Look closer. Think harder. Choose the sound argument over the clever one.

Monday, July 07, 2008

Saddam's Yellowcake

How about that? Saddam had 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium after all.

Comments:

(Please keep in mind that each commenter's opinions are only his/her own.)



As the article says, "Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said."

So apparently everyone knew about this yellowcake. It was there in 1991. If it has been seen as any kind of threat what-so-ever wouldn't Bush the Elder have taken the initiative to remove it?

The fact that you raving Bush apologists are trying to twist this very old well-known story into some kind of rationale for our grand three trillion dollar war would be laughable if it were not so pathetic.
 


Hi! Thanks for taking time to comment. Thanks for looking closer than I did, too. I glossed over the key parts you mentioned, and my original comment is off in light of that. Thanks for pointing that out.

The news is that it's finally safe, as opposed to still being in Saddam's Iraq. (Recall that David Kay said, "... what we learned during the inspection made [Saddam's] Iraq a more dangerous place potentially, than in fact we thought it was even before the war.")

If it has been seen as any kind of threat what-so-ever wouldn't Bush the Elder have taken the initiative to remove it?

No. Bush the Elder didn't enforce the conditions of his own cease fire (which Saddam didn't meet). He knew Saddam had (and used) WMD on his own people, but took no real initiative on that either. (That was pre-9/11, though, before we had to re-calculate Iraq's WMD threat.)

The fact that you raving Bush apologists are trying to twist this very old well-known story...

Hey, let's be fair: I'm a Congress apologist and Bill Clinton apologist, too, if that's how you want to look at it. And if you originally supported the war, I'm an apologist for you, too.

...our grand three trillion dollar war...

Speaking of twisting, I doubt that the financial cost was your original primary reason for opposing the war. (Or maybe you put something on record at the time that proves me wrong.) Eh?
 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?