Chemical Weapons found in Iraq

[RGBVideo]

Now to the true question: how many countries in the world do NOT have some kind of WMD? And of those who do, what is the one that used them in the most significant way? Hmmmm...

A point most often made by anti-war hippies, but it's bs when it comes to Iraq. Iraq was required in the cease fire treaty to destroy all it's WMD. There was even a UN resolution made out of this -- if Iraq would've developed WMD, it would've had redeclared war and thus could be freely attacked.

[Winston]

Um, Oncle Boris, hate to break this to you, but I believe this thread is about Iraq.

You'll have to vent your frustration at the cruel World in general some other place.

[yaroslav]

Originally posted by VJ
Yaro -- > Oh, missed your point. Sorry.

There is not need to say "Sorry". It's probably my fault, because I'm not a very good writer an that is in Spanish, so guess how bad I'm in English

[General Ludd]

I mentioned earlier that Canada has alot of mustard gas. If I remember correctly, it's because it's very dificult to dispose of properly, and they figured it was easier to just keep it around. That might give credance to the argument that these where weapons which where barried in a half-assed attempt to dispose of.

[Fake Boris]

So if the thread is about Iraq then we can not talk about anything else in the world that might related?

If you can't make out of my post that my point was "Iraq was not any more of a threat than X", then you may be the one who needs to post somewhere else.

And where in the world did I say the war was unjustified? My sole point remains: it was not a threat to the US. If you think wars are about preventing a threat from arising, then you should open some history books, along with your dictionary at the definition of the word "conquest".

[Ned]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
It's sad to see how the debate turns. Of course, they would find somewhere, some kind of WMD. GePap has been absolutely right from the beginning- these rusted shells were not a threat to anyone.

Now to the true question: how many countries in the world do NOT have some kind of WMD? And of those who do, what is the one that used them in the most significant way? Hmmmm...

Ah hah! The next tactic of the left when the facts confront their conspiracy theories.

Divert attention.

[GePap]

And we are back to the Nedaverse....

[Ignorance]

Originally posted by Ned

Ah hah! The next tactic of the left when the facts confront their conspiracy theories.

Divert attention.

Look who's talking. When you can't confront the argument, attack the person who made it.

[debeest]

"However, US officials played down the find, saying the shells were probably left over from Saddam Hussein's 1980-88 war with Iran. "

So, these are leftovers from the chemical weapons Saddam was using against the Iranians and the Kurds back when the U.S. was supporting him. Major find, huh.

Who knows? Maybe these were buried in the sand because they were with some of the helpless Iraqi troops that U.S. troops buried with bulldozers in the first Gulf War.

[Patroklos]

"However, US officials played down the find, saying the shells were probably left over from Saddam Hussein's 1980-88 war with Iran. "

Sure sounds liek the US is over emphasizing this one for political gain, yessery.

Yep, I was there, buried them alive (you forgot the while laughing, and then pissing on the grave afterwards). If only I knew shooting at me from entrenched positions was a sign of surrender...

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PLATO
Is it to hard for you to get that this is just blantantly NOT TRUE. 1441 specifically said to account for all weapons of mass destruction.

Quit kidding yourself.

1441 did not sanction an invasion.

You either follow it or you don't, you can't have both.

[Ned]

GePap, et al., I hardly think that burying mortar shells filled with mustard gas is a proper form of destroying weapons of mass instruction.

Burying them under sand is not a proper form of storage.

Burying things under sand is a known method for hiding things from UN weapons inspectors.

So we find mortar shells buried under sand, and enemies of the United States and/or Bush conclude that they were not burried to hide them from UN weapons inspectors, but to destroy them!

And just who is living in the land of conspiracy theories?

[Fake Boris]

Ned, can't you understand that they are leftovers from the Iran-Iraq war? In any case, the resolution did not plan an outright invasion- the Iraqis would obviously be given the chance (if WMDs had been found) to destroy them.

[DinoDoc]

Well there's about 5k more to find according to the UN.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Well there's about 5k more to find according to the UN.

And let's say they are mostly in an unusable state, buried beneath the desert. Will that prove that Iraq was a threat?