« If President Bush's policies are so 'failed' | Main | Islamic terrorist co-conspirators shot »
November 03, 2006
Ah! The Left's Emily Latilla moment is at hand!
You know it's over for the "Bush Lied, People Died" morons when even the one segment of the Democrat's PR division, the NYTimes, is publishing the fact that Saddam was only one year away from having a nuclear bomb.
Come on, BDS asshats ... where's the "Iraq was based on lies" meme now? The "there is no war on terrorism" mendacities and "Saddam was never a threat" perfidies?
Where are all your Iraqi kites and butterflies under Uncle Saddam now???
Technorati: Democrats, Islamic fascism, Saddam
Posted by Darleen at November 3, 2006 01:06 PM
Comments
They didn't realize at the Times that anyone would read so far down in the article. They had it buried at paragraph #14 or so, under allegations that the Bush administration is helping Iran get nukes.
Posted by: Van Helsing at November 3, 2006 02:28 PM
jesus christ, darleen...how stupid can you and your fellow Wingers be?
Just ask yourself this simple question... It requires a bit of logical thinking however.
If your own reading of the NYT article is such that you believe the claim to be true, then why would the administration, knowing about this program, decide not to say anything about it?
All you need to do really is examine the words ending the preceding revelatory sentence. THose words are "after the Persian Gulf War" In other words, 1991.
Every true weapons expert from our own United States who has investigated this -- I mean David Kay and Charles Duelfer -- has concluded without a doubt that Saddam's scientists stopped the nuclear program after 1991. There was no advance to produce any sort of nuclear bomb. The NYT does not contradict this.
You guys are desperate to find a flaw in the logic of the Left to cover up your own flawed support of Bush's original reason for going to war. And you seem to want to cling to any morsel of stupidity you can.
Posted by: Brad at November 5, 2006 07:29 PM
Every true weapons expert from our own United States who has investigated this -- I mean David Kay and Charles Duelfer -- has concluded without a doubt that Saddam's scientists stopped the nuclear program after 1991. There was no advance to produce any sort of nuclear bomb. The NYT does not contradict this.
And why did they stop their nuclear program after the Gulf War, genius? Could it be because the sanctions put in place prevented them from obtaining the manufacturing capability and raw materials they needed to construct a nuke? We see from the documents recently highlighted by the NYT that Saddam wasn't lacking knowledge or a plan for making nukes. He just needed the tools and raw materials. These, of course, would have become available just as soon as the sanctions were lifted (which France and Russia were pushing strongly for prior to the 2003 invasion).
You know, this is not that difficult to understand. Why are the liberals having so much difficulty comprehending it? Is it because the "Bush is an idiot and screwed things up... AGAIN!" reflex is so hard to overcome? I thought liberals were supposed to be the intellectual betters of us poor, dumb conservatives. Apparently, not so much.
Posted by: VRWC drone at November 6, 2006 09:15 AM
VRWC,
So you're admitting that the sanctions WORKED.
Think about that for a minute.
Posted by: Brad at November 6, 2006 01:45 PM