IRAQ MINISTER SAYS SADDAM WMD CAREFULLY HIDDEN

Reuters ^ | 1/29/04

[Coop]

and the available evidence points to these stockpiles not existing.

No, it doesn't. Make your case, if it does. (Some of you just really have trouble grasping the fact that you can't prove a negative.)

[sean327]

O.K. I see what you are getting at, and I agree, the weapons were there, the problem is we don't know what happened to them. I looked at your profile and realised I was preaching to the choir. Sorry about that. I only wanted to point out to others on this thread that there is a difference between the intel tactical units use, develop, and impliment. I think the President did the right thing, WMD or no WMD. I just love the debate. By the way I became a Jarhead in 1984 also. Fox Co Plt 2101 MCRD San Diego. Graduated 14 Dec 84. Senior Drill Instructor Sgt Graves, DI's Sgt Walter, Sgt Petti, and Cpl Simmons. These men's names and faces will forever be burned into my soul. Semper Fi!

[Coop]

Plt 1009, A Co., 1st Bn., Parris Island, Feb 85 graduation

Semper Fidelis, Sean!

[justshutupandtakeit]

The really interesting question is why would he not come clean and allow the UN to do its job when defiance cost him 20 billion a yr in lost oil revenues? This has totalled over 200 billion during the period of sanctions.

If he had no weapons why on earth would he have foregone such wealth? This, to me, is the strongest proof that he did, indeed, have these weapons.

[Physicist]

Based upon the evidence we have right now.

The point is that we don't have evidence right now. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

We know that the stockpiles did exist. We don't know what became of them. If they were destroyed, fine, but it's not enough to say that we didn't find them. We need to be able to say (and prove) "this amount of anthrax was destroyed by this method at this location using this equipment on this date; this amount of mustard gas was destroyed by this..." and so on, until the entire stockpile is accounted for. Short of that, we need to act as if those weapons still exist. That was true a year ago and it's true now.

I suppose it's possible that Saddam had all that stuff destroyed when we weren't looking, and failed to keep any record of it, thereby causing a war. He should have been more careful in his bookkeeping. But that's his bad, not ours.

[Marysecretary]

Maybe she took one look at his new 'underground palace' and took half of what he owned (WMD's) and boogied outta there. Who really knows. It's all supposition and conjecture. I think they're hidden somewhere but what do I know? Not any more than any of the rest of us, I guess.

[BushisTheMan]

I'm going with Cheney on this one. If Cheney says there's WMD in Iraq...then I believe him.

And I would dealy love for it to be revealed in late September, along with pulling Bin Laden out of the closet for Ms. Albright. That would be so sweet!

[Go Gordon]

Face it. A janitor in a WMD facility could become a very wealthy man right now by telling us where the stuff was buried. Some scientist who drank too much, could have told his wife where they are. To have a very active program, there are way too many people who know things. One person would have blabbed right now, either out of greed, out of spite, or out of fear of a very mean looking CIA field agent.

And just how many people involved in the actual concealment do you think Saddam allowed to live? Do you remember the story about the one scientist that tried to jump in the UN white Branco for the inspectors ? He's dead Jim. He had them, they'll show up sooner or later. Remember last week when they found buried munitions from the Iraq/Iran war?

[Go Gordon]

But then one of history's biggest mysteries will be why didn't Saddam use them.

Because it would have meant the US was right (that he had them illegally) and the rest of the world would have had to support REGIME CHANGE! Saddam thought he could buy off the security counsel into not allowing the US to attack. He probably thought Bush II would limit himself to UN mandates only, just like Bush I. In addition, bad field intel and lack of communication during the sprint to Baghdad (and that first night bomb that apparently almost took him out, but left him injured/groggy), meant Saddam got caught short on time to implement any of his pre-war plans.

[HankReardon]

Oh, is the trash fire how bio-weapons are disposed of in Chicago? If not, how would we know this?

[HankReardon]

Now let's keep im mind, the liberal socialist Democrats and the liberal socialist elements of the media will not be over reporting anything less then tons of WMD's found. Afterall, they have been hoping for encouaging failure for U.S. forces all throughout this war.

[HankReardon]

We cannot find Jimmy Hoffa, he must have never existed!

[HankReardon]

The burden of proof was on Saddam. It was up to him to prove that he did not have them, it was not up to us to prove that he did! TA DA!

[Solson]

You're absolutely right. But that doesn't diminish the fact that this was an intelligence failure on the part of two-three administrations, multiple countries, and the UN.

[Solson]

It does make the case that this was an intelligence failure. Kay saw that, Condi Rice sees that. Most rational people agree.

[HankReardon]

No, this was an intelligence failure on the part of Saddam Hussein.

[Maria S]

Loved the "Absolut" ad! I've got a collection of them.

[LibWhacker]

When theses WMD are found, I want to see the press relentlessly hammer 'Rats everyday, for months and months on end, about how they lied to America.

[HankReardon]

Because of the Iraq War WMD's have been found and being dismantled and destroyed, in Libyia. What a great success this war has been! Has their ever been a more succesful war in U.S. history?

[Mr. Mojo]

It's truly amazing. .......Enough bio/chem weapons to kill millions of people can be stored in a very small space (an average-sized basement), but yet there are people who think that because we haven't found any yet, they must not exist. And Iraq is a good-sized country -- California-sized.