Miss GW Yet?

[Dos Equis]

Sounds like we are saying the same thing then.  I agree they didn't go to war totally for oil and our government isn't also an oil company. 

But these believe it was a big par of it.

Our companies went in their and profited from their oil in many ways.  It looks like as time when on, we let go of some of it, prolly becuase ti wasn't as profitable.

Here are some other quotes:

Husayn al-Shahristani, Iraq Oil Minister, 23 May 2006:
"There is need to pass an oil and gas law to guarantee the right conditions for international companies to help develop the Iraqi oil sector... We will start contacts with the largest oil companies in the world who want to come in".

Ahmad Chalabi, former Chair of Energy Council (responsible for high-level oil policy in Ja'afari government), November 2005:
"In order to make major quantum increases in oil, we need to have production-sharing agreements"

Shamkhi Faraj, Director General of marketing and economics, Ministry of Oil, April 2006:
"The investment law could take some time and we are not prepared to wait for that long... I think (negotiations) can happen very fast. I am confident that we can do our own legislation within the  contract itself to assure the investors that if any new regulation comes through it will not affect them. What we have on offer are the oilfields in the south, the big ones that will add some 3 million barrels per day to our production and that's what the big companies are looking for."

Yeah I think we pretty much agree. 

Regarding PSAs, I haven't looked at this issue since I argued about this with Decker years ago, but I recall the PSAs involved foreign oil companies going in and competing for contracts. 

[bears]

here's what I know........nothing really.

i'm just guessing. 

[blacken700]

according to blacken no.  Clinton was trying to stop sadaam's nuclear program.  but that was in 1998.  in 2001, a whole 2 and a half years later Sadaam didn't want anything to do with a nuclear program.  he just gave it all up and wanted to live on the straight and narrow.

and just when he turned his life around GWB came in and attacked him.  poor guy.

this is what Blacken actually believes.  its fuckin scary.

I see your telling some stories now,lets get back to the facts,some thing bears seems to be omitting.first did they or did they not find wmd's the answer is no  so if he didn't have them in 2001 he most likely didn't have them in 98,so maybe just maybe the intel was wrong,not like it's never happened before.
                               bears from page 6
and wait.  YOU show ME the evidence that GWB and his buddies knowingly conspired to go to war over falsified evidence.  i'll be waiting.  why is there a burden of proof on me and not you?  oh that's right i know.

More than five years after the initial invasion of Iraq, the Senate Intelligence Committee has finally gone on the record: the Bush administration misused, and in some cases disregarded, intelligence which led the nation into war. The two final sections of a long-delayed and much anticipated "Phase II" report on the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence, released on Thursday morning, accuse senior White House officials of repeatedly misrepresenting the threat posed by Iraq.

[dario73]

Is slick willy an intelligence analysis that did the research and analyzed it himself or was he presented hand picked evidence?

Was Bush an intelligence analysis that did the research and analyzed it himself or was he presented hand picked evidence?

So why all the Bush hate?


You fell into that one.

[bears]

I see your telling some stories now,lets get back to the facts,some thing bears seems to be omitting.first did they or did they not find wmd's the answer is no  so if he didn't have them in 2001 he most likely didn't have them in 98,so maybe just maybe the intel was wrong,not like it's never happened before.
                               bears from page 6
and wait.  YOU show ME the evidence that GWB and his buddies knowingly conspired to go to war over falsified evidence.  i'll be waiting.  why is there a burden of proof on me and not you?  oh that's right i know.

More than five years after the initial invasion of Iraq, the Senate Intelligence Committee has finally gone on the record: the Bush administration misused, and in some cases disregarded, intelligence which led the nation into war. The two final sections of a long-delayed and much anticipated "Phase II" report on the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence, released on Thursday morning, accuse senior White House officials of repeatedly misrepresenting the threat posed by Iraq.

why do you keep posting the same fucking copy and paste??? 

here's something you don't understand.  these accusations were NEVER proven.  that's all they were.  accusations. 

but you're not concerned with having all of the facts.  all you have to see is that he was ACCUSED and you copy and paste it.  because you troll the internet for ammunition not information.

try again. 

no one has ever been able to prove what you're accusing him of.  You're just like every other asshole who saw Fahrenheit 911 and believed every single fucking word of it because why?  well because you wanted to believe every fucking word.  now stop it.  you're embarrassing yourself.

[blacken700]

why do you keep posting the same fucking copy and paste??? 

here's something you don't understand.  these accusations were NEVER proven.  that's all they were.  accusations. 

but you're not concerned with having all of the facts.  all you have to see is that he was ACCUSED and you copy and paste it.  because you troll the internet for ammunition not information.

try again. 

no one has ever been able to prove what you're accusing him of.  You're just like every other asshole who saw Fahrenheit 911 and believed every single fucking word of it because why?  well because you wanted to believe every fucking word.  now stop it.  you're embarrassing yourself.

comparing fahrenhewit 911 to a  Senate Intelligence Committee  lol talk about grasping at straws .seems your the one that doesn't like facts or should I say the facts that don't fit your agenda.still waiting for the pictures of the wmd's

[blacken700]

here's some more facts for you 


After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration formed the Iraq Survey Group and tasked it with the job of locating WMD stockpiles in Iraq. The ISG was staffed with hundreds of intelligence analysts and military personnel from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. The group scoured Iraq, searching for deposits of weapons. But that was actually only part of the ISG’s focus.

According to the ISG final report, the search for WMDs actually began during the invasion phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom. A military task force was deployed to investigate suspected WMD sites on the theory that the Iraqi military might otherwise employ those weapons against coalition troops. After the invasion, the ISG was established to conduct "a more systematic collection of evidence to build an understanding of Iraqi WMD programs." In other words, the ISG did not simply look for WMDs. The group also looked at Iraq’s WMD capabilities and examined evidence relating to past WMD stockpiles.

During its investigation, the ISG reported that "[a] total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear to have been part of pre-1991 Gulf war stocks based on their physical condition and residual components." These isolated discoveries received significant media attention, and it’s likely that these overhyped reports contributed to your friends’ beliefs that Iraq really did possess WMDs. But the finds were rare, and the ISG concluded that they were not part of a significant stockpile of weapons. Indeed, after nearly two years of investigation, the ISG concluded that:
◾"Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program."
◾"While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter."
◾"In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW [biological warfare] weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes."

Experts from the three nations failed to document any existent biological or nuclear weapons and discovered only a few random chemical weapons. The ISG concluded that contrary to what most of the world had believed, Iraq had abandoned attempts to produce WMDs. In his congressional testimony, the head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, admitted, "We were almost all wrong" on Iraq.

The ISG report was sufficient to convince the Bush administration that there were no WMDs to be found; they called off the search in 2005. If that doesn’t convince your friends, we’re not sure what else might do the trick. Anyone who believes something without any positive evidence and in the face of evidence to the contrary is no longer acting on the basis of reason.

-Joe Miller

[bears]

comparing fahrenhewit 911 to a  Senate Intelligence Committee  lol talk about grasping at straws .seems your the one that doesn't like facts or should I say the facts that don't fit your agenda.still waiting for the pictures of the wmd's

not comparing them.  just bringing light to the fact that you probably believed every word.  which you did.  you still probably do.

and i'm still waiting for GWB to be charged with anything.  if they could prove ANY of it.  he would have been.  

[blacken700]

here's some more facts for you 


After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration formed the Iraq Survey Group and tasked it with the job of locating WMD stockpiles in Iraq. The ISG was staffed with hundreds of intelligence analysts and military personnel from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. The group scoured Iraq, searching for deposits of weapons. But that was actually only part of the ISG’s focus.

According to the ISG final report, the search for WMDs actually began during the invasion phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom. A military task force was deployed to investigate suspected WMD sites on the theory that the Iraqi military might otherwise employ those weapons against coalition troops. After the invasion, the ISG was established to conduct "a more systematic collection of evidence to build an understanding of Iraqi WMD programs." In other words, the ISG did not simply look for WMDs. The group also looked at Iraq’s WMD capabilities and examined evidence relating to past WMD stockpiles.

During its investigation, the ISG reported that "[a] total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear to have been part of pre-1991 Gulf war stocks based on their physical condition and residual components." These isolated discoveries received significant media attention, and it’s likely that these overhyped reports contributed to your friends’ beliefs that Iraq really did possess WMDs. But the finds were rare, and the ISG concluded that they were not part of a significant stockpile of weapons. Indeed, after nearly two years of investigation, the ISG concluded that:
◾"Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program."
◾"While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter."
◾"In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW [biological warfare] weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes."

Experts from the three nations failed to document any existent biological or nuclear weapons and discovered only a few random chemical weapons. The ISG concluded that contrary to what most of the world had believed, Iraq had abandoned attempts to produce WMDs. In his congressional testimony, the head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, admitted, "We were almost all wrong" on Iraq.

The ISG report was sufficient to convince the Bush administration that there were no WMDs to be found; they called off the search in 2005. If that doesn’t convince your friends, we’re not sure what else might do the trick. Anyone who believes something without any positive evidence and in the face of evidence to the contrary is no longer acting on the basis of reason.

-Joe Miller

[bears]

here's some more facts for you 


After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration formed the Iraq Survey Group and tasked it with the job of locating WMD stockpiles in Iraq. The ISG was staffed with hundreds of intelligence analysts and military personnel from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. The group scoured Iraq, searching for deposits of weapons. But that was actually only part of the ISG’s focus.

According to the ISG final report, the search for WMDs actually began during the invasion phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom. A military task force was deployed to investigate suspected WMD sites on the theory that the Iraqi military might otherwise employ those weapons against coalition troops. After the invasion, the ISG was established to conduct "a more systematic collection of evidence to build an understanding of Iraqi WMD programs." In other words, the ISG did not simply look for WMDs. The group also looked at Iraq’s WMD capabilities and examined evidence relating to past WMD stockpiles.

During its investigation, the ISG reported that "[a] total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear to have been part of pre-1991 Gulf war stocks based on their physical condition and residual components." These isolated discoveries received significant media attention, and it’s likely that these overhyped reports contributed to your friends’ beliefs that Iraq really did possess WMDs. But the finds were rare, and the ISG concluded that they were not part of a significant stockpile of weapons. Indeed, after nearly two years of investigation, the ISG concluded that:
◾"Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program."
◾"While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter."
◾"In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW [biological warfare] weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes."

Experts from the three nations failed to document any existent biological or nuclear weapons and discovered only a few random chemical weapons. The ISG concluded that contrary to what most of the world had believed, Iraq had abandoned attempts to produce WMDs. In his congressional testimony, the head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, admitted, "We were almost all wrong" on Iraq.

The ISG report was sufficient to convince the Bush administration that there were no WMDs to be found; they called off the search in 2005. If that doesn’t convince your friends, we’re not sure what else might do the trick. Anyone who believes something without any positive evidence and in the face of evidence to the contrary is no longer acting on the basis of reason.

-Joe Miller

"In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed. ... There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate."

In a minority report authored by Sens. Orrin Hatch, Christopher Bond and Richard Burr, the Republicans accuse committee Democrats of committing a key error of governmental logic. "Intelligence informs policy. It does not dictate policy," they wrote. "Intelligence professionals are responsible for their failures in intelligence collection, analysis, counter-intelligence and covert action. Policymakers must also bear the burden of their mistakes, an entirely different order of mistakes. It is a pity this report fails to illuminate this distinction."



from your own article that you posted. 

[blacken700]

no pictures because there wasn't any,or is this report wrong too because it doesn't fit your agenda


[

here's some more facts for you 


After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration formed the Iraq Survey Group and tasked it with the job of locating WMD stockpiles in Iraq. The ISG was staffed with hundreds of intelligence analysts and military personnel from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. The group scoured Iraq, searching for deposits of weapons. But that was actually only part of the ISG’s focus.

According to the ISG final report, the search for WMDs actually began during the invasion phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom. A military task force was deployed to investigate suspected WMD sites on the theory that the Iraqi military might otherwise employ those weapons against coalition troops. After the invasion, the ISG was established to conduct "a more systematic collection of evidence to build an understanding of Iraqi WMD programs." In other words, the ISG did not simply look for WMDs. The group also looked at Iraq’s WMD capabilities and examined evidence relating to past WMD stockpiles.

During its investigation, the ISG reported that "[a] total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear to have been part of pre-1991 Gulf war stocks based on their physical condition and residual components." These isolated discoveries received significant media attention, and it’s likely that these overhyped reports contributed to your friends’ beliefs that Iraq really did possess WMDs. But the finds were rare, and the ISG concluded that they were not part of a significant stockpile of weapons. Indeed, after nearly two years of investigation, the ISG concluded that:
◾"Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program."
◾"While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter."
◾"In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW [biological warfare] weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes."

Experts from the three nations failed to document any existent biological or nuclear weapons and discovered only a few random chemical weapons. The ISG concluded that contrary to what most of the world had believed, Iraq had abandoned attempts to produce WMDs. In his congressional testimony, the head of the ISG, Charles Duelfer, admitted, "We were almost all wrong" on Iraq.

The ISG report was sufficient to convince the Bush administration that there were no WMDs to be found; they called off the search in 2005. If that doesn’t convince your friends, we’re not sure what else might do the trick. Anyone who believes something without any positive evidence and in the face of evidence to the contrary is no longer acting on the basis of reason.

-Joe Miller

[blacken700]

maybe you can list some repubs that disagree with it lol

[bears]

maybe you can list some repubs that disagree with it lol

LOL!  I know blacken someday I hope to see things as objectively as you do. 

[blacken700]

LOL!  I know blacken someday I hope to see things as objectively as you do. 

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

[bears]

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

  "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations.  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."
 
 Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
     Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
     December 16, 1998

how about the House Intelligence Committee, namely Nancy Pelosi?

I ASSUME THAT YOU NOW BELIEVE SHE IS A LIAR AND NOT TO BE TRUSTED???

[bears]

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction.  It has refused to take those steps.  That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."

     Senator Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada)
     Addressing the US Senate
     October 9, 2002
     Congressional Record, p. S10145


or Harry Reid? 

I am assuming you now think he is a liar and not to be trusted as well

[bears]

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

"We must exercise responsibility not just at home, but around the world.  On the eve of a new century, we have the power and the duty to build a new era of peace and security.

 We must combat an unholy axis of new threats from terrorists, international criminals, and drug traffickers.  These 21st century predators feed on technology and the free flow of information... And they will be all the more lethal if weapons of mass destruction fall into their hands.

 Together, we must confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons and the outlaw states, terrorists, and organized criminals seeking to acquire them.  Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
     President Clinton
     State of the Union address
     January 27, 1998

     http://freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html#Heu6cOcHyc

     http://clinton5.nara.gov/textonly/WH/SOTU98/address.html

he's lying here right blacken?  I thought the nuclear program was ended in 1991?  

[bears]

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

 If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."
     President Clinton
     Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
     February 17, 1998


another lie.  nuclear program ended in 1991.  but Clinton said there was "clear evidence".  maybe Clinton was working with Bush.  that's going to be my new conspiracy theory.  he is very close friends with George Bush Sr.

[bears]

so I'm guessing you agree with the report that there were no wmd in Iraq on or after 2001 and that Saddam  ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.if not post a link that proves this  investigation wrong.three repub senators doesn't count

and there you go I gave you 3 democrats.

[bears]

and keep in mind Pelosi and Clinton made those statements before GWB was even in office so I will assume you will be as hard on them as you are on GWB about this?  because according to what YOU said, they ARE lying.

[bears]

US State Department
 November 4, 1998

 Bin Laden, Atef Indicted in U.S. Federal Court for African Bombings

 New York -- Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.

 Bin Laden's "al Qaeda" organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Somalia.

 Bin Laden, the US Attorney charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.

According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the indictment said.

 Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his "fatwah" committees a series of escalating "fatwahs" against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a "fatwah" stating that Muslims should kill Americans -- including civilians -- anywhere in the world they can be found.

JUST ANOTHER LIE BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.   OH WAIT THIS WAS IN 1998.

[bears]

"Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction.  If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future.  Saddam will strike again at his neighbors; he will make war on his own people.  And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction.  He will deploy them, and he will use them."

    President Clinton
    National Address from the Oval Office
    December 16, 1998


LIES!!!!!

[blacken700]

lol this group did their work in 2003 and your posting stuff from the late 1990's,thanks for proving my point that the intell was faulty.now back to the 2003 report do you agree that their were no wmds in iraq

[RRKore]

and keep in mind Pelosi and Clinton made those statements before GWB was even in office so I will assume you will be as hard on them as you are on GWB about this.  because according to what YOU said, they ARE lying.

C'mon, it's not reasonable to be just as hard on Pelosi, Clinton or anyone other than the president at the time for it's GWB that gave the final word on the invasion.  Had Pelosi, Clinton, or whomever been in a position to make that call, I'd hope they'd have done a better job than Bush at getting confirmation about intelligence (that turned out to be inaccurate) before using it to sell the citizenry on going to war.  Too many innocent people died as a result of either incompetence or straight up lying.  (Perhaps as many as 751,000 one prominent study says, lol.)

[bears]

lol this group did their work in 2003 and your posting stuff from the late 1990's,thanks for proving my point that the intell was faulty.now back to the 2003 report do you agree that their were no wmds in iraq

you need to start reading your own posts.  didn't you JUST say that Sadaam's nuclear program was ended in 1991?  

I have thoroughly owned you enough for today I think.  now you're just trying to salvage some dignity by trying to change what your claims were.