Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
According to WikiLeaks, small amounts of chemical WMDs were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion.
Why did George W. Bush lie when he said there were no WMD in Iraq?
Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11 - YouTube
this is why seriously participating in a discussion on boards like this is futile.
they NEEEEED to believe that Iraq had WMDs.
and use old chemical weapons, which were found, as a crutch to rationalize that the invasion of iraq was not built on a full-blown lie.
the leaders of a third world country invading another third world country on those grounds would now sit in Scheveningen.
so dems lied...bush lied, the cia lied, most world leaders lied...
fuck yeah.
the wmd were transported to syria.
this is why seriously participating in a discussion on boards like this is futile.
they NEEEEED to believe that Iraq had WMDs.
and use old chemical weapons, which were found, as a crutch to rationalize that the invasion of iraq was not built on a full-blown lie.
the leaders of a third world country invading another third world country on those grounds would now sit in Scheveningen.
democrats were for more inspections.
which were done.
ask hans blix.
you will never own up to this, you scumbags.
maybe it helps you if i tell you that i am not an american. i am german.
it feels good to not be culpable for starting a war for a change.
With your half truths and not admitting to the actual facts, you are looking lame dude.
You probably don't remember when the inspectors were denied access to stategic areas for days, and only then let in to the sites....enough time to move what needed to be. If the democrats didn't want an invasion, they shouldn't have voted for it....PERIOD.
Sound more like your still butthurt over WWII when the Germans had their ass handed to them on a pewter plate, dude. Time to move forward...remember?
dude, you are the old fuck, not me.
so don't try to bluff me with this "you don't remember" stuff.
now, get off my lawn, poser.
this is why seriously participating in a discussion on boards like this is futile.
they NEEEEED to believe that Iraq had WMDs.
and use old chemical weapons, which were found, as a crutch to rationalize that the invasion of iraq was not built on a full-blown lie.
the leaders of a third world country invading another third world country on those grounds would now sit in Scheveningen.
You NEEEEEEED to mock it even though it is self-eviently and completely and totally true.
There were no WMD's in Iraq after 1994.CIA, PENTAGON KNEW U.N. DESTROYED IRAQI NERVE-GAS ROCKETS
WASHINGTON -- American intelligence knew at the time that United Nations inspectors had discovered and destroyed Iraqi rockets containing 4.4 tons of nerve gas at Khamisiyah in 1992, the CIA said Thursday.
CIA, PENTAGON KNEW U.N. DESTROYED IRAQI NERVE-GAS ROCKETS.(MAIN) - Albany Times Union (Albany, NY) | HighBeam Research
Don't EVER let another LYING scumbag liberal say there were not weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.. They're LIARS.
After everything that has been said on this issue, if WMD's had been found in Iraq, this is the first thing you would see the next day...U.N.: Iraq had no WMD after 1994
U.N. reports submitted to the Security Council before the war by Hans Blix, former chief U.N. arms inspector, and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, have been largely validated by U.S. weapons teams. The common findings:
- Iraq's nuclear weapons program was dormant.
- No evidence was found to suggest Iraq possessed chemical or biological weapons. U.N. officials believe the weapons were destroyed by U.N. inspectors or Iraqi officials in the years after the 1991 Gulf War.
With your half truths and not admitting to the actual facts, you are looking lame dude.
You probably don't remember when the inspectors were denied access to stategic areas for days, and only then let in to the sites....enough time to move what needed to be. If the democrats didn't want an invasion, they shouldn't have voted for it....PERIOD.
Sound more like your still butthurt over WWII when the Germans had their ass handed to them on a pewter plate, dude. Time to move forward...remember?
dude, you are the old fuck, not me.
so don't try to bluff me with this "you don't remember" stuff.
now, get off my lawn, poser.
Get off YOUR lawn....really? What lawn would that be........
CaféAuLait;6056058 said:The term, "Weapon of Mass Destruction," is ambiguous. A molotov cocktail tossed into a crowded bar literally and categorically qualifies as a weapon of mass destruction. As does an ordinary fragmentation grenade or a high-capacity machine gun turned against an unarmed and trapped crowd.
As far as a chemical weapon is concerned, it can be considered a weapon of mass destruction if used to optimum effect. But not any moreso than a comparably lethal high-explosive or indendiary device. In keeping with the topic at hand, the chemical weapons found in Iraq, which were purchased from the U.S. as far back as the 1970s and 80s, are long past their shelf-life and are no longer useful.
The bottom line is the widely accepted meaning of a "WMD" is some sort of nuclear device, from a so-called "dirty bomb" to a full-scale thermonuclear bomb or artillery round. So the lingering rumors about chemical weapons being found in Iraq are nothing more than attempts to justify the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq.
WMD's include nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.
and the case for invasion was tried to be sold with the mushroom cloud (for obvious reasons) and with anthrax (for obvious reasons as well, if you remember 2001), not with sarin or mustard gas.
Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 1994, despite Iraqs denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraqs claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction. Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production. Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts. Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
According to WikiLeaks, small amounts of chemical WMDs were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion.
There were no WMD's in Iraq after 1994.CIA, PENTAGON KNEW U.N. DESTROYED IRAQI NERVE-GAS ROCKETS
WASHINGTON -- American intelligence knew at the time that United Nations inspectors had discovered and destroyed Iraqi rockets containing 4.4 tons of nerve gas at Khamisiyah in 1992, the CIA said Thursday.
CIA, PENTAGON KNEW U.N. DESTROYED IRAQI NERVE-GAS ROCKETS.(MAIN) - Albany Times Union (Albany, NY) | HighBeam Research
Don't EVER let another LYING scumbag liberal say there were not weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.. They're LIARS.
After everything that has been said on this issue, if WMD's had been found in Iraq, this is the first thing you would see the next day...U.N.: Iraq had no WMD after 1994
U.N. reports submitted to the Security Council before the war by Hans Blix, former chief U.N. arms inspector, and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, have been largely validated by U.S. weapons teams. The common findings:
- Iraq's nuclear weapons program was dormant.
- No evidence was found to suggest Iraq possessed chemical or biological weapons. U.N. officials believe the weapons were destroyed by U.N. inspectors or Iraqi officials in the years after the 1991 Gulf War.
dude, you are the old fuck, not me.
so don't try to bluff me with this "you don't remember" stuff.
now, get off my lawn, poser.
Get off YOUR lawn....really? What lawn would that be........
mine, obviously.
CaféAuLait;6056114 said:CaféAuLait;6056058 said:WMD's include nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.
and the case for invasion was tried to be sold with the mushroom cloud (for obvious reasons) and with anthrax (for obvious reasons as well, if you remember 2001), not with sarin or mustard gas.
So which one were the democrats selling with all of their claims?
A. All of the above and they focused on gas and biologic weapons.
Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production. Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998See previous quotes as well.Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts. Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
The UNSC. Their the ones who issued the resolution.whose call was it then moron, yours?
According to WikiLeaks, small amounts of chemical WMDs were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion.
You mean the traces of old chemicals found on the floor of some unused armory?
FAIL.
CaféAuLait;6056114 said:CaféAuLait;6056058 said:WMD's include nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.
and the case for invasion was tried to be sold with the mushroom cloud (for obvious reasons) and with anthrax (for obvious reasons as well, if you remember 2001), not with sarin or mustard gas.
So which one were the democrats selling with all of their claims?
A. All of the above and they focused on gas and biologic weapons.
Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production. Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts. Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
See previous quotes as well.
Get off YOUR lawn....really? What lawn would that be........
mine, obviously.
I guess you have nothing once your lies were exposed. it must suck
Get off YOUR lawn....really? What lawn would that be........
mine, obviously.
I guess you have nothing once your lies were exposed. it must suck
