http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,200499,00.html
I heard a senator talking about this,and he says he had to fight to get the info released because the government was embarrassed yet again for being wrong in assuming there were none.
I wonder if you'll hear about this on CNN... "Degraded"
"Pre-Gulf War"
If this is the random, decade old junk from Gulf War I scattered around Iraq, this is a very disigenuous claim. The Dulfer report mentioned that some of this stuff existed.
I think I saw an interview with Scott Ritter last year where he was comenting on these. He said because the stuff had a shelf life, you could drink the goo from the tips of those shells and get little more than a stomach ache.
Perhaps this is something new, but I will wait to reserve judgement. 
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
"Degraded"
"Pre-Gulf War"
If this is the random, decade old junk from Gulf War I scattered around Iraq, this is a very disigenuous claim. The Dulfer report mentioned that some of this stuff existed.
I think I saw an interview with Scott Ritter last year where he was comenting on these. He said because the stuff had a shelf life, you could drink the goo from the tips of those shells and get little more than a stomach ache.
Perhaps this is something new, but I will wait to reserve judgement. |
I gotta agree with ya here.
"Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq."
He probably didn't mention it because he knows is just random stuff lost in various dumps sinec the first gulf war. Would rather let the whole WMD issues die as quietly as possible.Haha, let us just consider the source - foxnews. They don't have much journalistic credibility left, do they? Lol
I've seen documentaries about those "Pre-Gulf War" WMDs and the experts said that one should be very very careful with that stuff. If you spill some in your eye you might get a slight irritation 
Or maybe they found some household bleach in kitchens in Bagdad? Could you possibly find a comparable article in a less biased new source? I would have to say that Fox has a tendency for uhhh.... less than perfectly respected credibility.
| Thundr n Lightning wrote: |
| Could you possibly find a comparable article in a less biased new source? I would have to say that Fox has a tendency for uhhh.... less than perfectly respected credibility. |
As opposed to the more credible liberal news media we are exposed to every day? Are you just shocked because a news source is actually... *gasp* conservative?!
I'm not surprised something like this could've been overlooked, I mean, liberals fund perhaps 99% of the media, and naturally they don't want Bush to look good, so they only play the stories that make the government look bad because they don't currently have the power. | Soulfire wrote: |
I'm not surprised something like this could've been overlooked, I mean, liberals fund perhaps 99% of the media, and naturally they don't want Bush to look good, so they only play the stories that make the government look bad because they don't currently have the power. |
I could be wrong, but even though I hate fox news, the article is giving us the info that these weapons are pre-1991 weapons likely just lost in the shuffle. Not the WMDs that Bush was looking for. I don't think its a discussion of bias in the media (this time ), its just politicians grasping at straws that even the Prez won't touch.Not the WMDs Bush was looking for?
Um, what exactly was he looking for then? I mean, any WMDs in Iraq is probably not for the best pre-1991 or not.
And out of curiosity, why don't you like Fox? Is it because they're the only major conservative network? Because they're the ones that are "different" to the rest of liberal media? I'm curious now. Although they are biased, so are other news.
I don't like FOX because it's biased.
I don't like CNN because it's biased.
I don't like getting biased news at all. I'd rather get the news as it is. Stop getting defensive, Soulfire.
And btw, if you have WMDs that are useless and degraded, they can't possible be a threat to you. I have rat poison at home which is probably more dangerous. If Bush is looking for "WMDs" that are that degraded, he might as well arrest everyone who has a gun in thier house.
| Soulfire wrote: |
Not the WMDs Bush was looking for?
And out of curiosity, why don't you like Fox? Is it because they're the only major conservative network? Because they're the ones that are "different" to the rest of liberal media? I'm curious now. Although they are biased, so are other news. |
I don't think we went into Iraq to find Pre-91 material lost in the shuffle. I seem to remember claims of current manufacturing and active stockpiles. But the biggest evidence that the stuff found is not a big deal is that Bush is not making a big deal about it. Just some politicians looking to be in the news.
Actually, I don't like fox news because they have this tendency to make every freakin story sound like it's armageddon. And Im not talking about politics, they just seem to make every story seem more important than it is. I prefer my news a little less strident.Yeah, you're correct that we didn't go into Iraq to find pre-1991 weapons, but we found them. If the insurgency got a hold of the weapons, do you think they could use them? So much for the "There are no WMDs in Iraq." Even though, I am not so quick to believe that it's true and I would like it verified, it's information that's quite interesting.
And for Fox, I suppose I do see where you're coming from.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| ....If the insurgency got a hold of the weapons, do you think they could use them? So much for the "There are no WMDs in Iraq." |
Once again.. degraded and pre-guld war WMD is NOT a "weapon of mass destruction".
Maybe you can call it "weapon of ant destruction". But only if you drop the canister on the ant, crushing it.
Normal ammoniac, household bleach or that chlorine stuff you put in your outdoor pool is more dangerous.WMD'S are WMD's... if there old or not... I don't care how old they are and I doubt they are as old as described, but I'm telling you, this is a big kick in the butt of the Democrats......
I knew in the back of my mind we found some sort of weapons, while many of which were sent into Syria........
Go USA, STAY THE COURSE, Free Iraq.
| tribe wrote: |
WMD'S are WMD's... if there old or not... I don't care how old they are and I doubt they are as old as described, but I'm telling you, this is a big kick in the butt of the Democrats......
|
Apparently you didnt even read the article quoted, huh? Even the fox article described them as degraded. It's simple really, as I said before. If this was anything close to what Bush was looking for, He would be all over it. End of story, son. | HoboPelican wrote: |
| tribe wrote: | WMD'S are WMD's... if there old or not... I don't care how old they are and I doubt they are as old as described, but I'm telling you, this is a big kick in the butt of the Democrats......
|
Apparently you didnt even read the article quoted, huh? Even the fox article described them as degraded. It's simple really, as I said before. If this was anything close to what Bush was looking for, He would be all over it. End of story, son. |
We're not in Iraq for weapons anymore. We're trying to set democracy up there, so what Bush is looking for (democracy) is not in Iraq... yet. It's a shame that only a few people support the establishment of democracy in the middle east. | Soulfire wrote: |
| We're not in Iraq for weapons anymore. We're trying to set democracy up there, so what Bush is looking for (democracy) is not in Iraq... yet. It's a shame that only a few people support the establishment of democracy in the middle east. |
I don't think that is the issue of this thread. I think we were discussing wheteher the WMDs found are justification the the invasion in the first place.
WHY we are still there is another good topic. It's also a shame that we feel like we have to FORCE democracy on people that may not really want it. It works for many people, but having it shoved down your throat may make some populations a bit resistant to it. Ha! Pre-1992 weapons are not the ones that Cheney said "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends".
Did you hear what the CIA just released? The fact that they stopped looking for Bin Laden late last year. Pick your source of news article from this google news search.
They stopped looking for Bin Laden? Isn't he really the terrorist? I want for my tax dollars to get that guy and make him pay. I don't want my tax dollars to keep pouring into this hopeless Iraqi conflict - it is a stupid conflict that has nothing to do with the initial terrorist attacks - and nobody ever proved that Iraq was going to attack America in any way.
I don't know about you humans, but I think that I have heard just about enough lies.
This thread touches on the reason that we went to Iraq, but I really feel that the direction is bad (must have been Cheney doing the aiming). Americans are getting sick of these amazing revelations - like the CIA unit giving up hunting down Bin Laden.... it is just pathetic.
I already think that I know what is going to happen before the 2006 elections in the US... We will begin to withdraw troops from Iraq. Democrats will be happy, Republicans will be weary of the plan. Time will pass - more withdrawals. At some time before the elections, (or this may be reserved for the 2008 elections... President may be more important that the house seats that are in 2006) either some terrorist attack will (be allowed) to take place on American soil or in Iraq - killing many (enough to make the people completely support the "fight back" direction)... the parties guilty of the act will be quickly traced back to Iraq... Many will argue that haste in this matter is potentially dangerous - pointing to the lead up to the Iraq war. Some democrats will start to support republican candidates. Election day, victory for (R)! - rinse and repeat - rinse and repeat - .... | bgillingham wrote: |
| I already think that I know what is going to happen before the 2006 elections in the US... We will begin to withdraw troops from Iraq. Democrats will be happy, Republicans will be weary of the plan. Time will pass - more withdrawals. At some time before the elections, (or this may be reserved for the 2008 elections... President may be more important that the house seats that are in 2006) either some terrorist attack will (be allowed) to take place on American soil or in Iraq - killing many (enough to make the people completely support the "fight back" direction)... the parties guilty of the act will be quickly traced back to Iraq... Many will argue that haste in this matter is potentially dangerous - pointing to the lead up to the Iraq war. Some democrats will start to support republican candidates. Election day, victory for (R)! - rinse and repeat - rinse and repeat - .... |
If were are into guessing the future i think there will be some real nuclear WMD findings in Iraq real soon. Not biological or chemical, because they tend to degrade quickly when left un-attended.
Unfortunately for Bush & Co, IAEA will soon discover that the weapon has a clear and undisputable US signature and that is has been planted in Iraq just in time for the US election.
Just look how they tried to dupe us with faked African documents regarding some nuclear material.Now the term "Weapons of Mass Destruction" seems so rediculous and funny that one wants to laugh at the Americans who are trying to befool the whole world in the most stupid way.
They used Weapons of Mass Destruction against unarmed civilian and directly killed 1,00,000+ of them and continue to use them everyday, they used chemical weapons against them and planted terrorists groups in Iraq so that the terrorists acts of their troops look innocent when compared to those of their planted groups. But those terrorist groups lost in performance badly, to the real terrorists.
It seems the dog is sniffing a far away desert in search of something which is found mostly in its own backyard
This isn't news. We (the US) gave Iraq Sarin and Mustard gas to use on Iran 25 years ago. Surprise surprise, we found some of it, gee, who would have guessed. If in fact it was really difficult to get anyone to release this information (which I doubt it really was) it was probably because the warheads had "Proudly made in the USA" stamped on the side.
We didn't give Iraq chemical weapons. Whether these munitions were degraded or not doesn't distract from the fact that they could still be used and still pose a threat. Why has the US and other countries undertaken such complex procedures to assure the safe disposal of these old chemical weapons?
This topic should now be discussed in the permanent MidEast topic.
Link here
Topic Locked
