What Happened to Iraq's WMD?

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by preemptingyou03, May 8, 2004.

  1. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    This is a serious question. As you know by now, I'm not a loonie liberal. I understand though that the failure to find WMD in Iraq (yet) has hurt our reputaion and it has hurt our ability to launch future preemptive wars against rogue states. This, along with the troubles we face in Iraq today, hurt the Bush Doctrine, even though the Bush Doctrine is right and important for the War on Terror.

    At the beginning of the war, I was expecting us to find WMD sometime in May or June. I remember like a week in, everyone was saying, "Where are the WMD?" I felt like telling them to STFU, but I realize now, that we weren't just going to find these weapons in actual governmental buildings. They are hidden.

    We all know Bush didn't lie. Saddam used them. He admitted to using them. He admitted to having them. Clinton thought he had them. Kerry did. The UN did (17 times). France did. Germany did. Russia did. The UK did. Even Syria did. The UNSC and IAEA did. He violated 17 war treaties about them.

    But where are they?

    Scenario 1: They Are Hidden in Iraq

    Iraq's the size of California. Chemical weapons can be contained in something the size of a Coke bottle. It took us months to find Hussein, and the hole he was found in was big enough to contain enough WMDs to kill over 500,000 people.

    Plus, Iraqi scientists, such as Adnan Sead, has said Saddam hid his WMDs underneath people's lawns and in waterwells.

    Libya gave up some WMD and they were hidden in a turkey farm... a turkey farm. Not a military base. A turkey farm. This is why these countries are ROGUE states.

    I think we may stumble across some chemical weapons in a basement somewhere some time in the future.

    Scenario 2: They Were Moved

    We've heard the reports about the Bekka Valley in Syria. We've heard about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi trying to get them. We've heard about the trucks going there.

    I think this is possible. If it is, I say before the election, we raid this camp where these WMDs are, get the WMD and destroy them. I'm not saying go to war with Syria. Just destroy this camp. It'd be better if we could get Syria to admit they hid them for Iraq.

    Scenario 3: He Destroyed Them

    I think once Bush came into office, Saddam knew he wouldn't f*ck around like Clinton. Saddam knew Bush would send the UN back in there soon, so Saddam started to destroy the stockpiles, while keeping the WMD programs active. Then 9/11 happened, and Saddam hurried up this process because he knew he was on Bush's hitlist.

    Any opinions?
     
  2. SpidermanTuba
    Offline

    SpidermanTuba BANNED

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,101
    Thanks Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Ratings:
    +258
    Yes. They are hidden. Saddam Hussein went through the trouble of ammasing a huge arsenal of WMD, and when his country was invaded, instead of actually using them to fight his enemy, his hid them. Sure. Whatever. Keep pretending, I wouldn't want to shatter your fragile reality. Now you go head onto Iraq and find some WMD, we'll be back here cleaning up Shrub's mess.
    First off, Bush did lie. He said we would find WMD in Iraq. We didn't. Second off, the UN never concluded Iraq had biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons or programs. Lastly, since when do you care what France, Germany, and Russia think? When it happens to support your argument?



    Scenario 4:

    There aren't any WMD.

    Well gee, which one of these is the simplest possible explanation? Duh.
     
  3. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    So, when Saddam Hussein admitted to having them in 1998, what'd he do with them? That's all I'm asking.

    If Bush lied, the UN lied 333 times.
     
  4. SpidermanTuba
    Offline

    SpidermanTuba BANNED

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,101
    Thanks Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Ratings:
    +258
    Hell if I know. Just because we don't know the answer to that doesn't change the fact that they obviously aren't there. Funny, you believe him when he says he has them, and don't believe him when he says he doesn't. You and the rest of the warmongering sheep seem to believe all Middle Eastern fanatics as long as they're telling you something that will support your point of view.
     
  5. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    Well, when a mass murdering man, who would feed his own citizens into wood chippers, uses WMD on his own people, admits to it, brags about it, and the international community concludes he has them, and he states he hates us and wants to "break our neck," and then says he has them, then says he doesn't...

    Are you gonna trust the word of him?

    Look... you cannot possibly deny that considering Libya admitted they had WMD, and they showed us they had them in a turkey farm. Wasn't Saddam found near a farmhouse? My point is this: Saddam could have had a lot of chemical weapons and they could be hidden anywhere. Or they could have been deployed. Or destroyed before the war.

    My point is Saddam and WMD combined was a threat, no matter what situation there was.

    The reason he didn't use them, (if he had them) is because French and Russian diplomats told Hussein they'd get Bush to stop before Baghdad. Saddam honestly believed he'd survive this war.

    Besides, the Marines heard over Iraqi transmition the ordering of the use of chemicals. It never happened.
     
  6. insein
    Offline

    insein Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    6,096
    Thanks Received:
    356
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Philadelphia, Amazing huh...
    Ratings:
    +356
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/4/17/141224.shtml
    WMD's in Syria you say? Jordan foiled a plot to kill 80,000? Syria got them from where? Iraq? No they don't have any WMDs.

    http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=482
    Whats that? Debka said that awhile ago? Hmmm...

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109338,00.html
    Whats that? Al Queda terror cell in iraq? Hmmm that can't be because Al Queda and Iraq don't like each other and have nothing to do with one another.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,779359,00.html
    Whats that terror Camp reported in 2002 byt a Liberal newspaper? Imagine that.

    http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/26/jordan.terror/
    Hmmm even CNN has shown that these attackers received training in Iraq and weapons from Syria.

    Yep he lied alright.
     
  7. SpidermanTuba
    Offline

    SpidermanTuba BANNED

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,101
    Thanks Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Ratings:
    +258
    You are the one using Saddam Hussein's claims to back your argument, not me.
    And aliens could come down to Earth and turn us all into space slaves. Destroyed BEFORE the war? Isn't that what we WANTED him to do?
    Got a source for that or am I supposed to take your word?
     
  8. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    It has been reported on television, but my source was my cousin's friend, who is in the Marines and said several times they heard Baathist generals order the launch of chemical weapons just north of Basra.

    It never happened. Probably because they didn't have them. My point is you are politicizing this. Everyone though he had them. And he still might have. Can you agree on that?
     
  9. SpidermanTuba
    Offline

    SpidermanTuba BANNED

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,101
    Thanks Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Ratings:
    +258
    I am to believe hearsay evidence? Not only that, but hearsay evidence from someone who heard hearsay evidence from someone who heard hearsay evidence? Did the Marine actually hear the generals himself? If not, then that adds one more level of hearsay. Total crap.
    Not me. But no one listened to me before we decided to light Baghdad on fire.
     
  10. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    So you didn't believe the international community? France? Russia? China? Britain? Syria? You didn't look at the 333 violations? You didn't believe Clinton? And Kerry? And Congress? And the CIA? And the IAEA?
     

Share This Page