It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Numerous bunkers, including eleven cruciform shaped bunkers were exploited. Some of the bunkers were empty. Some of the bunkers contained large quantities of unfilled chemical munitions, conventional munitions, one-ton shipping containers, old disabled production equipment (presumed disabled under UNSCOM supervision), and other hazardous industrial chemicals.
originally posted by: James1982
originally posted by: buster2010
The OP seemed to have forgot this little part from the article.
Although declared, the bunkers contents have yet to be confirmed.
So nobody really knows what was in those bunkers for all we know they could have been the CW's that Rumsfeld sold to Hussein. Now the question is why did Bush and his cronies not destroy these chemical plants before he signed the paperwork that made us cut and run from Iraq?
10 years of American occupation and you seriously think we never peeked inside the bunker to see what it was? That's utterly absurd to think that the American government doesn't know exactly what's in that bunker. If it IS chemical weapons, that means huge lies. If it's NOT chemical weapons, it still means huge lies.
You defense of Obama is achieving laughable levels... good job!
Well isn't that the reason US invaded Iraq, took Saddam out of power and then allowed his execution?
The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:
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."
originally posted by: macman
originally posted by: buster2010
Now the question is why did Bush and his cronies not destroy these chemical plants before he signed the paperwork that made us cut and run from Iraq?
Because they were never there, as declared by every Progressive............after they agreed that there was WMDs.
originally posted by: Stormdancer777
I don't see why it is so hard to believe Saddam had WMDs.
I don't get it.
originally posted by: amazing
So let me get this straight. We've been in Iraq for over 10 years. and not just us, British and other UN troops. And not just troops but specialists and investigators and Chemical Weapons inspectors etc etc etc. And not once, in those 10 years did anyone find any Chemical Weapons? LOL Really?
Editing to add, that there has been a huge, like 10 year running argument whether Iraq ever had any chemical weapons in the first place, despite all kinds of evidence that they used it on their own people.
Next thought, is that in those ten years, if we did find Chemical Weapons, we would just leave them sitting around in stockpiles? That is retarded.
With an area of 437,072 square kilometers (168,753 square miles) Read more: www.nationsencyclopedia.com...
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DeadSeraph
You bush supporters are hilarious. You STILL can't accept the fact the man you voted for lied the nation into a war.
I guess this has to be posted for those who don't bother reading the thread.
Bush 'lies' eh.
Why is this the standard defense of Bush supporters? Why do you point at Democrats and say "THEY DID IT TOO" as if that somehow makes it ok?
originally posted by: crazyewok
Well looks like our Politicians are trying to BS us again.
I don't think "OMG WMD IN IRAQ" will work again.....
That is an ignorrant statement because they would have been justified by the un to stop the incursion by isis and needed no extra push of info for support on the matter. the truth is the wmd's have always been there and it looks like our leaders in the us wants isis to have control of them. The statement "see you in new york" comes to mind. How about a commercial jet liner filled with these wmd's coming to the u.s. being drivin by a former gitmo prisioner and ats poster now banned.
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.
The country didn't have a problem with it when Clinton,and company SAID THE EXACT SAME GD THING.
Enter GWB oh hell, he's just a liar !
In case someone didn't read the GD op WMDS WERE/ARE IN IRAQ.
But hey who cares right.
Bush lied, and blah,blah,blah.
originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: neo96
of course there was chemical weapons in Iraq and there very well may be more of them laying around. Consider that even in camp fallujah they had a destroyed gas chamber that turned into USMC berthing for a time, kind of eerie looking at a half destroyed building with paintings of arabs in chem suits. Point here is that even in trace amounts they used to use live agents in that chamber for training purposes. Outside of that (my spelling my be off here) on the north western side outside camp fallujah heading north from msr michegan there was a string of villages at the designated Shiahabi villages 1, 2, and 3. In this location you would find stock piles of russian style gas masks, suits, and canisters. A bit farther on down near the red crescent hospital you would find UXO in the form of unexploded but dropped Iraqi and American bombs and rockets with god knows what in the Iraqi weaponry. Traces of chemical weaponry are found all over the country.