if iraq didnt have WMDs?

Question

why did hussien play games with the UN inspectors for 12 yrs , by randomly throwing them out of the country then letting them back in. and if you remember correctly bush told hussien either you let the inspectors do thier jobs or you will pay the consiquences.


So for all those that can seem to remember what happened, why is it so hard for you to get your facts straight?


heres the question

If hussien had nothing to hide why did he play games with the UN?



why is it so hard to believe that the weapons were moved?


if i had 12yrs to hide something im sure i could

please i want serious answers , no bush or liberal bashing , just opinions to the points i have made


sorry for spelling im dyslexic i do my best

omar because i care about the world and feel everyone should be able to sample freedom and i think its a wonderful thing thats why

Answer 1

Good question!
AND I HAVE YOUR ANSWER!
Almost two years ago a team of researchers heard a rumor from returning American soldiers that WMD was being discovered in Iraq.
Now, we've heard about the "No WMD" from the libs as often as the stock market changes for 4 years, and they incessantly beat Bush bloody over it too.

Well, these guys get a court order, using the Freedom of Information Act and request all the Pentagon's documents about this stuff.
It turns out that as of 2005 coalition forces had recovered WMD (mostly Sarin nerve agants and Mustard gas) in nearly 600 different instances. all documented in the papers released to the researchers.

(I wish I could remember their names!...but I did hear their interview...guess where...not CNN, no not MSNBC or CBS...good ol' Sean Hannity was there to tell the truth!)

My question: is Bush that stupid he doesn't use this info to stop up the yaps of the freakin' libs and their own no WMD diatribes?
I've heard theories and reports of truck convoys to Syria, the Russians sneaking off with the stuff just before Gulf War II....may be its buried out in the desert?
We do know they've been finding the remnants of Saddam's huge WMD arsenal and, for what ever reason.. the administration has been keeping it quiet. and God knows why????

Answer 2

If the weapons were moved, why didn't we have any intelligence to that effect or find any evidence to suggest that after the fact?

"Playing games" is a relative term. Hussein was a militant leader, and he clearly didn't want to be fully compliant with the UN. He did use chemical weapons at times, so it is possible that he did in fact have secret weapons facilities at some point. The issue is whether or not he had weapons and/or a weapons program after 9/11. The UN gave him his last chance to comply with their searches, and he did. Their findings were that although there were some residual scraps from Saddam's old weapons programs, there was no current weapons production and there was not enough evidence to warrant military action. What we've seen since the beginning of the invasion backs up the UN's findings.

The case that the public was presented with stated that not only did he, without question, have WMDs in his possession, but he intended to produce more and had the capability of handing them off to terrorist groups including al-Qaeda. There has been no physical evidence to support those claims at all. Saying that he hid the weapons is like saying that there was a second shooter in the Kennedy assassination. Without any hard evidence it's a phantom argument that can not be rationally pursued.

Answer 3

I don't what's scarier. The fact that none were found or the stupid answers I see posted here.
Iraq used WMDs on the Kurds in the North following Gulf War 1, which is why we insisted on Inspectors to go. This, in conjuction with, our actually seeing these as we entered Iraq the first time. Plus, the world has video footage of Iraq's deployment of these weapons during the Iran/Iraq war.
Since we went in we have NOT found these weapon stores. What we HAVE found is that Iraq DID move these weapons into Jordan under the auspices of Humanitarian Aide, follow some flash floods that debilitated certain regions of Jordan.
With the delicate peace between Israel and Jordan, I think it is important to note that we have not sought to enter Jordan to have these weapons disposed of.

Answer 4

First djominous20, you don't need to apologize for being dyslexic and misspelling something here or there. We all do it no matter how hard we try. I am not dyslexic and I have my share of typos!

Second: Iraq DID have WMD's. He used them on his own people numerous times. One instance being the mass slaughter of the Kurds with nerve gas in Northern Iraq. No matter how any of the politicians back peddle to try to distance themselves from this "failure" in Iraq, they are on record of saying that they too believe the intelligence and that Iraq had WMD's and they voted to authorize the war. Saddam Hussein had plenty of warning we were coming, the WMD's were more than likely moved to some place like Syria or some other Saddam friendly country. They are still uncovering mass graves of the people Saddam slaughtered. Even if they were not move to another country Iraq is roughly the size of the state of California, that is a LOT of area to bury whatever you don't want found. And remember, the same people who say there are not/were no WMD's are the same people that were saying that al quada is not in Iraq and have/had no ties to Saddam Hussein. If we really wanted the oil in Iraq, believe me, we could have taken it by now without staying to help rebuild the country.

Answer 5

Listen, you have to review the interview tapes with Saddam while he was in captivity. He was a master of starting rumors; for instance, he would start false coups to test the loyalty of his followers. If people on the inside were manipulated into joining the false coup, he would have them assassinated.

Also, do you remember when the US thought he had body doubles? Well, he never did, he only did this to confuse US intelligence.

Lastly, he explained, in detail, how he falsified WMD's to scare the US and other surrounding countries. Unfortunitly for him, he did such a good job that it became believable. However, he stopped doing this for quite some time before the war. Why then did we still attack Iraq if there was no further intelligence? Because the Iraqi informant known as "curveball" started to falsify intelligence to the German government to lessen his imprisonment time. Curveball picked up where Saddam left off.

Look up "curveball" to see who really falsified the intelligence. We basically went to war beacuse of this lying $%# who never even graduated college.

Answer 6

The U.N. inspectors indeed did their jobs. Bush was the one who insisted they leave when they told him there were no WMDs in Iraq. The latest investigations by our own intelligence agencies, not the U.N., re-affirms there were no WMDs and FOIA actions by several organizations have forced the release of numerous documents detailing that Bush was told again and again there were no WMDs, there was no Iraqi connection with Al Quaida and that the scumsuckers who attacked us on 9/11 were common criminals who happened to be Saudi, not Iraqi. Now all 19 of our security agencies, including CIA and NSA, are telling George the Iranians are not building nukes and in fact put a stop to their nuclear weapons program in 2003...four years ago. And he's still trying to say we gotta stop Iran's nuclear weapons program. What's wrong with this picture?

By the way - the chemical weapons Saddam used on the Kurds were provided him by the United States. Iraq at the time didn't even have the facilities to manufacture their own chemical weapons. Wild, huh?

Answer 7

The same reason anyone who thinks the UN is irrelevant, like neocons keeps whining, would play the same games.

Maybe you should ask the CIA, since they are the ones making the claims. You obviously know so much more about the secret operations of other countries than our own spy programs do. But lets just ignore the fact that all your information is gathered through half twisted black-white logic that the world obviously doesn't work in. that really is only a minor technicality.
Maybe you should go work for Bush so you can get paid more to be his apologist!

Don't know how it could be made any more plain to you, we went into Iraq, because our spy satillites caught a glimpse of things that looked like mobile weapons labs, and a defector said "sure sure, that is exactly what they are, now can I have my green card and $500 American?" If the weapons would have been moved, we would have nticed the big carvans of heavy equipment hauling them out of Iraq.
We found them, they weren't. better luck next time!

The only thing that was getting hauled out of Iraq, was the oil that was getting smuggled out to skirt trade sanction that allowed only a limted amount to be trade for necessities and food.

if you want to pretend to be a logical thinker, try to pretend what you would do, being the next door neighbor of your enemy, who had a nuclear weapons program going on, as the Bush admin claims Iran did, even if you didn't have one yourself.
i'll tell you what you would do.....BLUFF your buns off!

Answer 8

We know he had certain items (old WWII nerve gas and anthrax) because the US gave those to him and those were accountable, we knew where they were. As for any thing else, it never existed, Saddam was bluffing for appearance sake to keep his enemies (Iran, Syria, Israel) off guard. Even given 12 years you actually think he totally hid all his WMDs, all the production facilities for the WMDs, and all documentation and witnesses of the WMDs? And where exactly are you proposing he hid all of these things? Nothing was found in Iraq that we didn't already know about (see above).

Answer 9

Yes, they could ahve been moved. Or, Saddam had the components prepared for quick and easy assembly, and tried to convince the authorities that the components were for "peaceful" uses.

Possibly Saddam was bluffing, thinking that exaggerating his capabilities would prevent an attack - from Iran, the US, or anyone. But he didn't figure on 9/11 and the call by many for Bush to "connect the dots" and prevent future attacks. So any exaggeration of bluff ultimately made us more likely to attack, not less.

Answer 10

It wasn't whether or not Iraq had WMDs that annoys me, it's that UNSOCOM had a a right and responsability to ensure he didn't. When Saddam refused, the US had the right to ensure he didn't by enforcing UN Resolution 687 section 13 in accordance with the Gulf war treaty.

As for the dipshit who was talking about chlorine bombs as chemical weapons, chlorine bombs are homemade, by insurgants.

Sageands: WTF??? 12 UN resolutions from 1991 to 2002 were passed all but begging Saddam to allow inspectors to inspect everything. Saddam would continuely kick them out.

At the time there were thousands of lbs of pre-Gulf War chemical muntions unaccounted for. (Still are)

Answer 11

You have been given the answer by a few. He didn't want to appear weak to his enemies. At the same time he thought the CIA knew he was lying and The US already knew he had none. He thought the CIA was all knowing and he wanted nothing more than to be our ally again. He was working on leaving Iraq though once he realized the US was really going to invade