Reply With Quote
Those would be weapons of destruction, not mass destruction.
Saddam didn't have the requisite delivery system to make any chemical agent a threat.
http://m.nypost.com/p/news/internati...7pDf7AZ3RO9qnM
There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.
The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war do ents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.
The do ents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons arsenal -- most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.
In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mus , a blister agent, the do ents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.
Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.
Those would be weapons of destruction, not mass destruction.
Saddam didn't have the requisite delivery system to make any chemical agent a threat.
The Kurds would tend to disagree.
The stuff was probably sold by USA to Saddam in the 1980s when Rummy and head were doing business with Iraq as counter to Iran.
Delivery systems to USA? none.
The Kurds don't live on another continent.
Not a weapon unless there's a way to deliver it.
you're such a stickler for details..
Suitcase?
Looks like Wikileaks finished translating the do ents!
USA is really vulnerable to suitcase weapons. after spending $100B/year on NSA/DHS/FBI for 10 years.
And $2T and 5000+ military dead, to stop suitcase weapons?
How the US military defines a WMD.
Chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons capable of a high order of destruction or causing mass casualties and exclude the means of transporting or propelling the weapon where such means is a separable and divisible part from the weapon.
Under that definition basically almost every single country has a WMD.
How the US military defines it is really irrelevant. What matters is what the world as a whole sees WMD as.
Meh, "small amounts" were bound to be around in a country as corrupt/inept as Iraq, after having a massive stockpile that was actively used in the Iran-Iraq war.
Such small amounts lost or pilfered or whatever do not cons ute anything that approaches what we attempted to say he has. Only an idiot would believe that.
The picture that most agree on based on all the available evidence is that Saddam got rid of all of his weapons, but kept the baseline capabilities that would have allowed him to ramp up had the sanctions been lifted.
Did Saddam have enough capability to justify the trillions of dollars we spent on the invasion/occupation? no.
Not that this will stop the usual idiots from saying the usual stupid things about how justified this was, just because a Republican president wanted it.
LOL
This topic clearly has some hidden agenda that fails miserably. If the government ever found weapons that satisfied their first justification to invade Iraq they wouldn't hesitate to let the whole world know.
Basically. It's the smoking gun they've been looking for years.
I wonder who wrote that little clause in
By this definition, then, I suppose having a drum of nitrogen-based fertilizer or an anthrax-saturated goat is enough. In which case my gramps' ranch was probably part of the axis of evil.
Not even Cheney would cite this as justification.
apparently you should ask the kurds about the wmds that were used against them... **
** the one's that we provided saddam
Yeah... not his style.
He'd have petroleum classified as a WMD and contract Halliburton to dispose of the haz-mat.
Any of the mainstreams reporting this?
Go to 5:06, or go here
You found it on YouTube. Not mainstream enough for you?
Is this where he joked about finding wmds under the lectern? hilarious.. as GIs were dying in Iraq... my tummy hurt so bad after bush's funny..
I'm talking about the current release of information that shows it was there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
