Reply With Quote
Maybe you're right, they never had WMD's.
Fox NewsWASHINGTON — The final U.S. intelligence report on weapons of mass destruction (search) in Iraq is expected to address whether the banned armaments may have been smuggled out of the country before the war started.
Top Bush administration officials have speculated publicly that chemical, biological or radiological weapons may have been smuggled out, and the question is one of the unresolved issues on WMD. The report is due next month. Intelligence and congressional officials say they have not seen any information — never "a piece," said one — indicating that WMD or significant amounts of components and equipment were transferred from Iraq to neighboring Syria, Jordan or elsewhere.
The administration acknowledged last week that the search for banned weapons is largely over. The Iraq Survey Group's (search) chief, Charles Duelfer, is expected to submit the final installments of his report in February. A small number of the organization's experts will remain on the job in case new intelligence on Iraqi WMD is unearthed.
But the officials familiar with the search say U.S. authorities have found no evidence that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (search) transferred WMD or related equipment out of Iraq.
There has yet to be any demonstration whatsoever that Iraq had any significant chemical, biological or radiological weapons capability of any kind. Even more significantly, there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that Iraq had the capability to produce such weapons, leaving open the question of where such minor, if any, capability that may have existed at one time might have come from.
It beggars the imagination to even try to conceive of a nation, anywhere nearly as 'dangerous' as Iraq is purported to have been, that wouldn't have used such weaponry, if they had it, when invaded in the "first Gulf War."
The sole significant findings had to do with "precursors" - materials which could conceivably be employed in the production of such weapons. Yet no significant industrial capacity for their production or the disposal of by-products of such production has ever been identified.
Maybe you're right, they never had WMD's.
2cent, no one ever said they didn't ever have them. What we said was that they didn't have them in recent times before our invasion, the rationale used for same. He killed a lot of Kurds and Iranians with poisons in the 80s (with our blessing, BTW), but , Duran Duran had a career in the 80s. Doesn't mean they do now. Stop posting 15+ year old pics to support an untennable position. The bolded quote that Dan used was off of Fox News, too, your freaking auxiliary bible.
argue's that Iraq may never have had WMD's.There has yet to be any demonstration whatsoever that Iraq had any significant chemical, biological or radiological weapons capability of any kind. Even more significantly, there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that Iraq had the capability to produce such weapons, leaving open the question of where such minor, if any, capability that may have existed at one time might have come from.
It beggars the imagination to even try to conceive of a nation, anywhere nearly as 'dangerous' as Iraq is purported to have been, that wouldn't have used such weaponry, if they had it, when invaded in the "first Gulf War."
Saddam didn't gas the Kurds with our blessing. We did support Iraq over Iran for many obvious reasons. Nevertheless, hindsight being what it is there were a lot of mistakes made since about 1945.
Looks like he left the door open to me.leaving open the question of where such minor, if any, capability that may have existed at one time might have come from.
Your right. Later investigations showed the Iranians did, not Saddam.Saddam didn't gas the Kurds
FauxNews...fair and balanced my ass.
Watch it Marxetti! Your ass ain't ever been fair and balanced!
his ass also doesn't claim to be a news organization.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
