General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"You've got to be kidding me"
Posted with permission.
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/30/20262049-those-who-still-get-the-iraq-wmd-story-wrong?lite
Those who still get the Iraq WMD story wrong
By Steve Benen
-
Fri Aug 30, 2013 3:37 PM EDT
It was a little jarring to hear Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) insist that Saddam Hussein "had weapons of mass destruction," and may have moved the stockpiles "over into Syria." I immediately double-checked the date, and sure enough, the comments came yesterday.
To clarify, those making remarks like these in August 2003 were foolish. For anyone, least of all an elected member of Congress, to repeat such things out loud in August 2013 suggests Louie Gohmert may, in fact, be made of wood.
Alas, he's not alone.
Terry, who has served in the House since 1999, supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. In an interview on Thursday with Omaha radio host Tom Becka, Terry said Syria was a completely different situation.
"The theory then and the evidence was that Iraq was an enemy of the United States and had direct plans in either support of al Qaeda and/or with other weapons that we found out weren't there -- which I still think they were moved to Syria," said Terry. "And it wouldn't surprise me if some of the chemical weapons that have been used by Syria actually came from Iraq."
The Nebraska Republican added, "{W}e all we know that Iraq had ... chemical and biological weapons and then they weren't there."
You've got to be kidding me.
It's painful to realize that there are still members of Congress who are confused about the basics, even now, a decade later.
But in case Reps. Terry and Gohmert see this, let's spell it out: Iraq's WMD stockpiles didn't exist. There's no reason to believe the weapons were moved to Syria since, once again, they didn't exist.
LearningCurve
(488 posts)"If the WMDs got moved to Syria, why didn't we invade Syria?" I never got a good response to that.
bluemarkers
(536 posts)rwnj friend posted this, and she just knew all along they would find the stockpiles.... errr what idiots, I ignored it, but if it comes up again , will use this response! lol
treestar
(82,383 posts)I specifically recall one wing nut family member asserting that. In which case, they should be for invading Syria now - not only do they have them, they used them.
No right winger has any cred to oppose war on Syria right now. In fact there are terrorists there and they are closer to these WMD.
Journeyman
(15,024 posts)and were floating about somewhere in the Indian Ocean while simultaneously being stored in Syria while they remained stockpiled in Iraq. Most Remarkable Weapons, indeed.
I remember too, given the very specific quantities cited in the run up to war, someone computed that in order to move all the weapons Iraq supposedly possessed would require a truck convoy some 50+ miles long. The question raised then was, how was such a massive movement of such supposedly deadly chemicals and explosives accomplished without anyone seeing it from the air?
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
Mnemosyne
(21,363 posts)BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)jmowreader
(50,528 posts)Since Ronald Reagan and Caspar Weinberger are responsible for Iraq having chemical weapons in the first place, does not Gohmert's admission mean that we should dig up Ronnie and Caspar, bury them in the Love Canal after grinding their bodies into a fine powder, scrape Ronnie's name off everything it's been pasted on, order Grover Norquist, Newt Gingrich, Ralph Reed and Arthur Laffer to commit seppuku in atonement for foisting that crappy actor on us, and in any other way attempt to erase the history of the worst eight years in the history of the United States?
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)...but rather reminds me of some people when I worked for CBS. ( Studio Musician).
Anyway..in keeping with the program, you think maybe we could whack a few of the Reagan voters...just for 'ol time sake and a little bit of payback or is that a little bit too much.
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)Fool the American people twice, shame on us.
Reaping what you sowed!
malaise
(268,693 posts)There were no WMDs in Iraq
freshwest
(53,661 posts)They say this with great conviction and claim the US military knows all about it, but the federal government won't tell as they are part of the plot. They claim the Founders were Luciferians and that all of our presidents are satanists or not human.
Some RWRs say Russia is a player in the Magog and Gog battle. They cite the size of the Chinese army which will join the whole world to destroy Israel.
Then the Second Coming will save Israel and all the true believers and throw all the non-believers in the lake of fire. Jesus will rule the world from Jerusalem and the temple sacrfices will begin. Everything will be like it was.
There are a few variations in this American theme, but that's where it was the last time I tuned in. Really can't stand it anymore. This is part of their End Times belief system.
Armageddon
Ruins atop Tel Megiddo.
The idea that a final Battle of Armageddon will be fought at Tel Megiddo has had a wide influence, especially in the US. According to Donald E. Wagner, Professor of Religion and Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies at North Park University, Ronald Reagan was an adherent of "Armageddon theology," and "seemed to blend his political analysis with his Armageddon theology quite naturally."[50]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armageddon
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)So NATURALLY you take your prior claim that Saddam moved his WMD to Syria and capitalize on the images of dead children to claim you were right.
Expect your crazy uncle to demand an apology over the holidays this year.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)maddiemom
(5,106 posts)JEB
(4,748 posts)for the title of "the dumbest fucking guy on the planet."
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)They have an uncanny ability to show up where the USA is looking
for reasons to justify an attack.
bluedeathray
(511 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)And that's on their best days.
IMO
rizlaplus
(159 posts)it becomes A Really Big Fat Lie
MindMover
(5,016 posts)there positions......
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)maddiemom
(5,106 posts)After all, they have FAR more influence on the willfully uninformed.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)iandhr
(6,852 posts)iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)since Syria has the capability to do it on its own..
it doesn't need fake Iraqi weapons to gas its own people
Turbineguy
(37,291 posts)The story was also that Saddam Hussein had a luxurious funk-hole built on the beach in Syria. There was also the claim that the Iraqis could shoot down any US plane. (I think Baghdad Bob confirmed this! Anything BB confirmed would be a fact, to a republican.)
As for Iraq sending the WMD's to Syria, it's certainly plausible. But those weapons would have to predate the first Iraq war. Would they be reliable after all this time?
shotten99
(622 posts)(I know you're being snarky - i've actually heard a lot of similar comments that were serious)
on point
(2,506 posts)gopiscrap
(23,726 posts)gopiscrap
(23,726 posts)for why they didn't find any wmd's in Iraq.
unblock
(52,116 posts)that iraq certainly *did* have chemical weapons at some point, because we supplied them for use in their war against iran.
that said, by the time of the build-up to the iraq war, they were long gone. some were used used against iran, some were used against "his own people" in iraq and some were destroyed.
so i think saying that they "didn't exist" is an overstatement.
spanone
(135,791 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Mopar151
(9,975 posts)If you make your Beleifs fit the Facts, then both are correct. If you attempt to make the Facts fit your Beleifs, there is little chance that the Beliif is valid, as the Facts cannot be correct if they are changed. My friend's analogy : Making the beleifs fit the facts is like trying to solve a jigsaw puzzle with cutting pliers!
cynzke
(1,254 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)(Would post the pic of Rumsfeld et al shaking hands with Saddam but don't have it on my phone)z
Snake Plissken
(4,103 posts)There also believe the Earth is 6,000 years old
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)to come up with anything that could be called a thought.
just think...he`s smarter than the people who voted for him.......
Beartracks
(12,797 posts)I remember a Republican sibling sending me something in an email in which was quoted or linked some story about satellite imagery showing military convoys heading into a neighboring country from Iraq on the eve of the U.S. invasion. I don't recall now if it was Syria or Iran... But I believe it was being bandied about as a likely theory about where the missing WMDs went, as well as an example of the kind of evidence that liberals were wont to ignore as they protested the invasion.
I don't remember now if that was ever debunked or not...
==============================
rpannier
(24,328 posts)I mean Hussein moves his most powerful deterrent/counter-strike military equipment to Syria and then stays in Iraq.
That argument is so incredibly stupid it defies even the remotest sense of logiv
But... then we're talking Gohmert Pyle USMC (Useless Simpleton Moron in Congress)
B Calm
(28,762 posts)of the Iraq War. I said, if Iraq has WMD's why would they hide them? You'd think they would use them against an invading army.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)The most credible reason for Saddam to have had these hypothetical WMD would have been to repel an invasion--to be, in effect, too nasty a hornet's nest for anyone to want to attack it. Therefore it would have made no sense whatsoever for him to respond to our invasion threat by moving the WMD to places where he couldn't use them.
Don't draw yet, Marshal Dillon. I gotta throw my gun away first.