Did we give WMDs to Sadam?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Hi All,
I have read it asserted here many times that Sadam was given WMD's by the US and Britain (I think). I have been looking around for solid proof of this on the net, and haven't turned up anything. I fould LOTS of articles from publications I haven't heard of though. Can anyone post a link for this evidence? Thanks!

-P




posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   
Yes, the U.S. government was allies with Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, and gave him everything needed to win a war, they even helped him with bombing some Iranian airstrips.



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Yes the above post is true, as Saddam was at the time fighting against extremist Islam with Iran just after the revolution.

Whilst a money making venture was there the West had a hand in it, like Afghanistan and the Taliban when they fought off the Russians.



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 04:24 PM
link   
USA is not the only country who supported Saddam by giving him weapons, Germany, France and Russia did it as well.

[Edited on 2-1-2004 by Salem]



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 04:52 PM
link   
yes we did but now people believe he never had any...

yet love to bring up the fact we gave them to him...but he never had them and we shouldnt have gone into iraq...because he didnt have any. figure out how this makes sense and explain it to me because i still cant figure out how he cant have something i know we gave him years before. and no jsut claiming he destroyed them doesnt work. UN inspectors were not there as orderd by at least ONE UN resolution so no officials from the UN can verify he destroyed them. even blix has said as much (but many over look this) so while everyone screams about bush not having proof i do know we gave him chemical and biological weapons years ago and i know he offered ZERO proof that he destroyed any of them. so the only conclusion one must make out of this is he must still have them somewhere. such things do not evaporate like water.


so lets see if this makes sense.

we give him WMD years ago when he was at war with iran. (iraq then was the lesser of two evils and we wanted an ally in that region and supported saddam, for our benefit, name a country that DOESNT do this)

years later after the first gulf war as ordered by UN resolution saddam openly declared all the stockpiles of WMD he had then.

he was ordered to let them all be inspected by UN officials and let them supervise the destruction of said WMD.

saddam repeatedly kicked the inspectors out directly violating not UN resolutions which called for a military response (which the UN never did, surprised? i'm not) but also violated agreements he made with the US government which also called for military action should he choose not to live up the agreements.

years later we go after him again this time people are saying he doesnt have any WMD yet he has offered zero proof that he destroyed them and hans "ambiguous" blix makes double speak remarks about saddam not being cooperative per resolution orders but cannot confirm either way whether he has WMD or not. basically blix not wanting to deal with the headache of saddam and iraq anymore takes the cowards way out. so zero proof he destroyed them or got rid of them yet i know we gave them to him.....

so since we gave them to him...and saddam never gave proof he got rid of them or destroyed them...where did they go if he doesnt have them? let me guess, regular iraqis took them home as conversational pieces right? a little momento to put on the mantle of the fireplace? sure!


but yes we did give them to him. but he never had any! as some would say and want you to believe...



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Whats the shelf life on chemical weapons and biological weapons?



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 05:09 PM
link   
The shelf life? There are alot of factors in regard to shelf life, more so for biological weapons. But the problem is not so much the pre-made weapons but his JIT production capabilities. Chemical weapons can be stored for quite some time, biological weapons for a shorter time, but with JIT manufacturing, you make it distribute it to the organizations and they in turn use them.



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 05:23 PM
link   
For a history lesson check out this site

www.ithaca.edu/politics/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Well we can't find any wmd in Iraq or proof he started manufacturing them again. Which makes you wonder either the inspectors did destroy everything. Or Saddam had them all destroyed the ones they cant account for so we would invade them find nothing an look like asses which has happened so far. Or we where simply lied to which isnt such a hard thing to believe knowing the history of government. Anyway you look at it Iraq is going to look bad for the USA for many years unless we can get the natives to convert to Christianity and support democracy.

Just because your records show you have it doesnt mean it exist. Ever work on an inventory project for any major company you would see that. But also the reverse is true we would find stuff that wasnt in the computer at all but was on the shelf. Things that always throw a wrench in inventory are theft and bad documentation. Im sure the military is no different when it comes to these problems. They probably stole and sold Saddams weapons, or they lied about the amount he had. Cause we sure as hell cant find them.



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 05:41 PM
link   
The U.S., Britain, Germany, France and Russia were countries that supplied Iraq with intelligence, hardware and other dual-use materials used to make chemical and biological weapons and missile technology.

Iraq's development of WMD was further along by the time the Gulf war was fought than many had realized.

Throughout the 90's with inspections, most of Iraq's WMD were found and destroyed. Saddam's son-in-law even said so much after leaving Iraq. That was before he was lured back and murdered by Saddam.

Saddam did not kick the inspectors out. President Clinton ordered the inspectors out of Iraq before the bombing campaign Operation Desert Fox commenced.

I believe a big part of Saddam's strategy was the big bluff. Afterall, he rightly assumed he had many enemies he needed to keep scared.

Here are a few sources for info:

Anthrax for Export
U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch's brew

by William Blum




The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein's weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for "developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
www.progressive.org...


Riegle Report


UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS
Hearing
www.gulflink.osd.mil... port/riegle_report_main.html



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 06:46 PM
link   
guys u have to realize its not really the us that controls the show its hidden groups that have infiltrated all groups and all secret societies at the highest levels remember the us is just an offshoot of the egyptian babylonian roman empire brotherhood going all the way back to sumer and the annunaki or those who from heaven fell to earth in order to understand the present you have to understand the past its all an orchatratel mental mind # illusion perpatrated on us by a small dark click called the illuminati whcih my have other worldy origins and may not be fully human at the highest level bush is just there puppet so is saddam they pit one nation agiainst another all this is to bring about there new world order they have armed and funded both sides of the conflict they are the puppet masters pulling the strings other poeple cant see this because everthing is compartmnetalized inot section no one knows what goes on at the top they engineered both world wars and this one as well including socalled threats which generate fear that they feed on like leeches
"Listen to the Jewish banker, Paul Warburg:

"We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent." (February 17, 1950, as he testified before the US Senate)."
that means we will use anything including wmds on whatever country or poeple including the usa !! people are so deluded they think its the terrorist muslims who are doing this there just puppets or scapegoats who conceal the real manipulators behind the scenes they will use islam and christainity and judaism to destroy one another since a house divided cannot stand then they will have there luciferian religion of light watch for tyhe obsession with light and light torches its there call sign more incidents will happen because they dont have much time left the 25000 year cycle of the equinox is coming to a close also one thing im worried about is the symbolism of the pheonix supposedly the eagle is a symbol of the phoenix and was gonna be the original brid on our us dollar bill if u know ur mythology youll know that the phoenix is a bird that destroys itself and rises from its own ashes is this what there planning for the usa destroying it with nuclear fire so that it will rise as the full blown nwo
peace



posted on Jan, 3 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
yeah we gave him tons of wmd. Alot of the stuff we thought he had before the second gulf war. There are still irainians in hospitals with paralisas and i'm not going to even start with the kurds. The point of giving him those weopons was to stop the iranians at alll costs, they suppoted terrrorism and could unite the middle east against the U.S.



posted on Jan, 3 2004 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
yes we did but now people believe he never had any...

yet love to bring up the fact we gave them to him...but he never had them and we shouldnt have gone into iraq...because he didnt have any. figure out how this makes sense and explain it to me because i still cant figure out how he cant have something i know we gave him years before. and no jsut claiming he destroyed them doesnt work......

Ummmm....maybe he used them, or sold them? That was a long damn time ago. Iraq has been at war with someone constantly. It sure isn't a big stretch to consider that he might have used or sold the weapons. Chemical warheads also have a shelf life. That's why we're destroying our old chemical warheads. Of course, we're making more though. You never know when we might have to supply a middle eastern country with WMD, right?



posted on Jan, 3 2004 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Satyr
Ummmm....maybe he used them, or sold them? That was a long damn time ago. Iraq has been at war with someone constantly. It sure isn't a big stretch to consider that he might have used or sold the weapons. Chemical warheads also have a shelf life. That's why we're destroying our old chemical warheads. Of course, we're making more though. You never know when we might have to supply a middle eastern country with WMD, right?


used them all? unlikely. i know the amount we gave him couldnt have been used on all of the countryies touching iraq, he still would have had a surplus. so i dont believe this. some maybe...

sold them? thats highly likely but everyone keeps saying saddam didnt have ties to terrorism. so who did he sell them to? tourists as keepsakes? i dont think so. i believe he sold some to lord knows who but i doubt he sold every last canister he had.

shelf life? yes but the wepaons we are destroying are still viable, as old as they are they are still HIGHLY deadly and there are strict standards they have to use to handle them when disposing of them.

as for your last comment (read: dig/snide remark)

HTF do you think countries have been making allies with other countries all these centuries? it wasnt with food and money i assure you, half of it has been with military in some way shape or form. if it helps us you're damn right we're going to do something and give things to people we normally might not give them to but as the middle eastern saying goes....the enemy of my friend is my enemy, the friend of my enemy is my enemy but the enemy of my enemy, HE is my friend.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 12:07 AM
link   
However, am I the only one that finds it curious that many of the links have expired in this piece? It may just be because of archiving of old stories etc, or possibly something else? I'm too tired right now, but I will do a Google-cache search for some of this stuff tomorrow if I can.

Thanks,
-P


Originally posted by PEACEMONGER
For a history lesson check out this site

www.ithaca.edu/politics/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm




posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 12:46 AM
link   
From ThePrankMonkey :


UN inspectors were not there as orderd by at least ONE UN resolution so no officials from the UN can verify he destroyed them


This is false.The U.N inspectors were present during many destruction seances of chemical and biological agents.Maybe they missed some but they DID get rid of the majority of Saddam stock.They were not only drinkin arab beer in the desert between 1991 and 1998 you know.They were present 7 whole years and they did a good job.


so while everyone screams about bush not having proof


Because it's simply true. All of the supposed "smoking guns" presented by Colin Powell in his speech in front of the U.N last year were bogus and manufactured.This has been proved many times by many people , including former CIA agents who worked in the middle east and former U.N inspectors.



saddam repeatedly kicked the inspectors out


False.He kicked them out only once and it was in 1998.



but cannot confirm either way whether he has WMD or not.


Blix said many times that he was sure that there was no WMD in Iraq.Also , notice that it's your govt who acted like a bully and kicked the U.N inspectors out this time , not Saddam.


where did they go if he doesnt have them?


They went NOWHERE because there was no WMD in Iraq.They were destroyed by the U.N inspectors years ago.Do you really think that with all of the intelligence that the U.S have , they would have missed something as big as a transfer of a complete arsenal of WMD to another country without ever hearing about it ??? The theory that he shipped them is bogus and based on very weak arguments.Also , it will be 1 year in a couple of months since you invaded Iraq and what did you find so far ??? A spoon of Botulin toxin that was found in the personnal refrigirator of a supposed doctor ??? These so called mobile biological labs presented by Powell in his U.N speech who were in fact used for meterologic purpose ??? This is far from the tons of chemical shells and liters of Anthrax and other fatal agents that Bush claimed that Saddam had don't you think ??? You guys will need to come to the evidence that there are no WMD in Iraq , well at least nothing that could be considered as an "imminent" threat like the Neo Cons and Blair claimed.

You should all watch the new video that was made by moveon.org in collaboration with the center for American progress.Its called :

UNCOVERED : WHY BUSH REALLY ATTACKED IRAQ

They are completely tearing apart the WMD theory.They also explain the real motives of this war (especially the speech of the 2 guys between the 11 and 13 minutes time respectively).I strongly suggest to anyone to watch this video.






[Edited on 4-1-2004 by ForceOfWill]



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 08:01 AM
link   
oh really? then why did the UN still want to put inspectors in iraq if they KNEW they got rid of his WMD???

because they liked his sparkling personality?

doesnt make sense to continue to go there if you saw his stockpiles destroyed.

why did saddam balk everytime? for a man who had nothing and nothing to hide he wasnt cooperative.

reminds me of just about every episode of cops. you see the guy getting pulled over and he's reluctant to let the cops search his car but finally lets them and they find.....drugs or a weapon or a combination thereof. then he offers excuses and copouts. sounds like saddam MO all these years.


but he never had them.....saddam kept inspectors from certain buildings even the UN wanted access to, he said no. they were to be given unfettered access, they didnt get that. or are you now going to tell me saddam was a good boy and cooperated all these years and never gave them a hard time?

if they were all destroyed why didnt the UN say this? why didnt they come out with documentation stating this showing proof? we did go to the UN first. what did they give us? certainly wasnt documentation showing he no longer had WMD just balking and countries who had business dealings with him trying to stop us not wanting to lose billions of dollars in contracts they had with him.



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   
This article did a good job backing up it's assertions with evidence. Anyone know of articles to the contrary that make just as strong of a case? Or can anyone make a strong case against it themselves?

-P


Originally posted by PEACEMONGER
For a history lesson check out this site

www.ithaca.edu/politics/gagnon/talks/us-iraq.htm




posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Force of Will....pretty good arguments given they have been hashed and re-hashed and are basically the same arguments that have been given over and over.....
Let's start here:

You mention:

"You should all watch the new video that was made by moveon.org in collaboration with the center for American progress.Its called :

UNCOVERED : WHY BUSH REALLY ATTACKED IRAQ"



My....isn't funny that you mention MoveOn.org...
Why?
MoveOn.org is a organization bent on removing Bush and is currently being investigated for its "mysterious" methods of funneling domestic and foreign monies to the Democrats...namely the Democratic presidential hopefuls. As per this post by me:
"posted on 18-12-2003 at 07:09 PM Post Number: 296133"
Link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Excerpts:

"Brewing MoveOn Scandal Over Foreign Contributions Involves Dean, Clark Campaigns"
Link:
www.gopusa.com...

"Drudge cites two Democrat presidential frontrunners who are listed by name on several international fundraising websites asking for donations to be made directly to MoveOn.org. Retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean were the two candidates listed on the websites requesting funds from foreign citizens."

"In other words, Moveon.org is funneling foreign investments to the DNC. Another question that comes to mind, is how can Moveon.org consider itself "politically independent" (from the site) and yet, knowing support the removal of Bush, a Republican, and press to elect a Democrat??
You don't think someone needs to notify the FEC: aford@fec.gov concerning this? Perhaps this from the FEC pages:

"Reports Analysis"

"Campaign finance analysts assist committee officials in complying with reporting requirements and conduct detailed examinations of the campaign finance reports filed by political committees. If an error, omission or prohibited activity (e.g., an excessive contribution) is discovered in the course of reviewing a report, the analyst sends the committee a letter which requests that the committee either amend its reports or provide further information concerning a particular problem. By sending these letters (RFAIs), the Commission seeks to ensure full disclosure and to encourage the committees voluntary compliance with the law. Analysts also provide frequent telephone assistance to committee officials and encourage them to call the division with reporting questions or compliance problems. Local phone: 202-694-1130; toll-free phone 800-424-9530 (press 2 on a touch-tone phone)."

Link:
www.fec.gov...
www.fec.gov...

As noted also by this:
"11 CFR 100.4(a). Foreign Nationals"
"Contributions from foreign nationals who do not have permanent residence in the United States (i.e., those without green cards) are prohibited. Additionally, foreign nationals may not make contributions in connection with any election, including state and local elections."

Link:
www.hklaw.com...


You then go on to mention:

"They went NOWHERE because there was no WMD in Iraq.They were destroyed by the U.N inspectors years ago."


Really? Can you provide the link or links to said UN or UNSCOM records verifying exactly what you are saying or implying? Personally and IMHO, you are mistaken to think and claim that "NOWHERE" and that they were "destryoed".....very mistaken.....provide the links to said information please.
In the meantime, lets look at this:

Here's the full transcript from Mr. Blix's report to the UN Security Council earlier this year:

"AS DELIVERED BRIEFING OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 14 FEBRUARY 2003
Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, Dr. Hans Blix"

Link:
www.un.org...

No where in this does he say, "No Weapons."

And here:

"Blix statement: Key excerpts"
Link:
news.bbc.co.uk...

Again, no where does Mr. Blix male such an assertion or claim of "No Weapons".

Here is the full report of UNSCOM:

"IRAQ: THE UNSCOM EXPERIENCE"
Link:
editors.sipri.se...


And here is UNSCOM's Final Report:

"UNSCOM Final Disarmament Report"
Link:
www.iraqwatch.org...


This is what the reports from UNSCOM and the UN say and have documented as unaccounted for and still not reported by Saddam or Iraq, as per UN Resolutions:

"1. VX

The inspectors never could figure out what happened to 3.9 tonnes of VX, the deadliest kind of nerve gas. Iraq admitted producing VX in 1988 and 1990, but furnished no convincing evidence that it was destroyed in 1991, as Iraq claimed. This failure was not cured by an Iraqi report handed to inspectors in March 2003, which attempted to account for up to 63 percent of the missing VX.

2. Anthrax

The inspectors concluded that Iraq may not have destroyed about 10,000 liters of the biological agent anthrax, which if properly stored, could still be viable. Iraq admitted producing 8,425 liters of anthrax, but claimed it had disposed of all the agent in 1991, and provided inspectors with a series of technical reports aimed at substantiating the claim. However, the reports failed to prove exactly how much anthrax was disposed of.

3. Other Germ Warfare Agents

Iraq did not explain what happened to thousands of liters of other biological agent that it admitted producing, including more than 340 liters of clostridium perfringens - though inspectors concluded that Iraq had enough growth medium to have made "much larger quantities." This agent would still be viable today if properly stored. The inspectors were also unable to account for some 19,000 liters of botulinum toxin and at least 2,200 liters of aflatoxin. Neither of these agents would be viable today, but accounting for them is necessary to determine the total amount of germ agent and the individual amounts of each agent that Iraq produced.

4. Chemical and Biological Munitions

Iraq consumed 6,526 fewer chemical-filled aerial bombs - containing some 1,000 tons of agent (mostly mustard gas, but also sarin and tabun) - during the Iran-Iraq war than it claimed, according to the "Air Force document" handed over by Iraq in December 2002. Moreover, inspectors could not account for 550 mustard-filled artillery shells that Iraq claimed to have lost. The inspectors determined that Iraqi mustard gas was still of a very high quality. Also unaccounted for are 29 germ-filled bombs, some possibly containing anthrax.

5. Missiles

The inspectors were in the process of destroying illicit Al Samoud 2 missiles and related equipment but were unable to complete the task before the start of the U.S.-led war in Iraq. Twenty-five missiles are still in the country, along with 38 warheads, 6 launchers, 6 command and control vehicles and 326 engines."

Link:
www.iraqwatch.org...



"Vials: A total of 97 vials-including those with labels consistent with the al Hakam cover stories of single-cell protein and biopesticides, as well as strains that could be used to produce BW agents-were recovered from a scientist's residence."


"Chemical Warhead found in Kirkuk, Iraq Ignored by the American Media----------:
Chemical warhead found at an Iraqi air base, marked with a green band, the symbol for chemical weaponry. Trace amounts of a nerve agent were found at two spots along the ~meter-long warhead. These amounts are consistent with leakage from the chemically armed weapon. A 13-foot missile was found next to it."
Courtesy of CNN

"What Weapons of Mass Destruction Evidence Have We Found In Iraq? Excerpts from David Kay's Report"
Link:
www.strategypage.com...

This is not counting the chemical suits and mask and antidite injection kits that were left behind by retreating Iraqi troops...
Not including reports of bio and chemicals that were dumped into the river Euphrates, reported and tested by US Marines.....

Want a bit more?

How about explain this:

"Iraqi bio-scientist breaks silence" --- the woman dubbed "Dr Germ" and even "toxic Taha".
Link:
news.bbc.co.uk...

Excerpts:

"UN weapons inspectors discovered munitions filled with these agents dumped in a river, proving they had indeed been weaponised.........

When a son-in-law of Saddam Hussein defected in 1995, the UN learned the truth about what was going on at al-Hakem.

But they have been unable to account for 8,500 litres of anthrax and large quantities of growth medium to culture germs............."




There have been multiples of threads debating this with much information to be gleaned and learned from them...Example:

"The WMD Cult" By MaskedAvatar
Link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Might want to read through them long exhaustive pages and glean what you can because to literally and figuratively say that Saddam or Iraq did not have WMD or programs or was destroyed or they went NOWHERE because they were destroyed is, quite frankly, unfactual and contrary to what is currently documented by the UN, UNSCOM, and many nations........



regards
seekerof

[Edited on 4-1-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 4 2004 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
sold them? that's highly likely but everyone keeps saying saddam didn't have ties to terrorism. so who did he sell them to? tourists as keepsakes? i dont think so. i believe he sold some to lord knows who but i doubt he sold every last canister he had.

Anyone! Why not? We do, as many other countries do.


shelf life? yes but the wepaons we are destroying are still viable, as old as they are they are still HIGHLY deadly and there are strict standards they have to use to handle them when disposing of them.

Some have leaked. Anyone who comes in contact with them will die pretty quick. I'm sure Saddam didn't even store them properly. I used to build air monitoring units to detect various chemical agents. I know a bit about this stuff.


as for your last comment (read: dig/snide remark)

HTF do you think countries have been making allies with other countries all these centuries? it wasn't with food and money i assure you, half of it has been with military in some way shape or form. if it helps us you're damn right we're going to do something and give things to people we normally might not give them to but as the middle eastern saying goes....the enemy of my friend is my enemy, the friend of my enemy is my enemy but the enemy of my enemy, HE is my friend.

It sure has a way of coming back to bite them on the ass, doesn't it? The enemy of your enemy is not your friend for very long, apparently.
Furthermore, why in the hell would we give anyone TONS of this dangerous stuff??? We know how tough it is to destroy. It's not as if you can just throw it in a fire. It has to be incinerated on a molecular level to be safely disposed of.


Originally posted by Seekerof
My....isn't funny that you mention MoveOn.org...
Why?

This is actually funny to me.
Do you expect Bush supporters to point out anything negative???
It's naive to automatically disbelieve anything against Bush just because it comes from people who don't like him. Those are always going to be the people that do find the worst points against him. IMO, this makes your argument pretty much nonexistent. Why in the hell do so many conservatives just cast aside anything written or said by any other party? That's just plain ignorant!


[Edited on 1-4-2004 by Satyr]





top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join