It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Iraq WMD Paradox Theory

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 07:21 PM
This is my debut post, I hope you enjoy my conspiracy theory.

Could it possibly be that WMD evidence was purposely squelched to be uncovered after certain conditions were met?

Consider this theory: The Iraq WMD Paradox Theory

By denying that Iraq WMDs ever existed the Bush administration essentially strengthens the terrorists; but on the same grounds it denies the terrorists the ability to use those same WMDs because the use of such would prove their existence.

The administration justified its war against Iraq based on Saddam’s wmds, links to terrorism and its atrocious human rights record. At the run-up to war, satellite intelligence confirmed an Iraqi exodus of Iraqi convoys embarked towards Syria. This may have been hailed a good sign and initially it appeared such as less Iraqi forces in Iraq meant less resistance and seemingly allowed the United States army to purge Baghdad. According to Yosseff Bodansky the US army faced 25 fewer divisions, divisions that vanished without trace, equipment and personnel. According to Bodansky these divisions were still missing at the time his book was published in 2005 (“the Secret history of the Iraq War”)

During the war the United States made several threats against Syria, one such threat by Powell resulted in Syria expelling dozens of high ranking Iraqi refugees. Could the true impetus behind these threats be the understanding that Iraq’s wmds were in Syria? Evidence to that effect can be gained by the statements of former deputy undersecretary John Shaw, who was fired for revealing such. Evidence was also provided by two former Iraqi Generals Goerges Sada and Al Tikriti, and an Israeli Lt General Moshe Yaalon. Evidence was also given by Syrian dissident journalist Nizar Nayuff. References were made in the ISG final report, and by statements by former ISG inspector Dave Gaubatz.

A greater horror is that at least part of Iraqi weapons were subsequently forwarded out of Syria; to such places as Sudan and Lebanon, and are accesible to Al Queda and Hezbollah. The Sudan allegation is based on statements by former CIA officer Clarridge and sources such as the Middle Eastern News Wire ( The Lebanon allegation comes from statements by the Syrian dissident journalist Nizar Nayuff.
Abu al-Zarqawi allegedly obtained 20 tons of transferred chemicals and attempted to attack Amman Jordan.

The initiation of war to prevent Iraq supplying WMDs to terrorists had the opposite effect; it actually caused Iraq to unleash WMDs into the hands of terrorists.
The Iraq WMD Paradox Theory answers this dilemma and provides a means to avoid panic within the civilized world. Certain terrorists would unquestionably employ wmds at their earliest opportunity. Terrorist sponsors such as states however are guided by strategic goals. These sponsors would only use wmds in the event of their biter defeat or to further their goals.

For the United States to deny and conceal the existence of Iraqi WMDs, a preeminent rationale for the war, the Bush administration becomes damaged politically, the credibility of the United States becomes questionable, the western powers become divided, future coalitions against terrorism are jeopardized, the US occupation of Iraq and the formation of an Iraqi democracy becomes jeopardized. By denying Iraqi wmds the administration essentially strengthens radical Islam and their supporting terrorists and allows an avenue for radical Islam to achieve its goals but on the same grounds it denies the terrorists the ability to use Iraqi WMDs because the use of such would proove their existence and establish the opposite effects.

What says you?


posted on Jul, 29 2006 @ 03:44 PM
Nice theory but I'm sticking with the old Iraq had no WMDs.

new topics

log in