posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:26 PM
Originally posted by micmerci
reply to post by whatsecret
Iraq wasn't GIVING Syria anything. They were transporting their own WMD's out of the country to appear on the world stage as the innocent martyr. They
were successful at that it seems as are Syria and Iran, presently.
Or maybe Iraq got rid of the weapons in 1995 and the satellite images of trucks going into Syria are not real just like most of Iraq brainwashing was
not real at the time?
Why would Syria take the WMD's and risk getting invaded?
Why didn't Hussein reveal that the WMD's are in Syria and accept Russia's help?
Why didn't Iraq use the WMD's in response to the invasion?
What did Hussein had to loose at that time if he used the WMD"s?
Do you see how unrealistic your theory is?
The point I'm trying to make is that Syria had chemical weapons for a long time but never used it to this day. And if they use it now it will guaranty
invasion and no country on earth would take Syria's side.
The CIA operation that should have prevented
the Iraq war
According to Tawfiq, Saddam Hussein gave the order to dismantle Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programmes in 1995, after his brother-in-law
and arms chief Hussein Kamel defected and briefed the UN inspectors. "I was Saddam's scientist," Tawfiq declared, with an ironic smile. "In 1991 if
you exposed something you were killed. In 1995 if you hid something you were killed!" Sawsan dutifully gathered this information and returned to the
United States to pass it on to her handlers. But the CIA was unimpressed. "Saad told me there was nothing left," she told AFP. "That everything had
been either destroyed or dismantled by the UN and the regime has abandoned its nuclear programme. And he begged me to explain all that back in the
ETA: I just read your response again and it seems that you're saying Syria stored their weapons in Iraq?
edit on 3-12-2012 by whatsecret
because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-12-2012 by whatsecret because: (no reason given)