View Poll Results: Will Iraq's So-called "Massive Stockpile" of WMD's Ever Be Found?

Voters
4. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    2 50.00%
  • No

    2 50.00%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Will the Iraqi WMD's ever be found?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    I doubt they existed in the firstplace. It was just a convenient rationale at the time.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators[/i]@Sep 23 2003, 02:42 PM
    [b] I doubt they existed in the firstplace. It was just a convenient rationale at the time. [/b][/quote]
    True - he has been making cookies for the last 20 years and is a victim.

    Oh - and every member of the UN Security Council was in on Bush's convenient rationale, too.

    What was the more convenient rationale at the time for Billy when he attacked Iraq - WMD lies or blowjobs from fat interns?

    Honestly Tail - do you have any concept of how ridiculous you are at times? Other liberals don't even take you seriously....

  3. #3
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    851
    Post Thanks / Like
    How about this gem? More redderrick and conjeggzha?

    [url=http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7350504^2,00.html]http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0...50504^2,00.html[/url]

    Hey, Pilger, show us the money! Get it on the American airwaves and the "liberal media", before this gets written off as another crackpot non-starter.

    Seriously, if this is out there and not some outta-context editing job (you know, the kind you guys accuse Bowling For Columbine of), it needs to be thrown into the mix.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever+Sep 23 2003, 04:35 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (jets5ever @ Sep 23 2003, 04:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--tailgators[/i]@Sep 23 2003, 02:42 PM
    [b] I doubt they existed in the firstplace. It was just a convenient rationale at the time. [/b][/quote]
    True - he has been making cookies for the last 20 years and is a victim.

    Oh - and every member of the UN Security Council was in on Bush&#39;s convenient rationale, too.

    What was the more convenient rationale at the time for Billy when he attacked Iraq - WMD lies or blowjobs from fat interns?

    Honestly Tail - do you have any concept of how ridiculous you are at times? Other liberals don&#39;t even take you seriously.... [/b][/quote]
    5-ever...Now who&#39;s getting emotional? Run away from the truth all you want. My assertions have been proven 100% correct.

    Keep bringing up the UN and Clinton all you want it just makes you look foolish. Bush was the only world leader who invaded Irag to disarm it, it&#39;s just to bad they were disarmed already.

    5-ever you are a tool, and not the sharpest one at that.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators+Sep 23 2003, 06:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (tailgators @ Sep 23 2003, 06:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> [quote]Originally posted by -jets5ever@Sep 23 2003, 04:35 PM
    [b] <!--QuoteBegin--tailgators[/i]@Sep 23 2003, 02:42 PM
    [b] I doubt they existed in the firstplace. It was just a convenient rationale at the time. [/b][/quote]
    True - he has been making cookies for the last 20 years and is a victim.

    Oh - and every member of the UN Security Council was in on Bush&#39;s convenient rationale, too.

    What was the more convenient rationale at the time for Billy when he attacked Iraq - WMD lies or blowjobs from fat interns?

    Honestly Tail - do you have any concept of how ridiculous you are at times? Other liberals don&#39;t even take you seriously.... [/b][/quote]
    5-ever...Now who&#39;s getting emotional? Run away from the truth all you want. My assertions have been proven 100% correct.

    Keep bringing up the UN and Clinton all you want it just makes you look foolish. Bush was the only world leader who invaded Irag to disarm it, it&#39;s just to bad they were disarmed already.

    5-ever you are a tool, and not the sharpest one at that. [/b][/quote]
    5-ever&#39;s a tool? You are the only person on the face of the earth that would say [i] I doubt they existed in the firstplace. It was just a convenient rationale at the time. [/i]&#33;&#33;&#33;

    Even blowjob bill clinton knew he had them.....he just decided not to do a damn thing about it&#33;

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why doesn&#39;t the Bush administration take us to the locations that Colin Powell showed the slides of to the UN Security Counsel and let us see whats really there?

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Jet Set Junta[/i]@Sep 23 2003, 04:04 PM
    [b] How about this gem? More redderrick and conjeggzha?

    [url=http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,7350504^2,00.html]http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0...50504^2,00.html[/url]

    Hey, Pilger, show us the money&#33; Get it on the American airwaves and the "liberal media", before this gets written off as another crackpot non-starter.

    Seriously, if this is out there and not some outta-context editing job (you know, the kind you guys accuse Bowling For Columbine of), it needs to be thrown into the mix. [/b][/quote]
    [b]Jet Set -[/b]

    Did you read that review of [i]Bowling[/i] that I posted earlier? I hardly say it "accuses" Moore of being fraudulent; it pretty much demonstrates that he [i]is[/i] fraudulent. Your allegience to Moore is confusing, especially in light of your constant Coulter bashing. You honestly think Moore should be taken seriously? Obviously, you have no problem with distortions of the truth, so long as they are made by people with similar political views as your own. Just stop accusing "us" of being Limbaugh or O&#39;Reilly parrots. I am sure you are a big Al Franken fan as well.

    I can appreciate if you think Moore is funny - but he&#39;s a crackpot high school drop out who makes no sense and misrepresents facts. He IS Ann Coulter...just inverted and considerably less educated.

    We&#39;ll see what happens with your link. It&#39;s presently a few words on a website - if a tape comes forth that contains what this guys says it does and is authentic, then, yes, obviously that would need to be thrown into the mix and explained.

    Right now, however, this is just more unsupported Bush-bashing. I&#39;ve seen websites with seriously-made allegations that Bush is a Nazi and has been secretly fascinated with Hitler for his entire life and also I have seen others that pretend to be able to prove that Bush CAUSED 9-11. So we&#39;ll see. You were all riled up about "millions" of "precious artifacts" that were supposedly looted while the US soldiers only guarded "oil fields" and that story turned out to be 100% untrue and unsupported bullsh*t.

    I have a question - why have no international leaders accused Bush or Blair of lying about WMD? Chirac and Schroeder vehemently opposed the war and have had no qualms about publicly rebuking America and Bush in thie regard. How come they have not joined the "LIAR&#33;" chorus? Thoughts?

    You know damn well why they haven&#39;t.


    [b]Tail -[/b] chirp, chirp, chirp. Bringing up the fact that the international community that you hold in such high regard AGREED with Bush about the WMD makes ME look stupid? Ok dude... I anser every one of your "points" with supported assertions, you parrot NY Times talking points and hurl insults when confronted to support them. You are not a serious thinker and are just a mosquito buzzing around this thread trying to annoy adults.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    Actually 5-ever the international community did not agree with Bush. The international community wanted to continue with the inspections. Bush wanted to invade Iraq to disarm it. The only problem was that Iraq had already disarmed.

    Keep on chortiling away with your FOX NEWS and Rush Limbaugh talking points. Your a degenerate in a cheap suit.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators[/i]@Sep 24 2003, 07:58 AM
    [b] Actually 5-ever the international community did not agree with Bush. The international community wanted to continue with the inspections. Bush wanted to invade Iraq to disarm it. The only problem was that Iraq had already disarmed.

    Keep on chortiling away with your FOX NEWS and Rush Limbaugh talking points. Your a degenerate in a cheap suit. [/b][/quote]
    Tail - you are now just demonstrating, and dare I say FLAUNTING, your ignorance of recent history and are too dim to even see the contradictions within your own sentences.

    If Iraq was already disarmed and if the UN believed this to be so, why would they need to have inspections? Why wouldn&#39;t the sanctions have been lifted? What would they have been inspecting for?

    Invasion and inspections are two differing [i]methods[/i] of disarmament. Both of them presuppose that disarmament is necessary, the USA and UN were in [b]complete [/b]agreement that disarmament was necessary, the UN was just too weak and/or corrupt to enforce the very resolutions they passed. You are just flatly wrong.

    Schooling you bores me, it&#39;s too easy.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    Aren&#39;t you guys curious to see what is actually at the locations Colin Powell said were the Iraqi WMD producion facilities?

    Wouldn&#39;t these locations be the logical place to look?

    You know darn well that if they went to these locations and found a cache of WMD&#39;s they&#39;d run to the mountaintop and share it with the world.
    My guess is that they went to these places and came up empty and are embarrassed by another error. Just another coverup by the Bush Administration.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators[/i]@Sep 24 2003, 08:10 AM
    [b] Aren&#39;t you guys curious to see what is actually at the locations Colin Powell said were the Iraqi WMD producion facilities?

    Wouldn&#39;t these locations be the logical place to look?

    You know darn well that if they went to these locations and found a cache of WMD&#39;s they&#39;d run to the mountaintop and share it with the world.
    My guess is that they went to these places and came up empty and are embarrassed by another error. Just another coverup by the Bush Administration. [/b][/quote]
    Tail -


    David Kay is giving a report within a month on the progress of the WMD search.

    Yes, those places would be a logical place to look. I am sure they have looked at those places and are continuting to do so. But also, the entire world knew those locations as soon as Powell stated them. Syria, which is run by Ba&#39;athists, sits on the Security Council. Obviously, then, the first thing Saddam would do would be to clear those known locations out.

    If your father had a diagram of your room and pointed to places where he suspected you were hiding your booze, the first thing you&#39;d do before he inspected your room would be to move the booze to another location&#33;


    WMD (chem and bio) weapons are not these huge, cumbersome things that take up a lot of space and are difficult to move and easy to spot. They are easy to use to &#39;weaponize&#39; conventional arms and can easily be smuggled around a large country.

    It&#39;s one thing to be surprised that they haven&#39;t found any yet - it is quite another to state that they never existed and Bush made it all up. This is why I don&#39;t enjoy debating with you - you only care about bashing Bush and don&#39;t even want to have a rational give and take. I KNOW you hate Bush. You KNOW I don&#39;t. It gets old.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    We&#39;ve been waiting for David Kay&#39;s report for quite awhile now. We were promised it for mid September, now they&#39;re saying it&#39;ll be in early October. His report always seems to be just a week or two away. I wonder what the delay is?

    5-ever you underestimate the ability of our Intelligence agencies and our armed forces to monitor Iraq. If they identified WMD production facilites you can rest assurred that these locations and the people who came and went from them were under constant surveilance. For 12 years Iraq was a nation under house arrest nothing moved in or out of that country that we didn&#39;t now about.

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators[/i]@Sep 24 2003, 08:51 AM
    [b] We&#39;ve been waiting for David Kay&#39;s report for quite awhile now. We were promised it for mid September, now they&#39;re saying it&#39;ll be in early October. His report always seems to be just a week or two away. I wonder what the delay is?

    5-ever you underestimate the ability of our Intelligence agencies and our armed forces to monitor Iraq. If they identified WMD production facilites you can rest assurred that these locations and the people who came and went from them were under constant surveilance. For 12 years Iraq was a nation under house arrest nothing moved in or out of that country that we didn&#39;t now about. [/b][/quote]
    Your last line is just false, Tail.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever+Sep 24 2003, 10:08 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (jets5ever @ Sep 24 2003, 10:08 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--tailgators[/i]@Sep 24 2003, 08:51 AM
    [b] We&#39;ve been waiting for David Kay&#39;s report for quite awhile now. We were promised it for mid September, now they&#39;re saying it&#39;ll be in early October. His report always seems to be just a week or two away. I wonder what the delay is?

    5-ever you underestimate the ability of our Intelligence agencies and our armed forces to monitor Iraq. If they identified WMD production facilites you can rest assurred that these locations and the people who came and went from them were under constant surveilance. For 12 years Iraq was a nation under house arrest nothing moved in or out of that country that we didn&#39;t now about. [/b][/quote]
    Your last line is just false, Tail. [/b][/quote]
    Prove it, and address the rest of my post.

    5-ever...I&#39;m shocked at your lack of confidence in the CIA and the Armed Forces of the United States.

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by tailgators+Sep 24 2003, 09:10 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (tailgators @ Sep 24 2003, 09:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> [quote]Originally posted by -jets5ever@Sep 24 2003, 10:08 AM
    [b] <!--QuoteBegin--tailgators[/i]@Sep 24 2003, 08:51 AM
    [b] We&#39;ve been waiting for David Kay&#39;s report for quite awhile now. We were promised it for mid September, now they&#39;re saying it&#39;ll be in early October. His report always seems to be just a week or two away. I wonder what the delay is?

    5-ever you underestimate the ability of our Intelligence agencies and our armed forces to monitor Iraq. If they identified WMD production facilites you can rest assurred that these locations and the people who came and went from them were under constant surveilance. For 12 years Iraq was a nation under house arrest nothing moved in or out of that country that we didn&#39;t now about. [/b][/quote]
    Your last line is just false, Tail. [/b][/quote]
    Prove it, and address the rest of my post.

    5-ever...I&#39;m shocked at your lack of confidence in the CIA and the Armed Forces of the United States. [/b][/quote]
    Prove what? You simply assert that nothing could have possibly been moved around in Iraq without our knowledge and the burden is on me? Nice work. Your oversimplifications are absurd. &#39;House arrest" "nothing" - this is your opinion and it is unsupported. My opinion is that your&#39;s is false. This is just getting ridiculous.

    Yes, months earlier, the estimates were that Kay would deliver a report in late September. Now it is been said to be delivered in early October. What&#39;s the story there?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    5-ever... Name another country that was subjected to more surveilance than Iraq.

    Your lack of confidence in the intelligence agencies of the United States is shocking. Do you honestly think that having identified so-called WMD prodution facilities that they somehow would have lost track of them?

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    I honestly believed at the start of the war that the WBD were there but I can&#39;t help but seriously question that at this point. Just a few reasons why...

    -Bush hardly ever refers to them anymore. EVER. When this thing started it was the top of the news every day. "they have them, we will find them" etc...

    -The language Bush uses now as opposed to then has changed dramatically. At the start he was confidently saying Iraq posessed stockpiles of WMD. Now when it&#39;s addressed he says "we know Iraq wanted to develope a weapons program" HUGE difference.

    -I recently saw Condy Rice in an interview where she was asked point blank if she thought Iraq had WMD, her response....."I believe the president acted on the best intelligence he was given and the world is a better place without Hussein in power" Not even she would say Iraq has them.

    So me personally, I don&#39;t see how anybody isn&#39;t starting to doubt this when the very people who sent us over to find them are changing their tunes.

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Highlights of the Kay Report-from Andrew Sullivan

    We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN.

    Translation: Saddam was lying to the U.N. as late as 2002. He was required by the U.N. to fully cooperate. He didn&#39;t. The war was justified on those grounds alone. Case closed.

    Some of the physical evidence still remains, despite what was clearly a deliberate, coordinated and thorough attempt to destroy evidence before during and after the war. Among the discoveries:
    * A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

    * A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.

    * Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist&#39;s home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

    * New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

    * Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists&#39; homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

    * A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.

    * Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

    * Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

    * Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.

    Would you be happy, after 9/11, if the president had allowed such capabilities to remain at large, and be reinvigorated, with French and Russian help, after sanctions were removed? I wouldn&#39;t. But Howard Dean and Dominique de Villepin would have happily looked the other way rather than do anything real to enforce the very resolutions they claimed to support.

    THERE&#39;S MORE: One of the crazy premises of the "Where Are They?" crowd is that we would walk into that huge country and find large piles of Acme bombs with anthrax in them. That&#39;s not what a WMD program is about; and never was. Saddam was careful. He had to hide from the U.N. and he had to find ways, over more than a decade, to maintain a WMD program as best he could, ready to reactivate whenever the climate altered in his favor. Everything points to such a strategy and to such weapons being maintained. The bio-warfare stuff is particularly worrying:
    With regard to biological warfare activities, which has been one of our two initial areas of focus, ISG teams are uncovering significant information - including research and development of BW-applicable organisms, the involvement of Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) in possible BW activities, and deliberate concealment activities. All of this suggests Iraq after 1996 further compartmentalized its program and focused on maintaining smaller, covert capabilities that could be activated quickly to surge the production of BW agents.

    Mustard gas in a matter of months. And concealment all the time:

    A very large body of information has been developed through debriefings, site visits, and exploitation of captured Iraqi documents that confirms that Iraq concealed equipment and materials from UN inspectors when they returned in 2002. One noteworthy example is a collection of reference strains that ought to have been declared to the UN. Among them was a vial of live C. botulinum Okra B. from which a biological agent can be produced. This discovery - hidden in the home of a BW scientist - illustrates the point I made earlier about the difficulty of locating small stocks of material that can be used to covertly surge production of deadly weapons. The scientist who concealed the vials containing this agent has identified a large cache of agents that he was asked, but refused, to conceal. ISG is actively searching for this second cache.

    When you read this kind of information, you can see why the president has ordered more money to go to this effort. We need every cent. We have to show to the world - and to the appeasers at home - the extent of the threat that this monstrous regime potentially represented.


    FOR THE FUTURE: But Kay makes a more important point at the end. He notes that our ability to examine this entire edifice in a liberated Iraq, to see where our intelligence failed and where it succeeded, is a hugely helpful task in the broader war on terror. Over to Kay:

    [W]hatever we find will probably differ from pre-war intelligence. Empirical reality on the ground is, and has always been, different from intelligence judgments that must be made under serious constraints of time, distance and information. It is, however, only by understanding precisely what those differences are that the quality of future intelligence and investment decisions concerning future intelligence systems can be improved. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is such a continuing threat to global society that learning those lessons has a high imperative.

    Of course it has. I&#39;ve waited a long time for this report, and kept my peace until it came out and we had some empirical data to measure. What we now see may not impress those who are looking for any way to discredit this administration and this war. But it shows to my mind the real danger that Saddam posed - and would still pose today, if one president and one prime minister hadn&#39;t had the fortitude to face him down. We live in a dangerous but still safer world because of it. Now is the time for the administration to stop the internal quibbling, the silence and passivity, and go back on the offensive. Show the dangers that the opposition was happy for us to tolerate; show the threat - real and potential - that this war averted; defend the record with pride and vigor; and fund the reconstruction in ways that will make it work now not just for our sake but for the sake of those once killed in large numbers by the weapons some are so eager not to find.


    A FRACTION SO FAR: As for actual munitions, absorb this fact:
    There are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous.
    Here are Kay&#39;s conclusions:
    1. Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons.
    2. In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn.
    3. In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre.
    Could we have contained this indefinitely? If we&#39;d wanted to continue to starve an entire country, make a mockery of U.N. resolutions, give new life to one of the most vicious dictatorships on the planet, and leave open the risk of this shadow but viable WMD program coming into the hands of any terrorist faction Saddam wanted to entertain. Were there risks of action? You bet. But most of the enormous risks did not come about: no use of such weapons, no massive destruction of oil wells, no fracturing of the country, no terrorist revenge or resurgence.

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    That was informative Bugg, thanks. Sullivan is a good source.

    [b]Tail [/b]- this is great news for you - now you can rest assured that Clinton wasn&#39;t lying about the WMD when he attacked Iraq&#33;

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Kingston, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by jets5ever[/i]@Oct 3 2003, 08:35 AM
    [b] That was informative Bugg, thanks. Sullivan is a good source.

    [b]Tail [/b]- this is great news for you - now you can rest assured that Clinton wasn&#39;t lying about the WMD when he attacked Iraq&#33; [/b][/quote]
    Well at least we now know that in 2003 Iraq didn&#39;t possess a "massive stockpile of WMD&#39;s. Perhaps as the Kay report says, Iraq may have someday been able to develop a program that possiblity may have been able to produce them.

    Now Mr. Kay is asking us to wait another 6 to 9 months and spend another &#036;600 million dollars to get the rest of the story. This is only neccessary because President Bush painted us into a corner last winter by claiming Iraq had a "massive stockpile of WMD&#39;s". I can tell you right now that Bush was wrong about this and it won&#39;t cost us a dime.

    It&#39;s only for political reasons that Bush is stretching out the story. He couldn&#39;t withstand the firestorm of a straight forward concluesive report. Dig deep everyone Bush is making sure that the final report on the so-called Iraqi WMD&#39;s is going to be very expen&#036;ive.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us