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: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Interesting question - I think the reason they've tried to hide this is that it's obviously not the masses of NBC they claimed was there. To anyone with any military experience it's a non-story.

To a senator (who as you say needs ratings) however it's the 'answer' they've been looking for - presuming you have a gullible public & compliant media to put the required spin on it / not ask the obvious questions.




posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous
To anyone with any military experience it's a non-story.


That statement would seem to be very inaccurate, considering it is the milblogs who are covering the story the most.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:44 AM
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.


It's never going to happen. No matter what is found or what documentation is found with it, it will never be enough. Anything found will be blown off as being planted by the US or someother entity. You could open one of those sites Gaubatz has referenced tomorrow and find a fully equipped bio weapons lab inside and there will be those who say that "Haliburton builds a damn nice lab if they are given three years".

I keep reading threads that say the Bush Administration has lied to the American people and we are a bunch of gullible fools for believing them. What makes them so certain that WE are the ones being lied to? For all we know they could be the ones getting fed the big lie.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:00 AM
link   
To me, what I see out of all this is if the weapons with the nerv gas, and mustard gas were found. Even if it is degraded, it is still dangerous. They could still be used, if not in the form of an artillery round, but useing the agent on the inside in the form of a crude device to disperse it. These weapons were found great, if there is more I hope they find them as well.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   
The question is not whether or not there are bio/chem weapons in Iraq. The question is whether or not there were enough, or enough of a threat from them to justify a full scale invasion of a sovereign country.

I DO NOT say this to jumpstart the debate again about the ethics of going to war in Iraq, I say this to give some form of measurement of value to finding these hidden weapons. A few cans of mustard gas, while dangerous, should not perpetuate itself to the point of declaring war, nor should it be seen in any way to now justify why the US invade Iraq in the first place.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I keep reading threads that say the Bush Administration has lied to the American people and we are a bunch of gullible fools for believing them. What makes them so certain that WE are the ones being lied to? For all we know they could be the ones getting fed the big lie.


Who is "they"? Do you mean the Bush Admin is being fed the big lie and they're passing it on innocently? If so, who is feeding them this lie? Or do you mean the people that say the Bush Administration lied about reasons to go to war in Iraq? No WMDs? No connections to Al-Queada? Do you mean we actually HAVE found WMDs and we're being lied to about it, and there ARE actual connections between Iraq and 9.11 and we're being lied to about it? I'm confused as to whom you think is telling "the big lie"?

I believe the Bush Admin. has undoubtedly "misled" America about the reasons they invaded Iraq, but it's not because ANYONE fed me a lie, it's because of the lack of evidence. I've seen no evidence of any of the presented reasons for war.

To answer the question from earlier about what would be enough... Exactly what Donald Rumsfeld said he knew for a fact was there. Active Nuclear and Biological warfare programs/devices. Paper weights from the Gulf War I don't count I'm afraid.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SKMDC1
Who is "they"? Do you mean the Bush Admin is being fed the big lie and they're passing it on innocently? If so, who is feeding them this lie? Or do you mean the people that say the Bush Administration lied about reasons to go to war in Iraq? No WMDs? No connections to Al-Queada? Do you mean we actually HAVE found WMDs and we're being lied to about it, and there ARE actual connections between Iraq and 9.11 and we're being lied to about it? I'm confused as to whom you think is telling "the big lie"?

I believe the Bush Admin. has undoubtedly "misled" America about the reasons they invaded Iraq, but it's not because ANYONE fed me a lie, it's because of the lack of evidence. I've seen no evidence of any of the presented reasons for war.

To answer the question from earlier about what would be enough... Exactly what Donald Rumsfeld said he knew for a fact was there. Active Nuclear and Biological warfare programs/devices. Paper weights from the Gulf War I don't count I'm afraid.


What I meant by "they" are the people who think that this is all a fabricated conspiracy by the Bush Administration to invade Iraq. Maybe there was faulty intellegence information provided, I don't know. As to who provided it, again I don't know. I do remember reading an article that claims Iraq's whole WMD program was a scam to bilk Sadam out of billions of dollars. I can see where this might be feasible. We are probably never going to know. The US government has had a nasty habit through out the years of declaring everything secret and then leaking certain parts to ensure what benefits the politicians gets out. Who knows what kind of info they are sitting on?



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   
I just did finish reading this article last night and haven't had the opportunity to cross reference any of its sources. At first glance, it is a very interesting article.

The Bush administration invaded Iraq claiming Saddam Hussein had tried to buy yellowcake uranium in Niger. As much of Washington knew, and the world soon learned, the charge was false. Worse, it appears to have been the cornerstone of a highly successful "black propaganda" campaign with links to the White House

It looks to be very well investigated and in my opinion, throws any claims of finding WMDs at this late date, into doubt. The entire subject of WMDs is shot through with disinformation and progaganda so much so that what may be good intel could be ignored.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499

What I meant by "they" are the people who think that this is all a fabricated conspiracy by the Bush Administration to invade Iraq. Maybe there was faulty intellegence information provided, I don't know. As to who provided it, again I don't know. I do remember reading an article that claims Iraq's whole WMD program was a scam to bilk Sadam out of billions of dollars. I can see where this might be feasible. We are probably never going to know. The US government has had a nasty habit through out the years of declaring everything secret and then leaking certain parts to ensure what benefits the politicians gets out. Who knows what kind of info they are sitting on?


Some of that information is well known. The fake Niger Yellowcake documents came from Italy.They were bad fakes, with misspellings and the wrong officials named, Backing that was a '98 approach by an Iraqi official abour 'exapnding trade' that was apparently never followed up.

The bio/chem weapons threats were largely misreadings of other facilities, including weather balloon support trailers. the idea that Iraq -- effectively flattened in GW1 -- could create highly complex bio/chem weapons when it couldn't reconstruct its water or electricity supplies is questionable. And that ignores the fact that Iraq had no delivery systems capable of reaching more than 1-10th of the way to the US.

In 2005, a Sarin-component artillery shell was used as an IED and got some press coverage. But the output of the device's explosion was not deadly.

500 similar rounds discovered is not insignificant, because that's 500 more shells that cannot be made into IEDs. And, technically, even the explosive shells themselves are WMDs in the broadest sense.

But In the cold light of day, who would sacrifice their child to eliminate artillery shells sitting 7,000 miles away? The semantic argument may be in dispute, but the "value" argument is not.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   

shanemcbain
Every time you anti-bush hippies

Please take such un-helpful and divisive remarks to Politics at ATS.


Santorum and Hoekstra released a newly declassified military intelligence report that said coalition forces have found 500 munitions in Iraq that contained degraded sarin or mustard nerve agents, produced before the 1991 Gulf War.


Interesting that it was Santorum who was elected to be the one to release the information. I am not familiar with Hoekstra though. Seems like the sort of thing you'd permit for people that you are 'grooming' for biger positions.


Saddam was in violation of the sanctions from the 1991 war by being in possession of any of these agents. They were all supposed to have been destroyed.

Indeed, but this is not really the sort of thing that was being talked about when they made mention of WMDs and threats. Also notice that these things, and the secret chemical manufacturing plant, weren't disclosed in that 'table top's worth' of books and documents pertaining to their WMD programs.


Isn't the title of this thread rather misleading? Should a mod change it, perhaps?

No. They are chemical weapons. They were secreted away and undisclosed. They were also not all that dangerous.


And Alan Colmes tore Santorum a new one on Hannity and Colmes

Really? Wow. Thats bad, when Colmes is the one beating you up.


He's scared out of his mind because he's 18 points behind.

Ahah. That explains why he was picked to release this information.


ANYONE who tries to say this is the evidence for WMD's. You should be immediately slapped with a glove dowsed in babypowder repeatedly.

However, these, and other post war discoveries, clearly show that Hussein was hiding away his chem-bio warfare capabilities, and plotting to revive the programmes in the future. At the same time that he was lying and presenting that table's worth of documents to the 'weapons inspectors', the international community, lead by russia, was talking about removing the very sanctions that had crippled the country and prevented the chem-bio weapons programmes from being alive.


It amazes me that the President and CIA can hide this information for years, after printing a report that says something exactly opposite only 2 years ago, and nobody seems to care.

This information hasn't really been hidden. There have been occasional news reports from when they'd find these munitions. It looks like what was classified was the total count of the weapons, and even that was released and declassified.

Do Bush haters not find it even the least bit strange this information was being concealed by the Bush administration?

Clearly, any information on chemical weapons found by the military is going to become classified, and a persuasive arguement would need to be made to declassify it.


The question is not whether or not there are bio/chem weapons in Iraq. The question is whether or not there were enough,

What? No. THe question was, are there bio/chem weapons in iraq. These weapons were undisclosed. Hussein's government was lying, and the weapons inspectors were unable to find them or account for them. At the same time, its nothing like what the administration was claiming.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 10:31 AM
link   
I think anyone would have to be naive to see this as anything but spin. These weapons --- although dangerous and illegal --- were of older manufacture circa 1991. The Iraq war was premised in large part on the alleged fact that Iraq was engaged in a variety of WMD programs that presented a clear and present danger to the world. We were told of WMD plants, mobile chem labs, etc. The impression given to the American people and the wolrd was that this was an ongoing, aggressive and determined program of WMD development. That was the original premise of the war. These weapons do nothing to substantiate that premise. We knew Iraq had chemical weapons from the first war. Love Bush, hate Bush it makes no difference. This is political spin plain and simple.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Again, these were NOT WMDs! These were a few munition shells whose chemicals were as dangerous as old pudding. SOLD TO SADDAM BY BUSH AND DONALD RUMSFELD!!!!

Of course DOnald knew Saddam had the weapons, HE SOLD THEM TO SADDAM!

As said, can you sell sarin gas to Mexico and then invade them for having Sarin gas?

Until you find WMDs you're president lied!!!! Hell the IEDs couldn't even use these to kill anyone, the explosion is more dangerous then the chemicals in them!



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing
"GOP is on Pluto
And Democrats are lost on the Moon

Closer distance to reality is with the Democrats." == MRGERBIK

I believe you have the moons confused. They are both in the same
ballpark, thus it is Charon. Depending on orbital position, their
position in reality gets swapped.

[edit on 22-6-2006 by nightwing]


Really?

Okay then how about the Sun. The GOP is vacationing on the Sun. Do you realize how far the GOP is from reality with this Occupation and all it's policies?
When they are arguing that the Voting Rights Act doesn't get renewed you know everything is desperate.

Mod Edit: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.




[edit on 22/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem
To me, what I see out of all this is if the weapons with the nerv gas, and mustard gas were found. Even if it is degraded, it is still dangerous. They could still be used, if not in the form of an artillery round, but useing the agent on the inside in the form of a crude device to disperse it. These weapons were found great, if there is more I hope they find them as well.


Do me a favor and look up the guidelines of why we went into war. We didn't go for Flat Sarin or Mustard Gas. We went for WMD's a U.S. threat..to avoid the mushroom cloud.
If you still are going to stump for this administration I feel sorry for you.

It's unacceptable and you still are not getting it. Maybe you would get it if you lost a limb to a I.E.D. It doesn't cut it to say "I guessed wrong"

The facts were fixed around the policy. And if you can't see that then you are a blind loyalist going lockstep off the cliff



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by MRGERBIK

Originally posted by RedGolem
To me, what I see out of all this is if the weapons with the nerv gas, and mustard gas were found. Even if it is degraded, it is still dangerous. They could still be used, if not in the form of an artillery round, but useing the agent on the inside in the form of a crude device to disperse it. These weapons were found great, if there is more I hope they find them as well.


Do me a favor and look up the guidelines of why we went into war. We didn't go for Flat Sarin or Mustard Gas. We went for WMD's a U.S. threat..to avoid the mushroom cloud.
If you still are going to stump for this administration I feel sorry for you.

It's unacceptable and you still are not getting it. Maybe you would get it if you lost a limb to a I.E.D. It doesn't cut it to say "I guessed wrong"

The facts were fixed around the policy. And if you can't see that then you are a blind loyalist going lockstep off the cliff




First of all Sarin, Mustard or any other kind of poisen gas is a WMD as defined by the international comunity.
Second a blind loyalist I am not, however I just dont spend my time and energy tyring to say the politishens did this wrong and this right, when I know I am not in the position to say so.
Third if you the Sarin and Mustard should not be removed the perhaps when the next atack comes and it happens in your comunity the you can lockstep into the slow painfull death those weapons will cause.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   


Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq
Thursday, June 22, 2006

PHOTOS VIDEO


WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

www.foxnews.com...


Now for the liberals and left wingnuts to downplay this find..

*** They are old munitions from pre 1991
Answer: They were not distroyed per UN resolutions

***They have no lethality..
Answer: Mustard Gas canister have lost some lethality, Sarin is very dangerous. and if found by insurgents would have been the new IED...

Bottom Line: Saddam had em, lied to the world, the UN, and the IAEA, and UNMOVIC inspectors, hid them, and could have possibly used them against coaltion forces. He has used them in the past against his own people and against his neighbors....

I am not particularly concerned that those who opposed the war, will try to spin this to insignificance. We did not go in just for WMD, although that has been the rallying cry of the left and liberal leaning on the BV and for that matter the world. But, it will be interesting to see how the world reacts.

Last night, Fox carried the news. Nobody else. What does that tell You???

Mod Edit: No Quote – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 22/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Here is the declassified report:
www.foxnews.com...



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by etraveler13
Here is the declassified report:
www.foxnews.com...


That is not the full report, that is 4 pages of a very large report. The rumblings are already happening, apparently the full report has a lot more information.

I think the stage is being set. You have North Korea getting ready to potentially launch ICBMs, you have Iran stalling the US and EU, and you have a large classified report with only the slightest of details unclassified so far.

Sounds like the Axis of Evil talkers are about to get their time on the camara.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but,

Didn't the UN inspectors say, when they were pulled out, that all that would or had been found were pre-circa 1991 degraded/dismantled "WMD"'s?

That being said, maybe we haven't seen any comment from the White House because they have no relevence to the "WMD"'s we were told were a national threat. And they would be fools to use these as justification for 3+ years and 2500+ American deaths and who knows how many non-Amercan casualties, not to mention "collateral damage", because the UN inspectors had already told the world about them before the US invaded Iraq. It was expected, no breaking news there.

And as far as them being "Hidden", I understand that the only way to destroy them is in a furnace. So if I was Saddam, and looking at the bottom line, it would be cheaper to just bury them instead of hauling them godknowshowmanymiles to the nearest furnace. Between the sand and the heat, most, if not all of the stuff that was buried, would be degraded and/or in-operatable. Not the brightest move, and I'm not trying to make excuses for either side. But it does make sense in a abstract sort of way.............

As far as the 2 senators, what didn't they understand about "degraded" and "pre-1991"? I think they might be trying to remove their feet from their mouths. Sounds like "Jumping the Gun", not "Smoking Gun"....



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I find it funny none of you left wing nutjobs have answered the question "what evidence would it take?" specifically.
We know why this is so. You are hate filled low-brows. NO evidence will ever convince you. My God if we found nuclear warheads you would just say "Bush Planted them".
Talk about being out of touch. You morons can't even agree if Bush is an idiot pawn or an evil genius.

The fact is Bush knows Russia, China, and France all had a hand in moving WMDs out of and around Iraq to avoid UN Weapon Inspectors (see oil for food scandal). The admin doesn't care all that much about promoting the facts of WMD existance now as we are already there. No point in rubbing other member's of the security councils' noses in it in a public way. I think it is an international political trump card they are sitting on.


But the again, Sadaam would never lie. I guess it was Israel that gased Kurds right?


[edit on 22-6-2006 by Apoc]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join