Literally THOUSANDS of WMD's found in IRAQ - PERIOD

[P@triot]

Sad that we have to provide the literal text book definition of WMD's to him and he still can't accept the truth...

 

[P@triot]

You can post your retarded shit in large letters, but even Bush and Cheney disagree with you.

such as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear

Weapon of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How long are you guys going to beat this dead horse?

 

[Si modo]

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.

WMD include CBNR weapons (chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological).

 

[Si modo]

And, of course chemical weapons were found. Some of those finds were reported by the WaPo and others.

Folks who say no WMD were found are lying or misinformed.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

WMD include CBNR weapons (chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological).

Nobody's arguing, except for Rotty, over the exact definition of the term "weapons of mass destruction." The point being that everybody knew Saddam had chemical and biological weapons, and yet the reason we were told we had to go to war was because he had or was developing nuclear weapons. This was a lie.

 

[bodecea]

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 yellow cake isn't used for chemical or biological weapons.

 

[bodecea]

such as chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear

Weapon of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ah .... bigger font....makes it so much more truer.

 

[Lakhota]

All Bush accomplished was to turn mortal enemies into allies - Iraq and Iran.

Iraq-Iran Ties Grow Stronger As Iraq Rises From The Ashes

U.S. Says Iraqis Are Helping Iran to Skirt Sanctions - The New York Times

Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting | Reuters

 

[Dot Com]

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.

yep & they had the Vulcan- Condi push it:

Search for the 'smoking gun' - CNN

"The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

They wanted Iraq for Chevron

 

[TakeAStepBack]

We already knew Iraq had those biological weapons. We sold them to Saddam in the first place. The controversy that began over the resolution for Iraq to work close with UN specialists on inventorying their stock and expose what they were creating is the issue. As it turns out, they were not creating biological weapons OR any nuclear weapons which was PART of the bad intel scandal that followed the invasion and subsequently, made the administration look foolish, rash and premature in their invasion/occupation.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Iraq posed no imminent threat to the united states or any surrounding ally. That is why this war was unjust and simply a goal that the PNAC had for the region. Along with several other key areas. Including Syrua, Yemen, Afghanistan and Iran.

 

[Charles_Main]

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]

So now you admit they had WMD. lol

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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]

So now you admit they had WMD. lol

You caught me. I'm guilty of saying something I never denied.

 

[P@triot]

Iraq posed no imminent threat to the united states or any surrounding ally. That is why this war was unjust and simply a goal that the PNAC had for the region. Along with several other key areas. Including Syrua, Yemen, Afghanistan and Iran.

Ok - if you want to make that rational argument, fine. Lets discuss that. But these people claiming that "no WMD's were found" are just moron's. It's a fact that quite a few WMD's were found.

Now, about your reasonable point, I happen to disagree. I think Saddam proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was a threat to the entire planet 24x7. He invaded Iran. He invaded Kuwait. He had unleashed WMD's on his own people (the Kurds in the north). And he had tried to develop nukes.

Whlle I agree with you that he was most likely not an "imment threat", I don't believe removing a vicious dictator from power is ever "unjust".

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Iraq posed no imminent threat to the united states or any surrounding ally. That is why this war was unjust and simply a goal that the PNAC had for the region. Along with several other key areas. Including Syrua, Yemen, Afghanistan and Iran.

Ok - if you want to make that rational argument, fine. Lets discuss that. But these people claiming that "no WMD's were found" are just moron's. It's a fact that quite a few WMD's were found.

Now, about your reasonable point, I happen to disagree. I think Saddam proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was a threat to the entire planet 24x7. He invaded Iran. He invaded Kuwait. He had unleashed WMD's on his own people (the Kurds in the north). And he had tried to develop nukes.

Whlle I agree with you that he was most likely not an "imment threat", I don't believe removing a vicious dictator from power is ever "unjust".

That is not how the war was sold. The war was sold that Iraq (Saddam regime) was building both biological and nuclear weapons against the first resolutions following Operation desert storm and the sanctions we saddled Iraq with subsequently.

It turned out that the regime was in fact, working cooperatively with the UN about its WMD stock and was NOT creating new weapons either biologically or nuclear.

So while your opinion counts on the merits that it is your opinion and you are entitled. The Iraq war of 2003 was conducted under false pretense entirely. Therefore, the war is both unconstitutional, unjust, immoral and ultimately an international crime.

Had Iraq been actually building nuclear or biological arms without resolution UN specialist knowledge, then the war would have at least not been criminal. But it turned out bad intel caused a lot of people to needlessly die.

 

[Indofred]

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?

Because there weren't any?

Links to credible sites please.

 

[IGetItAlready]

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.

If it weren't for singular obscure references morons like you would be lost.
It was a well known fact that Hussein had no nukes. It was also a widely held belief that he had in fact used chems on Kurds.
Had all the controversy been over nukes why didn't everyone simply say "nukes"? Much quicker and easier than incessantly referring to the threat as "WMDs".
This whole new twist on the narrative is as dumb as a birther suddenly saying, "I never said Obama was born in Kenya, I said he wasn't born in Kansas".
Pffft uber stupid.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Because the Bush Administration had intel that the Saddam regime was building nukes and bio weapons against UN resolution and specialist enforcement.

If you actually fucking read once in a while you might know that we already knew saddam had a stock pile. That isn't the issue here at all with the Iraq war. You're simplifying something complex.

 

[Indofred]

I think Saddam proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was a threat to the entire planet 24x7. He invaded Iran. He invaded Kuwait. He had unleashed WMD's on his own people (the Kurds in the north). And he had tried to develop nukes.

Whlle I agree with you that he was most likely not an "imment threat", I don't believe removing a vicious dictator from power is ever "unjust".

You'd better prove Saddam had the ability to attack the entire planet now you've made that claim.
If the military power of the US can't hold back a few tribesmen in Afghanistan, when chance did Saddam have of invading Russia, China or the US?

Next up.
You mentioned Saddam attacking Iran. Do you realise he did so with US help and direction?

As for dictators.
Why isn't the US invading Zimbabwe and China?