Debating a hardcore freeper, need stark facts

"So, you say that Bush knew about WMD's and lied about them. That means that Britain, Russia, Jordan, Israel, Pakistans intelligences all knew and lied about it too. Those countrys said Iraq had wmd's. What do you expect Bush to do. 5 countries plus the u.s. said he had WMD. If he acts and they weren't there everyone gets ticked off, if they are there and he doesn't react... then there may not be a U.S. any more.

Don't call him a liar, 3 separate investigations, including the 9-11 commission said it wasn't so."

I'm going for the "wake up call" approach with this guy. Any succint counter arguments to "other countries had the same intel"?

And I know the 9-11 commission doesn't say anything like that. Anyone know passages offhand that kill this?

They were not spending intelligence resources looking for WMDs in Iraq.

this is the same shell game Cheney played, leaking fake info to the NY Times, then going on TV holding up the story in the Times!

Unbelievable that nobody can see the fraud, but that's where we are.

here:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/

They have it broken down into sections and you might be able to figure out which one you need to look at.

You have to focus on the emotional, not logical.

Don't bother.

His ego is right now at Richter Scale 8, since he undoubtedly feels complete approbation for his stances.

Don't waste your time with those people. Work the fringes, the wavering ones, the ones that will, in the coming days, weeks, months and years, be bled by this. There is the fertile ground.

Not freepers.

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

link

http://pipa.org/

Freepers are cultists. They're unable to comprehend facts, reason and logic.

This was a chimp appointed commission set up to investigate and make recommendations about pre 9/11 intelligence and intelligence failures.

They would gladly have you believe that this commission had something to do with absolving the chimp in some kind of criminal/court proceeding.It absolutely did not.

Yes. Hussein had WMD...back before the first gulf war the US was selling him the ingredients for bio weapons. So yes, he HAD them.

In 1998, in response to Hussein's attempts to interfere with the work of international inspectors, President Bill Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox, as described here; (Republicans mocked Operation Desert Fox because they thought investigating Bill Clinton's penis was more important than disarming Saddam Hussein)

http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/desert_fox/

MISSION: To strike military and security targets in Iraq that contribute to Iraq's ability to produce, store, maintain and deliver weapons of mass destruction.

MISSION GOALS: To degrade Saddam Hussein's ability to make and to use weapons of mass destruction. To diminish Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war against his neighbors. To demonstrate to Saddam Hussein the consequences of violating international obligations

International inspectors were withdrawn before Operation desert Fox began, and were not back until 2002. They were about to confirm that President Bill Clinton's Operation Desert Fox was a success. Realizing this, George Bush rushed the start of his War for Oil before the inspectors could complete their work.

That's the whole story. Now go tell your freeper friend to go fuck himself.

Facts dont work against freepers.

Firstly, if Bush is so concerned about WMD, ask your friend to explain why Bush failed to secure 380 tons of explosives now being used to blow up our troops.

Secondly, remind him of these words from his man in Iraq, David Kay, "We were all wrong."

You can cross Israel, Jordan and Pakistan off the list upfront, as they're all in the same region as Iraq and had their own politics dictating Saddam be removed. If the U.S. could do the dirty work for them, all the better. They played Bush for a sucker. Not that he needed any extra reason to invade.

Tony Blair chose the path of maintaining Britain's "special relationship" with the U.S. above all things -- Google Robin Cook, Claire Short, and you'll find their statements pointing to how only Blair believed Iraq had WMD and had to work hard to sell it to the rest of the country -- and still hasn't. Also, the so-called intelligence provided by the British was a load of bull (lots of it even culled from a 12 year-old student paper copied off the "Internets") and debunked by former Ambassador Joe Wilson. Because Wilson told the truth of Bush letting loose with mouthfuls of crap during the State of the Union, the Bush regime committed a high act of treason and exposed Wilson's wife as the CIA operative she is.

Finally, remind him the giggling murderer refused to testify under oath to the 9/11 commission and instructed them they couldn't look into in any way, shape or form, his administration's responsibility for 9/11. Also, he had to sit on Uncle Dick's lap, too.

Moral, tough leader my American ass.

The reference to British intelligence claiming that they know of WMD's comes from the magic 16 words in Der Chimp's 2003 State of the Union address. The only reason Chimp foisted the now-disproved claim of WMD knowledge on Britain was that he'd been strongly warned by his own people, including George Tenet, NOT to say that the U.S. knew conclusively of WMDs. In other words, surprise surprise, Chimpie pulled the 16 words directly out of his ass. Here's some more on that subject:

http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/newswires/2003_7_21.html
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2004/09/29/cbs_wmd/
http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/Iraq3Chap2.pdf

Your Freeper buddy should also remember that Russia has repeatedly declined to be a member of the Coalition of the Soon to be Maimed and Killed. Does that sound like a nation that's sure as sh*t that there are WMDs in Iraq? In fact, if I'm not mistaken, not a single one of those nations is a member of the Coalition. Hmm, gee, why not, if they all say Iraq has WMDs?

The 9/11 Commission does not speak at all of Iraq's WMD capability specifically. It references Bin Laden's WMD-mounting capabilities frequently, not Iraq's. One could infer that the 9/11 Commission doesn't regard Iraq among a real threat to Homeland Security. Duh. But here, have your freeper buddy search for himself:
http://www.americanprogress.org/atf/cf/{E9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03}/911Report1.pdf

proved Saddam had the WMDs. Bush didn't exactly let the weapons inspectors fulfill their mandate, did he? Nope...he impatiently decided their time was up and RUSHED TO WAR.

I'll either convert some people or scare them away. Either way is good as far as I'm concerned.