2007-05-01 08:48:27 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I know what chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons are considered WMDs, that doesn't meant Iraq had any.
2007-05-01 08:53:07 · answer #1 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
WOW.. how'd you work that out.. did you do it all alone.. or did mommy help you with it..
Ummm.... Deeeerrrrrr!!!
If you though WMD=nuclear weapons.. then you were never well informed!
Most of the informed.. which includes most liberals.. we knew what WMD's were 5-7 years ago.. before the iraq war started..
Alas.. it's always good to see progress in the ranks of the ill-informed..
2007-05-01 16:04:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
About a year ago Bill O'Reilly broadcast an announcement about the discovery of Saddam's chemical weapons cache. Turns out some old discarded munitions had been dug up from some dump site out in the desert somewhere.
No doubt had Saddam had the foresight to dig these up himself, O'Reilly and the crowd of slathering neocons would have been appeased, and called off our unprovoked war.
Right.
We used chemical weapons against Iraq during the 2003 invasion, and lied to the british about having done so. For as bad a guy as Saddam was, he never deployed such weapons against invading US troops. This time he wasn't even able to launch any of his SCUDs, UN weapons inspectors had made him dismantle and destroy.
I am not disappointed our invasion was easy and (aside from friendly fire) nearly bloodless--for us. I am disappointed we invaded a country without provocation and upon false, trumped up pretexts in the first place. My disappointment was exacerbated by our torture and subsequent execution of dozens of iraqi prisoners. How morally superior we are, engaging in the very same barbarous acts we accuse Saddam of committing (and worse).
2007-05-01 16:12:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think people have been aware of that from when the term WMD was first talked about 7 years or so ago.
2007-05-01 15:53:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Actually accordin to defintion they can even be conventional if there is enough quantity or destructive power.
And if you go with homeland security's definition Iraq had literally thousands of tons of WMD's
2007-05-01 15:53:50 · answer #5 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I understand what WMD's are.
When somebody says "mushroom clouds over our cities", I think nuclear.
2007-05-01 15:55:00 · answer #6 · answered by davethenayber 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That is correct. And still no WMD's were found in Iraq.
2007-05-01 16:01:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I guess you'd have to ask "most people." See you in a couple years.
2007-05-01 15:51:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I knew that -- I hope most people do to.
2007-05-01 15:52:37 · answer #9 · answered by jj raider 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes
http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/declassdocs/dia/19950901/950901_22431050_91r.html
2007-05-01 16:12:32 · answer #10 · answered by here to help 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋