So what is the [your] definition of what WMD's are, as it relates to Iraq?
Didn't Saddam tell us that he had no more chemical weapons? Where he fooled the UN inspection team.
So it looks like Saddam lied - again. As if anyone really believed him in the first place.
No we didn't; although it isn't surprising that you might think we did since variations of that particular lie (that the "US armed Iraq") have been repeated so many times.
Iraq did obtain various dual-use equipment from several US companies (nearly all illegally via deception), and even obtained samples of some biological agents (anthrax, for example, which, while they weaponized it, was delivered to them by a naive commerce department who believed it to be for cattle vaccine). But there was never a formal policy to arm Iraq in any way.
In fact, the exact opposite was true. We were arming their enemy Iran (covertly sending Iran, via Israel ironically, TOW ATGMs, HAWK SAMs, and a variety of other equipment to help them defend themselves against Iraq).
About the only thing in Iraq's inventory that was of US manufacter were a few dozen Bell 212 helicopters, used as unarmed transports. And even those were ordered for civilian use. The fact that Iraq used non-US (mostly Soviet, French, and Chinese) military equipment can easily be shown by going to a library and checking out a copy of Janes. Unfortunately, most people won't bother to do so, and will instead continue to believe the "US armed Iraq" lie.
No doubt, you can find quite a few stories in the media, not to mention a few books, which claim otherwise. But they're all lies, easily disproved just by looking at what Iraq actually had. Outside of the Soviet Union and Communist China, their biggest source for military equipment was France, but they had equipment from just about every weapon-exporting country on the planet (even MRLSs from Brazil and artillery from South Africa) except one, and that was the U.S.
Nonsense. What is the source of that allegation?
This has the Freepers all in a tizzy. The war is now justified at a cost of 5 dead and 36 wounded US soldiers ($and $600,000,000) per shell. Yay!
Many are questioning, though, why the information was not released earlier. Speculation is that we kept it a secret to prevent al-Qaeda from knowing that such armaments might still be found and used. (Of course, if thats the case, either Santorum has independently determined that these are ALL the weapons were ever going to find, or he has revealed state secrets to al-Qaeda in a cynical attempt to boost his polls against Casey.)
Personally, Ill assume these shells are long-past-their-freshness-date junk, until more details emerge.
Comment by RunningDogLackey June 21, 2006 @ 7:11 pm
How do you know we sold chemcial weapons to Saddam's Regime? Many countries sold Saddam many things but did the US sold the actual chemical weaponary?
Many chemicals are used in agriculture to help to get rid of pest or used in cleaning products. It's called dual use items. Remember Clinton going after dual use items during the 90's?
I think the US sold Iraq anthrax samples because lifestock needs anthrax vaccinations. We also sold Iraq Botulin toxin because it is used in medience.
Proof of burden is on Saddam....not on other countries.
Common household cleaning products can be lethal if you have large batches of it.
"WE (the US) taught and trained them how to make and use chemical weapons"
Yeah, right. Got any evidence that this statement is true?
2 Reasons why this is significant to me:
1. Saddam told everyone that EVERYTHING had been destroyed.
2. One soldier I know was present when delivery devices and precursor chemicals were dug out of the sand in Iraq. I can only assume it wasn't announced because the result would only be folks saying: "Precursors aren't the same as WMDs."
So you're implying we approved of their [Iraqi government] use of chemical weapons against anyone, in any shape or form? BULL****.
You willfully missed the first part of the news conference, when Senator Santorum quoted three dems saying TODAY in one form or another that there were never any WMD's-- that the Iraq war was fought on a false premise.
By the way, many of us here at FR also had plenty of reports that there were WMDs found, just nothing 'official' and certainly nothing with the bombshell effect of this announcement based on declassified documents.