To all you libs who say the WMDs are too old, would you be willing to crack them open and take a deep breath?

Question

Efficacy of the weapons vary. Properly stored (i.e., not hastily hidden as the invasion started) they would most likely still work. Regardless, they existed in his country and prove that Saddam was lying.

Answer 1

the libs will never admit that Bush was right...that is until years from now, if he passes.....they will all weep and say what a great man he was.....remember when Reagan passed away? He had been hammered his entire political career, but after he was gone....boy the libs thought he was the greatest.....

The libs are now saying that Bush planted the WMD's....how desperate can they get....If Bush made a speech about the world being round....they would argue that it was flat.

Answer 2

If we had found them early in the search, the liberals would have accused Bush of planting them. We find them a few years later, and liberals say 1) They are too old to be dangerous, 2) They were planted, 3) It's all a lie.

They will NEVER believe the truth, however. Doing would show President Bush was right, and that they were wrong. The last thing they want to do is give credit to Bush for ANYTHING!
~~~~~~~~~
What kind of brainless cretin refuses to comprehend the difference between a can of bug spray on a shelf, and a SARIN-filled artillery shell?

The U.N. told Hussein he could NOT have what we've found. The U.N. told Hussein refusing to cooperate would result in armed conflict. Hussein denied having what we've shown he had. For Hussein simply being caught in the LIE gives us the moral legitimacy for invading Iraq.

The poster below is what we're dealing with in society. Some people deserve to be sterilized to protect us from future generations of their slug spawn.

Answer 3

I'm a conservative, and my belief of why they have not previously made this information public, is that it does absolutely nothing to show that Iraq had an ongoing WMD's program.

Yes, we all know they did; however, Senator Rockefeller going over to the middle east months before we went in, and meeting with the leaders of the surrounding countries and informing them that the decision had been made to go in, probably gave Saddam a good heads up to get rid of any weapns or materials.

And why that pitiful, worthless bastard, Rockefeller, wasn't brought up on charges of treason, I will never understand.

Answer 4

Actually they prove that Bush was lying.

I'm sorry that you're so misinformed on what "libs" say - let me clear it up for you.

The weaponry being "old" refers *also* to the fact that they existed BEFORE the prohibitions were put in place. So Bush's claim that Saddam was "developing" (note the present tense he used) WMD's was a lie. They were "old" WMD's in the sense that they were produced before Saddam was ever told not to produce them. In all the years we've been in Iraq, no one's *ever* found WMD's that were produced in the manner Bush claimed they were. Ooops.

Ergo, Bush lied and posts like these just help get the word out.

Ta and thanks for the free publicity!

Answer 5

To all those that are saying "no WMDs were found," read the news. We found more than 500 chemical weapons. But they were manufactured before 1991, and therefore are too old to be of real military use. But they were still there, and avoided detection all this time. I still wouldn't want to get anywhere near them.

Answer 6

I've been listening to the Sean Hannity Show this afternoon, which he is not hosting because he called in sick, and even they aren't as fired up as some of the conservatives on this site are. Plus, weren't they found between 2003 and 2006? Why lie to the American people for 3 years?

Answer 7

They were from 1991, WAAAAAAAY before the invasion. Saddam probably didn't even know they were there. Defense department officials say they were not the WMD we were looking for.

Answer 8

I am rather liberal in most things, but I thought that there were WMDs I'm not that stupid to think there wasn't, and WMDs almost not matter how old are/can be dangerous, maybe not as dangerous as the day they were created but enough that I'm not gonna be the test dummy.

Answer 9

If you take deep enough breaths of anything toxic it will kill you, that does not mean you can use it for mass destruction. HELLO
Dude Bush has not been right about anything and thats why we dont belive it when fox news says they found WMD in Iraq

Answer 10

So now that which has been proven at incredible expense not to have existed existed because you say so and that proves it? Think you may be into the realms of circular/magical argument here, at least Bush and Blair aren't alone right?