No WMD in Iraq

[Sirotnikov]

If they haven't been manufacturing them since the 80s, there wouldn't be any trace left in many place. These weapons do degrade. Even if they had anything left, it would have been utterly useless.

Anyway, the proof is against those who say he had them.

No it's not. Not in this case.

In this case the UN has specifically ordered the burden of proof on Iraq- to prove unequivocally that they don't possess the weapons.

Instead Iraq did everything in its power to avoid such a proof or even a hint, beyond generalized statemenst by their information ministers.

Well, that explains everything then.

Wow, then their thoroughness is absolutely staggering, considering the high tech means that the US has at its disposal to detect even the faintest traces of bio and nerve agents.

I'm sure Iraq had excellent tools lent to them by the Ruskis. I'm also sure that 2 years of cleaning started around sept 11, got Iraq pretty clean.

Also if you are somehow sure that the 6 months since the war, are enough to thoroughly check anything more than 1% of Iraq, you are very mistaken.

The weapons were reported to be dispursed, hidden in small quantities all around the country. A missile in a farm. A box in a far village.

All you need is to remove those, sanitize the area, and destroy the original files detailing the previous hiding places.

Many of these agents are detected in parts per
billion. You can't tell anybody that the apparatus for mass WMD production simply vanished into thin air.

They had 2 years to vanish into what ever coffers in neighbouring countries or just far away villages.

[Japher]

I don't want to talk about this any more

And Siro, take that stupid CIVII Democracy Game banner off your profile, it's really messing with my screen

[Sirotnikov]

This theory falls apart on the grounds that Saddam is not a complete moron.

On the countrary. Only were a Saddam a complete moron, would he leave the evidence justifying the Americans in place to be caught.

The germans began destroying evidence of the holocaust. They started it too late, and enough evidence was caught.

Still, an ever growing population today says that the evidence were mis enterpreted by the evil zionists and americans.

And I'll just add my usual point that gases and germs are mediocre battle weapons and lousy terrorist weapons.

not true. they can wreak a havoc in sufficient quantities.

And in any case, they are very effective towrads creating mass hysteria that can paralyze a country.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Anyway, the proof is against those who say he had them.

No it's not. Not in this case.

The UN is not the arbiter of what is or is not a philosophic proof. Legally, Iraq may have been responsible for prooving it had gotten rid of everything. But here, now, in this agument, you need proof that he had them.

[Japher]

Thanks, anyway, I agree with Siro

[Jac de Molay]

I'm sure Iraq had excellent tools lent to them by the Ruskis. I'm also sure that 2 years of cleaning started around sept 11, got Iraq pretty clean.

Also if you are somehow sure that the 6 months since the war, are enough to thoroughly check anything more than 1% of Iraq, you are very mistaken

They had 2 years to vanish into what ever coffers in neighbouring countries or just far away villages

Even assuming that's true, that still leaves out the captured scientists and technicians. Why havent they led the coalition or past inspection regimes to "smoking guns"?

If weapons were hidden as you assert, why hasn't anyone, six-month's post-war, led the coalition to
one, single cache of stored materials or even brought forward documentation that supports this claim.

His WMD program ended long before 9/11. Too bad we believe the BS foisted on us.

[Sandman]

On the countrary. Only were a Saddam a complete moron, would he leave the evidence justifying the Americans in place to be caught.

So he decided to sacrifice his regime and possibly his life in order to make the Americans look bad? No way. I have to wonder, if the Iraqis were able to hide their weapons with such superhuman efficiency, why they were not able to conduct a better defence.

not true. they can wreak a havoc in sufficient quantities.

So can bombs and bullets. So can wooden spoons.

And in any case, they are very effective towrads creating mass hysteria that can paralyze a country.

Mass hysteria orchestrated by orange alerts, duct tape and a media ever-willing to hype up the 'threat'.

[chequita guevara]

When Saddam's son-in-laws feld to Jordan they were debriefed in Amman by the UN and the US. They state that they had destroyed almost all of their weapons. What they were trying to do was to have a program to start a program, so if attacked by Iran, they could start producing weapons again.

Then the idiots went back to Iraq and got themselves killed.

[Curiosity]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

And I'll just add my usual point that gases and germs are mediocre battle weapons and lousy terrorist weapons.

not true. they can wreak a havoc in sufficient quantities.

*In sufficient quantities* yes. But those quantities are pretty huge. The claim that Iraq could have destroyed the evidence by clearing out one or two rooms in a bottle plant, and the claim that they had sufficient quantities to be militarily relevant, are not really compatible.


It should be pretty damned obvious that Iraq didn't have WMD, and that the US knew it, IMO. If Iraq did have WMD then the military would have used them in the face of the destruction of their regieme. The US, being aware of this, would not send their troops into battle with the possibility of taking a couple of thousand casualties.

(In fact it's pretty much a rule that the US only attacks countries which are harmless to it. The dangerous ones they buy off.)

[Zero]

Originally posted by Curiosity

It should be pretty damned obvious that Iraq didn't have WMD, and that the US knew it, IMO. If Iraq did have WMD then the military would have used them in the face of the destruction of their regieme. The US, being aware of this, would not send their troops into battle with the possibility of taking a couple of thousand casualties.

so true. so true.

[chequita guevara]

Curiousity, the Iraqis were more than aware that their chem weapons were not capable of doing significant damage to the Americans, and would only invite nuclear retaliation. That's why they didn't use them in the 2nd Gulf War (the 1st being against Iran). America's chem defence capacity was such that there was no point in wasting those weapons on us.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

In this case the UN has specifically ordered the burden of proof on Iraq- to prove unequivocally that they don't possess the weapons.

[Iraq]

*looks around*

Ummm.. what can I say? I dont have it
[/Iraq]

[Berzerker]

How do you prove the non-existence of something that doesn't exist?

[Myrddin]

It looks as if the problem will now be for those Western politicans who justified the war on the grounds of the threat from WMD, and the intelligence agencies who provided the 'evidence'

[Victor Galis]

So El Presidente lied in order to gain support for a war of imperialist aggression. This is new how?