The Secret Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons

Same effect. Nothing dishonest about it at all. Just because some fact undermines your arguments doesn't make it dishonest or justify rule violating personal attacks.

And since you brought it up, please prove your claim that I have ever tried to shut down Fox News, as you implied, or any any "liberals like me" have tried to do so.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricin

And pull your head out,9/11 showed threats don't need to be 'imminent'...

And 'we knew he always had this stuff' is a far cry from claiming 'he had none'.....

He wasn't supposed to have ANY of it,per UN sanctions

 

Honestly
I can't tell if you liberals are being obtuse,or you actually like the view from your glass navels.....

152MM artillery shells are NOT made for any US weapons system...

 

Same question to you, honestly. I can't tell if you are being obtuse,or you actually like the view from your glass navels.....

How on Earth could your comment possibly have anything to do with what I wrote in my post?

 

Well reports coming to light say there WERE WMD And they were still very much viable

Something saddam wasn't supposed to have

Honestly,do you liberals ever get tired of carrying water for the late butcher of Baghdad?

 

So are you rejecting Bush's multiple statements that there were WMDs, as the post you just quoted pointed out?

Honestly, do you neocons honestly think your colossal (*)(*)(*)(*)up in Iraq has made things better for anybody?

 

Where did it say no US forces would be used?....it was deliberately ambiguous in the matter

 

You tell me....your posts are a mishmash of half truths and speculation sprinkled with a boatload of opinion.....It's coming to light that there were WMD's in Iraq,and they were viable,but in order to save face for 8 years of bogus claims,you hand wave it away..

 

Seems his 'multiple statements that there were WMD's were true....


And you answered my question with a question...answer mine first....or can you?

 

The oil for food program and his using the money to bribe the UN was ONE of the concerns we had, that the sanctions would be lifted. We could not allow that to happen.

The inspections which were a sham as was proven after we removed him. Once again absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

"WASHINGTON — United Nations inspectors reported Thursday that Iraq has failed to disclose its weapons programs and to cooperate fully with disarmament efforts, assertions welcomed by the Bush administration as it tries to build a case for a U.S.-led military invasion to topple Saddam Hussein.

Six weeks of UN inspections have failed so far to produce any "smoking gun" evidence that Iraq has hidden chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, chief inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei told the Security Council in New York.



But the inspectors said that despite Iraq's show of willingness so far to grant them access to suspect weapons sites, they remain dissatisfied over omissions in Baghdad's declared inventory of its weapons programs and the failure of the Hussein regime to provide an up-to-date list of weapons scientists to be interviewed."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...inspectors-hans-blix-weapons-security-council

They were a total joke as what we found later proved. And again if you knew and Blix knew and everyone else you claim knew Saddam had no WMD then what they heck were they looking for?

Except for the ones we found later and the new proscribed materials he had snuck in and was hiding from inspectors.

Well as you are fond of saying I have posted it over and over and over for 6 years are more if you are interested just search, and I said the proscribed materials needed to rearm his chemical weapons stocks along with the new chemical weapons shells, so get it straight. Are you denying we found such materials yes or no?

Again and a straight answer this time. Do you believe the WMD threat he posed began and ended with just those WMD?

SO WHAT, he was to TOTALLY DISARM and DISCLOSE EVERYTHING, those made in 1980 were just as deadly in 2000.

 

What is a joke is claiming that was claimed. The Bush administration like the Clinton administration said we couldn't wait for him to become an imminent threat for it would be too late by then.

 

New Documents Reveal Saddam Hid WMD, Was Tied to Al Qaida

Case closed!Recently discovered Iraqi documents now being translated by U.S. intelligence analysts indicate that Saddam Hussein's government made extensive plans to hide Iraq's weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 - and had deep ties to al Qaida before the 9/11 attacks.

The explosive evidence was discovered among "millions of pages of documents" unearthed by the Iraq Survey Group weapons search team, reports the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes.

In the magazine's Nov. 21 issue, Hayes reveals that the document cache now being examined contains "a thick stew of reports and findings from a variety of [Iraqi] intelligence agencies and military units."

Though the Pentagon has so far declined to make the bombshell papers public, Hayes managed to obtain a list of titles on the reports.

Topics headlined in the still embargoed Iraqi documents include:

• Chemical Agent Purchase Orders (Dec. 2001)

• Formulas and information about Iraq's Chemical Weapons Agents

• Locations of Weapons/Ammunition Storage (with map)

• Denial and Deception of WMD and Killing of POWs

• Ricin research and improvement

• Chemical Gear for Fedayeen Saddam

• Memo from the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to Hide Information from a U.N. Inspection team (1997)

• Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team

• Correspondence between various Iraq organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment

• Correspondence from [Iraqi Intelligence Service] to [the Military Industrial Commission] regarding information gathered by foreign intelligence satellites on WMD (Dec. 2002) • Cleaning chemical suits and how to hide chemicals

• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] plan of what to do during UNSCOM inspections (1996)

Still other reports suggest that Iraq's ties to al Qaida were far deeper than previously known, featuring headlines like:

• Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government (Nov. 2000)

• Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity

• Possible al Qaeda Terror Members in Iraq

• Iraqi Effort to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals

• Iraqi Intel report on Kurdish Activities: Mention of Kurdish Report on al Qaeda - reference to al Qaeda presence in Salman Pak

• [Iraqi Intelligence Service] report on Taliban-Iraq Connections Claims

• Money Transfers from Iraq to Afghanistan

While the document titles sound stunning enough to turn the Iraq war debate on its head, Hayes cautions that it's hard to know for certain until the full text is available.

It's possible, he writes, "that the 'Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity' was critical of one or another Taliban policies. But it's equally possible, given Uday's known role as a go-between for the Iraqi regime and al Qaeda, that something more nefarious was afoot."

"What was discussed at the 'Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government' in November 2000? It could be something innocuous. Maybe not. But it would be nice to know more."

Hayes also notes that an additional treasure trove of evidence on Saddam Hussein's support for al Qaida may be lost forever.

"When David Kay ran the Iraq Survey Group searching for weapons of mass destruction, he instructed his team to ignore anything not directly related to the regime's WMD efforts," he reports.

"As a consequence, documents describing the regime's training and financing of terrorists were labeled 'No Intelligence Value' and often discarded, according to two sources."
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=3273

 

He either doesn't get it or doesn't want to

 

LOL, I knew you were just making (*)(*)(*)(*) up. Caught you again.

 

Your article dated Nov 17 2005.

Bush statements:

Aug 2006:
Now look, 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, ....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082100469.html

Dec 2008:
Looking back on his eight years in the White House, President Bush pinpointed incorrect intelligence that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction as the "biggest regret of all the presidency."
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/story?id=6354012

Nov 2010:
Former US President George W Bush still has "a sickening feeling" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, US media report.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-11680239

President Bush as a lot more integrity than a lot of neocons we see here.

 

I'm supposed to tell you how your own post has anything to do with mine. Got it.

About what I figured.

- - - Updated - - -

So his multiple statements that there were no WMDs in Iraq must be a lie, right?

Conservatives make sense.

If you ignore reality.

 

"America will be making only one determination: is Iraq meeting the terms of the Security Council resolution [1441] or not?... If Iraq fails to fully comply, the United States and other nations will disarm Saddam Hussein."
— President George W. Bush
November 8, 2002, the day the UN Security Council

"The world needs him [Saddam Hussein] to answer a single question: Has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed, as required by Resolution 1441, or has it not?"
— President George W. Bush
press conference, March 6, 2003

To the contrary. The inspections found now WMD in Iraq.

Bush, Aug 2006:
Now look, 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, ....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082100469.html

To bad he didn't listen to them then.

Are you trying to deliberately mislead people by pretending that was the Blix's final say on the matter?

Why did you post these excerpts, which I have given you before?

1-9-2003 Security Council briefing

I now turn to the role and results of our current inspections. Evidently if we had found any 'smoking gun' we would have reported it to the Council. Similarly, if we had met a denial of access or other impediment to our inspections we would have reported it to the Council. We have not submitted any such reports.


Let me conclude: the prompt access/open doors policy that has been pursued so far by Iraq vis-à-vis the inspectors is an indispensable element of transparency in a process that aims at securing disarmament by peaceful means.

The awareness in Iraq that industrial facilities, military installations, public or private offices and dwellings, may be the subject of no-notice inspection is further likely to deter possible efforts to hide items or activities or, at the very least, to make such action much more difficult. This is no small gain. Saying this is in no way to ignore the special value of inspections directed to sites, which have been indicated by fresh and reliable intelligence.

Inspections resumed on 27 November 2002 and since then, almost everyday, including Christmas and New Year, inspection teams have been out in the field.

There are presently about 100 UNMOVIC inspectors and 58 support staff in Iraq. In addition, there are 49 air crew for the fixed-wing and helicopter operations.

One hundred and fifty inspections of 127 sites have taken place up to 8 January 2003.
http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/pages/security_council_briefings.asp

2-14-2003 Security Council briefing

Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming. The inspections have taken place throughout Iraq at industrial sites, ammunition depots, research centres, universities, presidential sites, mobile laboratories, private houses, missile production facilities, military camps and agricultural sites.

More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened using our own analytical laboratory capabilities at the Baghdad Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's declarations.

In my 27 January update to the Council, I said that it seemed from our experience that Iraq had decided in principle to provide cooperation on process, most importantly prompt access to all sites and assistance to UNMOVIC in the establishment of the necessary infrastructure. This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that had never been declared or inspected, as well as to Presidential sites and private residences.
http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/pages/security_council_briefings.asp

7 March 2003 Security Council briefing

Inspections in Iraq resumed on 27 November 2002. In matters relating to process, notably prompt access to sites, we have faced relatively few difficulties and certainly much less than those that were faced by UNSCOM in the period 1991 to 1998. This may well be due to the strong outside pressure.

Some practical matters, which were not settled by the talks, Dr. ElBaradei and I had with the Iraqi side in Vienna prior to inspections or in resolution 1441 (2002), have been resolved at meetings, which we have had in Baghdad. Initial difficulties raised by the Iraqi side about helicopters and aerial surveillance planes operating in the no-fly zones were overcome. This is not to say that the operation of inspections is free from frictions, but at this juncture we are able to perform professional no-notice inspections all over Iraq and to increase aerial surveillance.

There have been reports, denied from the Iraqi side, that proscribed activities are conducted underground. Iraq should provide information on any underground structure suitable for the production or storage of WMD. During inspections of declared or undeclared facilities, inspection teams have examined building structures for any possible underground facilities. In addition, ground penetrating radar equipment was used in several specific locations. No underground facilities for chemical or biological production or storage were found so far.

They were completely accurate.

No WMD was "later found".

False premise. He post no significant WMD threat.

He did.

Don't be silly.

 

You either can't debate the facts or don't want to.

 

And he wasn't and he was bribing the UN to get out from under the sanctions.

January 10, 2003|By Howard Witt, Tribune senior correspondent.


2
WASHINGTON — United Nations inspectors reported Thursday that Iraq has failed to disclose its weapons programs and to cooperate fully with disarmament efforts, assertions welcomed by the Bush administration as it tries to build a case for a U.S.-led military invasion to topple Saddam Hussein.

To the contrary read the OP and the post above.

They were a total joke as what we found after we removed him proved. And they weren't supposed to have to have this unfettered access you falsely claim they did, HE WAS SUPPOSED TO LEAD THEM TO THE WMD. They weren't supposed to have to engage in their Keystone Cops searches. And tell me how do you search every square foot of Iraq to prove he had no WMD?

Read the above and read the OP and are you denying that we found his hidden cache's of precursor chemicals, deadly in their own right, along with the new chemical artillery shells, all proscribed, all undeclared, all hidden from inspectors.

Yes or no, are you aware of this?

Here's another for you

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2014...orld&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body&_r=0#more-55552

Dodging and dancing again

Again and a straight answer this time. Do you believe the WMD threat he posed began and ended with just those WMD?

And who declared he had totally disarmed and disclosed everything and then where did everything we found after we removed him come from?

Dodge noted.

"Kay said his team has found "a large body of continuing activities and equipment" that Iraq failed to declare to U.N. inspectors in November 2002, including a substantial chemical and biological weapons program and an even more substantial missile program.

He said the missile program had foreign assistance, included both ballistic missiles and Land Attack Cruise Missiles capable of carrying significant payloads, and would have extended Iraq's reach beyond 1,000 kilometers. Kay cited Ankara, Turkey; Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; Cairo, Egypt; and Riyadh, Saudi Arabia as cities that would be within range of the missiles.

Kay said that since Saddam oversaw "a regime that hid so much, that buried so much, whose population is still fearful of talking and collaborating with the coalition," nothing his team finds should surprise anyone."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/10/iraq-031003-afps02.htm

 

Says the guy who completely dodged defending his own claim: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=378337&page=17&p=1064365909#post1064365909

 

It was Bush who said there was a single question: Whether they had WMD or not.

Again, are you purposely trying to deceive people by posting an early report? What about the February report and the March report? You know what they say because I just posted it.

So Bush was lying?

So Bush was lying?

You mean these "WMD"? What you call "hidden ... deadly ... brand new shells"?



Yep, "brand new" "deadly" WMD, carefully hidden away so that Hussein could pick 'em up and fire 'em off at his enemies.

Just the "WMD" we invaded Iraq for. Just the "WMD" you're claiming Bush is lying about.

LOLSays the guy who completely dodged defending his own claim: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=378337&page=17&p=1064365909#post1064365909

Where's the proof of that "brand new" WMD you claim they found?

But I'm not at all. Just pointing out your false question.

False question. There was no "WMD threat." He had not WMD.

Abandoned junk piles.

LOL, Says the guy who completely dodged defending his own claim: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=378337&page=17&p=1064365909#post1064365909

Where's that proof of the "brand new" WMD you claim they found?

No dodge.

You produced this misinformation last time we discussed this issue. Are you intentionally trying to deceive people? Why don't you show them Kay's later reports, you know, the one I quoted for you last time:

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

And Bush in 2006:

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[/QUOTE]

Showing far more integrity that was see from many conservatives here.

 

If they were burried, how did they get found to blow-up in-face?

 

Showing far more integrity that was see from many conservatives here.[/QUOTE]

yes... it would appear bush lied. There is a lot of speculation as to why. Carl rove is behind the denial in 2k6. It is possible because the wmds would or did test out to come from US labs. They also ported out yellow cake in 2008.

I hope that both sides will welcome an investigation on the subject.

 

And that was only addressing the UN RESOLUTION, the UN he was bribing. And without the sanctions he would have free reign with the ones we found after we removed him and to create new and even more deadly ones with the proscribed materials we found. You are making distinctions without merits.

I don't think he really cares nor wants to get into a debate over it, the fact remains we found WMD that the inspectors had not found and we found LOTS of proscribed materials the inspectors had not found that Saddam would have used to quickly rearm with even more deadly WMD that he was actively researching.

No those aren't the ones I meant, I mean the ones I cited to you a few months abo which you were unable to address then.

I have defended it to you before are you denying it? And if you are going to quote me then do it accurately

"Well as you are fond of saying I have posted it over and over and over for 6 years are more if you are interested just search, and I said the proscribed materials needed to rearm his chemical weapons stocks along with the new chemical weapons shells, so get it straight. Are you denying we found such materials yes or no?"

I was quite clear about what we found, are you denying it? Yes or no?

Again are you saying the WMD threat Saddam posed began and ended with just the WMD UNSCOM was looking for?

Hidden from inspectors and since Saddam was no longer in power, but in jail, yes abhandoned DUH. But WMD that the inspectors did not know about.

The same Dr. Kay who said Iraq was even more a threat than we had imagined? The same Dr. Kay who found all the active WMD programs? But note, it is what he "thinks" not proven, and of course we know that we found different than what he thought.

But all your statements from then have been rendered moot by what we have found and you refuse to address.

Why do you think I care what Bush said in 2006, we found the WMD Saddam had hidden, we found all the proscribed materials he would have used to quickly rearm.

That's all that matters.

- - - Updated - - -

Our troops were alerted to someone digging in one place with a backhoe and when they went to inspect started finding WMD that had been hidden there.

 

Invasion of a sovereign nation because they have some old poison gas munitions still around from days gone by is no reason to go to war and in fact never was a reason why we were there.

We were supporting and funding Saddam for many years during and after the time when he used chemical weapons.

If we listened to the UN we would not have wasted trillion of dollars in treasure and thousands of US lives on a war that had little point and no return on investment.

Even if one was only paying only a little attention to the details leading up to war one realized that it was never about some big threat to the US.

US foreign policy has little to do with promoting the stated ideals ( democracy, human rights and so on) . These are just platitudes to keep the raging masses happy.

- - - Updated - - -

There was never a significant WMD threat and finding some old corroded munitions (that would kill the user if anyone tried to use them) does not change that fact.