|
So Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| PeacefulWarrior |
Published on Sunday, April 13, 2003 by the lndependent/UK
America Targeted 14,000 Sites. So Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction?
by Andrew Gumbel
They were the reason the United States and Britain were in such a hurry to go to war, the threat the rank-and-file troops feared most.
And yet, after three weeks of war, after the capture of Baghdad and the collapse of the Iraqi government, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction – those weapons that President Bush, on the eve of hostilities, said were a direct threat to the people of the United States – have still to be identified.
Many influential people – disarmament experts, present and former United Nations arms inspectors, our own Robin Cook – have begun to wonder aloud if the weapons exist at all.
The public surrender of a senior Iraqi scientist could yet backfire against the US and Britain. Lieutenant-General Amer Hammoudi al-Saadi, who handed himself over to US forces yesterday, continued to proclaim that Iraq no longer holds any chemical or biological weapons. He should know: the British-educated chemical expert headed the Iraqi delegation at weapons talks with the United Nations.
The few "discoveries" trumpeted in the media – the odd barrel here, a few dozen shells there – have not been on a scale that could reasonably justify the unprovoked military invasion of a sovereign country, and in most cases have been proven to been no more than rumor, or propaganda, or a mixture of the two.
It could still be that, as American forces advance on Tikrit, Saddam's home town, chemical or biological weapons may be discovered, or even deployed by diehard Iraqi troops. But if the casus belli pleaded by George Bush and Tony Blair turns out to be entirely hollow – and it should be stressed that we can't yet know that – what does it say about their motivations for going to war in the first place? How much deception was involved in talking up the Iraqi threat, and how much self-deception?
Full Article |
|
|
| ZinG |
they must be in Syria by now with Saddam and his crew
Yup American intelligence is always right |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| - I think that the "weapons of mass destruction" are toruing all the "axis of evil" countries, and will eventually escape to outter space, after beating the crap out of everyone. |
|
|
| PeacefulWarrior |
| quote: | Originally posted by IronDragon
Here you go..I think
Well it seems that my hat may be safe after all |
The only objective news that article presents, is the following:
| quote: | | There were no chemical or biological weapons with the containerized labs, which measure 20 feet square. |
The rest of the article is speculation and the reiteration of old accusations. So far, out of all the reported WOMD sites and findings nothing conclusive has been found. But we don't hear about that nearly as much as we hear the speculation of the poosbility of chemicals and biologicals at these sites. It's great PR and propaganda! |
|
|
| fr0st |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vesa
Debka claims that many of Iraq's WMD are stored in a hard-to-penetrate area called Al-Qaim in North-Western Iraq which has been fiercely defended by Special Republican Guards against American troops.
Some of Iraq's WMD were also rumoured to have been hidden in Syria, from which they could quickly moved on Iraqi soil to be launched against Israel.
My guess is that the former is true, and the latter may or may not be true. Syrian's leadership were not on good terms with Saddam, so it's not clear if they might have co-operated as a joint defense against Israel.
My own opinion is that whether WMD or not, even the mere threat of WMD in Saddam's underground networks was a sufficient reason to topple Saddam. Except that the current Neoconservative invasion was overkill, and done for their own entirely unjustified reasons.
A potentially right reason as a pretext, the wrong background reasons,the wrong guys, the wrong methods.
PS. I nearly tear out my hair every time I hear Pro-War supporters jubilant after a potential WMD find, as the WMD as a justification to the war IMO misses the point of the invasion entirely. But to each their own. |
I agree with you even the threat of WOMD is reason enough to remove him. We should have never even had a reason to begin with. If he would have been 100percent cooperative with the inspecters and the UN and the US none of this would have happened. Instead he wanted to keep ing arround... |
|
|
| Mental Exodus |
| AS I have said a few times before. Sadam has had pleanty of time to move anything questionalbe out of the country. If there are no wmd at all then it would explain why Sadam asked Bush for a live televised debate to discuss the "proof" that the US had. THe likely hood of Sadam owning weapons is high tho. He has all the money needed. SMaller courntys with less money have pulled of nukes and other nasty weapons. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | | • Buried laboratories: The buried labs U.S. troops found last week were not the mobile chemical and biological weapons labs one U.S. Army general suspected, CNN Correspondent Ryan Chilcote reported Tuesday. The 11 cargo containers were filled with new laboratory equipment apparently intended to make conventional weapons, said Chief Warrant Officer Monte Gonzalez, the head of the team brought in to examine them. |
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ir...cker/index.html
Quelle suprise. :)
Perhaps they shouldn't announce these "smoking guns" until adequate testing has been done? Not that it matters though. The discovery of these "chemical" labs were headline news, while the "disclaimer" gets but a paragraph. How's that hat looking IronDragon? |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| So where where WhErE and wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere !!!!!!!!! are the famously WMD!?!?! .. me wants to know, ooh yes, Id like to know, Oh yes!:D |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| They're in Syria now. Obviously, the US forces now must attack Syria to prove that the WMDs do exist. And if they don't find any there, that means they're moved to Iran or Lybia, or maybe even to North Korea. Who knows where they'll be moved after US attacks those countries. France? Russia? China? Or maybe each country in the world was given a single missile with antrax, so they all need to be attacked in order to prevent the horrible imminent attack on the US by some of those countries. Damn, whole world will soon be engaged in an anti-US conspiracy, so the only thing US can now do is to preemptively nuke it. |
|
|
| Wurm |
Is this victory tainted in light of a lack of evidence?
Does the end justify the means?
Hmmmm...
What new lie will be cooked up for the next enemy?
Don't get me wrong, Saddam get what he deserved, in the only way possible. But the absence of WMD is troubling. |
|
|
|
|
