Literally THOUSANDS of WMD's found in IRAQ - PERIOD

P@triot

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2011
61,031
11,514
2,060
United States
From Chuck Pfarerr's book, Seal Target: Geronimo

It is a chilling fact that thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq. *These weapons have been used by Al Qaeda against coalition and NATO forces on dozens of occasions. *This has been confirmed by countless sources, most recently in the released WikiLeaks cables.

So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?

The Republicans won’t touch this because it would reveal the incompetence of the Bush administration in failing to neutralize the danger of Iraqi WMD (instead of preventing Weapons of Mass Destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq has accelerated the acquisition, manufacture, and use of chemical weapons by Al Qaeda). The Democrats won’t touch it because it would show President Bush was right to invade Iraq in the first place. It is an axis of embarrassment. *And the*press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's. *The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". *Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time.

Sarin-loaded bomb explodes in Iraq - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq - NBCNews.com

NewsMax.com: Inside Cover Story
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

WTF are you talking about? Nobody ever said WMD could only Mean Nukes you asshole. You are making shit up. WMD clearly includes Chemical and Biological Weapons.
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

Why are we talking about this?? Should this not fall under history since it does not pertain to todays politics?

Some democrat comes in and drop a stinker and it seems like everyone wants to come and sniff. Why? You know it stinks, are you trying to compare it to some other stink you are fond of?

Really, why are we talking about this?

PS--WMDs was in reference to more than Nukes.
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

First of all, if they meant "nuclear" weapons, they would have said NUCLEAR weapons. Instead, they said WMD's because they were exponentially more concerned about chemical and biological than they were nuclear. No matter how much you try to back peddle, lie, and change the story now, you're still WRONG.

Second, nuclear materials were in fact foudn and removed from Iraq. Rather than opening your mouth, perhaps you should have clicked the last link, read, and actually LEARNED something for once.
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

WTF are you talking about? Nobody ever said WMD could only Mean Nukes you asshole. You are making shit up. WMD clearly includes Chemical and Biological Weapons.

Except everybody knew that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons long before the Bush administration started the war propaganda. They sold the war on the idea that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons, which was a lie. Now you clowns come out and try to say that chemical weapons that everybody knew Saddam had, considering it was the U.S. that gave them to him in the 80's, were what they were talking about the whole time. Nope, not going to work.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gUzD1Ud4Lk]Smoking Gun - YouTube[/ame]
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...

Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...

Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.

And nobody cared about a "mushroom cloud". Wasn't even mentioned. Sorry about your ignorance. In fact, a dirty bomb was an exponentially more likely scenario. You'r'e being exposed as the partisan, misinformed hack that you are...
 
Making the same thread over and over doesn't change the fact that when they said "weapons of mass destruction" they were referring to nuclear weapons, and that no nuclear weapons were discovered in Iraq.

The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...

Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.

It's funny how you people can't admit when you are WRONG! You're so humiliated by screaming for 8 years that there "were no WMD's" and now that everyone knows there were, you're trying to change the story to nukes only. Funny thing is, nuclear material was found as well! :lol:
 
The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...

Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.

And nobody cared about a "mushroom cloud". Wasn't even mentioned. Sorry about your ignorance. In fact, a dirty bomb was an exponentially more likely scenario. You'r'e being exposed as the partisan, misinformed hack that you are...

So George W. Bush did not mention a mushroom cloud at all in the video I posted?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gUzD1Ud4Lk]Smoking Gun - YouTube[/ame]

Your powers of denial are impeccable. :clap2:
 
The Administration even admitted that it would be very difficult to detonate a nuclear weapon, even if terrorist obtained one. Just shows what a lying piece of shit you are...

Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.

It's funny how you people can't admit when you are WRONG! You're so humiliated by screaming for 8 years that there "were no WMD's" and now that everyone knows there were, you're trying to change the story to nukes only. Funny thing is, nuclear material was found as well! :lol:

Changing the size of your font just exposes your nonsense more clearly. You should probably cease and desist from doing so.
 
Biological and chemical weapons don't create a mushroom cloud. Sorry about your luck.

It's funny how you people can't admit when you are WRONG! You're so humiliated by screaming for 8 years that there "were no WMD's" and now that everyone knows there were, you're trying to change the story to nukes only. Funny thing is, nuclear material was found as well! :lol:

Changing the size of your font just exposes your nonsense more clearly. You should probably cease and desist from doing so.

First you change the conversation to "chemical weapons don't count, WMD's meant nuclear weapons only". I prove that Iraq had nuclear materials, so now you attempt to change the coversation to my font?!? Really?

LMAO! Serioiusly folks, you can't buy this kind of entertainment!
 
It's funny how you people can't admit when you are WRONG! You're so humiliated by screaming for 8 years that there "were no WMD's" and now that everyone knows there were, you're trying to change the story to nukes only. Funny thing is, nuclear material was found as well! :lol:

Changing the size of your font just exposes your nonsense more clearly. You should probably cease and desist from doing so.

First you change the conversation to "chemical weapons don't count, WMD's meant nuclear weapons only". I prove that Iraq had nuclear materials, so now you attempt to change the coversation to my font?!? Really?

LMAO! Serioiusly folks, you can't buy this kind of entertainment!

Indeed you can't. :eusa_whistle:
 
You can post your retarded shit in large letters, but even Bush and Cheney disagree with you.

g_w_bush_wmd_poster-p228219741660571693t5wm_400.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top