And around and around we go... I'd like someone to explain to me exactly what those two "mobile weapons labs" really were if they were not really mobile biological warfare production plants. And then I'd like someone to explain to me how, if they actually are mobile biological warfare production plants, the Iraqis did not have an active WMD program. And then I'd like someone to explain to me how, if the Iraqis actually had an active WMD program, the administration's intelligence was incorrect about that fact. And then I'd like someone to explain to me how, if their intelligence was correct on that, the administration is lying. I want someone to explain these things to me. Rationally, using logic and established facts - not speculative theories. I also want someone to explain it to me without quoting opinion articles that are based on speculation and come from clearly biased news sources (Boston Globe, NYT, etc). Please, just use logic and facts. That is not too much to ask. I should have known that no one here really wanted to discuss the issue. I post a link to a CIA analysis on the trailers, and all anyone here can do is slum up more hack op-ed articles and articles that have little to no evidence to back the writer's claims. I should have known no one had the cajones to actually argue a real find and its implications. You guys never cease to amaze me. How anyone can blow so much smoke out of their assholes I will never know.
Ah. Two replies, and yet no responses. Can anyone solve the riddle? The questions are not complicated. They are not difficult to understand. This is not a complex issue. Please, answer the questions.
1) Re: mobile chem labs...I answered this in another thread...they are anything but rare, and used for many benign purposes throughout much of the world, especially 3rd world countries. 2) N/A ( see above) 3) N/A ( see above above) Understood? Supposition built on assumption constructed upon speculation.
And then I'd like someone to explain to me how, if they actually are mobile biological warfare production plants, the Iraqis did not have an active WMD program. As I said before, there is no proof they were active. So the WMD program could have been old. If this war was about two trucks, there was definitely an exaggeration of the threat, and the Iraqis program. The intel saying they had mobile labs wasn't incorrect, the intel about them having stockpiles of bio and chem weapons might be. The intel about listing the top sites where the weapons would be was wrong, and possibly lied about. The story about the chem weapons being handed out to various commanders and them being authorized to use them was dishonest. The nuke stuff was all dishonest. The list of dishonest and deceitful practices goes on and on. Yes they were correct about 2 trucks. That doesn't make their case for war honest. See above. The papers you list, are major news sources at least as credible as sources that the pro war crowd uses. I agree, hopefully the administration will stop doing that, and start levelling with the American people.
We may never know that, but would you not agree that the mere existence of the trailers indicates that the Iraqis either had or surely intended to have an active WMD program? I would think that you would have to agree with that. As for the threat these trailer systems represented - they could each produce extremely large amounts of WMD in relatively short periods of time. Their fermenters are quite large. These trailer systems represented quite a large threat - don't be fooled just because they don't take up alot of acreage. Biological warfare production systems are not, by nature, very large or even very sophisticated. This is possible, but can we please follow logic here? The Iraqis produced these systems in order to produce large amounts of boilogical agents. We're talking ballels-full here, enough to kill tens or hundreds of millions of people here. Now, if they actually did produce the production systems, is it not logical to infer that they did produce what the production systems were intended to produce? And that is aside from the existing stocks that we know existed at one time and were never accounted for. Those stocks are completely apart from anything the Iraqis produced with the mobile labs, because their existence predates the construction of the mobile labs. Taking these two pieces of evidence and following their logic, we would conclude that it is highly likely that a stockpile either exists or did exist at one time, would we not? The biases of those two publications are well documented, but that is irrelevant here. I want facts from the UN, NGOs, things like that - not opinion pieces and "investigative" journalism conducted by biased hacks. I want verifieble facts. The administration has been surprisingly level about this whole ordeal. The reporting and "analysis" has been atrocious. And most of the American people see that.
