CIA says, no WMD found
- Thread starter Havoc
- Start date
TheBear
NON-WOKED
Whatever the US may have sold to Iraq, it is known exactly how much. And apparently, this administration and the previous administration had extremely high confidence that there is much unaccounted for WMD's in Iraq. Accounting is made a lot easier when we know exactly what, and how much we sold. 
Upvote
0
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031006-490596,00.html?cnn=yes
here's an interesting article which tries to explain where those WMDs are.
Also, I've heard the discrepancy characterised in terms of Saddam's potential production minus what was accounted for. Those "unaccounted for" stuff was never shown to have been actually produced.
here's an interesting article which tries to explain where those WMDs are.
Also, I've heard the discrepancy characterised in terms of Saddam's potential production minus what was accounted for. Those "unaccounted for" stuff was never shown to have been actually produced.
Upvote
0
The Bear, you forget one important part.
No chemical style WMD is usable after 15 years, not even with proper storage. Heck, even normal ammo won´t be usable after about 10 years for military purposes.
Biological WMD´s need proper storage. Tell me how many security level 4 biolabs are in Iraq? I bet none.
It may be, that one is foolish enough to store the strains in normal houses within normal comercial coolant devices. And in turn risking the outbreak of the resoective deseases. I would think, not even Hussein would have been that stupid. (After all there is no guarantee, that he himself would survive. And even the most maniacal dictator has a strong sense of self preservation)
It is quite unimportant, if 650 tons, 10000 tons or 1000000000 tons of chemical WMD´s from 15 years past are unaccounted for. They simply are not usable now. (As a side note, where are those "hundreds of production and storage sites"? Hundreds of production and storage sites would mean a personnel of at elast 50000 people. The US soldiers couldn´t find even one of them until now? Stange indeed.)
No chemical style WMD is usable after 15 years, not even with proper storage. Heck, even normal ammo won´t be usable after about 10 years for military purposes.
Biological WMD´s need proper storage. Tell me how many security level 4 biolabs are in Iraq? I bet none.
It may be, that one is foolish enough to store the strains in normal houses within normal comercial coolant devices. And in turn risking the outbreak of the resoective deseases. I would think, not even Hussein would have been that stupid. (After all there is no guarantee, that he himself would survive. And even the most maniacal dictator has a strong sense of self preservation)
It is quite unimportant, if 650 tons, 10000 tons or 1000000000 tons of chemical WMD´s from 15 years past are unaccounted for. They simply are not usable now. (As a side note, where are those "hundreds of production and storage sites"? Hundreds of production and storage sites would mean a personnel of at elast 50000 people. The US soldiers couldn´t find even one of them until now? Stange indeed.)
Upvote
0
TheBear
NON-WOKED
Yes. An interesting article indeed. Thanks for the link.
Here's something I find particularly odd.
From the article -
"Ten years and another war later, a new set of interrogators is wondering what happened to Iraq's bioweapons program........ They particularly focused on the period after 1998, when U.N. inspectors left Iraq........."
The article pretty much paints the picture, (according to interviewees), that most of the wmd's were destroyed in 1991, and there were no further wmd devlopement programs. Also, according to the article, by 1998 all wmds were destroyed...Stating, "Bush Administration officials never anticipated this predicament."
But, what happened immediately after the inspectors left in 1998? What was the purpose of Clinton invading Iraq with air strikes, if there were no wmd's?
See. I look at it like this. If there are wmd's in Iraq, both Clinton and Bush take credit for their actions. However, if this article depicts the reality of things in Iraq, then both Clinton and Bush, and the whole slew of Republicans and Democrats take the blame. You can't blame just Bush on this one. This had bi-partisan support for years, and in both Bush and Clinton administration.
A side note: The article itself shows it's bias against Bush. Even though the time-frame covered in the article was over a decade, not once was Clinton's name mentioned. Nor were Clinton's air strikes in 1998 called into question in the article, (a time when all wmd's, according to the article, were already destroyed).
Here's something I find particularly odd.
From the article -
"Ten years and another war later, a new set of interrogators is wondering what happened to Iraq's bioweapons program........ They particularly focused on the period after 1998, when U.N. inspectors left Iraq........."
The article pretty much paints the picture, (according to interviewees), that most of the wmd's were destroyed in 1991, and there were no further wmd devlopement programs. Also, according to the article, by 1998 all wmds were destroyed...Stating, "Bush Administration officials never anticipated this predicament."
But, what happened immediately after the inspectors left in 1998? What was the purpose of Clinton invading Iraq with air strikes, if there were no wmd's?
See. I look at it like this. If there are wmd's in Iraq, both Clinton and Bush take credit for their actions. However, if this article depicts the reality of things in Iraq, then both Clinton and Bush, and the whole slew of Republicans and Democrats take the blame. You can't blame just Bush on this one. This had bi-partisan support for years, and in both Bush and Clinton administration.
A side note: The article itself shows it's bias against Bush. Even though the time-frame covered in the article was over a decade, not once was Clinton's name mentioned. Nor were Clinton's air strikes in 1998 called into question in the article, (a time when all wmd's, according to the article, were already destroyed).
Upvote
0
Well lets see, who's the president? Bush. Who's got the responsibility currently? Bush. Who can do something about the situation? Bush.TheBear said:
Clinton's air strikes were stupid. I didn't hate the man, but he wasn't a great president (mediocre is the word I'm looking for I think). But man does mediocre look good right now.
Upvote
0
Air strikes were to punish Iraq, Invasion is to take it over. Well, good old Bush got what he wanted, and guess who pays for his stupidity? The US Tax payer and the military who are dying.
Jeff the Finn
Jeff the Finn
Upvote
0
TheBear said:
No, it doesn't clear anything up.
Those CBW could have been used up, traded, destroyed or hidden. The fact is that the U.S. has no proof to back up their allegations. Period.
That proof was crucial for the U.S. to have prior to invading Iraq. The result of the U.S. not having any proof prior to attacking is that the credibility of the U.S. has been damaged to an irreparable degree. This damaged credibility is further compounded by the fact that they still lack real evidence.
And the credibility of the U.S. was supremely damaged by another fact, and this is the real issue that should be addressed!!!!!:
The U.S. openly disregarded the U.N. Security Council and attacked Iraq for allegedly disregarding U.N. resolution 1441, and they did this while the U.N. had UNSCOM teams inside Iraq investigating the alleged violations. There was never adequate proof to justify attacking Iraq. And their still isn't.
The utter abomination of "Preemptive Strike":
How would you like it it if your neighbor came and filled your carcass with lead suppliments and then looked for evidence that you wanted to do him harm?
"Shoot first and ask questions later". This is the arrogance with which the U.S. has persued this "Just Cause".
Well, don't be deceived, God is not mocked, every man and nation will reap what they have sown, whether for life or destruction.
Satisfied
Upvote
0
I have to agree. the US was never serious about not going to war--not after having deployed hundreds of thousands of men and thousands of armoured vehicles.
the war plan had to be started in spring since troops wouldn't be able to fight effectively in summer. notice that the last thing that happened just before the war was that Turkey refused to let US use its soil; once that decision had been made, there was no longer any reason to hold off the invasion;
the war plan had to be started in spring since troops wouldn't be able to fight effectively in summer. notice that the last thing that happened just before the war was that Turkey refused to let US use its soil; once that decision had been made, there was no longer any reason to hold off the invasion;
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
As far as "cowboy" goes, it appears as though President Bush has taken that title when he told the Iraqi patriots to "Bring 'em on". Since then 170 U.S. servicemen/women returned home in body bags... "Mission accomplished"?
Perhaps if President Bush 'settled down' those 170 would still be alive?
Satisfied
Perhaps if President Bush 'settled down' those 170 would still be alive?
Satisfied
Upvote
0
Because Democrats and Republicans are both working for the same team. All the fighting between the parties is a ruse. Watch carefully. Whenever they argue, the argument is about HOW to control us, not WHETHER to control us.TheBear said:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
The scary part is that we elect these politicians and they have access to the military. The president is a figure-head. The only military he can activate on his own is the U.S. Marine Corps. And then only for 30 days before the house and the senate take over and decide what we do.
Upvote
0
I'm gonna ask the CIA who is going to win the super bowl
then put my money on the other team.
then put my money on the other team.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
