The Pentagon says that no weapons were found in Iraq. What was found - and we already knew this - was that inert items were found that could not have been used. The chemicals were no longer functioning (More then 12 years inert) and there was no active program to make any more. Republican supporters of the war continue to say weapons were found to prop up Bush and themselves. Wont this further embarrass them in November if they keep saying there were weapons and the war was justified?
2006-06-26 11:10:15 · 12 answers · asked by Michael H 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
I can't believe the number of people who seemingly want to take the side of Saddam. As far as I am concerned, the man refused to follow the rules, he wanted to pretend he had them, so I think we should have acted as if he did. I would rather be safe than sorry. I have seen too many reports that show the people are greatful for our intervention. I think there is still a possibility that there are weapons hidden somewhere.
2006-06-26 12:06:53 · answer #1 · answered by wolfmusic 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately they are shameless and can rely on people's short memory. Also, they are not interested in the truth.
Iraq did have a factory to make one of the precursors to deadly VX gas - because we the Americans gave it to them. Probably there were a lot of old and completely inert chemical agents stored in rusty buckets somewhere that were later poured out into the sea or neutralized in a primitive way. Nothing threatening was there by the time Dubya's troops invaded - unless it came through Syria (through Russia's CW and mil complex). You can't make the really bad stuff in some hot bunkers in the ground and then carry it around in trucks in the hot sun. You can't get up in front of cameras and wave vials of real anthrax spores around, without real risk.
What you have here folks with the Republicans is a dog and pony show, orchestrated by all kinds of charlatans, in order to draw the maximum funding to defense work on these problems. There's nothing really wrong with that, except they are not interested in the truth. How can you protect anyone if you don't even want to know what the truth is?
2006-06-26 19:29:28 · answer #2 · answered by Zelda Hunter 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were definitely uncertainties about it. Saddam was always trying to seem like he always had them to bully Iran. He definitely used them to kill many people in the past, so we knew he would use them if he could.
He did have the Samoud Missile. It was one of the missiles that we told him that he cannot have because of it's range. He blatantly went against the agreement that he would not develope and use them. He also shot at our aircraft on a daily basis while we flew over the nothern no fly zone. When it looked like he was a threat from all points and he would not comply with the extended deadline that our Government gave him, we feel we had no other choice. Even Kerry agreed we needed to invade.
There were some found, but not enough to kill millions. Just thousands.
2006-06-26 18:22:50 · answer #3 · answered by madbaldscotsman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not: the Republican base simply doesn't care to know the truth. And if anyone tries to point it out near election time, the administration will just round up another few immigrants and claim they were terrorists That always clears the front page of the newspaper.
About the only thing the Bush administration has done a competent job of is create and disseminate propaganda.
2006-06-26 18:14:35 · answer #4 · answered by Blackacre 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are some weird people here continuing to claim they were found - even though the people who would know THE PENTAGON sais there were none.
Not before the war, not after
Not moved to Syria
Not moved to Iran
Not buried in the desert
Not sold on Ebay :)
NONE. Not enough to kill millions. Not enough to kill thousands. Not enough to kill one - unless an empty canister was hurled at or dropped on someone.
2006-06-26 18:26:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not only did we just find WMD in Iraq (last week) but what we found before that was all the parts to make WMD within a close proximity. Imagine taking a gun into your home and taking it apart. Now imagine putting the pieces throughout your home. Technically, you don't have a gun in your house. That's what we found. If you don't believe me, you ask my husband and his fellows Marines that served with him in Iraq who saw it first hand.
2006-06-26 22:42:36 · answer #6 · answered by proud_usmc_wife04 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They weren't found in Iraq because Saddamn (yes, I know ) sent them to Syria by the planeload before his time ran out. His former head of the Iraqi air force gave over the documents to prove it. All the examinations of said documents so far prove them to be genuine.
Al Bore lost the election fair and square, now get over it !
2006-06-26 18:20:59 · answer #7 · answered by S.A.M. Gunner 7212 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hey raage, if you dont have a weapon that can be made usable (fixed, made functioning, "re-energized" etc., etc.) Then you *dont* have weapons!
Your analogy implies that if someone has a box full of spent bullet casings and then says they have no bullets then they are lying.
2006-06-26 18:21:46 · answer #8 · answered by Brenda Portine 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Saddam said he had destroyed those weapons, and weapons inspectors did not find them in the bunker they were in.
What makes you believe saddam did not have any other weapons, and that he hid them from inspectors?
What is it that Saddam has done to have gained your trust?
2006-06-26 18:16:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over."
-- Adolph Hitler
2006-06-26 18:14:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋