If he knew Iraq didn't have them, shouldn't he have had Halliburton plant WMDs there to justify it? Certainly he has the wealth, power and influence to pull it off.
2007-02-20 09:11:15 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Damn good question. You know, that absolutely destroys just about every assertion the crazy left has made since this war began.
2007-02-20 09:22:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
EVERY press account indicates that no WMD were found in Iraq. I mean what about "Iraq had no stockpiles of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons before last year's US-led invasion, the chief US weapons inspector has concluded." can't you understand?
America afterall did sell Iraq things such as anthrax, botulism and more biological weapons (not to mention what weapons other european countries sold to him).
They didn't have anything planted because it was unneccessary - who in America would really want another Vietnam? They would want to win and support the troops - at all costs.
More than one miscalculation but ultimately they are still winning because the Americans who have the power to stop the war won't.
2007-02-20 09:33:14 · answer #2 · answered by David M 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Wow. What college district is that? Presidnet George W. Bush prosecuted the conflict in Iraq for various motives. the single maximum widley understand and least understood, advert to do with weapons of Mass Destruction. maximum folk think of that the belief replaced into to bypass inot Iraq and discover vats of weaponized botulism or almost finished nuclear gadgets. the actuality is far less concrete--Iraq had made consistent efforts to stymie inspections and had by no potential presented an entire accounitng of their WMD components. there have been such components that have been wide-unfold to be in Iraq in 1992 and in 1998, via 2002, the question replaced into what had befell to those materails--what have been destroyed and how, the place have been they, ought to any of this is shown? Hussein had additionally given lots help and help to terrorists. We have been engaged in Afghanistan for particularly much a 12 months and it replaced into wide-unfold that al Qaeda members have been fleeing--between the risk-free havens they have been fleeing to replaced into Iraq--partly the invasionwa approximately denying those havens and combating help to different terror communities besides suhc as Hamas and Hezbollah.
2016-10-02 11:20:34 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, you see inspectors were there for years, combing everything. We know where things weren't and where they were expected. We have no fly zones over Iraq for ten years before Bush - that's how those of opposed to the war before it began knew there were no WMDs there. Please remember Bush kicked the Inspectors out of Iraq. Why would he do that? Because they were undermining his justification for the war.
We know who sold to stuff to Saddam - have the serial numbers - hey, Cheney's company sold a bunch to Saddam.
So, while Bush undoubtedly wanted to plant them, he simply couldn't.
I hope you will understand this and be able to face that bush is a lying, theiving, mass murdering, torturing, war criminal gangster.
2007-02-20 09:20:30 · answer #4 · answered by cassandra 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
doubt you could keep it a secret for long, it would totally destroy the republican party if it ever became public
and really what keeps us in iraq longer, finding real or planted WMD's and then leaving or an endless search for WMD's?
2007-02-20 09:14:47 · answer #5 · answered by Nick F 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
What a ridiculous question! Because we have no physical proof of the WMD does not mean they are not there. Please do some research before posting such absurd comments. Our troops were exposed to chemical weapons during the 1st Gulf War - HELLO - that's a form of WMD. There is no need for our President to plant anything - now go take a nap!
2007-02-20 09:18:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
he didn't because he's gonna make the excuse that Iraq sent their weapons over to these bordering countries, and butter the public up for another war for WMD's
2007-02-20 09:14:37 · answer #7 · answered by Evil Man 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Think about it. Where would he get them from? That would be a good trick to reproduce WMD's manufactured in Iraq - or elsewhere.
2007-02-20 09:15:21 · answer #8 · answered by ArgleBargleWoogleBoo 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because it was never really about WMD'S.
2007-02-20 09:43:18 · answer #9 · answered by PARKERD 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because Rumsfeld told him he knew where they were.
2007-02-20 09:15:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋