ThinkDifferent

We ask for evidence. You can also convince us if you have evidence. If your logic has strength and arguments have power. Unlike believers for whom "bible told", "god told", "daddy told","president told", "cnn told","fox told", "tommy franks told" etc. seem to be more than enough, we ask for proof and verifiable evidence. Why don't you attack and disprove our arguments rather than attacking "us"??

leonarde,
We are asking for proof to this WMD theory which looks like cocoted BS so far? Efforts have been made to mislead everybody with continuous propaganda and even forged evidence. Nobody is guilty unless he is proven so. If iraq is accused of having WMD then it is the job of the accuser to bloody well proove it. It definitely can't be the other way round where the accused is asked to proove his innocence. This way anybody can make any accusastion and ask the accused party to proove he is not guilty. Isn't that crazy?

ThinkDifferent

:banghead:

Liquidrage

Yup.

I've had to deal with conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory when trying to discuss this war.

And I'm a freaking atheist.

faded_Glory

7th Cavalry?

Isn't that Custer's old outfit?

Racing alone through the desert....hmm....

fG

wdog

thinkdifferent,

you are ignoring recent history. the main problem with iraq is lack of cooperation, time and time again the iraqis have blocked inspectors efforts, hidden critical information and programs, and lied. there is no reason at all to believe iraq when they say they don't have any. You say they must be proven guilty? they have been shown to be guilty of coverup many times, and how about those scuds just launched that they said they didn't have? it is not the simple 'proving the negative' conundrum, it is the lack of trust. just look at the history of iraqs nuclear program and you'll see why.

Soul Invictus

Somehow I missed the CIA making those assertions. Links please, if you have them...

Thanks

Soul Invictus

What news sources/ web sites are you finding out about the Kurdish exodus...If it's on CNN/MSNBC, I must always turn when they show it, as I eventually lose interest in the war coverage. If they do fear a chemical attack, I'd like a source to be more familiar with this.

Thanks

Soul Invictus

That may be so, I won't dispute that, but at least on this board, no matter your inclinations, I've found that at least the majority of the users here at least use sources (where many forums, people merely spew their opinions based on little to no evidence) and generally the burden of proof is pretty high here. You can't really go around here jaw-jacking w/o getting called on it. To say that the people here disallow information that challenges their current views is a bit much.

faded_Glory

wdog - those weren't SCUD's, the Pentagon itself has said so.

fG

wdog

righto on the scuds, I was just a little behind the news when i posted. I was getting war news wary and was would rather watch basketball or nothing.