Posted on 06/29/2006 5:39:02 PM PDT by wagglebee
The U.S. military has found more Iraqi weapons in recent months, in addition to the 500 chemical munitions recently reported by the Pentagon, a top defense intelligence official said Thursday.
Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, did not specify if the newly found weapons were also chemical munitions. But he said he expected more.
"I do not believe we have found all the weapons," he told the House Armed Services Committee, offering few details in an open session that preceded a classified briefing to lawmakers.
Responding to questions from lawmakers anxious to make political points ahead of the November congressional elections, U.S. defense officials said the 500 chemical weapons discovered in Iraq were "weapons of mass destruction." However their degraded state may make them more dangerous to those who find them than anyone else.
Maples said the pre-Gulf War rockets and artillery rounds recently reported by the Pentagon were produced in the 1980s and could not be used as intended.
If the chemical agent, sarin, was removed from the munitions and repackaged, it could be lethal. Its release in a U.S. city, in certain circumstances, would be devastating, Maples said.
But despite statements of concern by Republicans about the risk of terrorists releasing the chemical in the United States, defense officials said the munitions pose as much a threat to people who try to handle them as potential victims.
When asked by a Democrat to confirm the weapons pose a risk to troops in Iraq, not Americans at home, Maples said, "Yes."
Republican lawmakers, some facing tough election battles amid growing anti-war sentiment, called the discovery of the weapons significant.
Republican Rep. Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania suggested the munitions were in fact the weapons of mass destruction that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein lied about, leading the United States to war.
"For those who claim that these weapons are not the weapons of mass destruction that the United States went to war over, I would refer them to 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions that Saddam Hussein violated," Weldon said. "It didn't say pre-'91 chemical weapons. It didn't say post-'91 chemical weapons. It said chemical weapons."
But Democrats dismissed such arguments and said the weapons were not the "imminent threat" used to justify the war.
"It's very difficult to characterize these as the imminent threat weapons that we were told we were looking for," said Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a California Democrat.
"For those who claim that these weapons are not the weapons of mass destruction that the United States went to war over, I would refer them to 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions that Saddam Hussein violated," Weldon said. "It didn't say pre-'91 chemical weapons. It didn't say post-'91 chemical weapons. It said chemical weapons."
What I want to know is why Bush doesn't go on TV and tell everyone this.
later read
I don't understand it either.
There is NO rational reason why Bush doesn't tout this or taunt the media for NOT reporting it.
" U.S. Still Finding WMD in Iraq"
We can't be, because Keith Olberman said last night that we haven't found any.
It has frustrated the heck out of me as well. All I can figure is that they have given up on this issue unless they find more recent WMDs - a slam dunk - that the dems can't demagogue.
Enough sarin gas to kill a medium size city is a "slam dunk" in my book.
Uh, it's a Reuters report.
Well, I'll be a lefties uncle.
Go figure.
That's AL-Reuters
These weapons may be pre-'91, but when they were being discussed, they had been under control of the Iraqi Government and in all probability maintained. Since our invasion, they have not been maintained and have quite likely deteriorated, but that does not diminish their danger at the time.
mine too. And I don't pretend to understand why this admin is not playing this better politically. The only thing I can think of is they want to completely destroy the dems on this issue and not allow them to say anything to demagogue it except they were wrong.
Once again the democrats are lying. Bush never claimed that Saddam and/or his weapons were an "imminent threat". In fact, he specifically stated that we should not wait for him to become an imminent threat before we removed him from power.
Great point. As I told my liberal brother-in-law, "Next you're going to say that the Kurds just fell down and died?"
I wonder how it went with him checking into what Sandy Berger stole from the Archives.
One possible reason: If the US announces this discovery, it may tip off insurgents as to where they can find some of their own so they can use them against us. It may also jeopardize the lives of informants who led us to what we have discovered thus far. Maybe. Then there's the "Bush let the Democrats hang themselves with their own words and now he's trotting out the evidence of their perfidy just in time for the 06 and 08 elections" theory. However, I think the first theory is probably closer to the truth.
In other words, Republicans are only talking about this because they're in political trouble? God, I hate Reuters.
I watched most of the replay of the hearing today, Frank Gaffney was brilliant,....but the DemonicRats still are claiming Bush lied....
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.