• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

PM Chretein did all right by us

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
4,351
Points
1,110
:goodpost:

He gassed the Kurds in Northern Iraq, and IIRC the Iranians in 1988.

Not a pleasant chap.
 

Tristan

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
10
Pusser said:
And what proof do you offer that he was lying? 

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi now characterizes his past statements as "lies". Admittedly, things get pretty circular pretty quickly when you're relying on a liar to confirm that he was lying.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/man-whose-wmd-lies-led-to-100000-deaths-confesses-all-7606236.html

Edit: Including the link might be helpful.  :facepalm:

(An odd first post, I know - but I just happened to be reading this article and browsing this thread simultaneously. Back to lurking!)
 

GK .Dundas

Sr. Member
Reaction score
339
Points
730
I seem to recall that there had been some planning to deploy what amounted to a  ad-hoc short light armoured brigade heavy on recce assets . Supposedly the planning cell spent a couple of weeks putting it all together . And were told at the last moment  Forget it! We're going some where else.Somewhere else was Afghanistan .
 

cphansen

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Jim Seggie said:
:goodpost:

He gassed the Kurds in Northern Iraq, and IIRC the Iranians in 1988.

Not a pleasant chap.

Oh you're right not a pleasant chap and no one would deny he gassed the Kurds and the Iranians before the first USA Iraq war but after George Bush invaded and limited the invasion of Iraq, which I by the way supported, Hussein got rid of his chemical weapons. When GW invaded Iraq, there were no weapons of mass destruction found, and don't think the Americans didn't do a great job of searching for them. But they didn't find them, day after day there were reports of WMD found and then a few days later they were found to be something other WMD, ie industrial or agricultural chemicals.
 

cphansen

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Jed said:
I call BS SherH2A. We are being trolled. No one can be this blind to all the direct anecdotal response to the original post.

The direct anecdotal response is not to the fact that the WMD used to justify the invasion but rather to the fact I used Chretien's name. The moment I used Chretien's name the issue became one of him being responsible for the duress of the Canadian Forces during the 90's. People here do not seem to be able to look beyond Chretien's name. It seems to be a Wolverton reaction as when the inhabitants of Dog River in Corner Gas automatically spit when they hear the name of their rival town.

I am very disappointed in this.  I have a lot of respect for the posters here because I thought they could step beyond their comfort boundaries and examine facts dispassionately, but they are just human and are guided by their own passions.
 

cphansen

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
fraserdw said:
No trolling there....... ::)

Sorry if that seems like trolling to you. I unfortunately just got angry at the way everyone ignored the fact that the Iraq invasion was NOT a justified war. I look upon it more as a freebooting expedition when even the US administration said the war would pay for itself when they got control of the Iraq oil fields.

 

Pusser

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
430
SherH2A said:
day after day there were reports of WMD found and then a few days later they were found to be something other WMD, ie industrial or agricultural chemicals.

However, the chemicals used in WMDs often started out as industrial or agricultural chemicals.  The chlorine gas first used in WWI started out as a laundry whitener and in fact, is still used as such.  Sarin, was actually first developed as a pesticide.  In fact, many modern day pesticides and insect repellants are actually low-grade nerve agents. 
 
A

aesop081

Guest
SherH2A said:
The invasion of Iraq was not a just war, it was based upon one person's lie and a government's willingness to grasp at anything to justify their desire to invade and use Iraq's oil resources to pay for it.

Loosen your tinfoil hat...........
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
941
Points
1,060
SherH2A said:
The direct anecdotal response is not to the fact that the WMD used to justify the invasion but rather to the fact I used Chretien's name. The moment I used Chretien's name the issue became one of him being responsible for the duress of the Canadian Forces during the 90's. People here do not seem to be able to look beyond Chretien's name. It seems to be a Wolverton reaction as when the inhabitants of Dog River in Corner Gas automatically spit when they hear the name of their rival town.

I am very disappointed in this.  I have a lot of respect for the posters here because I thought they could step beyond their comfort boundaries and examine facts dispassionately, but they are just human and are guided by their own passions.
  Then you obviously didn't read my response.

Chretien didn't keep us out of Iraq due to any sense of honour or anything of the like.

I'm not raising any bitterness over the years of darkness of him treating us as Canada's Boy Scouts.

He kept us out because him and his real employer (Power Corp) were up to their eyeballs in an oil scandal and the business partner they were working with was good old Saddam.

You can't prove there were no WMDs, but the evidence is more that sufficient of his (Power Corp) involvement in the Oil for Food Scandal.

You can believe what you want. Chretien kept us clear because it would have cost his company plenty. It all boiled down to the buck and bad publicity for his bosses.

I also don't agree the war was unjustified. Saddam and his whole infrastructure had to go.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,366
Points
1,260
SherH2A said:
I am very disappointed in this.  I have a lot of respect for the posters here because I thought they could step beyond their comfort boundaries and examine facts dispassionately, but they are just human and are guided by their own passions.

OK Commander Data.
 

Jed

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
SherH2A said:
--- People here do not seem to be able to look beyond Chretien's name. It seems to be a Wolverton reaction as when the inhabitants of Dog River in Corner Gas automatically spit when they hear the name of their rival town.

I am very disappointed in this.  I have a lot of respect for the posters here because I thought they could step beyond their comfort boundaries and examine facts dispassionately, but they are just human and are guided by their own passions.

Well did you ever consider that these numerous instances have indelibly imprinted themselves in the minds of many of these posters? I would say if the shoe fits, wear it.

The same reaction will occur if you ever discuss the NEP (National Energy Policy) with anyone who was drastically effected economically by this bit of sage wisdom from the Federal Government.
 
J

jollyjacktar

Guest
SherH2A said:
The direct anecdotal response is not to the fact that the WMD used to justify the invasion but rather to the fact I used Chretien's name. The moment I used Chretien's name the issue became one of him being responsible for the duress of the Canadian Forces during the 90's. People here do not seem to be able to look beyond Chretien's name. It seems to be a Wolverton reaction as when the inhabitants of Dog River in Corner Gas automatically spit when they hear the name of their rival town.

I am very disappointed in this.  I have a lot of respect for the posters here because I thought they could step beyond their comfort boundaries and examine facts dispassionately, but they are just human and are guided by their own passions.
Well, SherH2A you did not serve during this POS's reign.  Hell, you barely served under his evil master's.  I would submit that unless you have walked a mile in our moccasins (and you haven't), you're in no position to comment/critize our hatred of him.  And as such, I am disappointed that you cannot accept we don't agree to your assumption we did all right by his decisions.

I won't dog pile you for your stand on Iraq, as you know the old saying "opinions are like assholes, everyone has one".  You just don't share the majority of the poster's opinions here.  I'll just finish with my final comment to my wife during a "heated discussion".  "well, one of us is wrong, and I don't think it's me".
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
658
Points
1,260
jollyjacktar said:
I'll just finish with my final comment to my wife during a "heated discussion".  "well, one of us is wrong, and I don't think it's me".

My wife always forgives me when she is wrong.  :)
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,160
Points
1,010
>Ther were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq

I say again: chemical weapons were found.  WMD includes nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Ergo, WMD were found.  Do you comprehend these simple statements?
 

cupper

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Brad Sallows said:
>Ther were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq

I say again: chemical weapons were found.  WMD includes nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.  Ergo, WMD were found.  Do you comprehend these simple statements?

Umm... much as I HATE to stick up for the trolling tinfoil hats, the was never any conclusive evidence found of any functional WMD program in Iraq post the first Gulf War.

Most of the interviews of captured Iraqis who were confirmed to have been involved in various programs all admitted to fudging data or outright lying to Hussein about what was going on in order to avoid punishment.

As for Curveball, yes he lied. But the US was also informed by European agencies who made first contact with him that the information he provided could not be independently verified, and was deeply suspect. Senior WH officials (read the VP's office) over ruled their own analysts and included this information in the summary.

Having said all of this, I still have to agree with the majority here that the OP is a trolling tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist that essentially knows only enough to be dangerous. Perhaps he should read more of the various tomes that have been written on the subject by well respected and credible journalists, and avoid getting sucked into reading blogs devoted to anti-Bush drivel.
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,100
Points
940
cupper said:
Having said all of this, I still have to agree with the majority here that
the OP is a trolling tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist that essentially knows only enough to be dangerous.

One just has to appreciate a subtle turn of phrase.  ;D
 

lethalLemon

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Chemical weapons are very easy to hide and go undetected even if it's under one's nose. Mustard gas had been found to be in use in multiple soil tests. The actual deliverable and weaponized mustard gas was not located but nonetheless, present.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,160
Points
1,010
I didn't write that a functional WMD program was found.  I wrote that chemical weapons were found.  There were not supposed to be any, period.

The US didn't fear that Saddam Hussein would use chemical weapons against the US.  The US feared that Saddam Hussein would allow (by act or neglect) chemical weapons to fall into the hands of terrorist groups.  While Iraq evidently had no "hard" links to Al Qaeda, Iraq certainly had "hard" links to other terrorists.  "Threat of supplying nukes directly to Al Qaeda" may be the only talking point for some, but it was not the only threat.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
4,351
Points
1,110
As has been said before, insecticides are a form of nerve agent and it would not surprise me if Iraq had hidden their assets in plain sight.

IMO, the world is better off without that murdering genocidal psycho. He should have been taken out in 1991......
 
Top