At last! Have they finally found a 'weapon of mass destruction' in Iraq?

Can somebody point out the rocket motor nozzle on that "missile" . It appears to be an inert practice dummy without a motor.

It kind of looks as if it may have been fired and didn't quite make it to it's target. Sort of crashed and buried itself in the dirt.

The "No WMD In Iraq" propaganda was always known to be a left-wing lie propagated as part of their anti-war, anti-Bush agenda from the earliest days of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The Clintons knew it was a lie, the United Nations knew it was a lie, seemingly everybody knew it was a lie to discredit the legitimacy of the war effort.

The UN, particularly, knew that there were WMD in Iraq, going back over two decades. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein used WMD liberally — especially nerve agents and mustard gas — against Iran and later against defenseless Kurds in northern Iraq. The effects of Saddam's chemical attacks are still manifesting today, both in Iran and Iraq, as the birth defect rate is several times higher in that region than anywhere else in the world.

All through the Clinton administration, the UN was adamant in warning Saddam to stop using these weapons and destroy his stockpiles of WMD — there were 16 UN resolutions passed and issued on this matter during the Clinton administration alone, each resolution more sternly worded than the previous.

That's because they knew the WMD did exist in Iraq, and because Saddam repeatedly kicked out UN weapons inspectors all through the 1990s. Even Bill Clinton himself ordered missile strikes in Iraq on suspected WMD manufacturing facilities — you will recall the infamous Clinton missile strike that blew up a "pharmaceutical company" in Iraq, resulting in the death of one lone maintenance man at the facility.

Here's a blast from the past, over 2 years BEFORE George W. Bush took office...

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

----------------------------

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

Unlike George W. Bush, who took his case for war before the United Nations for 18 long months, Bill Clinton never consulted the UN Security Council before launching his attacks on Iraq. Clinton violated international law in this respect, which is enough to get anyone else labeled a "terrorist," right.

After 911, George Bush correctly named Saddam Hussein as a user and stockpiler of illegal WMD, just as both Bill and Hillary Clinton had pointed the finger at Iraq. Where were all these "No WMD in Iraq" Lefties back during the Clinton administration? Likely, they had their heads up their own asses, ignoring the truth as usual.

While the Bush administration followed legal channels to war for 18 months — taking the case to the U.S. Congress and to the UN Security Council — Saddam Hussein undoubtedly moved his WMD around, sending much of it to Syria and burying much of it at remote locations all over Iraq.

Another blast from the past, a year before we went to war in Iraq...

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

After the war finally began in 2003 — hardly a "rush to war" as Bush detractors falsely claimed — evidence mounted from Day One that Saddam had still stockpiled WMD until very recently before the war started: Chemical weapons handling gear and biohazard suits were found stored in Iraqi schools; Still-toxic chemical warhead casings were discovered; Mobile chemical weapons labs were discovered.

All that in addition to caches of literally millions of landmines stored in bunkers all around Iraq. Some could make a case that millions of landmines could rightly be considered WMD as readily as any chemical warheads.

Beyond all this, Saddam was still threatening to use WMD right up until Coalition forces rolled into Baghdad! That bragging bastard (may he rot in Hell) was still using terror tactics.

Those Lefties who assailed the Bush administration for taking definitive action against Iraq can be counted among those who offered aid and comfort to a terrorist nation, a nation that used and stockpiled WMD and threatened to use it right up until the end.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

— Doc Velocity







[edit on 2/6/2010 by Doc Velocity]

Originally posted by groingrinder
Can somebody point out the rocket motor nozzle on that "missile" . It appears to be an inert practice dummy without a motor.

You can see very plainly that this configuration is meant to be carried and then released. More properly than a self-propelled "missile," this thing resembles a guided bomb.

— Doc Velocity




[edit on 2/5/2010 by Doc Velocity]

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Exactly my question...where is the tip? The nuclear device itself. Back in Russia? Doubtfully.

Also, looks like they wrote a message on the fuselage to their intended target as we are known to do, meaning this thing was armed at some point.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


G'day Doc Velocity

That's a really well thought out & well written written post

I agree broadly with your position & in the beginning I was a strong supporter of the preemptive action against Iraq.

Now.....some years later.....

I am not so sure if it was all worth it.

I guess if pushed I'll say it was, but I don't feel that very strongly any more.

I think I'll equivocate like this for quite a long time.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

i seek not to offend anyone, and i'd burn in hell before i'd claim to be an ally of Bush


But


Anyone who doens't think Saddam had WMDs is either really dim witted or just bull headed and refusing to agree with common sense.

Now - that being said - i still don't think Iraq is justified. I don't care if they had WMDs. Lots of places have WMDs and we're not going after them.

Save my money and use it on me. Stop spending it on a bunch of people on the other side of the globe who would rather see me dead than say hello.

What a laugh.

Are you serious !? A country the US invaded has a couple weapons they could have used to defend themselves with ? Strange!

I find this story ironic with the timing and all.

Reading the link to article shows some reader comments at the bottom of the page, and one says they were in Iraq and there are valid reasons why the missile was damaged before burying it , and the reason that the WMD's that WERE already found there wern't reported because they were made in the USA, and the UK lol....
The thread derailers are worried that bush might get some credit?
That is some darn good entertainment

good catch

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
The "No WMD In Iraq" propaganda was always known to be a left-wing lie propagated as part of their anti-war, anti-Bush agenda from the earliest days of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

No the lie seems to be that we went there to find WMD. I seem to remember that being one of Bush's reasons.

The Clintons knew it was a lie, the United Nations knew it was a lie, seemingly everybody knew it was a lie to discredit the legitimacy of the war effort.

The UN, particularly, knew that there were WMD in Iraq, going back over two decades. During the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam Hussein used WMD liberally — especially nerve agents and mustard gas — against Iran and later against defenseless Kurds in northern Iraq. The effects of Saddam's chemical attacks are still manifesting today, both in Iran and Iraq, as the birth defect rate is several times higher in that region than anywhere else in the world.

Ok so we knew he had WMD in the war vs Iran because the US gov showed everyone the bill of sale, in addition to him using them.

I wonder if the birth defect rate has anything to do with the US use of depleted uranium and white phosphorous? Both, if I am not mistaken, illegal under international law.

All through the Clinton administration, the UN was adamant in warning Saddam to stop using these weapons and destroy his stockpiles of WMD — there were 16 UN resolutions passed and issued on this matter during the Clinton administration alone, each resolution more sternly worded than the previous.

That's because they knew the WMD did exist in Iraq, and because Saddam repeatedly kicked out UN weapons inspectors all through the 1990s. Even Bill Clinton himself ordered missile strikes in Iraq on suspected WMD manufacturing facilities — you will recall the infamous Clinton missile strike that blew up a "pharmaceutical company" in Iraq, resulting in the death of one lone maintenance man at the facility.

Odd how you went from everyone "knew" to using the word suspected. If everyone "knew" he had them then the lab wouldnt be "suspected" now would it?

Where is all the proof the US was going to show the world?

Unlike George W. Bush, who took his case for war before the United Nations for 18 long months, Bill Clinton never consulted the UN Security Council before launching his attacks on Iraq. Clinton violated international law in this respect, which is enough to get anyone else labeled a "terrorist," right.

After 911, George Bush correctly named Saddam Hussein as a user and stockpiler of illegal WMD, just as both Bill and Hillary Clinton had pointed the finger at Iraq. Where were all these "No WMD in Iraq" Lefties back during the Clinton administration? Likely, they had their heads up their own asses, ignoring the truth as usual.

While the Bush administration followed legal channels to war for 18 months — taking the case to the U.S. Congress and to the UN Security Council — Saddam Hussein undoubtedly moved his WMD around, sending much of it to Syria and burying much of it at remote locations all over Iraq.

Oh I get it. George Bush, the most lawful president ever.

After the war finally began in 2003 — hardly a "rush to war" as Bush detractors falsely claimed — evidence mounted from Day One that Saddam had still stockpiled WMD until very recently before the war started: Chemical weapons handling gear and biohazard suits were found stored in Iraqi schools; Still-toxic chemical warhead casings were discovered; Mobile chemical weapons labs were discovered.

Sounds like youre reading straight from a neocon pamphlet.

All that in addition to caches of literally millions of landmines stored in bunkers all around Iraq. Some could make a case that millions of landmines could rightly be considered WMD as readily as any chemical warheads.

No they couldnt. I was going to say I cant believe you even tried to put forth this argument, but I have already read your post.

Heres a blast from the past: U.S. won't join landmine ban, administration decides - CNN.com
Nov 24, 2009

Beyond all this, Saddam was still threatening to use WMD right up until Coalition forces rolled into Baghdad! That bragging bastard (may he rot in Hell) was still using terror tactics.

You mean he was threatening to use WMDs right up until the US stopped threatening him and started action?

Those Lefties who assailed the Bush administration for taking definitive action against Iraq can be counted among those who offered aid and comfort to a terrorist nation, a nation that used and stockpiled WMD and threatened to use it right up until the end.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

— Doc Velocity

How about the rubbish that sold it to him? A terrorist nation? Aid and comfort to terrorists? OMG Iraq supposedly trained al Qaeda in bomb making? Didnt the CIA already do that?

Your post is a great example of how mind control works.

I'm such an opinionated ass. But look! It wasn't buried there, it was planted there! I suppose some off-duty officer had a metal-detector during off-hours? I'm calling this too-little-too late. I'll give an F; for effort.

Just to clarify...
I meant the F for effort to be directed at the story, not the messenger.

[edit on (2/5/1010 by loveguy]

reply to post by Now_Then


Does the missile in question HAVE a nuclear warhead attached?

If not, then it's clearly a non-starter. This is a missile, not "WMD". It's also obviously ancient - Even if it's got a nuclear bomb at the tip, I doubt any Iraqi officials had an inlinking that the thing was there in the first place

Originally posted by antideceit
the reason that the WMD's that WERE already found there wern't reported because they were made in the USA, and the UK

I have no doubt that much of the WMD and conventional armaments in the Middle East are from Western sources. Israel itself is the most heavily-armed country in the Middle East, and the bulk of its weapons technology — nuclear weapons included — are from Uncle Sam.

However, don't fall into the trap of thinking that all weapons in the Middle East are Western in origin.

On more than one occasion, shipments of missiles and missile parts originating in Korea and China have been intercepted on their way to destinations in Iraq and Iran. These are just the shipments that were intercepted... God alone only knows how much of the stuff makes it through successfully.

Also, Russia is one of the biggest known suppliers of weapons to the Middle East, and our good friend Al Gore (in his capacity as VP under Bill Clinton) even made deals with Russia for weapons going to Iran in the 1990s. Check this story, which was less-than-well-publicized in the 1990s...

VP Al Gore Deals with Russia for Weapons to Iran

It's not at all surprising to find lots of Russian weapons technology in Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan, even WMD-grade technology.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by watcher73
No the lie seems to be that we went there to find WMD. I seem to remember that being one of Bush's reasons.

Keep drinking the koolaid, my boy. You're ignoring the fact that the United Nations "went looking" all through the 1990s and Saddam kept kicking them out. You're ignoring the fact that all your lefty friends in Congress and the Clinton administration were convinced the WMD existed and were all in favor of striking Iraq — which Clinton DID. Oh, but you forgot about that... Or perhaps you weren't old enough to read back in the 90s.

Originally posted by watcher73
Ok so we knew he had WMD in the war vs Iran because the US gov showed everyone the bill of sale, in addition to him using them.

Saddam had ongoing WMD development programs, he didn't get everything from the USA, as you Lefties are always whining.

Originally posted by watcher73
Odd how you went from everyone "knew" to using the word suspected. If everyone "knew" he had them then the lab wouldnt be "suspected" now would it? Where is all the proof the US was going to show the world?

Ask Bill Clinton, he's the one who ordered missile strikes on Iraq, it was his administration who called it "suspected" only AFTER they blew it up.

Originally posted by watcher73
Oh I get it. George Bush, the most lawful president ever.

Don't be such a horse's ass. Those are your words, not mine. But Bush did follow the legal course of action, whereas Clinton did not.

Originally posted by watcher73
Sounds like youre reading straight from a neocon pamphlet.

I was publishing this information back in the 1990s, while you were still wetting your diaper. BTW, what the hell is a neocon, anyway?

Originally posted by watcher73
No they couldnt [make a case that landmines are weapons of mass destruction]. I was going to say I cant believe you even tried to put forth this argument

There you go again, making uninformed statements. In point of fact, MANY people have likened landmines to WMD.

What do you think WMD are, exactly? Do you erroneously believe that the term applies to chemical and biological and nuclear warheads only? Wrong, Einstein.

The exact definition of WMD is: A weapon that kills or injures civilians as well as military personnel.

Period. WMD do not blow up whole cities, they don't wipe out whole villages, but WMD simply kill civilians as well as military personnel.

Former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance called landmines "WMD in slow motion"... The USA hasn't used landmines since 1991 and hasn't manufactured landmines since 1997, simply because the goddamned things kill civilians as well as military personnel well after military operations are concluded.

As for refusing to sign the landmines ban treaty, you can take that up with your Nobel Peace Prize-winning president, Barack Hussein Obama — it was his administration that refused to sign the ban last year.

Originally posted by watcher73
You mean he was threatening to use WMDs right up until the US stopped threatening him and started action?

Saddam Hussein threatened to use WMD dating back to the 1980s, and he threatened to use them the day before Coalition forces rolled into Baghdad in 2003. That's 20 years of not only threatening to use WMD, but using WMD. Saddam Hussein had a proven track record of WMD threats and use — ask the Kurd villagers who were gassed to death by the hundreds.

Originally posted by watcher73
Your post is a great example of how mind control works.

And your post is a great example of not having a mind to control. You're pure Lefty propaganda, my little parrot.

— Doc Velocity







[edit on 2/5/2010 by Doc Velocity]

the only WMDs ever found in Iraq was an effort called Desert Storm and was comprised of 100k + troops

Originally posted by kleverone
It's a good thing they found that!!! It looks totally launch ready.

Kinda reminds me of a '72' pinto I used to own.

I owned one of those, and they *are* deadly! It was held up by yarn and duct-tape. Do you remember how the gas tanks would EXPLODE in the event of a rear-end collision??!

[edit on 5-2-2010 by Wookiep]

Originally posted by TXRabbit
the only WMDs ever found in Iraq was an effort called Desert Storm and was comprised of 100k + troops

Not true at all. Operation Desert Storm took place in 1991. Operation Iraqi Freedom began in 2003.

Between 1991 and 2003, the United Nations Security Council issued 17 WMD Resolutions against Iraq, warning Saddam Hussein to stop production of WMD and destroy his stockpiles of WMD, OR ELSE there would be military action taken against Iraq.

17 Resolutions...

17 Warnings...

OR ELSE...

The Clinton Administration took this so seriously that Clinton ordered missile strikes on Iraq to destroy WMD production facilities.

All FACT.

However, I know those who are incapable of facing the facts are likely to never accept the Truth.


— Doc Velocity

reply to post by Doc Velocity


ALL CAPS AND INCREASED FONT SIZE MAKES AN ARGUMENT TRUE!

Why is it that folks such as yourself cheer on obliterating a country entirely because of 17 UN resolutions muscled through by the country that wanted to do the obliteration...

But think that the 221 resolutions issues against Israel aren't even worth looking at?

Oh right. One country is Arabs.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by TheWalkingFox]

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

Originally posted by watcher73
No the lie seems to be that we went there to find WMD. I seem to remember that being one of Bush's reasons.

Keep drinking the koolaid, my boy. You're ignoring the fact that the United Nations "went looking" all through the 1990s and Saddam kept kicking them out. You're ignoring the fact that all your lefty friends in Congress and the Clinton administration were convinced the WMD existed and were all in favor of striking Iraq — which Clinton DID. Oh, but you forgot about that... Or perhaps you weren't old enough to read back in the 90s.

Im not ignoring that fact. I merely superceding it with the fact that both the lefties and righties in the gov are taking orders from the same people. Something you apparently are failing to grasp while youre still all caught up in the right vs left thang.

Originally posted by watcher73
Ok so we knew he had WMD in the war vs Iran because the US gov showed everyone the bill of sale, in addition to him using them.

Saddam had ongoing WMD development programs, he didn't get everything from the USA, as you Lefties are always whining.

The only WMDs he used were from the US. The imaginary WMDs no one can find are from his ongoing development.

Originally posted by watcher73
Odd how you went from everyone "knew" to using the word suspected. If everyone "knew" he had them then the lab wouldnt be "suspected" now would it? Where is all the proof the US was going to show the world?

Ask Bill Clinton, he's the one who ordered missile strikes on Iraq, it was his administration who called it "suspected" only AFTER they blew it up.

So you took the word suspected and translated it into "knew" with zero evidence. How religious of you.

Originally posted by watcher73
Oh I get it. George Bush, the most lawful president ever.

Don't be such a horse's ass. Those are your words, not mine. But Bush did follow the legal course of action, whereas Clinton did not.

Lie some more.

Show me the UN resolution declaring war and Ill show you a "coalition of the willing" to break international law.

Originally posted by watcher73
Sounds like youre reading straight from a neocon pamphlet.

I was publishing this information back in the 1990s, while you were still wetting your diaper. BTW, what the hell is a neocon, anyway?

We werent issued diapers in 1991.

neocon from the latin new con-artists.

Originally posted by watcher73
No they couldnt [make a case that landmines are weapons of mass destruction]. I was going to say I cant believe you even tried to put forth this argument

There you go again, making uninformed statements. In point of fact, MANY people have likened landmines to WMD.

Oh so youre just copying other people...

You should pick better people to copy.

What do you think WMD are, exactly? Do you erroneously believe that the term applies to chemical and biological and nuclear warheads only? Wrong, Einstein.

The exact definition of WMD is: A weapon that kills or injures civilians as well as military personnel.

It's like you totally made up your own definition and left the M out of WMD.

Period. WMD do not blow up whole cities, they don't wipe out whole villages, but WMD simply kill civilians as well as military personnel.

lol I'm glad I had time to quote you before you went and googled WMD or something.

Former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance called landmines "WMD in slow motion"...

By that definition soda is a WMD.

The USA hasn't used landmines since 1991 and hasn't manufactured landmines since 1997, simply because the goddamned things kill civilians as well as military personnel well after military operations are concluded.

As for refusing to sign the landmines ban treaty, you can take that up with your Nobel Peace Prize-winning president, Barack Hussein Obama — it was his administration that refused to sign the ban last year.

I'll take your facts about US use and manufacturing about landmines with slightly less than grain of salt after reading this post. You think if landmines were WMDs then he would have no problem banning them. I think the real question is why didnt GW Bush ban them since he has a real dislike for WMD?

Originally posted by watcher73
You mean he was threatening to use WMDs right up until the US stopped threatening him and started action?

Saddam Hussein threatened to use WMD dating back to the 1980s, and he threatened to use them the day before Coalition forces rolled into Baghdad in 2003. That's 20 years of not only threatening to use WMD, but using WMD. Saddam Hussein had a proven track record of WMD threats and use — ask the Kurd villagers who were gassed to death by the hundreds.

I wonder how he would have managed to gas the Kurds without the US selling him the chemicals? Youd think the US could have saved itself all these years of war by simply refusing to arm him. Especially since according to you he was making the threats since the 80's and we kept selling until the 90s.

Doesnt make sense does it?

Originally posted by watcher73
Your post is a great example of how mind control works.

And your post is a great example of not having a mind to control. You're pure Lefty propaganda, my little parrot.

— Doc Velocity

1) signing posts is stupid, your name is already on them

2) a sure sign that youre mind controlled is to call everyone who disagrees with you a name for the opposite side.

Get it straight. I am not a lefty. I am not a righty. Both sides are the same. You're being played like an ill tuned fiddle.





[edit on 6-2-2010 by watcher73]

reply to post by Doc Velocity

The Clinton Administration took this so seriously that Clinton ordered missile strikes on Iraq to destroy WMD production facilities.

So, let's see, the Clinton Administration had the WMD facilities destroyed. So even though they were already gone. George W. Bush decides that he still has WMD's and links Iraq to Al Qaeda. Even though, there was no evidence that Saddam had WMD's anymore and by your own admission, the production facilities were already destroyed by Clinton.