What Happened to Iraq's WMD?

[preemptingyou03]

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?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

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.

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.

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

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.

 

[preemptingyou03]

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.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

So, when Saddam Hussein admitted to having them in
1998, what'd he do with them? That's all I'm asking.

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.

 

[preemptingyou03]

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.

 

[insein]

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.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

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...

You are the one using Saddam Hussein's claims to back your argument, not me.

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.

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?

Besides, the Marines heard over Iraqi transmition the ordering of the use of chemicals.

Got a source for that or am I supposed to take your word?

 

[preemptingyou03]

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?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

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.

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.

Everyone though he had them.

Not me. But no one listened to me before we decided to light Baghdad on fire.

 

[preemptingyou03]

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?

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by preemptingyou03
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?

Dont you know. They were all lying! Its a big conspiracy.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Dont you know. They were all lying! Its a big conspiracy.

Bush cloned them and placed them in a gulag. Then they broke out to tell everyone that Bush is evil.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by insein
Bush cloned them and placed them in a gulag. Then they broke out to tell everyone that Bush is evil.

Wait, why wouldnt he just have killed them if he had already cloned them. I mean that sounds like a blunder at the Dr Evil level of blunders.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Wait, why wouldnt he just have killed them if he had already cloned them. I mean that sounds like a blunder at the Dr Evil level of blunders.

No no he wanted to torture them along with all the other innocent peaceniks of the world.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by insein
No no he wanted to torture them along with all the other innocent peaceniks of the world.

You mean he put them all in a round room and told them to pee in the corner?

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
You mean he put them all in a round room and told them to pee in the corner?

No he made them watch movies like Red Dawn endlessly, lol.

 

[Patriot]

Pre,


It is number one and two. Why is this so hard for Americans to believe. I mean everyone in Europe knows this as the French and the Germans helped them hide the shit. Europeans had a heavy stake in this whole deal and of course they are going to send disinformation out to cover their tracks. Europe is tired of America being the only superpower and by hook or crook they WILL accomplish what they want.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/...17/141224.shtmlWMD'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.

Do you even realize that your argument here is based on the assumption that your argument is correct? You're saying that some weapons came from Syria, and since Saddam Hussein hid his weapons in Syria, that means Saddam Hussein had weapons. Circular logic, a fallacy.

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

"intelligence sources", "our intelligence sources", "Our sources", "its most exclusive sources", "DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s sources say", "DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s Middle East experts" I am to believe a bunch of anonymous sources just because you say so?

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.

No smallbrain, its that Al Qaeda and HUSSEIN didn't like each other. If you want to debunk a liberal argument at least bother to learn exactly what that liberal argument is. In case you weren't aware, Hussein and the Iraqi people didn't like each other to much. That's why Al Qaeda hated Hussein, because Hussein oppressed the Iraqis and did not force Islam on the people like Al Qaeda wanted.

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

"in northern Iraq," - What's that, NORTHERN Iraq? And which parts of Iraq did Hussein have control over?

"Most of them fled Afghanistan after the US-led offensive, "

What's that? They weren't in Iraq before 9/11?

"But US analysts decided that whatever al-Qaida was up to was too rudimentary to pose a direct threat and was not worth risking American lives for. "

What's that you say? Not worth risking American lives for?

And I don't know where you've been since that article came out, apparently you ignore all the news you don't want to hear, because it later came out, like everything else Bush was claiming, that the camp in KURDISH CONTROLLED northern Iraq isn't all its cracked up to be.

LINK

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

First off, I never claimed there were no weapons in Syria, so I really don't see what your point is with that.
"On a confession shown on state-run Jordanian television, "
On a what? We're to take the word of a terrorist's confession on a Muslim State's state run TV? WTF? Oh, I get it, ONLY when it helps YOUR argument. The rest of the time confessions given under duress on state run state censored Islamic TV aren't worth didly, but if they support YOUR viepoint, they're gold!

"U.S. officials have said is behind some attacks in Iraq."

Your point? Where did I ever say Al Qaeda isn't in Iraq NOW?



If you were trying to prove that Hussein had WMD and/or that Hussein was linked to Al Qaeda, I have to tell you, you have failed miserably. Thanks, try again.

 

[Patriot]

Well spidy since you are not a terrorism expert I think you need to drink a cup of shut the hell up.

 

[Avatar4321]

Do you even realize that your argument here is based on the assumption that your argument is correct? You're saying that some weapons came from Syria, and since Saddam Hussein hid his weapons in Syria, that means Saddam Hussein had weapons. Circular logic, a fallacy.

Actually thats not the argument at all. This is the argument

1)Reports started when we entered the country that Saddam shipped Weapons to Syria.

2)Syrian Terrorists were found with weapons that we knew Saddam had that were unaccounted for.

3)Syria doesnt have the capability to build these weapons

So where on earth did they get them? Lets use Occums Razor here. The simplist explanation on how weapons that Saddam hadnt accounted for in Syria would be that Saddam shipped them to Syria as per the earlier reports. Do you have any better explainations for how the weapons we were looking for In Iraq ended up in the hands of Syrian Terrorists?