13 ms·

This isn't some lowbrow conspiracy site, and I don't expect the participants to have the sort of superficial, facile understanding of world events that you've s

by personZ 12y ago

This isn't some lowbrow conspiracy site, and I don't expect the participants to have the sort of superficial, facile understanding of world events that you've so evidently demonstrated. If reality makes you "pissed", you should stick to gentler pastures that conform with your worldview. I don't think the US should have invaded Iraq for purely pragmatic and financial reasons. That does nothing to change the actual complex, convoluted reality that led to the decisions that were made, and then the long and fruitless, but very intense, search for WMDs after the attack.

lotsofmangos 12y ago
You know, we found WMDs after the attack. They were just the wrong ones. President George W Bush led the US into war in Iraq on the back of assertions that Saddam Hussein had recently-built weapons of mass destruction, supplies that had only increased in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks. Yet all the chemical weapons found by soldiers were manufactured before 1991, the Times reported. They consisted largely of 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets – not designed for mass destruction, and produced in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war. According to the Times, the reports were embarrassing for the Pentagon because, in five of the six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been “designed in the US, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies”. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/iraqs-hidden-chemical-weapons-us-covered-up-discovery-of-chemical-weapons-after-2003-invasion--and-many-are-now-in-isiss-hands-9795485.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/iraqs-hidde...
- corin_ 12y ago
  > we found WMDs after the attack The text you quote confirms chemical weapons but not weapons on mass destruction
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    They are WMDs by certain standards of international law on the technicality of belonging to a certain class of chemical munitions. The shells they were packaged in were not designed for mass dispersal, however the classification is on the stuff inside the shells.
isaacremuant 12y ago
One day, when you're older, you'll look in the mirror and realize that acting superior and being superior are 2 very different things. Your "reality" is simple regurgation of your own government who has lied time and time again. Your straw-man that I make things simple instead of trying to explain the "complex reality" is pathetic. You're not actually saying much, just evading. We all simplify if we don't want to write an essay but the crux of the issue is that the US government used lies or extremely weak info in order to advance their interests. It doesn't matter if there was weak info or if they DID waste time searching later on. You're probably the kind of guy who says "disposition matrix!" instead of illegal executions and try to rationalize it. Sigh...
- personZ 12y ago
  Evading? How in the... I'm sorry, acting emotionally offended by reality (and hurling spurious and misplaced claims like "kinder garden excuses") is the domain of the rank imbecile, and has absolutely no place on HN. This sounds hostile, but quite honestly you should take it as such - your reply is outrageous nonsense. It is a crime against any reasonable discourse. And FWIW, "my government" is the Canadian government. But remarkably I have an ability to see the world as a complex gradient of shades, where there is no simple right, no simple wrong, and where people who pretend that they are should be mocked into silence.
  - isaacremuant 12y ago
    Your elitist attitude is hilarious considering you've shown no signs of actually having credentials to support it (and, even if you had, an elevated person would not condescend so much). I'm not going to respond much more since there's little point and it doesn't create useful content, just some final bullet points. a) My bad, given how subservient you acted towards official claims I thought you were American. (Sorry, other Americans) b) https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/canada-proclaiming-war-12-years-shocked-someone-attacked-soldiers/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/canada-proclai... still kind of applies considering your attitude. c) The fallacy of complexity you're using against your straw-man that I look at things simplistically or black & white is the same politicians use to further most crimes and illegal activities. See most things related to NSA disclosures and trumping over civil rights in the name of the wars on terror/drugs/etc. d) "mocked into silence"? You can yell all you want and people will leave you alone because you're disgusting to be with or talk to. That doesn't make you right. Good bye.

by personZ 12y ago

lotsofmangos 12y ago

You know, we found WMDs after the attack. They were just the wrong ones. President George W Bush led the US into war in Iraq on the back of assertions that Saddam Hussein had recently-built weapons of mass destruction, supplies that had only increased in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attacks. Yet all the chemical weapons found by soldiers were manufactured before 1991, the Times reported. They consisted largely of 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets – not designed for mass destruction, and produced in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war. According to the Times, the reports were embarrassing for the Pentagon because, in five of the six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been “designed in the US, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies”. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/iraqs-hidden-chemical-weapons-us-covered-up-discovery-of-chemical-weapons-after-2003-invasion--and-many-are-now-in-isiss-hands-9795485.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/iraqs-hidde...

corin_ 12y ago
> we found WMDs after the attack The text you quote confirms chemical weapons but not weapons on mass destruction
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  They are WMDs by certain standards of international law on the technicality of belonging to a certain class of chemical munitions. The shells they were packaged in were not designed for mass dispersal, however the classification is on the stuff inside the shells.

isaacremuant 12y ago

One day, when you're older, you'll look in the mirror and realize that acting superior and being superior are 2 very different things. Your "reality" is simple regurgation of your own government who has lied time and time again. Your straw-man that I make things simple instead of trying to explain the "complex reality" is pathetic. You're not actually saying much, just evading. We all simplify if we don't want to write an essay but the crux of the issue is that the US government used lies or extremely weak info in order to advance their interests. It doesn't matter if there was weak info or if they DID waste time searching later on. You're probably the kind of guy who says "disposition matrix!" instead of illegal executions and try to rationalize it. Sigh...

personZ 12y ago
Evading? How in the... I'm sorry, acting emotionally offended by reality (and hurling spurious and misplaced claims like "kinder garden excuses") is the domain of the rank imbecile, and has absolutely no place on HN. This sounds hostile, but quite honestly you should take it as such - your reply is outrageous nonsense. It is a crime against any reasonable discourse. And FWIW, "my government" is the Canadian government. But remarkably I have an ability to see the world as a complex gradient of shades, where there is no simple right, no simple wrong, and where people who pretend that they are should be mocked into silence.
- isaacremuant 12y ago
  Your elitist attitude is hilarious considering you've shown no signs of actually having credentials to support it (and, even if you had, an elevated person would not condescend so much). I'm not going to respond much more since there's little point and it doesn't create useful content, just some final bullet points. a) My bad, given how subservient you acted towards official claims I thought you were American. (Sorry, other Americans) b) https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/canada-proclaiming-war-12-years-shocked-someone-attacked-soldiers/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/22/canada-proclai... still kind of applies considering your attitude. c) The fallacy of complexity you're using against your straw-man that I look at things simplistically or black & white is the same politicians use to further most crimes and illegal activities. See most things related to NSA disclosures and trumping over civil rights in the name of the wars on terror/drugs/etc. d) "mocked into silence"? You can yell all you want and people will leave you alone because you're disgusting to be with or talk to. That doesn't make you right. Good bye.