They have been found. Even if they hadn't been, the chemical agents in them only have a shelf life of a decade or so -- rendering them useless in any event. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/11/1073769454329.html?from=storyrhs http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040702-055713-6502r.htm It was answered. Ask David Kay. "Let me begin by saying, we were almost all wrong, and I certainly include myself here. "
Amnesia. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2003/17300.htm and the embarrassing retraction. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4997766/
“The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas. ~George W. Bush, October 7, 2002 Is "thousands of tons" a "huge stockpile"? “Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.” ~George W. Bush, January 28, 2003 How about enough precursors for 500 tons of these? And just in case anyone wants to say that we went to Iraq for humanitarian reasons... “We have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about.” ~Ari Fleischer, April 10, 2003
After September 11, 2001, Bush told the world he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive" for his role in the attacks. Three years later, no bin Laden. Later that year, Bush told us that his new anti-terrorism laws would protect us from terrorism. Three years later, terrorism is at an all-time high. In 2003, Bush told the world that Saddam Hussein should be stopped because his stockpile of weapons of mass destruction posed an immediate threat to American security. A year later, no weapons. So excuse me if I have doubts about Syrian claims that have no evidence or proof to back them up.
Brilliant post. My sentiments exactly. After so many lies from the Bush Administration, exactly when are we supposed to believe what they are saying?
I don't know; is it? I couldn't find where Cheney quantified the amount as HUGE and Powell retracted the expectation of finding the mobile labs.
if this is true, why didn't anyone point that out before the war? "hey G-dub, the weapons from 1988 are useless after 1998 or so, so it ain no big thang" or words to that effect? i don't recall anyone, certainly not hans blix, making this point until after the fact. seems terribly convenient...at least if you have a preconceived agenda.
This is true, and it has been pointed out for years before the war by both the UN and the Pentagon, as well as much reviled, though partially vindicated, former Inspector Scott Ritter: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2000_06/iraqjun.asp Here's an interview with RItter from Jan of 02 http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/07/17/saddam.ritter.cnna/ And this, I believe is from a declassified CIA or Pentagon report: It's a simple factual matter that most of the IRan-Iraq war bioweapons were unusable a long time ago. How on earth do you say it's a "convenient" argument? Is there some anti-Bush conspiracy between chemical elements and the fact that they decay over time and the NYT editorial page?
btw- The gripe now convieniently switches from the "No WMD's found by the Bushies" to the "It wouldn't have mattered anyway" one... Please. You'll all have to lie better. The "No WMD's found by the Bushies" arguement may have very well been refuted if this evidence proves to be true. But now you quickly PROVE your Bush hatred by saying... "oh well, we were kiddin'... that wouldn't have mattered anyway." Y'all are mentally ill. Seriously. Sociopaths must run down the left side of the American family tree. YOU CAN'T HIDE YOUR HATRED. This is about the issues. About the truth. But here it is, in your collective faces, and you snub it - overlook it - deny it - refuse to hear it. Of course The Washington Times DOES NOT equal the NY Times... but it far, far more left than say... the 700 Club, or CBN, TBN, or even the O'Reilly, Rush or similar news outlets. Perhaps it is only seen as "left" to those on the "right." But I have heard "middlers" on the radio talk shows saying that this is definitely no "right wing" story. Try again, "Number 1 Spinner" Fisher. (yes I peeked in on your ignored self to see what falsehoods and lies are being propagated behind my factual back.)
