If there were WMD in Iraq why haven't "they" used them?

Answer 1

We answered that a long time ago...there aren"t any

Answer 2

If Saddam Hussein ordered a WMD attack on any of his neighbouring countries, the allies would have had the PERFECT excuse to invade iraq even sooner. After the first war Iraq was completeley under the microscope. France and Germany who were against the second invasion would of had no choice but but back the UN resolution to start a war if he had launched a WMD attack. Also Israel has got plenty of nukes. They would retaliate quickly if somebody were attacked with a WMD from Mr Hussein. Even so none were found. The war was based on a pack of lies. There were supposed to be loads of al queda in iraq. The were almost none. Now there are thousands the country is on the brink of civil War. Chaos reigns.

Answer 3

A defector from Iraq was quoted in a magazine article stating emphatically that Saddam had hidden wmd's under ground and shipped some to other countries.He goes on to state that weapons inspectors were duped because Iraqi officials knew in advance where the inspections were to take place and removed all vestiges of weapons.This person was in a position to know.Whether he's telling the truth or not is still a guess.

Answer 4

Think it's pretty much common knowledge that they weren't there. If they really were there then the Americans would have made much greater effort to find them when they first invaded. Once they'd gone in it seemed that the "weapons of mass destruction" were just forgotten about. It was just a convenient excuse at the time that they hoped would justify an illegal war. And yes, something needed to be done about Saddam , but war was never going to be the answer and unfortunately Iraq now seems to going into civil war

Answer 5

The American public has been conditioned by the one-sided media into believing that the term "WMD" applies only to nuclear weapons.

This is incorrect. A "weapon of mass destruction" is one that causes massive destruction of property and structures, massive deaths and injuries, or both. Chemical weapons are classified as "weapons of mass destruction," and more than 600 TONS of chemical munitions were indeed found in Iraq during the invasion.

Of course, you won't hear about this from the news media because it would justify the invasion, and you won't hear this from the Democrats because it would prove that they're full of you-know-what and wouldn't give them anything to complain about with Bush.

Answer 6

They were used.

Soon after I started my tour of duty in Iraq we had two soldier hospitalized after they were attacked by a nerve-gas artillery shell rigged as an IED.

Later I was aware of the steady discovery of caches of chemical warheads. In fact I personally saw a couple of these.

If you are not aware that we found 500+ chemical weapon warheads in Iraq - then you have nobody but yourself to blame.

Answer 7

Because there aren't any. WMD's is a farce. Considering that the Iraqi's are suicidal and ready to die fighting without regard to the wholesale slaughter of their numbers, no doubt that they would have used these WMD's if only they existed.

Answer 8

They were there. They had huge stockpiles of chemical weapons. The Iraqis didn't have the time or the capability to deploy these weapons as was feared. The language used by the US and UK governments confused the issue.

Answer 9

There were no WMD found in Iraq.

Answer 10

One more time: What do call 450,000 TONS of high explosives? Yes, I know, captured artillery shells. And what do you call captured artillery shells retrieved by Saddam's terrorists out of the ammo dumps before they could be fully secured by the American occupying forces, that were converted into roadside booby traps to kill and maim the occupying forces?

We call those IED's, and trust me, they have used them well.

Answer 11

i would like to request you to refer to the announcment of the pentagon in summer 88 after halabcha(the kurdish town)was bombardes by chemical agents,on which it is claimed by the kurds (but not yet being able to proove it) that 5000 kurds were killed due to that chemical attack.the report says,the kurds were bombed by the sarine nerve gas wich was used by iran,it concluded that iraq was possesing and manufacturing the mastard gas,it never had sarine.
after the people forgot the truth,the story was changed,saying that the iraqi army was the one who bombed halabcha.these lies dont last long you know,and they are belived only by naieves and ignorants.