It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile' - live

page: 13
74
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok




Not my problem you live in a paranoid nanny state.


A paranoid nanny state who seems to think chemical weapons, and materials in a bunker complex doesn't seem to matter very much.

But if that was here ?

Be a totally different story. Making the nightly news.



And I keep asking you.

IF there was REALLY active Chemical weapons there, then WHY the hell would our coalition forces not have picked up on it? Chemical plants should be the first place they would look! If they were really there then our troops would have found them and Bush and co waving around saying "HEY LOOK I TOLD YOU SO!"

So tell me why did that not happen?
edit on 20-6-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




IF there was REALLY active Chemical weapons there, then WHY the hell would or coalition forces not have picked up on it?


Because they were fighting a war ?



Quote Stockpiles of chemical munitions are still stored there. The most dangerous ones have been declared to the UN and are sealed in bunkers.


After 14 YEARS.

AFTER 14 YEARS.

No one ever bothered to go look ?

As was stated earlier in the thread.

That is a question of two US administrations.

And the Iraqi government.

Because common sense say that should have been the first thing done.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96



Because they were fighting a war ?

Thats got to be the silliest excuse I have ever heard!

They were in Iraq FOR that EXACT reason. To find WMD! You had dedicated teams set up for that!

You don't just send some Yahoo's in with guns in war.

Everyone trained to do a job, every team is trained to do a certain job. Yeah your front line cannon fodder wont be doing much searching I guess but only a moron wouldn't believe the army of rear echelon personal are just there to take up space.

Im speechless you even try that excuse I mean really.

The war they were fighting WAS OVER WMD's! They were there to FIND THEM! Not just shoot guys.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
Im not denying they had WMD pre 1991.

Im arguing after the 1st gulf war they didn't make anymore and the remaining WMD just decayed into inactivity. Hence why they didnt find anything in 2003.


Be careful how you phrase and view the situation -- "not finding anything" and being told "we didn't find anything" are two different things. Especially when the "being told" part comes from a group of lying socio/psychopaths.

The problem that we have (as we discuss this) is that the story was Iraq had nuclear grade materials - aluminum tubes for enrichment, and yellow cake uranium. Remember "Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons." That was a lie as we both know.

I think we are looking in the wrong place. According to an Iraqi General who wrote a book - Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein.

In the book he claims that 2002 Saddam moved his chemical weapons to Syria. AHEM. A HEM!
edit on 20-6-2014 by WCmutant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

And to add.

The war was over in a couple of months anyway, or did bush about the mission accomplished?

I though most of the last 10 years was mopping up?

If so not much effort to secure a chemical plant to check.

IE the first place they should check.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:10 PM
link   
I had a long search on the OP link to find out just who
states that ISIL now has a cache' of CW at their disposal....

found the source : State department (Ain't that where the lying Hillary worked & created the 'fact' that Benghazi was a civil disturbance created in response to an anti Mohammed video... yeah lets believe the State Department now)


...
16.32
Isis jihadists have seized a chemical weapons facility built by Saddam Hussein which contains a stockpile of old weapons, State Department officials have told the Wall Street Journal:

Quote U.S. officials don't believe the Sunni militants will be able to create a functional chemical weapon from the material. The weapons stockpiled at the Al Muthanna complex are old, contaminated and hard to move, officials said.

Nonetheless, the capture of the chemical-weapon stockpile by the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, known as ISIS or ISIL, the militant group that is seizing territory in the country, has grabbed the attention of the U.S.

"We remain concerned about the seizure of any military site by the ISIL," Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in a written statement. "We do not believe that the complex contains CW materials of military value and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials." ..



if the USA intel investigated this or the Iraqi military reported this...& the State Dept. is just mouthing Oak Desk Analysis instead of actual, physical evidence that the decades old chemical weapons were unstable &/or unusable remains to be seen

I read a comment in another article that cited a Saddam announcement that he had produced some 5,000 gallons of Botulism, some 2,000 gallons of Anthrax, along with small quantities of other chemical agents-made-in-Iraq


why hasn't Iraq the democracy already destroyed these unstable artillery shells &/or drums of chemical agents in the years since 2009 while getting military aid from the U.S. to also do away with that hazardous stuff ?

I think only the Anthrax can be traced back to a Saddam Hussein act of manufacture and not actually be New Chemical Weapons manufactured and planted there recently for a 'false flag' event to 'happen' by ISIL provocation~ or else a complete ISIL use of CW fabrication so as to garner world-wide comdenation

edit on th30140329904220172014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




The war they were fighting WAS OVER WMD's! They were there to FIND THEM! Not just shoot guys.


No it wasn't for anyone who bother to read the GD Iraq war resolution

There was NO single reason.



Contents The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
Iraq "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability" and "actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability" posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them. The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power. Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.
"


en.wikipedia.org...

But hell IGNORE It.
edit on 20-6-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
I'm not believing the "official" story either...much more likely the Obama gang provided the chemical weapons to Syrian rebels, who blamed the use of chem weapons on Assad. Now ISIS, composed of our Obama's Syrian rebel pals, are going to use them in Iraq.....Obama has to get ahead of this one with the Iraq WMD story.

On the bright side, a Gallup poll shows that almost nobody believes a word from MSM....which says Obama's propaganda may just come back to bite him (although I think the media will always defend the most scandalous president ever).



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

And one of the reasons was WMD's its says in the print


Buy as you said hell ignore it.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Think about it...

1. 2003/2004 Chemical weapons aren't found!
2. 2006 Iraqi General writes book claiming in 2002 Saddam moved his chemical weapons to Syria
3. 2012 ISIS and al-CIA-DA trained at secret Jordan base to launch assault in Syria
4. 2013 we aid Syrian Rebels to overtake chemical weapons stores in Syria that were formerly Saddam's
5. 2013 sarin gas used by Syrian Rebels (including al-CIA-da) and blamed on Assad (prob. from Saddam's Syrian storage)
6. 2014 ISIS (ISIL) moves through Iraq retaking many cities and now claims "they have Saddam's WMDs!"

Hmmm, seriously. The WMDs didn't come from Iraq, but from Syria even though they were originally Iraq's/Saddam's.

This makes the most logical sense.
edit on 20-6-2014 by WCmutant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: WCmutant

i think the same concept. I mean our military walked every inch of iraq pretty mush to find Saddam in what they called a "spider hole" if i remember correctly, AND NEVER FOUND THESE OVER 14 YEARS..?
This is just an excuse to invade Syria and put military back into Iraq for Iran next..



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills

originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: JJRichey

Also wanted to remind you (not that these are pleasent to remember)


Do you remember all the chlorine bombs that guerillas used to use in ramadi and fallujah? Those are chemical weapons too are they not? I mean granted they are not exactly military manufactured but still none the less are chemical in nature and highly lethal and those are apparently easily made with materials in high abundance just laying around.


Of course, anytime you use a chemical as a weapon its considered a chemical weapon. A good example of this is white phosphorous. When used to just light up an area it is not considered a chemical weapon, but use it against human beings for the purpose of killing them it then becomes a chemical weapon. Military grade or not, a weapon is a weapon.


Exactly! tv says chemical weapon what does that mean? Starred



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Biological Hazard in Jordan on Sunday, 13 April, 2014 at 01:48 (01:48 AM) UTC.

hisz.rsoe.hu...

Coincidence?

I hope so.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
Because they are lying through their teeth to fabricate a reason to get the war machine rolling again.

Was it Westley Clark that said "when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail" ? Somebody said that.

Something has the US government (more likely the banking cartels that employ the USG) spooked to the point of desperation.

"when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail" I like that one!



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

It's really old stuff, leaky and weakened, unstable. If these fools try to use it they will be unable to safely move it... They will most likely only harm themselves if they do.

That said, the US presence in Iraq is the problem... The Sunnis and Shiites hate us.. if they could ever work together or cooperate, it would be in a plot to kill Americans...

We should get out completely now... Or expect the worst eventually.

IMO



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: WCmutant
Think about it...

1. 2003/2004 Chemical weapons aren't found!
2. 2006 Iraqi General writes book claiming in 2002 Saddam moved his chemical weapons to Syria
3. 2012 ISIS and al-CIA-DA trained at secret Jordan base to launch assault in Syria
4. 2013 we aid Syrian Rebels to overtake chemical weapons stores in Syria that were formerly Saddam's
5. 2013 sarin gas used by Syrian Rebels (including al-CIA-da) and blamed on Assad (prob. from Saddam's Syrian storage)
6. 2014 ISIS (ISIL) moves through Iraq retaking many cities and now claims "they have Saddam's WMDs!"

Hmmm, seriously. The WMDs didn't come from Iraq, but from Syria even though they were originally Iraq's/Saddam's.

This makes the most logical sense.


Full test of Colin powell's speech before the UN in 2003

Maybe this will help with resolution 1441 and Powell's speech and how they knew there were WMD's. Basically the sales pitch before the UN. Interesting short read. Might shed a little light on timeline and thinking at that time.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: DelMarvel
Also from the OP's link:



17.05 The Chemical Weapons Convention, which Iraq joined in 2009, requires it to dispose of the material at Al Muthanna, even though it was declared unusable and "does not pose a significant security risk"


Declared by who ?


By the same people who didn't see the 'fall' of Iraq coming.



The point being that if we're going to accept the credibility of the OP's article reporting that the stockpile was found why aren't we accepting the credibility of the article when it reports the stockpile is unusable?

Confirmation bias?


The people who run this country have no credibility as they DID NOT see the events in Iraq coming.

or in Syria, or in Libya.

Because of the people who are saying they are 'unusable'.



I'm sorry....the people who run this country did not see what was going to happen in Iraq? Are you even reading what you're typing? Bush declared war on he country! For events that they were not associated with for things they did not even have in their country (WMD's)..and don't say they just now found them after all this time, if they did..its because we have controlled the country since we attacked and its much easier to traffic this crap across a border that you own. You are a shill aren't you? You are doing everything possible to keep your job here......your logic can be shot down by rational proof on the internet and even some MSM material. You have no legs here pal...don't know why you're trying so hard. You want to lie and get people to believe you...become a politician and the sheep that show up at your circus will believe you. I am reading your material and am laughing at damn near every one. You are a comedian here...you know that RIGHT?
edit on 20-6-2014 by Illuminawty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 10:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok




IF there was REALLY active Chemical weapons there, then WHY the hell would or coalition forces not have picked up on it?


Because they were fighting a war ?



Quote Stockpiles of chemical munitions are still stored there. The most dangerous ones have been declared to the UN and are sealed in bunkers.


After 14 YEARS.

AFTER 14 YEARS.

No one ever bothered to go look ?

As was stated earlier in the thread.

That is a question of two US administrations.

And the Iraqi government.

Because common sense say that should have been the first thing done.




.
Searched every bunker and every cave and even "allegedly" found Osama under the freaking ground...in a spider hole within months, but 14 years...and they now find the WMD which would have been one of the most important strongholds in the country....#2 to Saddam....the leader of the country . Are you really going to keep talking Ha Ha. Ill give you one thing. No interrogation could ever get you to admit failure. Your wife could find you in bed with stranger and you would probably incessantly try to convince her that you were giving her a medical exam. I respect your persistence, but at this point its just getting to be hilarious in the face of real evidence that a monkey could find online.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

My my, soooo clever! But come on now, we all know demons use technology as their soul harvesting tool of choice.

I mean is it THAT far outside of the realm of possibility that WMD was moved out of the Iraq while Bush and the Congress at the time debated and discussed. I remember at the time that they were concerned about CW moving across the Iraqi border into countries like Syria and Jordan. Any CW attacks in those countries recently?

It's easy to say Bush lied people died, but EVERYONE in the intelligence community both foreign and domestic had STRONG evidence for WMD at the time, we waited months before we actually put boots on the ground but I guess that is just not enough time to hide anything? The liberal movement is predicated on lies and BS (Blatant Skullduggery)



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: kix

NO WAY not while this president is in office. But I do foresee a major problem in Jordan soon within the next 8 months. I have been reading about the influx of refugees from the Syrian conflict and with these new events in Iraq they are expecting to see more and more people escaping the violence. CBS News Story




top topics



 
74
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join