WMD's were found in Iraq

[dmahurin]

WMD's are chemical, biological, nuclear, or radiological weapons.

Here's a report from the DOD that says munitions containing mustard and sarin gas were found in Iraq.

http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918

Here's a report from the house select comittee on intelligence stating the same thing.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...Iac5L9Cm-FUqLw

No nutjob links, but real evidence showing stockpiles of WMD's did in fact exist in Iraq. Just throwing it out for the "bush lied, people died" crowd.

[LiveSteam]

On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, all are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.[115]
These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said


But hey its only good for 3-5 years cause Scott Ritter says so

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." However, all are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.[115]
These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said


But hey its only good for 3-5 years cause Scott Ritter says so

That is a damn strong argument.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

That is a damn strong argument.

agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said

How could this be? Do tell grandson of Einstein

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

That is a damn strong argument.

Makes you wonder why the democrats sold the war hard to the public and went to great lengths telling the American voter Saddam either had WMD or would develop them if we didn't act.

Democrats own the Iraq war just as much as Bush does.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Just so people don;t get all hyper about this report. First its old news. The reason its old news is that the weapons were from the Iran/Iraq war. They were so old, they would not have worked even if someone tried to use them.

This was no smoking gun. Saddam was not making WMD. The reason for the war was BS.

Speaking of old news, all of this ground has already been covered. In this short thread. Including the false nature of your final sentence.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Actually, the shelf life of the stuff Saddam was known to have was less, more like 3-5 years.

This is completely false. Do you just make this stuff up or is there a fringe website out there that you rely on?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Even the W administration years ago started blaming the lack of WMDs on intelligence failures. I understand you want to stand up for your hero Cheney, but trying to defend the war based on the alleged unknown whereabouts of useless remnants of "WMDs" is quite ludicrous.

I've addressed this in a previous response. I agree with the Bush administration about how faulty intel led to some pre-war beliefs not panning out. This is a different issue and the existence of these remnants from Saddam's pre-sanctions stockpiles more than proves the Bush pre-war claims on it.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Actually, the shelf life of the stuff Saddam was known to have was less, more like 3-5 years.

You do realize that when you tell an outright LIE here, someone is going to call you out on it, right?

I have no clue where you read this or if you simply pulled this out of your ass but this is 100% factually incorrect.

Originally Posted by THE U.N. in 2003

The Sulfur Mustard contained in artillery shells that had been stored for over 12 years, had been found by UNMOVIC to be still of high purity. It is possible that viable filled artillery shells and aerial bombs still remain in Iraq.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by patteeu

This is completely false. Do you just make this stuff up or is there a fringe website out there that you rely on?

Originally Posted by AustinChief

You do realize that when you tell an outright LIE here, someone is going to call you out on it, right?

I have no clue where you read this or if you simply pulled this out of your ass but this is 100% factually incorrect.

I relied on the chief UN weapons inspector. I guess he could have been lying.

[LiveSteam]

He gets it from Wikipedia. Just like everything else he spews.
& this paragraph is what BRC & him are both quoting as fact,I fricking guarantee it

.
Scott Ritter (ARGUED) that the WMDs Saddam had in his possession all those years ago, if retained, would have long since turned to harmless substances. He stated that Iraqi Sarin and tabun have a shelf life of approximately five years, VX lasts a bit longer (but not much longer), and finally he said botulinum toxin and liquid anthrax last about three years.

Arguments are now facts in the new America

[cosmo20002]

Scott Ritter: Well, look: As of December 1998 we had accounted for 90 to 95 percent of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capability -- "we" being the weapons inspectors. We destroyed all the factories, all of the means of production and we couldn't account for some of the weaponry, but chemical weapons have a shelf-life of five years. Biological weapons have a shelf-life of three years. To have weapons today, they would have had to rebuild the factories and start the process of producing these weapons since December 1998.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/m...m.ritter.cnna/

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

He gets it from Wikipedia. Just like everything else he spews.
& this paragraph is what BRC & him are both quoting as fact,I fricking guarantee it

.
Scott Ritter (ARGUED) that the WMDs Saddam had in his possession all those years ago, if retained, would have long since turned to harmless substances. He stated that Iraqi Sarin and tabun have a shelf life of approximately five years, VX lasts a bit longer (but not much longer), and finally he said botulinum toxin and liquid anthrax last about three years.

Arguments are now facts in the new America

You are really...not smart.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Scott Ritter: Well, look: As of December 1998 we had accounted for 90 to 95 percent of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capability -- "we" being the weapons inspectors. We destroyed all the factories, all of the means of production and we couldn't account for some of the weaponry, but chemical weapons have a shelf-life of five years. Biological weapons have a shelf-life of three years. To have weapons today, they would have had to rebuild the factories and start the process of producing these weapons since December 1998.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/m...m.ritter.cnna/

So says Ritter. Other's think his shelf life is just a lil off

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

You are really...not smart.

Is that supposed to offend me Einstein? What contribution's to humanity have you made? You are nothing more than a lil piss-ant that likes to hump my leg.
Fry cook

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

He gets it from Wikipedia. Just like everything else he spews.
& this paragraph is what BRC & him are both quoting as fact,I fricking guarantee it

.
Scott Ritter (ARGUED) that the WMDs Saddam had in his possession all those years ago, if retained, would have long since turned to harmless substances. He stated that Iraqi Sarin and tabun have a shelf life of approximately five years, VX lasts a bit longer (but not much longer), and finally he said botulinum toxin and liquid anthrax last about three years.

Arguments are now facts in the new America

This is twice now that you have lumped me in with Cosmos as one and the same. Why do you continue to that?

I don't ****ing need Wikipedia to view DOD documents. I guarantee that.

When this report came out it was a big deal and the DOD released some information in their findings. Google it yourself and find it. I was just stating the conclusion.