Believe it? Really? We have death camps? We execute entire villages because someone assasinates one of our officers? We've attacked and occupied all the countries around us, subjecting them to brutal oppression and occupation?

Gee thanks for your oh so reasoned opinion. Obviously we should listen to people like you since you obviously know more about us than we do ourselves. So Mr. Expert, tell me what you think about the following quotes made by those representing the other half of the country you mention:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from USA but, what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has .. chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998.
We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan.23.2003

you qouted democrats like Kerry and Kennedy. :rotfl: Sorry.

Are you saying they're not Democrats? That they aren't leaders of their party?

It's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about. Just another anonymous internet troll with zero credibility trying to stir up trouble.

@ August:
You show poiticians including Democrats from all sides were convinced that Iraq had or was working on a WMD program. Do you realise that means that Bush might not have lied?
You very bad boy, August!
Please never use historic sources again!
Promise?
:D

Wow, and eglish if your first language? :)

Anyone know that Kennedy is a nobody in politics in the US (though at least he's consitent, but he's a joke) and Kerry - well... Comon man, he couldn't beat BUSH! That guy changes positions every single day.. :rotfl: Stop this patronising bullsh*t August, you really are not in any position to call people trolls just because they have an opinion that's differnt to yours. :-j

Saint Cindy demands US end occupation of New Orleans
 

@ Type941:
I find your attack on August a little personal, a little rude and your line of reasoning a little funny.
After all, August also mentioned Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Bob Graham, Madeleine Albright, Hillary Clinton (oops) - apart from Kennedy and Kerry.
Seems to be quite a list of Democrats convinced that Saddam was one way or the other working on WMD's.
Do you mean all major Democrats are nobodies? After all none could beat George Bush!
:D

Uh huh, just admit it you don't have a clue... Why don't you just stick to revisionist Russian history? You're not really any better at it but at least you don't come off sounding like a complete idiot.

So calling people names you don't know makes you look like a very smart person? I rest my case. :rotfl: Sorry but you are too funny sometimes August. I don't think you are a complete idiot btw. I actually enjoy reading your point of views because they are easy to fend off. :up:

Oh, and guess what, I lived in Massachusets for quite some time, so I think i can speak a little bit on Kennedy and Kerry. :roll:

I'm sorry you feel insulted, but i'm just calling it as it see it. Nobody in their right mind that knows anything about Massachusetts or the American government would say that "Kennedy is a nobody in politics in the US (though at least he's consitent, but he's a joke)". Nobody.

He's one of the most powerful Democrats of all time, certainly one of current ones. The man has been a US Senator since 1962. He is the senior Democrat on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee in the Senate. He also serves on the Judiciary Committee, where he is the senior Democrat on the Immigration Subcommittee, and the Armed Services Committee, where he is the senior Democrat on the Seapower Subcommittee. He is also a member of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee.

Then there's his family, brother to a martyred President and brother to another that would have been President, both among the most popular politicans in American history. Son of wealth and power that extends back to the beginning of the 20th century. Kennedy family tentacles are deep and extend far beyond the Bay State.

Now for someone to dismiss him as a "nobody" only shows that they do not have any clue what they are talking about.

Like i said, stick to Russian revisionist history, you're better at it.

Blah blah, what has Kennedy done? And I don't mean his family. :roll: I don't know what he's been doing in the 60s, but he's consitently strong anti republican, his statements are very much into Dean terretory (now is he sane?) and overall it's important what's he doing now, not 30 years ago. I didn't take any offence, if I had I'd probably call you some name as well. I think you just sunk into arrogance and patronising crap way too deep to look at other people's opinions objectively - but than again, it's trend...

His dynasty is a just what's been done in the past, but nothing in the future. There's in my view, only 1 dynasty in the US right now that's worth noting, and is much more powerful than Kennedy - that of Bush... 3 presidential terms, governors, etc. I doubt Kennedy clan can rival that. They were the darlings of america, the Kennedy's, while the Bushes are the ones with power. Democrat's power in america now is not so great, so being the most powerful democrat (which I think probably goes to the clintons and not kennedy!) is not that much of an achivement when compared to what the republicans are doing. If you just keep calling me idiot every time you complete your sentence that tells volumes about your level. Which thus far hasn't been much. None of what you said was an objective opinion, but subjective blah from someone who probably never even left the US to see what's out there in other countries. Am I wrong? I hope so!

You could have saved a lot of typing because that is what your post comes down to.

but i was referring to your post!! :doh: :rotfl:

Your post was nothing but babble. It doesn't really matter what you were referring to.

No no, you didn't understand me. When I said 'blah blah' I just referred to your previous post which was simply another rant that was patronising and condescending just because the opinion was different to yours. It was a very valid response, I don't get why you keep attacking on this issue whereas you base the offence only on your own biased opinion! :yep:

More babble.

Look, you cherry picked two people out of a fairly big list of extremely prominent Democrats, including both Clintons. You've heard of the Democrats haven't you? The ones who represent "half of the country less a few hundred thousand" as you put it?

I pointed out that you were dead wrong about Kennedy and you got all defensive about it, like you do whenever someone disagrees with you. I'm just returning your fire and i must admit i'm beginning to enjoy it.

So let's get this straight once and for all, since i'm sure our exchange is boring the rest of the people reading it. Saying what you did about Kennedy shows that you have absolutely no clue how the US government works. If you want to keep digging yourself into a hole i'll be happy to keep shovelling dirt in on top of you.