If WMD's are proven to not exist in Iraq , what conservative would you want to confront and why?

Question

Recently, I asked the question, "If and when WMD's are proven to be in Iraq, what liberal would you want to confront and why?". In the spirit of fairness I am giving the folks on the other side a forum to speak even though I believe WMD's have been found and are in Iraq.

Just playing a little devils advocate.

Please try to give me someone other than GWB which will be the obvious answer for most of you.

Now that doesn't mean my conservative and moderate friends can't react either. Lets have a healthy debate.

Once again, intelligent answers please.

Let the games begin.

If anyone is interested in the 500 WMD's found here is the link.

http://santorum.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=1078

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/sarticle.php?id=10101&o=DIB004

Answer 1

They did just find over 500 chemical warheads- and oh yeah, Saddam USED THEM on his own people in the early '90's, and he said he would to kill all Americans and Jews if he had the chance... still think it was a mistake to go over there? But liberals live in the past (they're all stick in the 60's and the hippie movement) so it is impossible to argue with one using LOGIC.

Let's not forget who also said that Saddam has WMD's as late as 2003- Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, I guess all the Dems in the Senate except two for that matter, as they voted 98-2 to go to Iraq in the first place. And Bill Clinton also said that Saddam has WMD's. Don't believe me? Just look it up. http://www.jrwhipple.com/war/wmd.html
copy and paste the link and be amazed, liberals.

Answer 2

There is a store of over 500 chemical weapons, all of which we've found since going into Iraq. To some on the left, this is being discarded as nothing more than a child's toy. But I have enough stuff under my kitchen cabinet that if I mixed them together, I'd have a weapon of mass destruction. So I'd say it's been proved and there's no need to point fingers.

Answer 3

Since the only "WMDs" they've found to date are useless leftover shells from the 80's(thank you FOX/CNN), I'm guessing they probably won't find anything like the hundreds of liters of chem/bio weapons Bush/Rumsfeld/Powell/etc. told us were in Iraq. The complete absence of those WMDs in the face of all the assertions and "proof" we were given in the run up to the war would be far more satisfying than confronting a politician.

Kathy: 20-plus year old expired shells aren't what Bush/Rumsfeld/Powell/etc. told us was in Iraq. We were told there were huge caches of hundreds of liters of biological and chemical weapons, not holdovers from decades past.

Answer 4

Thats a problematic call. i visit assert Ted Kennedy because he's the oldest dogs interior the pound. i'd tell him that with the freedom of speech comes the awsome responsability of understanding even as to save your mouth close. he's sufficiently old to carry close this by using now, yet apparently he desires a stern reminder. How he would have sat on such an excellent style of senate commities and not in any respect realized to attend till each and each and every of the information are in is frankly staggering.

Answer 5

Surely it has be proved? 3 years in Iraq and not one cache found?

Answer 6

... well... I wish we did find them... that would mean this whole thing was quasi-legitimate after all...

I'm not much for "hahaha... told you so..."

but, I am afraid if we haven't found them in this many years... we won't find them...

Answer 7

what are you,,, illiterate,, there are no WMD