Obama Seizes Saddam's WMDs That Bush Couldn't Find?

[1still_waters]

It has been reported that Saddam smuggled his chemical weapons into Syria before the 2003 invasion. It looks like the Obama administration has once again accomplished what a Republican administration was unable to accomplish. The Obama administration just helped in seizing a lot of chemical weapons in Syria. Read below for the details.

Israel National News reported...

Former IDF Chief-of-Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Ya’alon said in an interview with the New York Sun on Thursday that Iraq moved its chemical weapons to Syria six weeks before the war started.

Ya?alon: Iraq Moved its Chemical Weapons to Syria Before War - Defense/Middle East - News - Arutz Sheva

Fox News reported...

Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border.

Sarin, Mustard Gas Discovered Separately in Iraq | Fox News

The Washington Times Reported

Saddam Hussein periodically removed guards on the Syrian border and replaced them with his own intelligence agents who supervised the movement of banned materials between the two countries, U.S. investigators have discovered.

Saddam agents on Syria border helped move banned materials - Washington Times

Then just today it's announced that the Obama administration has helped in the seizing of many chemical weapons in Syria.
Fox News reports.

The final eight percent of the 1,300-ton stockpile, which includes mustard gas and raw materials for making sarin nerve gas, have been loaded onto Danish and Norwegian ships in the Syrian port of Latakia.
Syria's government agreed to surrender its arsenal last fall when the U.S. threatened punitive missile strikes after a deadly chemical attack on a rebel-held suburb of Damascus.

Kerry applauds Syrian chemical weapons disposal, warns chlorine gas threat still serious | Fox News

It looks like Obama may be accomplishing things in his foreign policy that past Republican administrations were unable to accomplish.

President Reagan bombed Libya, but missed Qadaffi.
U.S. bombs Libya — History.com This Day in History — 4/14/1986

Obama's administration assists in trying to oust him, and it results in him being killed.
Moammar Gadhafi Dead: How Rebels Killed the Dictator - ABC News

President Bush tried for six months to get Bin Laden, but then announced to the world he doesn't think that much about getting the guy who murdered 3000 of his citizens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o

Then Obama issues the order that leads to the killing of Bin Laden.
Usama Bin Laden Killed in Firefight With U.S. Special Ops Team in Pakistan | Fox News

Bush spent a trillion dollars in Iraq chasing these chemical weapons, and years later it appears the Obama administration helped in seizing them.

Of course if these are really Saddam's chemical weapons in Syria, then that means.......wait for it....wait for it....

BUSH WAS RIGHT!

AHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

 

[TheAristocat]

If I remember correctly the Bush administration did seize many chemical weapons in Iraq. Apparently not all of them though. Besides, I don't think invading Iraq was only about seizing weapons of "mass destruction." I think maybe it was a good excuse for something else.

 

[posthuman]

remember where Iraq got its chemical weapons and nerve agents in the first place.. ?

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/03/27/1195471.php

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

the idea that saddam hussein had chemical weapons smuggled into syria just before the invasion is still plausible but still unsupported by anything other than anecdote...

syria had its own chemical weapons stockpile before the invasion of iraq...so they didn't need to smuggle chemical weapons in from iraq to obtain their stockpile...

now anything that might have been evidence is being systematically destroyed as part of this agreement so i guess we will never know with 100% certainty...

 

[SonInMe]

How do you prove these weapons were from Saddam Hussein?

wackadoodle

 

[1still_waters]

How do you prove these weapons were from Saddam Hussein?

wackadoodle

But but..it's an open door to proclaim Bush as RIGHT!!

Take it...take it...

 

[crossnote]

I think the WMD's were the ones released from Abu Graib too early, look at Iraq now.

 

[SonInMe]

Iraq was never about wmd, primarily so this is kinda moot.

Saddam bad. Dead Saddam. good

Pull out of Iraq....wasted everything.

Idiot. Nice job of politics. Nice job of making us look like fools...again.

Impeachment.

 

[dcontroversal]

Iraq was never about wmd, primarily so this is kinda moot.

Saddam bad. Dead Saddam. good

Pull out of Iraq....wasted everything.

Idiot. Nice job of politics. Nice job of making us look like fools...again.

Impeachment.

I don't know about all the above, but I will say...When a nation is ripe for judgment....women, children and fools are allowed to rule over said nation!.......God said that in the scriptures concerning Israel...God is consistently the same and is unchanging in his nature and characteristics....

So....which of the above three are running our system......?

 

[Esanta]

There are a lot of opinions on what this war was about, but for me the thing that puts the final nail in Bush's proverbial coffin is the fact that he invaded Iraq on shaky grounds and then invaded Afghanistan to find terrorists and 'save the people', then ended up indirectly killing more civilians than Saddam had. It's literally like NATO invading the Basque region to find ETA terrorists and killing millions, or like NATO invading the Republic of Ireland to find IRA members, or NATO invading Libya for the Lezbolah or invading Texas for the KKK or Nigeria for the Boko Haram or India for the Lashkari Taiba. You get the point.

The US government are responsible more than any party for giving Al Qaeda (which means 'the database' (from the Arabic root word for 'base', or 'bottom'), a reference to the CIA database of the Mujahideen's numbers and members) the power they have. The US funded and armed them to fight the Russians in the first place.

The fact that the oil is scarce and Afghanistan and Iraq lie around some of the largest oil pockets on Earth doesn't strike me as a coincidence either. I mean, terrorists exist in lots of countries but many of those countries don't have many resources.

And the US have a long history of installing dictators and arming various wars for their own interests like this. Osama Bin Laden was a CIA asset in Afghanistan, a member of the Mujahideen, and the only reason he was ever able to implement the plan to crash those planes (if he did in fact implement it) was because the US government gave him guerilla training years beforehand.

It's no different than the US overthrowing Arbenz in Guatemala after killing 200,000 civilians, or Reagan and the Contras, which gave me nightmares, or the fact that the US government supplied armaments to Saddam for Iraq's war against Iran where an estimated 500,000 Iraqis died. You can bet that if there's a war the US has a public involvement in, that they were instrumental in the political manoeuvring that led to that war starting in the first place.

 

[crossnote]

I didn't know Buddhists were democrats. So much for moral equivalency.

 

[Drett]

Iraq was never about wmd, primarily so this is kinda moot.

Saddam bad. Dead Saddam. good

Pull out of Iraq....wasted everything.

Idiot. Nice job of politics. Nice job of making us look like fools...again.

Impeachment.

Plenty of bad people around that get ignored. In a way though it was about Saddam being bad but not what you think. Saddam failed with Iran even with the chemical weapons that the US gave them. Time for a regime change but the US got out too quick. Then in 2000 Saddam was looking to disown the USD for oil trades so the US had to come back in to finish off the job.

 

[PennEd]

remember where Iraq got its chemical weapons and nerve agents in the first place.. ?

https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/03/27/1195471.php

What does this strawman post matter? At one time we were mortal enemies with Japan and Germany. Now we are "friends" and help them militarily. Alliances, military aid, and enemies change all the time.

 

[Esanta]

I didn't know Buddhists were democrats. So much for moral equivalency.

Buddhists are people who want to further the means to the cessation of human suffering. Unnecessary wars cause unnecessary suffering. In an internet world where communication is as easy as moving your fingers on a keyboard it pays to highlight that suffering just the same as in daily face-to-face life. I am sure we can all agree suffering is negative.

Moral equivalence is not something that I believe in. It is a fallacy in that it assumes that one moral action is 'just as bad' or 'just as good' as another.

Buddhists believe moral systems based on conditioning, circumstance and subjective views are in themselves nothing more than constructs, like all things based upon life conditioning, which is itself based upon the experiences of the sense faculties and the conclusions formed from them, are constructs.

Bush used this specific logical fallacy when he termed Iran, Iraq and North Korea the 'Axis of Evil' in comparison to the Axis Powers of WWII. That is moral equivalence.

I understand Buddhist philosophy extensively. If you are open to understanding it I would be more than willing to speak to you in private. However, if you are not, that's also fine.

 

[crossnote]

Moral equivalence is not something that I believe in.

Apparently not as your previous post suggested Democrats are sooo moral over the Republicans.

 

[kennethcadwell]

There has been just as many bad republicans as there has been democrats...

I personally have been raised up in the Regan, Bush sr., Clinton, Bush jr., Obama era......And almost every middle to low class families I know struggled harder under Regan and the Bushes then under Clinton. Then you have Romney who came out publicly and said he didn't care about the poor. ( Not Christian like there, of course he is Mormon though )

Obama has done much of nothing yet to release any burdens on the American public, and has caused even more to be placed on us.

Apparently not as your previous post suggested Democrats are sooo moral over the Republicans.

 

[Esanta]

Apparently not as your previous post suggested Democrats are sooo moral over the Republicans.

I didn't even mention democrats.

 

[PennEd]

There has been just as many bad republicans as there has been democrats...

I personally have been raised up in the Regan, Bush sr., Clinton, Bush jr., Obama era......And almost every middle to low class families I know struggled harder under Regan and the Bushes then under Clinton. Then you have Romney who came out publicly and said he didn't care about the poor. ( Not Christian like there, of course he is Mormon though )

Obama has done much of nothing yet to release any burdens on the American public, and has caused even more to be placed on us.

SMH. So many inaccuracies and half truths here it's hard to no where to start. Romney never said that. You were 3 yrs old when ReAgan took office. How many PEOPLE, much less "middle to low class families" did you know before you could even speak? You were 15 when Clinton took office, and although he deserves credit for understanding that America rejected his socialism in his 1st term, when in 1994 the Republicans took over the house for the 1st time in over 40 yrs, and made huge gains in the Senate, had the congress remained democrat we would not have had the economy we had in the mid to late 90s. G.W. Bush actually had a good economy considering the ramifications of 9/11 TIL the democrats won the house and senate back in 2006, primarily because of the fiasco surrounding hurricane Katrina.

obama is simply THE single worst thing EVER to happen to America. He has been a smashing success in his goal to "fundamentally transform the United States of America".

 

[Stephen63]

If ya ask me, just another lie to get back in there & take something they forgot.

 

[kennethcadwell]

You are wrong for making that assumption...I was five when he first took office. He was president from 81-89, and through all those years I grew up in a lower middle class to low class neighborhood. My parents, and most the other parents in the neighborhood, plus by news reports always talked about how hard they had it in trying to make a living under those changes.
Clinton was president from 93-2001, I graduated high school at 18 years of age in 94 meaning I was 17 when Clinton took office. Clinton spent most his time in office cleaning up Bush sr. crap policies.

I am not a supporter of the democratic or republican parties, but to say democrats are the ones who destroyed the economy and the republicans have not. And to say Bush had a good economy under him is crap. It was only good cause Clinton got it there, and then Bush spent his time in there destroying it, and then Obama has made it even worse. Our economy was already bad before Obama took office, he has just made it worse.

And yes Romney did say he did not care about the poor, if you have not heard this or refuse to believe I am sorry but it is well known facts and easy to look up. The remark about the poor, wanting to do away with medicare/medicade , and giving the rich tax breaks is what shot him in the foot.

SMH. So many inaccuracies and half truths here it's hard to no where to start. Romney never said that. You were 3 yrs old when ReAgan took office. How many PEOPLE, much less "middle to low class families" did you know before you could even speak? You were 15 when Clinton took office, and although he deserves credit for understanding that America rejected his socialism in his 1st term, when in 1994 the Republicans took over the house for the 1st time in over 40 yrs, and made huge gains in the Senate, had the congress remained democrat we would not have had the economy we had in the mid to late 90s. G.W. Bush actually had a good economy considering the ramifications of 9/11 TIL the democrats won the house and senate back in 2006, primarily because of the fiasco surrounding hurricane Katrina.

obama is simply THE single worst thing EVER to happen to America. He has been a smashing success in his goal to "fundamentally transform the United States of America".