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.

 

US has found some 500 Chemical Weapons in Iraq

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   
After reading this thread a thought popped into my mind. Why didn't GWB have a lab ready to go so that when they marched into Iraq a secret intelligence unit could quickly set it up and then yell, "VOILA!" Here is the reason we had to invade.

It would have made his life so much easier.

Just a passing thought,

wupy

[edit on 21-6-2006 by mrwupy]




posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
this should be big news. why is it not being picked up by the major news sources??



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Here is the link to the document itself, its pretty clear WMD's were found.

The Document -- Declassified

-- Boat



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrwupy
After reading this thread a thought popped into my mind. Why didn't GWB have a lab ready to go so that when they marched into Iraq a secret intelligence unit could quickly set it up and then yell, "VOILA!" Here is the reason we had to invade.

It would have made his life so much easier.
[edit on 21-6-2006 by mrwupy]


Agreed, but it almost seems that this Administration is intent upon rubbing the world's nose in their mess and laughing while they do it. In a way it's almost like they are daring the world to question them.

On the other hand, I have heard some speculate that the goal (in the context of globalization/NWO) is to make us look like renegade cowboys that can't be trusted in order to generate worldwide sympathy for organizations like the UN.

Either could be plausible, but I agree that with the resources at the U.S.'s disposal there is no reason that a ruse could not have been executed to ensure the validity of our causus belli. I suspect that the mere fact that such an effort has not been undergone is telling on its own.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I heard an interesting interview on the radio tonight with Curt Weldon about this, I think the show is called “Savage Nation” but I had not heard it before so don’t know much about it. The host sounded like a bag of wind, but the interview was compelling none the less.

Weldon said the total classified report is several dozen pages long and goes into great detail including a report about US inspectors into Syria confirming documentation exists that WMD was transferred to Syria.

The 500 WMD found supposedly predates the 1991 war, and the report details how Saddam concealed WMD in a number of ways including private airlines from the UN inspectors. The classified report also includes information about 4 caches of WMD large enough to drive a semi truck through that have yet to be inventoried.

The classified report is also rumored to mention assistance to Iraq in hiding WMD by three nations; specifically Russia, China, and France. If that is indeed true, it would explain why the administration would conceal the information, because pissing on 3 members of the UN Security Council isn’t a good move politically for Bush.

I expect a front page exclusive in a major newspaper coming in the next few days.

BUT....

Here is my question.

From what I understand, this information has been concealed by the Intelligence services and the Dept. of Defense. While I fully expect the ridiculous politics to follow as Republicans gloat and Democrats attempt to discredit, the real question that needs to get asked is, how in the world can non elected bureaucrats in the Intel and Defense Depts. conceal this information from our elected officials for years and no one know about it?

This information came about because of a leak in the CIA to a member of the House Armed Services Committee. A leak? Sound familiar? The media needs to ask the right question and rise above the olitical bull, because the right question is:

Is the CIA attempting to manipulate the politics of elected officials in the US by intentionally misdirecting politics on both parties against each other?

Think about it, Democrats have based policy regarding Iraq on a CIA report that said no WMD in Iraq, which has the effect of making Republicans look bad. Now the CIA is releasing documents that completely contradict their own report, which has the effect of making Democrats look bad. It looks pretty clear to me the CIA is screwing with both parties, and they are too busy blaming each other to notice how the bureaucrats are manipulating the elected officials. Some Democracy we have in the US.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by aecreate
www.foxnews.com...


Thanks for that

This bit of the Fox report seemed a key point to me:



Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"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."



Assuming it's a correct quote the un-named official seems very keen to point out this report isn't the smoking gun the two republican senators would have us believe.

Also nowhere is it clear if this is an additional 500 munitions or is it just a summary of the total found in over 3 years - 500 munitions (mortar bombs or 155mm shells? - again there's crucial difference) in a country the size of France is a negligible amount.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Would this mean that Sadaam did lie to UN weapon inspectors about destroying his weapon caches?



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:42 PM
link   
www.cnsnews.com.../Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060621e.html


".........500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent"


I believe this is much ado about nothing. The weapons are degraded, pre 1991, according to FOX news. But I guess its better than nothing since the Bush cabal forced us in this war, based on those WMDs. They needed a diversion from the news of those two young soldiers who were found after they were kidnapped, tortured, and the bodies desecrated. After the next round of bad news they'll trot out Bin Laden to divert us.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by UnBreakable]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Not neccessarily - Iraq being soviet-equipped & trained would have regarded NBC munitions (I'm sick of this political WMD spin BS - what's a.50 cal HMG in a shopping centre if not a 'wmd' ?) as a slightly more effective standard payload rather than a clearly-deliniated separate level of reponse as western forces did.

The lie statement also presumes that Iraqi forces had C3 / admin procedures on a par with western forces when this clearly wasn't the case; More likely a rag-tag, disorganised and largely written-down Iraqi Army forgot about a mere 500 shells (etc) that were stored somewhere.

Perhaps the guy who stored them was killed in GW1? - there are loads of other possible and probable explanations.

To assume 'Saddam knew / Saddam lied' is a massive leap and just more spin.

If he was lying wouldn't he have had 50,000+ munitions filled with fresh and effective agents?



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   
.....not make the Bush knockers to apologize.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Good point Strangerous. I love seeing all the information I can on news stories like this.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   
wow. It is clear that people are going to easily get sucked into the political spin based on 4 unclassified pages of a large classified report. Republicans claim victory, Democrats try to discredit, and all it really proves is most people are sheep to their political agenda's talking points.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   
saw it on fox eh?!?

If this were true and verifiable by a more credible source then fox news then i would suggest that the weapons were planted by the u.s for obvious reasons.

i recall fox reporting that saddam was responsible for 9/11 on more then 1 occasion too so there ya have it. mr blix said no but fox says otherwise...ya ok. more hot air from the no spin zone


[edit on 21-6-2006 by Census]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax
I would like to know more about this. If I'm not mistaken, didn't we find chemical/chemical laced artillery this go-around?

Along with camoflauged and undisclosed secret chemical manufacturing plants.

THere's no misdirection here, chemical munitions had been found and announced previously. THere was nothing along the lines of what was claimed. The weapons were at most, munitions that, at one time, had chemicals in them, but appeared, as I understand it, to have been decomissioned after Gulf 1.

What it actually looks like is going on here is that they are saying, "Terrorists and others can use WMD to attack us".

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:30 PM
link   
ok.....this is just me here.......but i would guess that if there were "weapons" there to be used, dont you think iraqis would have maybe just maybe USED THEM to defend themselves from a very powerfull american and british invasion???

Mod Edit: Removed Unnecessary Punctuation.

[edit on 21/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Why don't we have some folk's go on record with what it would take to convince them? How many, weapon's what type? More interesting than hearing the tired old liberal 'blame America - defend saddam' garbage.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:46 PM
link   
how about this.........some proof.....just one shred!!!! thats all.....just a tiny piece....but so far NOTHING...just some BS from fox news. iraq said no wmd, the rest of EARTH said no wmd......ALL confirmed by blix but fox runs a psy-op fairy tale and the neo-con linear thinker who sees in high contrast black and white cannot....refuses the FACTS and looks through the truth. are these the values you teach your children?

doctors can medicate you for this disorder.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Census]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Oh I don't know - something close to the 'evidence' Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell, Cheney, Blair etc etc used as justification for subverting the UN and launching an illegal war.

Not too much to ask is it with 21,000 US casualties, c. 3,000 UK and countless thousands of Iraqis killed, maimed and wounded?



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   
So, to summarise:

1) all the weapons were pre-1991
2) they were degraded and unusable
3) therefore no threat
4) therefore no justification for invasion

so this report is just SPIN.

We knew he had old chemical weapons... we also knew, according to Scott Ritter, that those weapons would be useless because they degrade.

And here they are, being trumpeted as "WMD"s. Which, while true in a very technical sense, is not exactly correct: EX-WMDs would be more accurate.

It's funny - Fox is trying to spin this for the administration but there are still some honest people within the army who won't sit still for it. Good for them.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar
Why don't we have some folk's go on record with what it would take to convince them? How many, weapon's what type? More interesting than hearing the tired old liberal 'blame America - defend saddam' garbage.




Jolly good Idea!! All go on record now.................



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join