Hundreds of WMDs found in Iraq

Were any of these missiles workable?

 

"The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq."

 

So those wmd were there after all.

 

Yep!They were

 

This is not the WMD's the Bush administration used as a scare tactic in order to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq.

I don't expect the supporters of Bush's war to agree, but this is just another bill of goods we were sold in order for this illegal war to take place.

 

And I dont expect the libs to concede to the fact that there were and are WMDs'.

"Well they are there but these are not the wmds bush was talking about. So these wmds dont count."

 

Daisy, I'm not debating with you, just explaining how this stuff works.

These are NOT missiles. They are cannisters or bomb-cases containing the chemicals in the form of a liquid. If they were to leak or break open just a drop will kill a person. Even if the gas is old (Its called gas because it is dispersed by an explosive charge in the middle of the container, so it evaporates or turns into mist which will blow downwind and contaminate the ground, people and equipment.

There are two agents (gases) spoken about here. I don't think the actual agent has been identified, or if it has they are not telling which one. The first is mustard gas. This is a "blister" agent of which a drop the size of a pin-head will cause a boil the size of a silver dollar to appear on your skin. It attacks mucus membranes (nose, throat, lungs) with a vengence and causes the whole body to be covered with huge horrible blisters. It was invented by the Germans in World War One.

The second agent mentioned was nerve gas. It is nothing more than very, very strong bug spray. It effects the nervous system and kills people in the same way it kills bugs (simplified). The positive part is that exposure to nerve gas can be more deadly when it first hits, but if you do survive it you will probably live with less problems than if you were exposed to blister gas.

This is bad stuff. Saddam originally had it to prevent the millions of Iranians from over-running his country. Short of nukes, it was the only thing in his arsenal that had enough power to stop thousands of people swarming in on you.

The Geneva convention has outlawed the use of most chemical agents with the exception of "smoke" and "riot" (tear gas like--non-lasting). The US is making a conscious effort to destroy all of the gas we still have stocked. It is very hard and very dangerous to get rid of this gas safely. It can be done, but it is difficult. The gas must be neutralized chemically.

Most of the gas is in cannisters that look like artillery shells so they can be fired by artillery, the rest are more like bombs dropped from planes. Most are rusted badly and even if the gas is old, it is still deadly.

There are other agents, but those are the only two mentioned and I believe the only two that Saddam had.

These bombs can be physically carried in a car and busted open where they will gas everyone downwind (probably including the driver). They can be dropped by a plane or even sprayed by a crop duster.

The BIG danger is the fact that these are probably old shells and they are most likely corroding and may develop leaks. This is a VERY, VERY dangerous situation for those who live anywhere nearby or have to clean them up.

The military will probably place them in over-packs (packages designed to hold the whole shell if the shell decides to leak). The shells may also still contain the burster charge (explosive to spread the agent) which can go off accidently.

 

You are right Revmitchel: see!

Five hundred rounds of poison gas and its not the WMD's Bush said that Saddam had stashed.

We'll volunteer Terry to go over and get rid of them--instead of friends of mine having to do the job.:thumbs:

 

The chemical weapons have always there, Donna, we knew that all along, but we didn't know where. Its just that nobody believed us and they hoped they wouldn't find anything....now they're denying its not the chemical weapons Bush was talking about--what difference does it make, its WMDs PERIOD. Saddam said he got rid of all of them and told the inspectors that. He lied--we knew it---just couldn't prove it, until now. Just, please, pray for the EOD people who have to clean this up. Its a REAL dangerous job.

PLUS, There's probably much more.

 

Thanks for the invitation, but I'll have to decline.:tongue3:

Besides being too old, never felt the need to fight in a war like Vietnam or Iraq. Anyway, machinist are needed to manufacture needed supplies used by soldiers during war, so I'll be glad to help manufacture what is needed.

 

The intelligence we were given by most of the rest of the world turns out to be correct. And it turns out that bush didnt lie, and couldnt lie as the wmds are there.:thumbs:

What else didnt bush lie about

 

I thought you were a teacher ?

Anyways, it looks like you may be looking at this objectively.

Sadaam is a really bad dude. He not only had WMDs at one point, he used them on his own people. This vindicates Bush, who, BTW, now has the Euroweenies behind him on N. Korea & Iran. (Note that news didn't make the forum, but you have three threads on this story.)

 

If they weren't usable, what is the point? We know that Saddam was destroying WMD even at the end. WMD only count if they are maintained in a usable form. They can't be a threat, if they aren't usable as weapons.

Bush has since admitted that removing WMD wasn't his purpose in invading, although that's what he told us earlier:



<B>12/14/05:

BUSH: I said I made the right decision. Knowing what I know today, I would have still made that decision.​

</B>

HUME: So, if you had had this — if the weapons had been out of the equation because the intelligence did not conclude that he had them, it was still the right call?
BUSH: Absolutely.
http://www.thinkprogress.org/2005/12/15/wmd-irrelevant/

The fact that there was no danger to us from WMD was irrelevant.



​

 

I'm in complete agreement, they were always there, and wmd count as wmd, no matter what others say.

 

,,,:thumbsup:

 

At least the Bush supporters now have something to help them feel a little better about their stance. :smilewinkgrin:
Personally, I still don't think that it measures up to all of the pre-war hype of the Bush administration back in late 2002 - early 2003.

But, to each his own.

 

Bro. Curtis, thats what I have always said, he used them that proves he had them, now we see he did have them, the only ones who lied are the ones who said they didn't exsist.

 

I have been a machinist most of my working life (about 25 years).

During the time I joined the BB I was teaching school, as a substitute teacher for five years, while I went back to college and earned my Bachelor of Science degree. I was going to go into teaching full-time, but the No Child Left Behind legislation did away with these plans (thank you President Bush).

Since the machine industry has increased during the past few years, I have gone back into the machine shop so we could survive.

Maybe in the future I will be able to go back to teaching.

 

From the Iraq Survey Group final report:

"While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered."

- http://tinyurl.com/zmdm6