Posted on 05/20/2004 11:47:27 AM PDT by Steven W.
You have trouble with Scott Ritter AKA Saddam's personal child-sex-blackmailed excuse maker specifying, before we went in, that the variety found in 1996 were NOT of the same type deployed against our troops recently?
Good find. I don't surf the blogs (maybe I should start) so I hadn't heard of this.
that is very interesting because - you're right - it appears our intelligence was beyond where the UN (and even Scott Ritter admits to the world) was factually.
I heard Biden on Fox saying that everyone knew Iraq had WMD, knew they had the ability to produce them, but they weren't weaponzied. He blamed Cheney and Rumsfield's belief in the guy they just arrested in Iraq (name?) for leading the President into the war. I think the new mantra is going to be "OK, so they had WMD, but they weren't weaponized." Whatever the heck that means. The four airliners they hijacked on 9/11 weren't weaponized either--until they were flown into buildings.
How much you want to bet this gets NO national media attention?
"I heard Biden on Fox saying that everyone knew Iraq had WMD, knew they had the ability to produce them, but they weren't weaponzied."
OMG, that's just so twisted and dishonest.
I think, if one of the recently banned's rants were translated correctly, that the guy you're looking for a name on is Chalabi.
Spot on about the airliners.
How could a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" not be "weaponized?" Biden's remark is an oxymoron.
Dunno.
It's intellectual dishonesty of the type that gave us "That depends on what the meaning of the word 'is', is" and "No controlling legal authority".
Biden has to ignore the fact that international agreement and consensus since pretty much WWI states that Sarin is a WMD.
It's internationally stated an ddefined as such.
So Biden has to be either insane, stupid, or simply ignoring fact to fit an agenda.
Egads, so immediately you can tell who's using HTML, the spelling chicken or not.
"Weaponized" is military-speak for possessing the raw materials by which WMD could be produced, but lacking a delivery means (bomb, artillery shell, missile warhead). Clearly the 155mm shell says that Biden doesn't know whereof he speaks. When Kerry, Clinton, Gore, et al were speaking of Saddam's WMD (pre-GWB), they were clearly referring to "weaponized" WMD.
you are right - Slow Joe Biden is treading water and showing that the extensive brain surgery he underwent a few years back did not go far enough.
Hugh just covered this on his show ...
I do have some questions that I hope can be answered here:
Over the past year, I've periodically heard about these HUGE ammo dumps in Iraq the size of a small county or so, that would take a VERY long time to sift through.
Now:
1) Could someone ballpark how far along are we in looking through them (e.g., 20%, 50%, 80%)?
2) Are we sure that we know about all these dumps, or could there be more yet to be found, in spite of their size? (Never mind all that desert that could have something buried in it like the Mig jets, not to mention Syria Public/Clandestine Storage Co.)
3) How thorough is this inspection regime, i.e., do they automatically dismiss an artillery shell as "conventional" if they don't see the "green band" or some other obvious external indicator of a non-conventional round? Or are they taking them apart one by one? If it's the latter, wouldn't that take YEARS even under the best of circumstances (i.e., as many personnel as they want working 24/7)?
4) Is David Kay really in the same league with Blix? He sounds relatively even-handed to me (said Iraq was still dangerous due to the technology available to terrorists 'wandering through') and he is the guy who found stuff back in '98, isn't he?
We need answers to these questions NOW. Or at least I do...
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.