English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Any ignorant hick or s|ut can find Waldo, so why can't the U.S. find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...

Or, are there none?

Do I smell conspiracy?

By the way, as a TAXPAYER, I want my money back!!! I paid for the military to go on a wild goose chase to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the military didn't produce!!! Refund please!?!?

And, can we use that refund to provide legitimate healthcare for our injured and impaired veterans and to get 20% of our nation's homeless (who are all military veterans) off the streets?

Thanks!!!

2007-03-10 05:24:17 · 11 answers · asked by yvvash 1 in Politics & Government Military

Rukidding

How about doing something productive instead?

Like bettering living conditions for our veterans.

Thanks :-)

2007-03-10 05:31:19 · update #1

rukidding says: "the majority of it is in Syria and Iran"

Is this based on the same intelligence that led us to the Iraq War???

If so, we're screwed dude.

2007-03-10 05:35:58 · update #2

11 answers

The whole thing...9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan (Iran next)...is a setup to make money, consolidate power (Patriot Act etc.) and bankrupt the US. The PLAN is to destroy the USA.

As a taxpayer I suggest you watch Arron Russo's "Freedom to Fascism" available on YouTube or Google video. You will never file a 1040 again and will reduce your "deductions" from your paycheck to almost zero because the "income tax" is illegal and unconstitutional. In other words it is time for the American People to cut off the funding.

While we are at it we need to outlaw/disband the illegal Federal Reserve Bank...the privately/British owned bank that controls our money and banking system. Both the income tax and Federal Reserve Bank were created illegally in 1913 and the US citizens have been paying with their freedom every since.

2007-03-10 05:39:56 · answer #1 · answered by Perry L 5 · 1 3

in many circumstances a weapon which will kill hundreds or maybe hundreds. So themes like nuclear warheads and poisonous brokers like nerve gas, poison gases and so on. those weapons must be presented by skill of skill of airplane or missiles and don't could desire to inevitably be an instant hit to reason deaths. in certainty a weapon designed to reason super deaths or harm with one launch and in all probability stable consequences. severely used bombs and such could reason hundreds of deaths whether the part of effect is often somewhat small the situation as WMD commonly could cover a plenty greater section. So a typical bomb could cover numerous undred ft a WMD could cover numerous miles (or maybe an entire city).

2016-11-23 19:23:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

IF you watched something other than CNN you'd know that we did find weapons grade chemical weapons, mustard, and vx. Ask the some 5,000 dead Kurds in Northern Iraq if there were any weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi minister of defense who defected personally acknowledges that the weapons were trucked to Iran and Syria.

The only conspiracy is that the mainstream media refuses to report the truth because if might make the Preisdent look good.

WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

2007-03-10 05:32:26 · answer #3 · answered by ric9757 3 · 2 3

I find that people who refer to other people as dude usually have their mother still wiping their @ss !

I see you don't keep up with Yahoo answers because we have said it over and over again. The weapons were flown to Syria, just before the invasion. Obviously, you're too young to remember Desert Storm when Saddam flew his air planes to Iran so the Americans wouldn't destroy all of them. This just proves his MO of getting things out before he gets caught !

Besides being young, you must be stupid, too ! I say that because you are getting sucked in by the liberal democrats like Nancy Pelosi in believing our wounded are not being properly cared for, that's pure bullcrap !
Walter Reed and the VA do an excellant job of caring for these young, but damaged warriors. If anyone is to blame, it is the GA Department that is responsible for keeping up government facilities. This is run by bureancrats from both sides of the aisle, so don't go sticking your naive opinion in when you don't know shiit about what you're talking about !

As far as the homeless veterans are concerned, once again you have an opinion that makes no sense ! Those homeless vets are homeless because they chose to be, not because they can't afford anything better or that the government won't take care of them. Many of these people suffer from mental illness and refuse health care. Many have simply withdrawn from society and probably from the results of battle fatigue! So, once again, offer an opinion when you have an educated opinion to offer !

2007-03-10 05:57:31 · answer #4 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 2 1

Aside from what was found from the troops in Iraq, the majority of it is in Syria and Iran. We gave Saddam too much notice that we were coming and why we were coming. Would you like us to go into those countries to get them for you? As a taxpayer, I think you will owe a lot more taxes, if that happens.

2007-03-10 05:29:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

,You will only find WMD discussed in mass media coverage along with reports of:

- Gulf of Tonkein incident.
- 9/11 Government "Theory of Conspiracy"
- Lone gunman theory of the JFK assassination

I'm afraid you will not find WMD. In addition we may all lose, our standard of living because of the massive war deficits.

It is criminal how the government has forced the military into illegal and unnecessary wars and then provided substandard medical care to veterans.

Think of all the good that could have been done domestically and internationally with the money we gave away to contractors during the war. The very wealthy do not need more wealth and power.

I'm trying to learn how I can have compassion for leaders who promote vile atrocities in our name, lie, spin, and cover up.

2007-03-10 05:40:34 · answer #6 · answered by Skeptic 7 · 2 2

Actually, we did find some, numerous unspent artillery shells with inert chemical payloads and about 5000 pounds of sarin gas in barrells.

And according to this report, we found over 400,000 tons of weapons that were illegal under UN resolution #687:

https://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap5.html#

(Yes, folks, that's TONS.)

In the report, you'll read that Saddam had maintained his industrial capacity to produce WMDs, as well as all of his scientists, he was waiting for a means of circumventing the US Naval blockade to resume operations.

You'll also read in the report that Saddam found a way to circumvent operations through the Oil for Food Program.

2007-03-10 05:29:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

those mass destruction weapons where already destroyed in mass , by the UN , long before bush used this weapons as a excuse to attack Iraq

2007-03-10 06:27:13 · answer #8 · answered by general De Witte 5 · 0 2

If you think that there were no WMDs then please explain the two mustard gas artillery shells my unit recovered.

And to answer your question - the 500+ chemical weapons we recovered were flown to Johnson Island and destroyed.

2007-03-10 07:13:44 · answer #9 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1 0

we know by now there is none.
the money back I agree
health care, Ross Perot wanted to rise the gas tax 50 cent and take that money pay off the national dept. with the interest saved he would have then gotten heath care for all. to bad nobody voted for him. you all want, but you want pay for it.
most homeless want to be on the street they don't want a house or permanent place to live

2007-03-10 06:07:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers