View Single Post
  #333 (permalink)  
Old 03-23-2008, 10:46 AM
BigRed BigRed is offline
Analyst
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,083
BigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud ofBigRed has much to be proud of
Credits: 21,175
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C-D-P View Post
Ok, all I had to do was restart. I got the same screen when trying to reply to several threads today. I need to buy a new PC.

Anyway.



Talking about nukes.



Once again talking about nukes. Never have I said they did. I think that the only reference to nukes that I made was when you started talking about them. And what did I say?



Published before we found those 500 pieces of ordinance I referenced earlier.
This?

Lawmakers Cite Weapons Found in Iraq - washingtonpost.com

Here is a quote at the end:
Quote:
Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by C-D-P View Post
I never said they had nukes. It was stated that we believed he was furthering his CB weapons research, and may have CB weapons, it was also believed that he may have been attempting to start his nuclear program again.
I was just bringing further evidence to knock down any claims that he had WMD's before the invasion and that it was a reason to invade. I also knocked down the CB weapons claim and the claim that he was attemping to build his nuclear program back up. So with all these things I've been knocking down, what other reason is there to invade Iraq? I still haven't found it and I haven't been given a strong reason yet.
Reply With Quote