Tornado Alley (PROG)

[woofer]

Geeeeeeez, there's a whole lot to address in your post.

1) We don't know if there were WMD or not. It's not a false claim unless it's known to be false at the time, and we don't know what was there at the time.

BEFORE we started Shock and Awe, the inspectors had spent months looking for WMD and couldn't find anything. Do you think it was fair then, to carry through with Shock and Awe?

2) They didn't even say they knew there was WMD, it was the fact that Saddam had gone to the trouble to buy off officials in governments.

Maybe you could read this?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/

Better yet, watch this....

3) To recruit spy's in the inspection teams so they always knew it was coming.

If you think that there were spies on the inspection teams, I don't know how I can debate you on anything at all though.

4) There were communications recorded of an inspection location being warned to move material on more than one occasion.

Show me where you got this bit of info (link, please).

5) The report by all countries took this into account.

Took exactly what into account?

6) Why would Saddam go to all that trouble, risking war over the cheating and breaking the treaty again, if there was nothing to hide? That is what that was based on.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. What "trouble" are you talking about? Are you saying that he risked everything by hiding WMD from inspectors?

7) Sure, the CIA came out and said there was no WMD, soon after they found a squadron of fighter jets buried in the sand, they didn't know those were there, what if they had been WMD?

You obviously didn't read the inspection reports. Iraq disclosed them. Besides, when have fighter jets been considered WMD?

8) There was residue of Mustard agent in the Tigris river.

That's too funny to even address. I am chuckling though.

9) An Iraqi AF General said they had taken loads of WMD to Syria in Cargo planes.

Can you provide the link please. I don't like statements like this without a source.

10) We didn't search 100% of the country. That is not really possible.

I'm not going to check right now, but I think Iraq is about the size of Texas. Scratch that. Here's a map....
http://www.vendian.org/mncharity/dir3/iraq_map/

Please tell me that you're aware of this.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB88/

11) The report that said they were absolutely sure there had no WMD? Done by the same agency that said there was WMD? Hello? Do you trust the first report less than the next? Why?

I'm confused. What agency are you referring to? If it's the IAEA, show me where they ever stated that Iraq had WMD or didn't have them.

12) Bush would have been a monumental moron to ignore reports from all the members of the UN security council, that situation was such we have to assume Saddam had WMD, and he was an imminent threat to use it.

Bush is a monumental moron and he certainly did ignore the reports. And for you to say that "we have to assume Saddam had WMD" is ludicrous. Bush says so, so we should assume?
http://www.bushlies.net/

13) There is all kinds of speculation as to why he went to war, even though almost every democrat was in it with him and most of the talking louder.

This is the first statement of yours that I agree with up to a point. Where I disagree is that there were slightly more Republicans who were vocal on the matter, but I'd say that it was pretty close to being even-steven.

14) The speculation is without exception, idiotic. His friends were in oil, his daddy was in oil, his daddy was under threat from Saddam, blaugh blaugh blaugh ... Stupid.

Speculation was not idiotic at all. It was, and probably still is a topic of interest.

15) Now what Intelligence Agency makes a definitive statement about an unproven negative?

I'm assuming you are referring to the IAEA. Show me the definitive statement you are talking about.

16) THEY DON'T, I don't know what the heck they were thinking, but that is absolutely not a professional evaluation.

Chuckling again. Are you suggesting that the IAEA didn't give a professional evaluation? And just out of curiosity, when Saddam was accused of having WMD, how do you suppose he was going to prove that he didn't? He did all he could do. He allowed the inspections to go forth.

17) It sounds like a politically motivated superior took over and just made the report.

A little history is in order....

In 1953, U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower envisioned the creation of this international body to control and develop the use of atomic energy, in his "Atoms for Peace" speech before the UN General Assembly. In September 1954 the United States announced to the United Nations General Assembly a plan to create an international agency to take control of the fissile material being used to create nuclear reactors, establishing a kind of nuclear bank, and the United States called for an international scientific conference on all peaceful aspects of atomic energy....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAEA

18) Real officers would be canned over such a ridicules official statement that they can't know to that degree of certainty.

I think this must be a carry-over from your two previous statements.

19) Any report that was credible would have said basically. We didn't find anything and we don't know if there was any. That is as definitive as you can get in that situation. Beyond that is unprofessional political bull.

The IAEA did that. So if I missed the definitive statement you keep mentioning, show me it.