|
WMDs found in IRAQ (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Renegade |
To be honest I'm surprised that the hawks are still trying to make an issue out of this, because the whole WMD pretense has already backfired on them once and I'm not sure that resurrecting it in the minds of the voters is a particularly great idea on their part. They shifted the goal posts and they were happy, we were happy, everyone was happy - why are we retreading old ground?
Oh and for those of you trying to frame this as a GOP vs Democrat or right vs left debate, I want to point out that it is nothing of the sort: as usual, it's the Republican party vs the entire doctrine of scientific enquiry. No credible weapons expert - that I can find - has come out to support what Santorum has been saying. Now you can pretend that this is one of those debates where there are two, equally-credible sides to the story and that if you keep on repeating the same talking points over and over again that they will eventually become true, but science just doesn't work that way. These are not weapons of mass destruction by any definition - they were, sure, but not anymore. Again, you needn't take my word for it - is David Kay authority enough on this issue for you to take notice?
| quote: | Two lawmakers — Sen. Rick Santorum (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., and House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich. — on Wednesday circulated a one-page summary of a military intelligence report that says coalition forces have recovered about 500 munitions with mustard or sarin agents, and more could be discovered around Iraq. "We now have found stockpiles," Santorum asserted.
But intelligence officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitive nature, said the weapons were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and there is no evidence to date of chemical munitions manufactured since then. They said an assessment of the weapons concluded they are so degraded that they couldn't now be used as designed.
They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the
Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.
He said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no longer be dangerous.
"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen sink at this point," Kay said.
And any of Iraq's 1980s-era mustard would produce burns, but it is unlikely to be lethal, Kay said.
[...]
Intelligence officials said the munitions were found in ones, twos and maybe slightly larger collections over the past couple of years. One official conceded that these pre-Gulf War weapons did not pose a threat to the U.S. military before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. They were not maintained or part of any organized program run by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
There is no evidence that insurgents have found the chemical munitions. |
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6062201475.html
Also:
| quote: | But the intelligence officials said the munitions dated from before the 1991 Persian Gulf War and were for the most part badly deteriorated. "They are not in a condition where they could be used as designed," one intelligence official said.
"There is not new news from the coalition point of view," one official said, noting that chief U.S. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer predicted in a March 2005 report that such vintage weapons would continue to be found.
[...]
"This is an incredibly - in my mind - significant finding," Santorum told a news conference Wednesday. "It is important for the American public to understand that these weapons did in fact exist, were present in the country and were in fact and continue to be a threat to us."
The intelligence officials offered a less alarming view.
They said the old munitions had been found in groups of one and two, indicating that they'd been discarded, not that they were part of an organized program to stockpile banned weapons. |
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/merc...cs/14879499.htm
If you want to run this issue into the ground then I'm happy to continue to massage my ego by proving you all wrong, but I think it's probably best for all of us if at some point you just suck it up, take it like men, and admit that you - and the Bush administration - were wrong about WMDs in Iraq. This deluded, last-ditch lunge for validation really isn't very becoming. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
admit that you - and the Bush administration - were wrong about WMDs in Iraq. |
awww c'mon. be a sport. you can think of more people than that, can't you? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
awww c'mon. be a sport. you can think of more people than that, can't you? |
i think thats the closest ive ever seen you come to conceding an anti-republican argument ;) |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
If you want to run this issue into the ground then I'm happy to continue to massage my ego by proving you all wrong, but I think it's probably best for all of us if at some point you just suck it up, take it like men, and admit that you - and the Bush administration - were wrong about WMDs in Iraq. This deluded, last-ditch lunge for validation really isn't very becoming. |
It really is funny how such a story like this gets splashed all over that darn librul media networks and newspapers and receives so much airtime. I mean, how do stories coming from a very far Right Conservative Senator that was so easily debunked by, oh, common sense and anyone who can read our intelligence reports get spread so easily in such a librul media setup? I heard this again on CNN this morning, and of course Faux is running bat over this still.
I'm waiting for Good Morning and a few other early riser shows to have Santorum interviews soon. May not be as "fun", "entertaining", or "newsworthy" as putting Coulter on there telling us about how widows of 9/11 are in such joyous ing excstacy over their husband's deaths, but I still anticipate our librul comrades in the media will be on the ball here soon.
But really now, how long has it been since we've even discussed WMD here? This is a foregone conclusion for a reason. Most discussion here resides around rebuilding efforts, insurgents, and ya know - present day stuff. It really doesn't bode well for any Bush supporter to tread up WMD, but of course I'm still game. I personally don't have much a desire to discuss this until Part II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence comes out about whether or not the White House manipulated intelligence,
but strangely, that darn document headed up by my Senator Pat Roberts has not shown up yet. Darn. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
Don't worry.
The Left has already written this guy off |
Everyone has written him off. If this were a credible find of WMDs the Bush administration and the US military would be all over it yelling "WE WERE RIGHT!" The fact that they aren't claiming this as a victory should signal that this find is not proof of WMDs in Iraq. |
|
|
| Purple |
The guy is obviously trying to sell his book and make money. He is only 10% into this book and rest 90% is from some other guy who you can say paid Sada for using his name.
Jesus, he is on a 'Comedy' show, you are supposed to laugh at him; not take him seriously. Its a Comedy show.
The book is a work of fiction.
If you want to believe in WMD and fairy tales just watch White House press conferences. No need to read lengthy fiction novels.
People who buy in to this still think the world is flat.
I cant believe some guys still think this war is for 'WMDs'. |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
awww c'mon. be a sport. you can think of more people than that, can't you? |
Sorry, I'll also include the governments of the UK, Australia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, Iceland and the rest of the coalition of the willing amongst those who were wrong. I'm not saying that the Icelandic intelligence agencies didn't have some really good data on Saddam Hussein's weapons programs before they decided to join the war effort, but hey - I guess they must have been wrong with the best of us, huh?
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
It really is funny how such a story like this gets splashed all over that darn librul media networks and newspapers and receives so much airtime. I mean, how do stories coming from a very far Right Conservative Senator that was so easily debunked by, oh, common sense and anyone who can read our intelligence reports get spread so easily in such a librul media setup? I heard this again on CNN this morning, and of course Faux is running bat over this still. |
And I'm sure that's all Rick Santorum wanted. Stories like this have a habit of being broadcast on page one and retracted on page 29, so little is lost for the GOP in the scheme of things. So long as they can muddy the waters and cast doubt in the minds of the voters about whether WMDs have actually been found in Iraq (and they don't need any sort of evidence to achieve this: the sort of baseless conjecture that we're seeing now will work just fine) then they have achieved all they ever intended to set out to achieve.
If I were the head of the DNC for a day I would attempt to organise a savage counter offensive to this publicity stunt. Get prominent Democratic figureheads on the front of every newspaper, decrying the desperate idiocy of the GOP and the almost comical lengths to which they will go to justify the war on Iraq. Let them demonstrate, using the words of the US's own intelligence agencies, just how pathetically out of touch with the realities of the situation Republican senators like Santorum and Hoekstra are. Let's face it: GOP senators resurrecting a failed causus belli for the Iraq war is a ing gift to the Democrats. Resurrecting debate about the Iraq war period is a ing gift to the Democrats - it's time to exploit it, guys!
Santorum has put his neck out there, so let the guillotine fall: expose this opportunistic sleazebag for the clueless idiot he is. If the Democrats can't gain some ground from this monumental slip-up then, frankly, they don't deserve to be in power... |
|
|
| Kapedan |
This is what I think about this. I might be wrong, but anyways.
Saddam knew he was going to get hit, and he knew Bush wanted him out. Well, he had the WMD's, and the only way he could hurt Bush was by making him a lyer in front of the world. So like the guy said, he put all the weapons somewhere else right before Bush invaded Iraq.
Maybe that happend? |
|
|
| Kapedan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Purple
I cant believe some guys still think this war is for 'WMDs'. |
I cant believe retards like you think this is about oil. |
|
|
| Purple |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
I cant believe retards like you think this is about oil. |
Yes oil, greed and personal vengance, son took his dad's revenge from Saddam Hussein. Its like a gift from him to his dad.
Jr. Bush: 'See daddy he is in his underwear' Daddy cries tears of joy and says: 'I am proud of you my son, what I coudnt do in my short career you did it; you kept our family's name, I am proud of you.' |
|
|
| Renegade |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kapedan
This is what I think about this. I might be wrong, but anyways. |
There's no "might be" about it, Kapedan: you're wrong. Saddam Hussein did not have WMDs at the time of the invasion, nor anywhere near the time of invasion:
| quote: | | While a small number of old, abandoned chemcial munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter. |
| quote: | | ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new Biological Weapons program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. |
| quote: | | ISG judges that in 1991 and 1992, Iraq appears to have destroyed its undeclared stocks of BW weapons [sic] and probably destroyed remaining holdings of bulk BW agent. |
| quote: | | In spite of exhaustive investigation, ISG found no evidence that Iraq possessed, or was developing BW agent production systems mounted on road vehicles or railway wagons. |
Read the CIA report (link). Or, if you're lazy, read the CIA "Key Findings" report (link). Or, if you're even lazier, read my commentary from a couple of years ago (link).
There is no point of contention here: the weapons weren't there and the war was waged under false pretenses. I can't see that there is any debate on this issue left to be had. |
|
|
| Purple |
| UN people were shouting before invasion, Iraq has no WMDs. They coudnt make it more clearer than that. They said it loud, in clear words; Iraq has no WMDs. But no; CIA is greater than UNO. US is right, world is wrong. |
|
|
|
|
