The story is simply not true.
#1 - Chemical and biological weapons leave behind chemical signatures, much like radioactive materials leave behind a signature. That’s how we found the old stuff after the first war. No traces this time.
#2 - What military dictator GIVES UP weapons as a preparation for invasion? Using WMDs against American troops would have made him a god in the eyes of Islamic militants.
#3 - Why send them to Syria? Do people who push this theory really think he thought we’d invade, overthrow him, not find any weapons and put him back in power?
#4 - If it’s even remotely true, why isn’t Bush telling people or pressing Syria on the issue? Do the people who push this think he loves watching his legacy destroyed?
This utter conspiracy nuttery is becoming our “electronic vote stealing.”
Well, how about this.
Saddam did not need large stockpiles.
“Just In Time” Break Out Capability.
“Iraq’s Real Weapons Threat” by Rolf Ekeus, June 29, 2003
Column by Former Head of UN Inspections Effort in Iraq
“the Iraqi policy after the Gulf War was to halt all production of warfare agents and to focus on design and engineering, with the purpose of activating production and shipping of warfare agents and munitions directly to the battlefield in the event of war. Many hundreds of chemical engineers and production and process engineers worked to develop nerve agents, especially VX, with the primary task being to stabilize the warfare agents in order to optimize a lasting lethal property. Such work could be blended into ordinary civilian production facilities and activities, e.g., for agricultural purposes, where batches of nerve agents could be produced during short interruptions of the production of ordinary chemicals.
This combination of researchers, engineers, know-how, precursors, batch production techniques and testing is what constituted Iraq’s chemical threat — its chemical weapon. The rather bizarre political focus on the search for rusting drums and pieces of munitions containing low-quality chemicals has tended to distort the important question of WMD in Iraq and exposed the American and British administrations to unjustified criticism.”
http://www.usembassy.it/file2003_07/alia/A3070202.htm
From 2005
http://www.asanltr.com/newsletter/05-5/articles/055b.html