Did Iran take the Iraqi WMD's?

When the US defeated Saddam, the WMD's where suddenly gone. What happened to them? Do you think that Iran might have taken them?

That would be all good and well if there was any solid evidence Saddam even had viable WMDs at time of invasion. Furthermore, how oh how did Iran get ahold of these weapons? Remember that Iran and Iraq under Hussein were mortal enemies.

reply to post by uberarcanist


True enough, but remember also that in Gulf War 1 several of Iraq's best planes were flown out of the country - to Iran. However, Syria remains a far more likely home for any stray weapons I would have thought.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
That would be all good and well if there was any solid evidence Saddam even had viable WMDs at time of invasion. Furthermore, how oh how did Iran get ahold of these weapons? Remember that Iran and Iraq under Hussein were mortal enemies.

President George Bush was very clear, maybe you liberals have forgotten. They had WMD's, ever heard of the Osirak power plant?
I believe they used Al Quada to smuggle the weapons, it must be some sort of middle-man in all of this.

Iran and Iraq where mortal enemies, so where France and Germany. Things change.

I believe there was one type of WMD removed to Syria. It is a bio-fungal agent that reportedly procreates from hair and carried by wind currents. Most would call it Red Rain as it is a very advanced form of Yellow Rain that was used in Viet Nam by Russia. This stuff was engineered by Russia and produced by N. Korea.
It’s first testing was performed in Southern Afghanistan. It's second testing will be when the gas is released from the border of India over southeast Pakistan.
Reports I checked while in Iraq verified some (reports vary) amount of this weapon was removed by way of gas fuel trucks from Iraq to Syria prior to the start of the war. It was escorted by soldiers in Russian uniforms. From my experiences in Iraq my guess would lean to the Ukrainians who were always tripping us up.
This is the weapon that is planed to be used here in the US if all goes “well”.
However to get the largest bang for their bucks the terrorist want to gather as many law enforcement agents to the location of release as possible. Since the terrorist have in the past used the network of pedophiles they will use the gathering of abducted children for “bait”.

I have bad news for you Eclipse. Our president is a liar. Sadam had no WMD's. The WMD's they showed before an invasion were CGI pictures, not actual footage. This not only is no longer our concern, it is not even something I consider debatable. The so called "Intelligence" was no intelligence at all. N Korea had WMD's at this time of the invasion, so why didn't we invade them? Oh thats right, they don't have fields of oil.

It's a sad day when the leader of a "free nation" lies and a brutal dictator tells the truth.

Originally posted by evanmontegarde
It's a sad day when the leader of a "free nation" lies and a brutal dictator tells the truth.

Bush didn't lie Its horrible how you can accuse the President of lying! Iran took the nukes.

Remember when the whole world was in a tizzy because Saddam wouldn't let the nuclear inspectors go into certain areas of warehouses and storage rooms? Everyone was stomping their feet and screaming and Saddam raised his middle finger to Everyone On Earth. I think Syria has Iraq's WMDs.

I think there were suppossed to be some weapons found. But a third party who no longer wanted to play the war game, moved them. Not sure if it is Iran though.
But this same thought has definetly crossed my mind.

The Iraq had current stock piles of WMDs and Nuclear program faith based movement rears it ugly head again. People let it go and just admit that the coalition got sucked into a war that has proven to strategic blunder akin to Germany invading the Soviet Union.

Has it occurred to the people who subscribe to this particular faith that despite members of the regime including Saddam were captured no concrete info concerning WMDs e.t.c has turned up ?
Coalition leaders would have screamed at the top of there lungs any info that validated the case for war. Believe me I would have preferred that Iraq was the threat it was made to be so the US government would still have some creditability left. But the given the lack of evidence the only rational explanation is that Iraq wasn't the threat it was made out to be.

Originally posted by Eclipse_Solar
Bush didn't lie Its horrible how you can accuse the President of lying! Iran took the nukes.

Are you basing both of these on evidence or just opinion?

If evidence, show us what sources you have been reading.

Originally posted by Eclipse_Solar
When the US defeated Saddam, the WMD's where suddenly gone. What happened to them? Do you think that Iran might have taken them?

Are you for real Its pretty clear to all but the most brainwashed and/or lobotomized neocons that there were no WMD's...... Wait there were those aluminum rods

Originally posted by Eclipse_Solar
President George Bush was very clear, maybe you liberals have forgotten. They had WMD's, ever heard of the Osirak power plant?
I believe they used Al Quada to smuggle the weapons

Wow a boneafied sheeple. Welcome. Your mindless patriotic chest thumping aside. couple of things here. This asinie premise is almost worth ignoring but I simply cannot resist.

The Osriak plant never went fully online. So how exactly did they enrich the uranium? With pleasant thoughts?

Al Qaeda (please at least know how to spell it eh?) really was not in Iraq in force untill after the botched reconstrucion attempt that Bush and company botched.

You make Al Qaeda out to be a bunch of savages (along with the Iraqi people based on some of your posts I have seen) yet they were able to get the weapons out under George, Rummys , and tricky Dicks noses?

You know you remind me of the people that still think OJ did not do it

Originally posted by Eclipse_Solar
Bush didn't lie Its horrible how you can accuse the President of lying! Iran took the nukes.

OK, I may sound totally rude and for that I will apologize in advance, but Eclipse I suspect you are playing devil's advocate or you are a labotomized troll. There is NO POSSIBLE way you can truly believe what you have posted. Bush has lied NUMEROUS times and it is a matter of public record! It is NO SECRET to ANYONE that the man has lied to the American people on a continuous basis through out his entire Presidency. You do not have to take my word for it, just Google "Bush Lies" and you will get 7,600,000 hits as of this posting. There are sites DEDICATED to trying to keep track of the amount of lies that Bush has told us, as well as his Administration. Seriously, if you really believe what you have posted I must ask...Have you been living in a cave or out in the wilderness for the last 7 years?

Top Ten Bush Lies

Bush Watch

Tracking Bush Lies Blog

THIS GUY is writing a book all about Bush's lies

Pre Iraq Lies


This Site documents most of the lies about Iraq, but when you read it keep in mind it is dated 2003 so the list is now MUCH longer.

And I would seriously encourage you to look into Bush's platform when he first ran for President. By "first" I mean back in 1999 when he was still Governor Bush. Go back and look at the things he said he would do as President, then look at what he has actually done. I am not sure there has ever been a bigger liar than George W Bush to hold the highest office in the USA. If there has someone please point him out to me cause I would love to read more about whomever has the honor.

To get back to topic: I do not believe there was EVER any WMD's in Iraq AFTER Operation Desert Storm. Of course I would not expect you to take my word for it, you can just take the word of Mr. Bush himself in THIS Washington Post Article.

The Duelfer report makes clear that much of the accumulated body of 12 years of our intelligence and that of our allies was wrong. And we must find out why and correct the flaws.

Thank you and please drive thru!

[edit on 20/10/2007 by section8citizen]

couple of questions:

if saddam had these weapons why not use them on invading us soldiers?

leading up to the war, there was much UAV, and satellite surveillance of iraq. (how do you think they got those keen drawings of the chemical trucks and such? ) if trucks were loaded with wmds and moved to syria as they alleged, why not follow those trucks and bust them at the sites where they were stored?

i cant belive this is still in question. The administrations OWN commissioned report stated there were no weapons and no proof anything was moved to syria. and when questioned bush said."well we didnt know there were no weapons until we got there" forgetting all the "proof" they dropkicked down our throats about knowing exactly where the weapons were.


if one wants to know why intelligence provided to the president is flawed, one need only look at the folks providing the intelligence.
lets take a quick look,
Caspar Weinberger: secretary of defense under Reagan, associated with Bechtel...
Frank Carlucci: also secretary of defense under Reagan, associated with the Carlyle Group, General Dynamics, Kaman, Wackenhut. Interestingly he is also a member of PNAC, which is full of businessmen (mostly the business of war) promoting war and increased spending on US defense (from their companies of course) and the RAND corp.

Dick Cheney: secretary of defense under Bush I, not like i have to mention it here but he is affiliated with Halliburton. also i'd like to mention that Cheney was the one who linked Saddam to Al Qaeda even though the cia and pentagon said otherwise.

William Perry: secretary of defense under clinton, associated with many defense companies including: Electronic Defense Laboratories, ESL inc. Los Alamos National Security, LLC, he also a member of the iraq study group advising policy in iraq.

Donald Rumsfeld: secretary of defense under bush II. associated with PNAC, RAND corp., Bechtel

Robert Gates: current secretary of defense. associated with SAIC, a defense company tasked with rebuilding the democratic government of iraq and advising on oil contracts, and they even set up a media network in iraq to help win hearts and minds (propaganda)
www.signonsandiego.com...
interestingly, SAIC was commissioned in 1999 to write a report on the possibility of anthrax being mailed in the united states by terrorists
abcnews.go.com...

these are just secretarys of defense, im leaving out the various CIA guys, foreign policy advisors, and various pro war lobby groups and others with a financial interest in constant war and the need for ever-expanding security.


--its a big club, and you aint in it
-George Carlin

Was this a post about President bashing or was this post on what happened to the WMD??

section8citizen before you go and personally judge a man, why don't you meet him.
it sounds to me that you are the one that is buying into the garbage produced by the media. i guess the truth is not factual anymore, it's based on how many people write books about lies right?

if you think the war was based on oil, why don't you take a look at all of the oil mexico possesses. are we invading mexico?

Ha... I guess you're waiting for Hilary the honest politician to come in and save America. $5000 for every child... oh wait, no that won't work.
Here's a link for you, just for starters.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Turbo Kid, There are limits to satellite surveillance such as what happened with the tracking of the gas (bio-fungal). Between low clouds and sand storms the satellites eventually lost the angle of coverage. I have worked in the field with Christians In Action and they do a lot better work than anyone else but since Jimmy Carter blew the cover on 900 Middle Eastern operative’s info was a little limited. Oh if you don’t know your history “Kid” while Jimmy was letting Iran fall to Islamic extremist he also allowed the printing of a high glossing magazine ($8 dollars a copy from Pueblo CO.) showing those operatives along with wives and children and where they lived and went to school but hey he was such a bear for details.
Anyway looks to me like the primary cause of the Iraq war was to draw attention from Afghanistan. Why you ask? Well that is a little more recent history. In 2000, the year just before 911, the Taliban destroyed the poppy fields in Afghanistan. Big deal you say. Yes it was. How do you think 800 billion dollars out of US banking and trillions of dollars world wide would affect our leaders?
Our leaders do I assure you believe in GOD:
Gold
Oil
Drugs

But the bad news is the gas really was moved. Invading Syria will not produce it. I expect soon it will be stored with spent nuclear fuel in the Western regions of India. To be tested on South Eastern Pakistan. Take a minute and consider the consequences of that test.

reply to post by Comforter


comforter. i agree that satellite surveillance is limited, but where i take notice is, if they are going to claim things were moved, and claim to know WHERE they were moved, why wouldnt they bust them? (The CIA,MI5,mossad were not watching these guys?)That would make the adminstrations arguement hold water. But when you take in account that the weapons we claim he had were ones we sold him, then you have inspectors saying those weapons were destroyed, or are obsolete from old age, then our inability to find them, and bush's amibtions about iraq before 911, and that they are not demanding inspections inside syria or iran. It seems the perfect way to place blame with no proof.

And about afghanistan and poppys. i agree with you 100%. i find it no coincidence that since the afghanistan invasion that poppy production has hit record levels.
see my post in this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by 1337cshacker
I have bad news for you Eclipse. Our president is a liar. Sadam had no WMD's. The WMD's they showed before an invasion were CGI pictures, not actual footage. This not only is no longer our concern, it is not even something I consider debatable. The so called "Intelligence" was no intelligence at all. N Korea had WMD's at this time of the invasion, so why didn't we invade them? Oh thats right, they don't have fields of oil.

nicely said y in all countrys after the 9/11 was iraq attacked y iraq? y not n korea tru? because thay need to attack a weak target with something in return like oil u americans have all been tricked by your goverment if it was australia the PM would of been taken out allready

[edit on 10/27/2007 by SoFunkyMe]