oh but you are RB, you are :stuck_out_tongue:

There were at one time banned chemicals in the warheads, they were just too old to be harmful. Why didn’t Saddam tell the UN inspectors about these? Why didn’t the inspectors find these?

Again, the war in Iraq was waged because Saddam wouldn’t confirm he had disband his WMD programs. Even if he destroyed all of them, or knew they were all too old to be harmful, he needed to relay that to the UN inspectors. The war was not waged because he had this giant arsenal of WMD, it was waged because he use to have a large cache, and never gave proof it was gone. The only safe assumption was that he did have them. Either way, we had to find out, and he wouldn’t tell us we had to use force.

uhh…Blindlizard, that link just shows that militants were trying to buy weapons… :smiley:

Remeber, the old stuff that is uncovered, thats 80’s stuff, this war was waged on him **having weapons **and developing WMD’s.

Acctualy, it was known by the UN

One of Mr Blix’s predecessors as chief UN weapons inspector, Rolf Ekeus, told BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme that the discovery of the warheads was “militarily insignificant”. (Telegraph, 18 Jan., p. 2) Dr Blix himself was equally dismissive, describing the warheads discovery as “no big deal”: “This discovery is interesting and obviously the warheads have to be destroyed. But its not something thats so important because we’re talking about empty warheads.” (Telegraph, 18 Jan., p. 1)

Dr Blix’s summary: “Some 12 empty shells have been forgotten and that, evidently, is not very good. But it is not a very big quantity. Its not a smoking gun.” (Independent, 18 Jan., p.1) None of the 12 warheads had produced “any evidence” of containing traces of lethal chemicals. (Observer, 19 Jan., p. 4)

No, the war was waged because he didn’t disclose what weapons he had, it didn’t matter if they were made in the 90’s, 80’s or 50’s.

The link is not a joke. It shows weapons that had been WMD, reguardless of shelf lige.

No, the war was waged because he didn’t disclose what weapons he had, it didn’t matter if they were made in the 90’s, 80’s or 50’s.

It does matter, Iraq was not under sanctions before so they could have had all the bombs they wanted. Once sanctions were placed, those shells were empty so he did not have to declare them. And the fact remains, he has no WMD’s. Thats why the whitehouse, which would have jumped on that like poop on kevlar to bloat out of proportion.

If he has no WMD what happened to the ones he used to kill his own people in the north? Did he make a batch and then use them all up? The point is we wouldn’t know unless he told us. He refused to and we went to war.

There are reports in the news now that the CIA is admiting that it got it wrong regarding the information on WMD.

Exacly. The ones he used to kill his people were the ones we and other coutries gave him. And he used them, so he didnt have them anymore.

The Report says it all.

ohhhhh…you mean the weapons the US Gov gave to Saddam…

for the sake of yourself…please download and watch these 2 documentaries



REAL FACTS from an open minded person…

[ot]You don’t seriously think that Alex Jones is open minded or produces real facts do you? He has no credible cross-references. :P[/ot]