Chemical weapons found in iraq.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Did they find WMDs in Iraq?

I think they are US WMD that were hidden there to attack Iran, forgotten by the US, and re-descovered a year later.

They found over 100 canisters and parts from inert chemical and biological weapons which dated back to the mid-80's. If Iraq was smart, they could have used the weapons as evidence to get Reagan's senile wrinkly ass in jail for violating international law, along with Bush's daddy and the Iran contra boys.

they have already been several chemical weapons used by the insurrgents against coalition troops in iraq...granted they were old, low grade weapons and have been few in number but they were there and they were used

thats great...but how was this a threat posed against the u.s.

perhaps it wasnt...but perhaps i could care less about threats to the US

didnt expect you to.

my reason for asking was for my next question:
where are the wmd's which were supposed to be used in an attack
on the u.s......the reason for going to war. of coarse thats not directed
at you, but if you have a good answer please state it.

In my pants mofo

that about the answer you're looking for

took me ages to think of it...hope it's good enough

or how about

we think we know what we knew we know we know but what we dont know is the known knowny known knowns from knew knows and unknown knowns if you know what we know we knew that you didn't know we known...then the uknown knowns would be knew and known

thank you...thank you...here all week...available for weddings and bar mitzvahs

ok........anyone else?

i've got a better idea

how about we discuss why the Clinton Administration made up excuses to not go into Rwanda when nearly a million people were massacred in 3 months (thats a rate the Nazis could only dream of) and even used its influence at the UN to stop other countries from intervening

that'll be a fun discussion

right to clinton. why dont we drag truman from his grave and beat him like a piniata for not advancing past the 38th parallel? or we can focus on current events...you know...the topic

Originally posted by PVS
right to clinton. why dont we drag truman from his grave and beat him like a piniata for not advancing past the 38th parallel? or we can focus on current events...you know...the topic

I hate to point out there doesn't seem to have been a topic.

Originally posted by PVS
right to clinton. why dont we drag truman from his grave and beat him like a piniata for not advancing past the 38th parallel? or we can focus on current events...you know...the topic

well if you're going to beat on republicans for being republican you can hardly pin the blame on me that we have to hark back so far into ye olde days to find the last democrat president and sling some shit right back

ok weapons of mass destruction....have some been found in Iraq?

yes

have some been used against US troops in Iraq?

yes

did we go to war because we said Saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

yes

did the UN threaten Iraq with serious consequences for having weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

yes

did the UN actually get its finger out and do anything about it?

it sent in inspectors

had these inspectors been given the run around by Iraq for 10 years prior to this

yes

Did Iraq finally change its mind about letting inspectors back in after the US threatened to blow the shit out of them?

yes

even then did Iraq produce a deliberately misleading 10,000 page document stating that it didn't actually document the destruction of its WMD's and that we just had to take their word for it...despite the fact the the UN demanded, not only their destruction (which didnt happen entirely because some were found) as well as documentation of their destruction (which they admitted they didn't do)?

yes

were also the removal of the regime and the stopping of the mass genocide (which has been documented and are still being documented and which only 50 or so of the 250 mass graves have been found and those 50 graves have contained over 300,000 bodies) also put forward as reasons for going into Iraq but were considered unacceptable reasons by all sides of the political spectrum and the American people are reasons for getting of their asses and doing something about it?

yes

is the Death toll in Iraq actually far less now than it was under the Saddam regime...its just we here about it more now than we did before?

yes

isnt the war in iraq actually part of the war on terror and its documented that Iraq funded suicide and bombings in Israel and rewarded the families of those suicide bombers?...thus being supporters of terror?

yes

like conversing with yourself?
its interesting to watch...shall we call it masturdebating?

we went to war under the certain knowledge that hussein was developing...developing...DEVELOPING weapons of mass destruction. instead all they found was depleated chemical weapons courtesy of reagan 20+ years ago.
if you can say "same thing" and hold a straight face, i must say i admire your mastery of bullshit.

You are a moron.
Thanks.
The US doesn't give a shit about genocide, Thats provable over and over again, thats not the reason, and its never been a reason why we wen't to war.
Show me proof of any WMD's used against troops.
Find any source to back up anything you are saying.
Oh and the resume thing has been proven to be bullshit, just to be fair in who I'm criticizing..
and about teh artical posted, you only have to read down a bit and you get this snippet...
"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."
Brilliant...
I rest my case...

yeah...but....CLINTON!!! 😠

This is what I was reading on the subject of Iraq's chemical weapons today:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060622/pl_afp/usiraqmilitaryweapons_060622191218

Basically those weapons are outdated.

"They" found chemical weapons in Iraq??

Strange that no european has heard a word about that...

Originally posted by jaden101
is the Death toll in Iraq actually far less now than it was under the Saddam regime...its just we here about it more now than we did before?

yes

Could you back that statement up with some numbers please?

Originally posted by jaden101
isnt the war in iraq actually part of the war on terror and its documented that Iraq funded suicide and bombings in Israel and rewarded the families of those suicide bombers?...thus being supporters of terror?

That's quite a stretch. If Bush was serious about the war on terror he would have finished the job in Afghanistan rather than head to Iraq. He would have also gone after other governments that have far stronger ties to terrorist groups than Iraq.

If Bush was serious about the WMD issue, then he would be making a b-line striaght to Korea.

These were all convenient excuses.

Well, if we had to compare the civilian deaths under Saddam under his rule all over the time he spent in power and compare it with the civilian deaths under the US occupation (2003), I think the latter outnumbers.

So... less civilians have died in three years than during all of Saddam Husseins regime? Is that supposed to be good news????
And what does that have to do with KIDROCKS alleged rumour that "they" (who, aliens?) found chemical weapons in Iraq? After three years?

Am I the only one who'll not buy that after so long and who has a small voice going "Okay, chemical weapons... who put them there"?