WTF??!! WMD's after all!!!!

[JoeB131]

[I have an excellent argument that an extremely sloppy poster who thinks he can spout misinformation with impunity and not get called on it. I too graduated before 1988, but then my diploma is real and I continued to keep myself informed. You have to believe I don't fact-check everything, but I can spot bullshit a miles away. Alarm bells go off and I called you on it.

Anyway Joey, everyone is convinced you are a history graduate. It's about as believable as your having a job and being a respected employee. The only thing you've ever come clean on is your losing your job because of psychological impairment.

That is believable.

So you still don't have an argument, then?

 

[depotoo]

[I have an excellent argument that an extremely sloppy poster who thinks he can spout misinformation with impunity and not get called on it. I too graduated before 1988, but then my diploma is real and I continued to keep myself informed. You have to believe I don't fact-check everything, but I can spot bullshit a miles away. Alarm bells go off and I called you on it.

Anyway Joey, everyone is convinced you are a history graduate. It's about as believable as your having a job and being a respected employee. The only thing you've ever come clean on is your losing your job because of psychological impairment.

That is believable.

So you still don't have an argument, then?

You are a real joke joe.

 

[JoeB131]

so you don't have an argument, either, then?

Okay, let's bottom line this. Everyone knew they were turning up these expired chemical munitions which had no tactical value, but nearly all of them dated before 1991. Bush could have tried to pass these off as a causus belli, but he didn't because he knew people would just laugh at him.

But pretty much like an old weather balloon from 1947 suddenly became a flying saucer becuase everyone forgot what actually happened, the sad, pathetic people who hate Obama are now trying to say, "Bush was right all along!"

 

[depotoo]

Actually, Bush was right.

so you don't have an argument, either, then?

Okay, let's bottom line this. Everyone knew they were turning up these expired chemical munitions which had no tactical value, but nearly all of them dated before 1991. Bush could have tried to pass these off as a causus belli, but he didn't because he knew people would just laugh at him.

But pretty much like an old weather balloon from 1947 suddenly became a flying saucer becuase everyone forgot what actually happened, the sad, pathetic people who hate Obama are now trying to say, "Bush was right all along!"

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, Bush was right.

Ask any mother who lost a son in Iraq if they think their son should have died for expired mustard gas.

I doubt you'd get any takers.

 

[depotoo]

They would say the same, even if a nuclear bomb had been found.
And I have several members of my family in the military. Noone likes war, but someone has to be willing to keep our homeland safe, and it is with great sacrifice those that join , and their families make, and know, going in the ultimate sacrifice may be made.

Actually, Bush was right.

Ask any mother who lost a son in Iraq if they think their son should have died for expired mustard gas.

I doubt you'd get any takers.

 

[Care4all]

They would say the same, even if a nuclear bomb had been found.
And I have several members of my family in the military. Noone likes war, but someone has to be willing to keep our homeland safe, and it is with great sacrifice those that join , and their families make, and know, going in the ultimate sacrifice may be made.

Actually, Bush was right.

Ask any mother who lost a son in Iraq if they think their son should have died for expired mustard gas.

I doubt you'd get any takers.

And HOW EXACTLY did going to war in Iraq, (and their son's or husband's death or maiming,) keep our homeland SAFE?

What did Iraq have to do with our homeland and its safety?

 

[Care4all]

What I think should have been done, is Bin Laden captured or killed within the first 3 months after 9/11...THAT would have shown the Radical Muslims that ALLAH/GOD,

was on our side...instead of their side..,

Bin Laden staying alive for nearly a decade after his 9/11 planned attack on us, in these Jihadists screwed up heads, meant that Allah was on THEIR SIDE....which allowed them to recruit more people towards their cause.

And us attacking Iraq ALSO gave them more recruiting Power...emboldened them.

 

[JoeB131]

They would say the same, even if a nuclear bomb had been found.
And I have several members of my family in the military. Noone likes war, but someone has to be willing to keep our homeland safe, and it is with great sacrifice those that join , and their families make, and know, going in the ultimate sacrifice may be made.

Nuclear bombs weren't found. Neither was Anthrax, those Mobile Chemical labs turned out to be weather stations, those aluminum tubes weren't being used in centrifuges, and no one was trying to buy any new uranium from Niger.

There's a reason why people are downright angry that Bush lied about the extent of Saddam's program. To the point where Rove told Santorum, "We can't bring this up, people will crucify us because it's laughable."

We did not go to war over expired chemical munitions that had been buried and forgotten in 1991.

We went to war because Saddam was about to hand over Nukes and Anthrax to Al Qaeda if we didn't get him RIGHT NOW! Don't even wait for the Inspectors to finish their jobs after Saddam let them back in. We got to invade RIGHT NOW!!! Ignore the Generals who say we don't have enough troops to secure the country. RIGHT NOW!!!

And when we had the resulting chaos of the country falling apart and 5000 troops dying for no good reason, you guys are running from it like a scalded cat.

 

[asterism]

Don't hide behind some faux concern for "our men" when you're talking to someone that has actually been there. If you have a point regarding the risk posed by Saddam having binary-agent Sarin or Mustard weapons vs. nuclear weapons then make it.

Are you saying without the "mushroom cloud" statement you would have not supported the invasion?

I would say that if Bush had said, "We know Saddam is nowhere near a nuke and he doesn't have Anthrax, but we think he might still have some chemical weapons from 1991 that have no doubt expired because they've exceeded their shelf life, but darn it, we need to go after that guy anyway because he tried to kill my Daddy once!"

Most sensible people would have laughed at him.

You keep saying that the chemical weapons were "expired," which shows you don't understand binary agents.

It's so funny that the "No WMDs" line is used and then when proof that there were WMDs the point shifts to nuclear weapons.

 

[asterism]

Binary agents do not deteriorate in relatively short periods of time. The shells discussed in the article were every bit as lethal as they were the day they were manufactured.

Subject SHELF LIFE OF IRAQ S CW AGENTS

Did you actually read what you posted?

Here, I will help you out.

20 FEBRUARY 1991

1. CIA AND DIA AGREE THAT IRAQLS CURRENT STOCKS OF

MUSTARD ARE STABLE AND SHOULD REMAIN EFFECTIVE FOR SEVERAL

YEARS.

Point being- Anything they made in 1991 would have been expired by 2003.

CIA AND DIA HAVE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENTS OF THE SHELF

LIFE OF IRAQ'S UNITARY NERVE AGENTS. BOTH AGENCIES AGREE THAT

IRAQ HAS ENCOUNTERED DIFFICULTY OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS WITH

THE SHELF LIFE OF ITS UNITARY NERVE AGENTS. DIA BELIEVES THAT

THE PROBLEM PERSISTS, THAT THE STOCKPILE OF NERVE AGENTS WILL

BE UNUSABLE BY LATE MARCH, AND THAT DAMAGE TO PRODUCTION

FACILITIES WILL FORCE THE IRAQIS TO RELY ON STOCKPILED AGENTS.

Read it again. UNITARY agents will be unusable in short time. That's different than BINARY agents.

"Point being- Anything they made in 1991 would have been expired by 2003."

The story in the OP proves your statement wrong.

 

[asterism]

That's like saying that a nuclear bomb like the ones dropped on Japan in 1945 wouldn't be a threat today because they are old.

NO, it's not the same at all....radio active nukes last for millennia, chemical and biological weapons deteriorate in relatively short periods of time.

Powell and Rice said in January of 2001 Saddam and his weapons capability were not a threat....

We also abolished 96.5% of ALL arsenal in Iraq, including chem and biological during gulf war 1, operation dessert storm...according to our military/gvt.

Binary agents do not deteriorate in relatively short periods of time. The shells discussed in the article were every bit as lethal as they were the day they were manufactured.

Subject SHELF LIFE OF IRAQ S CW AGENTS

i don't care....chemical weapons , whatever....they are not nukes, they have no mushroom cloud, they are no reason to send our men off to die for...period.

Don't hide behind some faux concern for "our men" when you're talking to someone that has actually been there. If you have a point regarding the risk posed by Saddam having binary-agent Sarin or Mustard weapons vs. nuclear weapons then make it.

Are you saying without the "mushroom cloud" statement you would have not supported the invasion?

Yes, without nukes there was no constitutional reason to send our men and women off to their possible deaths.

I've always had plenty at stake with my father and husband...

Not true. Saddam broke the cease-fire and Congress approved the invasion. That's reason enough

 

[asterism]

[


"He told me that most of the WMD had been destroyed by the U.N. inspectors in the '90s. And those that hadn't been destroyed by the inspectors were unilaterally destroyed by Iraq," Piro says.

"So why keep the secret? Why put your nation at risk, why put your own life at risk to maintain this charade?" Pelley asks.

"It was very important for him to project that because that was what kept him, in his mind, in power. That capability kept the Iranians away. It kept them from reinvading Iraq," Piro says.

Before his wars with America, Saddam had fought a ruinous eight year war with Iran and it was Iran he still feared the most.

"He believed that he couldn't survive without the perception that he had weapons of mass destruction?" Pelley asks.

"Absolutely," Piro says.
s

but the point was, before we went to war, we should have MADE SURE he had them before sending troops into combat.

And the thing was, a lot of people like Hans Blix, Scott Ritter and El-Baradai were telling us we HAD gotten all of his stockpiles.

But your boy Bush went to war anyway.

The OP proves that point to be incorrect also. If "all of his stockpiles" were secured, how did these brave men get injured?

 

[asterism]

And the Ws they found couldn't kill a fly!

...and the soldiers were treated for what then? What a Bozo.

Nausea.

Not one was fitted for a pine box!

Very minor contact with some of these "expired" munitions caused serious injuries and permanent damage (way more than "nausea"), and that's your justification for saying they were not dangerous if they were actually used as weapons?

 

[NLT]

JoeB131
U.S. removes yellowcake from Iraq - World news - Mideast N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq NBC News

The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.

What's now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad — using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine.

 

[asterism]

so you don't have an argument, either, then?

Okay, let's bottom line this. Everyone knew they were turning up these expired chemical munitions which had no tactical value, but nearly all of them dated before 1991. Bush could have tried to pass these off as a causus belli, but he didn't because he knew people would just laugh at him.

But pretty much like an old weather balloon from 1947 suddenly became a flying saucer becuase everyone forgot what actually happened, the sad, pathetic people who hate Obama are now trying to say, "Bush was right all along!"

You should read the actual casus belli.

 

[Mojo2]

What I think should have been done, is Bin Laden captured or killed within the first 3 months after 9/11...THAT would have shown the Radical Muslims that ALLAH/GOD,

was on our side...instead of their side..,

Bin Laden staying alive for nearly a decade after his 9/11 planned attack on us, in these Jihadists screwed up heads, meant that Allah was on THEIR SIDE....which allowed them to recruit more people towards their cause.

And us attacking Iraq ALSO gave them more recruiting Power...emboldened them.

Bush had no choice.

Saddam did.

Bush gave him plenty of time to vacate and spare everyone that war.

 

[Godboy]

They would say the same, even if a nuclear bomb had been found.
And I have several members of my family in the military. Noone likes war, but someone has to be willing to keep our homeland safe, and it is with great sacrifice those that join , and their families make, and know, going in the ultimate sacrifice may be made.

Actually, Bush was right.

Ask any mother who lost a son in Iraq if they think their son should have died for expired mustard gas.

I doubt you'd get any takers.

And HOW EXACTLY did going to war in Iraq, (and their son's or husband's death or maiming,) keep our homeland SAFE?

What did Iraq have to do with our homeland and its safety?

Al Qaeda was decimated in the Iraq war. They lost THOUSANDS of terrorists who would have no doubt caused great misery. Have you seen any big AQ attacks recently? Me neither.

 

[Mojo2]

They would say the same, even if a nuclear bomb had been found.
And I have several members of my family in the military. Noone likes war, but someone has to be willing to keep our homeland safe, and it is with great sacrifice those that join , and their families make, and know, going in the ultimate sacrifice may be made.

Actually, Bush was right.

Ask any mother who lost a son in Iraq if they think their son should have died for expired mustard gas.

I doubt you'd get any takers.

And HOW EXACTLY did going to war in Iraq, (and their son's or husband's death or maiming,) keep our homeland SAFE?

What did Iraq have to do with our homeland and its safety?

Bush successfully prevented a global Holy War.

That would have affected you, I think.

 

[JoeB131]

You keep saying that the chemical weapons were "expired," which shows you don't understand binary agents.

It's so funny that the "No WMDs" line is used and then when proof that there were WMDs the point shifts to nuclear weapons.

Well, no, guy, the binary agents degrade as well.

the thing was, Bush didn't talk about chemical. He talked about nuclear and biological weapons.