WMD in Iraq not found ?

Question

Why were the WMDs never found in Iraq? Donald Rumsefield still had the receipt.

Answer 1

You may not have heard that about 500 artillery shells filled with nerve gas and mustard gas have been found in Iraq, because we've given this story much less attention than the (increasingly fishy) allegations that U.S. Marines committed atrocities in Haditha last November.

The information is contained in a report by the Army's National Ground Intelligence Center, a small portion of which was declassified at the insistence of Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich), who announced the findings in a news conference June 21.


The munitions date from the 1980s — the time of the Iran/Iraq war — and have degraded since then.


The number of weapons found wouldn't have posed much of a threat to protected troops, but could be devastating to civilians. (Saddam used fewer than 20 such munitions to kill an estimated 5,000 Kurds at Halabja in 1988.)


The discovery makes it clear Saddam did possess stockpiles of WMD, and that if there were an effort to dispose of them, it was incomplete. Five hundred artillery shells filled with sarin and mustard is a lot to overlook.


There likely are more. Confidence on the left that "Bush lied" when he said Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction is based on the report of the Iraq Survey Group, which found no stockpiles of WMD. But Charles Duelfer, who headed the ISG, acknowledged his group examined less than one quarter of one percent of the more than 10,000 known weapons storage sites in Iraq.


News organizations took notice of the find chiefly to deprecate its significance. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann described them as "weapons of minor discomfort:"


"You might get a burn if you rubbed these weapons directly on your skin," he said.


That prompted Tom Lipscomb to suggest Mr. Olbermann be given an all expenses paid trip to Iraq, where he could select any one of the shells, open it, and rub its contents on his skin.


I doubt Mr. Olbermann will accept Tom Lipscomb's challenge. Liberals talk the talk, but rarely walk the walk.

Answer 2

Some WMD's were found - chemical munitions primarily, many of which were buried or partially damaged seemingly after the first gulf war

suspicious gas & fertiliser plants were discovered, but again no clear evidence of a WMD program that could threaten the UK as per the 'dossier' prepared by Cambell et al that led to the death of Kelly

however no nukes, or seemingly signs of nuke programmes were found

short range missiles were found (but no WMD warheads to fit)

Rumsfeld (either personally or whilst Secy DoD) didn't supply those munitions - the shell cases were made in Iraq using (its believed) CNC equipment supplied from the UK & Japan - Iraq owned Matrix Churchill for a while I seem to rememebr.

The chemical plant was supplied by Germany and possibly Switzerland, the chemical feedstock came from Germany, UK & I think Netherlands. Other countries were implicated - no country was neccesary supplying equipment, most equipment was supplied by private companies in those countries or by surrogates in those countries.

The US did supply conventional munitions.

However by far the pargest supplier of munitions to Iraq was Russia and other former East Bloc and affiliates such as Yugoslavia, China etc...

Answer 3

WMD's have been found. WMD's that were said destroyed by Saddam during the ridiculous un debacle. Obviously you don't read the papers unless the headlines are anti- Bush !

Answer 4

Don't believe what you have been hearing on the Clinton News Network or the Communist Broadcasting Service. I have many friends and colleagues who have served in Iraq recently, and they have seen the WMDs with their own eyes. The mainstream media won't tell you that because it doesn't fit their liberal anti-war military-bashing agenda. They want you to believe the war was all about oil (same B.S. as the first Gulf War).

Answer 5

According to farkas419 the US Army finally found 400 rounds. Take the cost of the war, divide it by 400 and you get the cost for us to find each round. Add to that the US Army said the weapons were so old they were useless. Not exactly Blair's insistence that they could be used against us in 45 minutes time. What I would also like to know is how 400 dilapidated artillery rounds could be used against the US and the UK from Iraq? There was, prior to our invasion of Iraq, no Terrorist activity in Iraq, and no connection to the events of 9/11. Yep, just keep putting your blind faith in Bush, he is the conservative messiah alright.

Answer 6

Because Hussein used most of the one the CIA sold him against Iran and the few that remained were largely duds. It's not hard to think we would find what we gave him. If Bush thought Iraq didn't have them he would have come up with a better excuse to invade.

Answer 7

well because we sold the iraqi military only firearms and small munitions during the iran iraq war, which we wouldnt even have had to do if Jimmy Carter hadnt et the ayatollah take control of iran. But i guess you dont consider anthrax, a chemical so deadly 1 ounce distributed properly could kill 1,000,000 people, we found millions of gallons of anthrax in iraq, and mustard gas. But you just think a wmd is a nuclear weapon. Your a dumbf*ck

Answer 8

They were found. However, the Bush administration admits that the WMD's that were found were not the WMD's that Iraq supposedly had when they decided to invade.

Answer 9

They were found, just after the Americans landed.

People pointed and said "look at all those WMD getting out of that plane"

Answer 10

Yes, not being found doesn't mean that they didn't exist. Ask the Marsh Arabs. Sad, that the Brits. and the Americans turned on their own Governments.