE

About 24 seconds in.......

Biden didn't write the patriot act. I have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt ... you didn't notice because youre incapable of understanding the truth Originally Posted by CJ7

You calling Biden a liar? Hmmm . . . GOOD FOR YOU!!

Calling Bush the worst president in my lifetime ... And that dates back to Truman...

GWB was easily the worst President in my lifetime, up until 2009.

when the war in Syria ends, we will find this with the words "Made in Iraq"



and this will settle the argument

If Syria had wmd's of any type, one side or the other would have already used them to win the civil war going on there ... its a fact the Rebel Sunni's don't have them

You calling Biden a liar? Hmmm . . . GOOD FOR YOU!!

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

one day you think Biden was smart enough to craft the legalese in the Patriot act, the day before you think he's to dumb to pour piss out of a boot ..