Saddam’s WMDs: The Left’s Iraq Lies Exposed

I would hope they do try to use these "WMD's"....it is likely they will kill more of them than anyone else, and once they do most of the world would decide to destroy them.

If this group wants to be a big time player...it would be rather stupid.

Nevertheless....these are NOT stockpiles of WMD.

 

They're not? What are they? Ingredients to bake a cake?

Wait, first it was "No WMD's found in Iraq."

Then...

After WMD's were found, it was "No stockpiles of WMD's found in Iraq."

 

He used OUR chemical weapons on the Kurds and Iranians. The Kurds are not his own people.

 

REUTERS - The UN nuclear agency said on Thursday it believed materials that Iraq said had been seized by insurgents were "low grade" and did not pose a significant security risk.

Iraq told the United Nations in a July 8 letter that "terrorist groups" had seized nuclear materials used for scientific research at a university in the country's north.

The International Atomic Energy Agency "is aware of the notification from Iraq and is in contact to seek further details," IAEA spokeswoman Gill Tudor said in an e-mail. "On the basis of the initial information we believe the material involved is low-grade and would not present a significant safety, security or nuclear proliferation risk."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.604226

 

We invaded because of the threat Saddam posed including the WMD threat he posed. WMD without a madman set on using them threaten no one. Until you understand that you understand nothing.

Again why didn't Obama destroy them, he's had almost 6 years to do it. They belonged to and were under the control of Iraq, the new Iraq government, on what legal basis would we have destroyed their property. Saddam and his government were no longer in power. THAT is who the UN resolutions and the ILA and the ATUMA applied. AND it was UNSCOM and the UN's responsibility anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

That's the nuclear stuff, we removed the yellow-cake he had a couple of years ago. This is about the chemical stuff.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes they are deteroriated but still dangers stockpiles, 1500 sarin rockets is a stockpile. And of course once the sanctions were lifted he would have quickly built up more stockpiles.

 

Hair splitting balderdash!

 

As it seems obvious you are privy to data in your position that the rest of us, the weapon inspectors, the United Nations, and the CIA are not...we must bow to your advanced insight and humbly accept your positions as valid.

 

Actually my position and knowledge of the matter is based on the UN, UNSCOM, ISG and subsequent investigations and reporting. It is not based on the lies deceptions and myths of the left.


Pesticides, Precursors, and Petulance

It has become established conventional wisdom that 'no stockpiles of WMD have been discovered in Iraq.' But this reading of the evidence uncovered to date is premature at best, and highly questionable.(*)A closer look at the data, and at the uses made of it, is essential for those who wish to understand the genuine state of Iraq's WMD threat at the time of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Another Congressional committee hearing has come and gone for the head of the hapless Iraqi Survey Group (ISG).(*) Charles Duelfer has testified that he did not know how much longer the weapons hunt might take, but that the "picture is much more complicated than I anticipated going in."(*) In addition, he also figured out that pinning hopes on getting information from frightened Iraqi scientists was probably not the best way to find the locations of all those WMD stockpiles. (see my previous article Cased Not Closed: Iraq's WMDs).(*)

Despite contracting out for assistance in document exploitation last October, only a small fraction of the seized documents have been analyzed. Keep in mind that the ISG is largely composed of personnel from the CIA, State Department, such as Duelfer, and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), such as the deputy, Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton.(*) These are the same organizations that are currently getting raked over the coals for bureaucratic bungling of intelligence prior to 9—11.(*)

In turn, the beleaguered agencies are deflecting this criticism to the President and his national security advisors, by essentially complaining the 'devil made me do it.'(*) In other words, their technical and tactical incompetence and/or their motivation to embarrass the administration has allowed the ISG to make proclamations about WMD stockpiles that minimize the significance of their findings, or deliberately downplay and contradict the findings of Coalition forces in the field.(*) Such is the case with chemical weapons (CW) precursors.

The anti—war left and the media continuously shift the goal posts about WMD stockpiles.(*) But what does the term 'stockpile' mean for WMDs?(*) One nuclear bomb is not really a 'stockpile,' but it would only take one, set off in an American city or dropped on US forces in the field, to make everybody wake up and smell the coffee.(*)

What did we expect to find in Iraq, the equivalent of the Pantex Plant?(*) In fact, we did find hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake and low—enriched uranium. But I digress.(*)

'Stockpiles' of biological weapons?(*) A stockpile of bio—weapons can be kept in a fridge in a scientist's house.(*) Ricin and botulinum toxin have already been found in sufficient quantities to regenerate a biological weapon (BW) capability in short order.(*) No, the standard established by the left and their allies in the media is that we must find chemical weapons (CW).(*) That is, if the US has not found pallets of CW projectiles in ammo dumps or munitions factories or at Iraqi Army unit areas, well then that George Bush flat—out lied to us.(*) In a fashion, the critics are correct concerning CW stockpiles. Here's why.

Chemical weapons are very potent in small amounts in a sterile setting. Hence, the bit in movies where the leading man dips a pen into a glass of water and says something to the effect that 'these few drops of nerve agent are enough to wipe out hundreds of thousands of people' is correct, but only if those people are crammed into the Silverdome.(*) Chemical weapons have very important weaknesses: They can be destroyed by light, heat, water, and wind —— that is, the weather —— not to mention the heat from the explosive charge designed to disperse the agent.(*) It is for this reason that CWs are employed en masse with strict targeting protocols, when attacking an army in the field.(*)

Even if done properly, depending upon the equipment and training of your adversary, the killing and incapacitating effects may not be tactically significant.(*) For these reasons, Saddam initially 'tested' his CW on unsuspecting Kurd civilians to gain an accurate medical picture of chemical agent effects.(*) Simply put, anyone contemplating use of CW needs a lot of it, and it must be delivered at the right time and place.

UNSCOM inspectors understood these factors when they concluded in 1995 that, at the time of Operation Desert Storm in January of 1991, Iraq had largely solved key technical issues. The problem of precursor storage and stabilization for VX, a powerful and persistent nerve agent was solved by Saddam's scientists.(*) In addition, UNSCOM noted the development of prototypes for binary sarin (non—persistent nerve agent) artillery shells and 122mm rockets.(*) Binary rounds consist of two non—lethal substances that combine upon detonation to form a lethal agent.(*)

The technically advanced binary nature of these projectiles was amazing enough, but they also had developed 'quantities well beyond the prototype levels.'(*) The DIA concurred with UNSCOM that Iraq had retained production equipment and chemical precursors to reconstitute a CW program absent an inspection regime.(*)

Specifically, the DIA noted that Baghdad had rebuilt segments of its industrial chemical infrastructure under the 'guise of a civilian need for pesticides, chlorine, and other legitimate chemical products.'(*) Pesticides are the key elements in the chemical agent arena.(*) In fact, the general pesticide chemical formula (organophosphate) is the 'grandfather' of modern day nerve agents.(*) Pesticides are also precursors of many other chemical weapons including Mustard—Lewisite (HL), Phosgene (CG) a choking agent, and Hydrogen Cyanide (AC) a blood agent.(*)

It was not surprising then, as Coalition forces attacked into Iraq, that huge warehouses and caches of 'commercial and agricultural' chemicals were seized and painstakingly tested by Army and Marine chemical specialists.(*) What was surprising was how quickly the ISG refuted the findings of our ground forces, and how silent they have been on the significance of these caches.

US forces participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom had the latest chemical detection gear, including chemical detection paper, chemical agent detector kits, improved chemical agent monitors, and sophisticated Fox Chemical Recon Vehicles.(*) Some American GIs remembered well the shortfalls of this equipment in Gulf War I.(*) Now all of these older devices had been improved, and new and more accurate devices had been issued.(*) In fact, some mobile Army labs had highly sensitive mass spectrometers to test for suspicious substances.(*) Who could argue the results of repeated tests using these devices without explaining how DoD had apparently been ripped off by contractors for faulty products?(*) Apparently, the ISG could and did.

One of the reported incidents occurred near Karbala where there appeared to be a very large 'agricultural supply' area of 55—gallon drums of pesticide.(*) In addition, there was also a camouflaged bunker complex full of these drums that some people entered with unpleasant results.(*) More than a dozen soldiers, a Knight—Ridder reporter, a CNN cameraman, and two Iraqi POWs came down with symptoms consistent with exposure to nerve agent.(*) A full day of tests on the drums resulted in one positive for nerve agent, and then one resulted in a negative.(*) Later, an Army Fox NBC [nuclear, biological, chemical] Recon Vehicle confirmed the existence of Sarin.(*) An officer from the 63d Chemical Company thought there might well be chemical weapons at the site.(*)

But later ISG tests resulted in a proclamation of negative, end of story, nothing to see here, etc., and the earlier findings and injuries dissolved into non—existence. Left unexplained is the small matter of the obvious pains taken to disguise the cache of ostensibly legitimate pesticides. One wonders about the advantage an agricultural commodities business gains by securing drums of pesticide in camouflaged bunkers six feet underground.(*) The 'agricultural site' was also co—located with a military ammunition dump, evidently nothing more than a coincidence in the eyes of the ISG.

Another find occurred around the northern Iraqi town of Bai'ji, where elements of the 4th Infantry Division (Mech) discovered 55—gallon drums of a substance that mass spectrometer testing confirmed was cyclosarin and an unspecified blister agent.(*) A mobile laboratory was also found nearby that could have been used to mix chemicals at the site.(*) And only yards away, surface—to—surface and surface—to—air missiles, as well as gas masks were found.(*) Of course, later tests by the experts revealed that these were only the ubiquitous pesticides that everybody was turning up. It seems that Iraqi soldiers were obsessed with keeping their ammo dumps insect—free, according to the reading of the evidence now enshrined by the conventional wisdom that 'no WMD stockpiles have been discovered.'

Coalition forces continued to find evidence of CW after major combat operations had concluded.(*) The US unit around Taji, just north of Baghdad discovered pesticides in one of the largest ammo dumps in Iraq. The unit wanted to use the ammo dump for their own operations, when they discovered the pesticides in 'non—standard' drums that were smaller in diameter but much longer than the standard 55—gallon drums.(*)

Then in January of this year, Danish forces discovered 120mm mortar shells with a mysterious liquid inside that initially tested positive for blister agents.(*) Further tests in Southern Iraq and in the US were, of course, negative.(*) The Danish Army said, 'It is unclear why the initial field tests were wrong.'(*) This is the understatement of the year, and also points to a most basic question: If it wasn't a chemical agent, what was it?(*) More pesticides?(*) Dishwashing detergent?(*) From this old soldier's perspective, I gain nothing from putting a liquid in my mortar rounds unless that stuff will do bad things to the enemy.

Virtually all agencies concerned with Iraq's WMD programs have reached the conclusion that Saddam was an expert at delay, dispersion, and deception.(*) His nuclear program had restarted as reported earlier this year by Dr. Kay, the previous head of the ISG.(*) Also, 'seed agents' and other bio—toxins had been dispersed throughout Baghdad and Iraq to form the basis for the regeneration of a full—fledged BW program.(*) This modus operandi was no different for the regeneration of Saddam's chemical weapons program.(*) Operating under the guise of legitimate industrial and agricultural chemical production and storage, Iraq would have gone into full—scale conversion of its stockpile of chemical precursors into weaponized agents, had the Coalition not attacked and seized Iraq.(*)

What is stunning is that the ISG seems incapable of connecting the dots to present to the American people the clear evidence of Saddam's flouting of 12 years of UN resolutions, and the grave consequences if we had failed to act.(*) The ISG also owes a detailed explanation to DoD as to how 12 years of research, development, and money has apparently gone down the drain in the effort to upgrade the military's chemical detection capability and NBC training regimen.(*) That the ISG can consistently contradict other technical specialists, while ignoring years of UNSCOM and US intelligence assessments, without accountability is unconscionable, and must be rectified as soon as possible.

Douglas Hanson was a US Army cavalry reconnaissance officer for 20 years, and is a Gulf War I combat veteran.(*) He was an Atomic Demolitions Munitions (ADM) Security Officer, and a Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Defense Officer.(*) As a civilian analyst, he has worked on stability and support operations in Bosnia, and was initially an operations officer in the operations/intelligence cell of the Requirements Coordination Office of the CPA in Baghdad.(*) He was later assigned as the Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Science and Technology.

(*)http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/04/pesticides_precursors_and_petu_1.html

 

So the biggest documented threat to the United States was Saddam's stockpile of pesticides which could conceivably, someday be made into chemical weapons. I guess I should be great full that Bush didn't decide to invade my garage. Of course then the United States could spend billions rebuilding my garage which it desperately needs.

 

So, ISIS are going to be stupid enough to attempt to approach unstable and deadly, unprotected and volatile chemicals, and in the process commit certain suicide? Ok...see, there's a reason they are contained within a sealed bunker-and that reason is not primarily to prevent theft.
"It would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials..."

 

Funny all those satellite shots of trucks moving nuclear weapons around that Powell showed on television in his presentation to justify the war missed a convoy moving weapons to Syria.

 

He didn't have to; the chemicals were in no fit state to be used as offensive weapons, having degraded dangerously beyond any practical use. Remember, Blix found no 'weapons of mass destruction' and a bunch of unusable and miscellaneous volatile chemicals cannot be considered as 'weapons' in the strictest definition of the word.

 

Actually they could have been used even if just in a IED or local explosive. And the precursor chemicals could have been used in their present state to commit a chemical attack or refined into more advance nerve gases.

Some of them but the fact remains their status was unknown at the time and could not be verified with lots found that was totally undeclared.

What do you think they were in the process of destroying when they were kicked out? What do you think they were looking for? That he and his group of Keystone Cops didn't find what Saddam was hiding even more so makes the case for his removal.

They were not miscellaneous chemicals, they were very specific deadly chemicals that were the precursors for even more deadly advanced nerve gases, proscribed and undeclared.

Even by the strictest that is what they were.

- - - Updated - - -

Ahhh you do know there was never a claim that Saddam had a nuclear weapons.

 

Who knows what they will do and with proper precautions at least some can be removed. The fact is they WERE secure and now thanks to Obama's failure they are not. And the fact remains this is just part of what Saddam had under his control at the time he was removed.

 

That's because, contrary to the endless right wing lies on this and other forums, it never happened.

When will these right wing America haters ever learn to speak/write the TRUTH?

 

....uh....you do know who eliminated Saddam...correct?

Do you also know who set the timeline for our troop removal?


*Hint*.....they are they same guy.

 

Right wingers know that truth but they persist in repeating the same lies over and over again and blame President Obama for the mess created by traitor Bush.

 

Yeah I know who eliminate Saddam, the Iraq government. The US removed him from power as was our official policy as set in the Clinton signed ILA. And you do know Bush did not want a timeline and that President Elect Obama drove that by giving Milaki the cover he needed but that same timeline could have included a residual force to provide ongoing security and training but that is not what Obama wanted.

- - - Updated - - -

And so do left wingers, that in fact Saddam remained a WMD threat and would always be one and that had Obama stood with Bush first as a President elect and then as President we wouldn't see the mess in Iraq we see now. Just amazing how he turned a success into a failure.

 

Interesting view of history you have there...Did you make it up yourself, or get it from someone's blog?

 

Tell me exactly what you think I got wrong.

 

As the majority of your post is supposition and opinion, there is no reason to claim anything is "Wrong", thus I did not claim it was. It is clear you wish to blame the current president for past actions, and there is nothing anyone can say that will change that...so why bother trying?

You have decided Clinton and Obama are to blame for what the rest of the world attribute to Bush...okay, have fun stormin' the castle.

 

"The main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't ..."
George W Bush, August 21, 2006.​

When confronted with the Bush's unequivocal admission, they mewl that just because Saddam didn't have the DubyaMD the Bushies insisted that he had doesn't mean that he (or any other head of state, presumably) might not acquire them at some future date unknown - a justification for invading any nation at any time!

The last thing Republicans need at this stage is the bottom-feeding blowfish dredging up their fraudulent pretext for a trillion dollar nation-building fiasco.

Still, it serves the truth, and allows Randy Paul to deftly smack down the party's pantywaists:

Perry was better off strutting along the Rio Grande, shaking his fist, and blustering, "You damn kids, git offa mah lawn!"

 

My post was based on the clear evidence..................dodge and diversion noted.

 

They care about the lie told by the left. That's all.

 

Iraq had no WMD.

On January 23, 2004, Kay resigned, stating that Iraq did not have WMD and that "I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kay

Now, look, I didn’t — part of the reason we went into Iraq was — the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn’t, ... President Bush, Aug 22, 2006. http://www.democracynow.org/2006/8/22/president_bush_admits_iraq_had_no

And even if Iraq had had WMD, it would have had had it for 20 years (when the Reagan administration OK'ed Hussein to acquire it) and had never been used in terrorist attacks or after the Iran war.

It didn't make Iraq an "urgent threat" justifying the waste of a trillion + dollars and scores of thousands of lives.

Iraq had no WMD.

On January 23, 2004, Kay resigned, stating that Iraq did not have WMD and that "I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kay

Now, look, I didn’t — part of the reason we went into Iraq was — the main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn’t, ... President Bush, Aug 22, 2006. http://www.democracynow.org/2006/8/22/president_bush_admits_iraq_had_no