OK, so we found WMDs

Status
Not open for further replies.

Arcades057

Warlord
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
146
Location
Delray beach, FL
WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.

"The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," Santorum read from the document.

"This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."

Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."


The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.

He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.

"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.

Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.

"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.

"It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don't want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there's mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq," Barnes said.

The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.

At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq's Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, "religious emir" Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.

Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday's debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.

"This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false," he said.

As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.

"We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war," Hoekstra said.

FOX News' Jim Angle and Sharon Kehnemui Liss contributed to this report.


So now we know that Iraq had WMDs. I know, I know, they were degraded, but they were there. Because the 500 pounds of pot you had was old, does not mean you'd not be arrested, right?

So now we found them. Does this STILL mean that Bush is a liar and that there are no WMDs in Iraq?
 
Oh I am sure the left will "wink wink, nudge, nudge" and say that stuff doesnt really matter.

Again.

;)

The part I really like is: "But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions."

I wonder why Hans Blix didnt find this stuff? And :eek: Saddam lied? Imagine that.
 
Yea I saw this story on CNN as well, so before the FOX blasters come. . .

They won't give this up, if I see one of the america-bahsres concede on this I would be shocked.
 
Arcades057 said:
So now we know that Iraq had WMDs. I know, I know, they were degraded, but they were there. Because the 500 pounds of pot you had was old, does not mean you'd not be arrested, right?

So now we found them. Does this STILL mean that Bush is a liar and that there are no WMDs in Iraq?

Degraded as in no longer deployable. Those gas canisters are probably the same ones we provided them. We went to war because of Bush administration's claim that Saddam has revitalized its WMD program and is projected to threaten the US very soon if we do not attack immediately. Bush still lied.
 
nihilistic said:
Degraded as in no longer deployable. Those gas canisters are probably the same ones we provided them. We went to war because of Bush administration's claim that Saddam has revitalized its WMD program and is projected to threaten the US very soon if we do not attack immediately. Bush still lied.

Why didn't he give them up though? Not that I don't generally agree with you.
 
tomsnowman123 said:
Many countries have numerous weapons that could bring about damage and destruction, I am just trying to recall correctly how many Iraq launched at us...
Dude you totally missed the point. The point was that 1) we have proof he lied to us 2) our acusations of Saddam have been realized an proven: WE WERE RIGHT! Now the only thing the world's got on us is the insurgency, and the lack of control in Iraq, but that's such a small thing compared to this
( remember the big thing was "OMG there's no WMDs!", well now there are)
 
If the point of that story is that Saddam had mustard gas in 1991, then I'm sorry to say but that's not a breaking news. :rolleyes:

Seriously, we still find mines and bombs on French beaches every year. Does that mean we're expecting an invasion ??
 
nihilistic said:
Degraded as in no longer deployable. Those gas canisters are probably the same ones we provided them. We went to war because of Bush administration's claim that Saddam has revitalized its WMD program and is projected to threaten the US very soon if we do not attack immediately. Bush still lied.
but he still had them, after stating he didnt anymore, and after he was told to dismantle them, it doesnt matter who he got them from; a direct violation of multiple UN resolutions. Also, mustard agent is mustard agent, it can still kill people.

I don't even understand what this "no longer depolyable" crap is, its poison, its not as if it's a nuclear weapon, which must be kept under maitainance.
 
nihilistic said:
Degraded as in no longer deployable.

Actually thats not what the story says. It even suggests that those WMDs still have value on the black market and some may have even been sold in that capacity. Old Sarin nerve gas can still kill you, even in its degraded form. Or do you doubt that?

Those gas canisters are probably the same ones we provided them.

Please link me up some proof that we ever sold Iraq chemical weapons. I hear this a lot, but I cant find one shred of evidence that we sold him full blown WMDs ever.

We went to war because of Bush administration's claim that Saddam has revitalized its WMD program and is projected to threaten the US very soon if we do not attack immediately. Bush still lied.

No, Bush didnt lie and apparently the UN inspectors were either incompetents or Saddam was really, really good at hiding stuff. Which is it?
 
Marla_Singer said:
If the point of that story is that Saddam had mustard gas in 1991, then I'm sorry to say but that's not a breaking news. :rolleyes:


I think the point is that it is certain that Saddam had lied repeatedly.
 
Arcades057 said:
So now we know that Iraq had WMDs. I know, I know, they were degraded, but they were there. Because the 500 pounds of pot you had was old, does not mean you'd not be arrested, right?

So now we found them. Does this STILL mean that Bush is a liar and that there are no WMDs in Iraq?

I'm sorry, my eyes glazed over when you said 500 pounds of pot :crazyeye: ... what are we talking about again?
 
Tulkas12 said:
Why didn't he give them up though? Not that I don't generally agree with you.

I have no idea. Hussein was not exactly completely stable; he believed until the end that bluffing about nuclear weapons and biological capabilities would keep the US out. The fact is, if Saddam had operating WMDs, we would have seen them used during the invasion.
 
Tulkas12 said:
Why didn't he give them up though? Not that I don't generally agree with you.

I don't know. Maybe Saddam might not have known either. He has pretended to have many other weapons.
 
Marla_Singer said:
If the point of that story is that Saddam had mustard gas in 1991, then I'm sorry to say but that's not a breaking news. :rolleyes:

Seriously, we still find mines and bombs on French beaches every year. Does that mean we're expecting an invasion ??

Marla, come on. Saddam said all the stuff was destroyed and the UN inspectors parroted that lie. Sure we all know Saddam had gas in 1991...and apparently had it laying around even after he said it was all destroyed.
 
nihilistic said:
I don't know. Maybe Saddam might not have known either. He has pretended to have many other weapons.


Its also possible he didn't know about his officials meeting with Taliban and Al-qeada officials. It doesn't change th fact it happened.
 
Cheezy the Wiz said:
Dude you totally missed the point. The point was that 1) we have proof he lied to us 2) our acusations of Saddam have been realized an proven: WE WERE RIGHT! Now the only thing the world's got on us is the insurgency, and the lack of control in Iraq, but that's such a small thing compared to this
( remember the big thing was "OMG there's no WMDs!", well now there are)


The point is that:

A) He had degraded, unusable weapons
B) We went in as the aggressor

I am one of those wacko's who still thinks it's wrong even if there are WMD's. But these were unusable.
 
Tulkas12 said:
I think the point is that it is certain that Saddam had lied repeatedly.
Saddam lying isn't a breaking news...

As for the WMD's, Americans would have laughed at Saddam's face if he had declared unusable mustard gas from 1991, something which he had probably done by the way in his "mega-survey" on Iraqi weapons. You remember, the stuff he has sent to the UN.

The thing is simple, the UN embargo made Saddam unable to create the single WMD after the Gulf War. Every reports have confirmed that. In september 2002, the US government was stating that their intelligence confirmed Iraq was currently stockpiling chemical and bacteriological weapons, and that they had set a nuclear program. It was even stated that Iraq could launch a WMD attack in less than 15 minutes.

All those allegations have been proven wrong. And it's not because you'll find a 20 year-old can of mustard gas at the Iranian border that it means the US government was right.
 
Marla_Singer said:
Saddam lying isn't a breaking news...

As for the WMD's, Americans would have laughed at Saddam's face if he had declared unusable mustard gas from 1991, something which he had probably done by the way in his "mega-survey" on Iraqi weapons. You remember, the stuff he has sent to the UN.

The thing is simple, the UN embargo made Saddam unable to create the single WMD after the Gulf War. Every reports have confirmed that. In september 2002, the US government was stating that their intelligence confirmed Iraq was currently stockpiling chemical and bacteriological weapons, and that they had set a nuclear program. It was even stated that Iraq could launch a WMD attack in less than 15 minutes.

All those allegations have been proven wrong. And it's not because you'll find a 20 year-old can of mustard gas at the Iranian border that it means the US government was right.

I didn't say as much anyways. Just clarifying the point of the thread. Yes it was well known that he was a liar, its also well known that corruption was swirling around the oil for food deal, leaving the US doubting the UN and it policies even more than it did already.
 
tomsnowman123 said:
The point is that:

A) He had degraded, unusable weapons

Once more...dont confuse degraded with unusable. The two are not mutually exclusive. Many IEDs over in Iraq right now use very old 155MM artillery shells that have been degraded. They sure as hell can still kill people.

I am one of those wacko's who still thinks it's wrong even if there are WMD's. But these were unusable.

Please point out in the story where it says this? Because, unless its just your simple opinion, I cant find it.

EDIT: What part of this do you not understand? While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom