Why do some people continue to blindly assert that there were NO WMD's?

Question

General Georges Sada (the highest ranking Iraqi Air Force General has published a book (available) that tell who, where, how and when the WMD's were transported to Syria. (Oh, my, that's SOO unexpected!!)
However, it's an "inconvenient lie" for Dems and others throughout the world, to recognize the truth. Isn't that an unconscionable political lie?

Answer 1

Because George Bush said so, are you calling him a liar?

Answer 2

I don't know about the movement of WMD to Syria, but I can tell you that while I was in Ar Ramadi, Iraq last year, a Russian MIG fighter with French weaponry was unearthed at a nearby base when they were doing some construction work. It was wrapped in thick plastic and buried about 20 feet under the sand. It was in perfect working condition, full of fuel and ready to fly.

Now if they can bury a MIG (funny how it was a Russian jet and had French weaponry and they didn't want us in there , huh?) why can't they bury the so-called WMDs out in the middle of the desert? The place is huge! We could look for 50 years and still not find them.

And that was not the only MIG unearthed since we've been there. There were several before and several since around the air bases.

As for GWB admiting there were no WMD, sometimes you have to bite the bullet and admit something even if you know it's wrong just to get the dogs off your tail. Unfortunatly, it had the opposite affect for GWB. It just gave the hounds a fresher blood trail to follow to try to drag him down.

Maybe you don't agree with this war and think it's all a waste, but I suggest you go to Iraq and have an old man run out of his house, grab the guy in front of you in a tight hug, and say "Thank you! Thank-you! Thank-you!" over and over, then go to a fishing village and give the kids school supplies and medical attention, and see the reaction of the people when you walk through town an patrol. THEN and ONLY then will you have the right to say we don't belong there, because you WERE there.

Answer 3

If Sada is correct then we need to ask these questions: how many WMD's did Iraq have then? Our intelligence should have picked up and monitored a huge and panicked (and it would have been a panicked move) transportation of weapons of that size and description across the Syrian border. There was no evidence of such a movement.

Moving weapons like the ones that the Bush administration described would have been quite a feat in a short period of time without being detected. By the way, there are a lot of people who are not a Democrat that would want more proof than just a handful of trustworthy politicians and generals... Sorry, but I would like to see actual concrete evidence. Generals have been wrong before just like everyone else.

A lot of people have speculated that Iraq transported WMD's to Syria... but for now, it is just speculation, it is not a fact. I have cited a big reason why this theory is not widely accepted. If you provide real evidence then I certainly can change my mind.

Answer 4

Because it is known that Saddam's Nuclear power plant was blown up so no WMD's a Nukes, as for chemical ones well the precursors that the United States sold to Saddam were apparently used gassing the Kurds, or in the Iran - Iraq war, so what other WMD's could they be talking about?

Satellite surveillance would have seen an movement of any kinds of trucks large enough to transport such items, and they were watching carefully.

BTW it was on a Canadian TV Program last night, America Supported Saddam With Millions of Dollars In the Years RIGHT AFTER He 'gassed the Kurds'

cbc.ca/fifth as it was broadcast on the News show "The Fifth Estate"

They also interviewed His chief engineer for the Nuclear plants, they were Destroyed completely in Gulf War One, and never re-built.

Some much for Being "Right"

Answer 5

I've read the book, and General Sada states that they were FLOWN out of Iraq to Syria... no PROOF of it, but it sounds plausible.

For the fool who states that it would be "Noticed"... how do you notice a few hundred CRATES loading into commercial aircraft at an international airport ?

The ISG found small stockpiles of weapons, and large underground facilities for creating further biologic and chemical weapons.

ANY nation (or group) with access to petrochemicals and or a basic pharmaceutical production plant can make bio-chemical weapons !

And to destroy them... just pop em in an incinerator or bury them in a dump

Answer 6

Even if they transported the weapons to Syria, Bush had said that there were WMDs there when they went to invade, and if the weapons had been moved, there weren't any, therefore no reason to invade. Besides, there is more of a reason for Sada to lie and make his country seem more advanced than for Bush to lie and say he invaded a country for no reason. For Bush to actually have admitted that there were no WMDs was a big deal for him, since he was admitting there was no reason for him to send in the troops, so there is really no reason to doubt his honesty.

Answer 7

Yes it is, and the Liberals have perfected the political lie, as well as slander, and character assasination. Nothing truthful about the war is accepted by the Liberals, it goes against their agenda to drag down the administration and the country. Thats why all you ever hear is negative, negative, negative in the media. So many good things are happening in Iraq but you NEVER hear about them, ever, because they would expose the Liberal left position as anti-American, which it is. If GWB would have not stopped for months to appease the Liberal left by going through yet another worthless UN resolution process thus giving Saddam plenty of time to get rid of all the evidence, we would have found them and destroyed them during the sweeping first weeks of the conflict. Thanks to the Liberal left appeasement program again, the world is less safe. I can only hope and pray THEY are the first to go when the big one happens.

Answer 8

I think most of us who have know about Saddam's past have been asking the same question. It's not like it was ever a secret Saddam had the stuff. It's amazing how quickly people conveniently forget history for the sake of their own political motives.

Answer 9

Gee I don't know - maybe it's because EVEN BUSH has acknowledged there were no WMD. Yes, it's possible some went to other countries, but most of the documentation siezed after Baghdad was taken indicate that the stockpiles were destroyed 10 years BEFORE we invaded.

Don't believe every general you read - there are plenty of sources that show there were no WMDs in Iraq when we attacked, that stockpiles had been destroyed, and that our government KNEW there were none. Powell, who presented the case to the UN for WMDs later said he was embarrassed to have presented that false information he had been fed by the administration.

Isn't this enough for you to stop insisting black is white?

Answer 10

It takes a low IQ individual to believe that Saddam, a Sunni, would hand his weapons over to a Shite country.