Bush Says Iraqi Weapons May Be Destroyed

AP ^ | Apr. 24, 2003 | RON FOURNIER, AP White House Correspondent

[cibco]

I haven't noticed many Dem leaders in the House and Senate getting face time asking, "Where are the WMD's?"

Of course, they are privy to security briefings...

[John Beresford Tipton]

"Wasn't "John Beresford Tipton" the hero of the old TV series?"

Yes, thank you for the compliment, but I don't feel like a hero. On many occasions I would summon Michael Anthony to come to my palatial estate, Silverstone, to receive his next assignment. Unfortunately, his scoundrel of a cousin, Michael "Tex" Anthony had me mortgage Silverstone and invest in Enron. I am now trying to get handouts from all those millionaires I created, but since I did it anonymously, they think I'm a con man an slam the door in my face.

[The show was called "The Millionaire" and it ran late '50s early 60's.]

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

Maybe W didn't attend those briefings. He seems to indicate that he has no idea where they are.

[RightWhale]

Dem leaders in the House and Senate

Come to think of it, it's been fairly quiet there all along. You know Hillary would be standing up on her senator's desk about this and it isn't fear of the 77% in the polls keeping them quiet. Who is still talking about WMDs aside from a few bloggers and DUers and Saloners and callers to talk-radio and a mere handful of thoughtful posters on FR?

[dennisw]

And, again, please don't post nay disinformation about the alleged finding of WMDs. No WMD's were found and the military confirms this every day during their briefings.

You are the disinformation specialist here. Why would Saddam go through 12 years of UN sanctions if he wasn't hiding WMD? Where is your logic on this?? 99% of them may have been destroyed or moved to Syria but he still had them months ago and years ago. Contrary to the terms of the 1991 surrender. We'll still find them though. Saddam was too sloppy.

Already you forget Saddam's track record of using poison gas in war.

[billbears]

It is possible to see a 'trial of the century' where a number of Iraqis are tried for.

Well heck as long as we get a good scapeg..., I mean a high level Iraqi official, to put on trial.

[DougF]

I believe very strongly that there were and probably are WMD in Iraq. And I believe that the war was justified already by freeing the Iraqis and by the identified links to terrorists including AQ (does anyone remember 9/11?).

However, we need to find them. Otherwise any American intelligence used to justify other actions will be looked at with much suspicion by not only the intl community, but by the American public.

[Amerigomag]

No WMD's were found

Not true. Not even close.

We've indentified the C&C for the systems and have recorded evidence of the commands. We've also indentified the delivery systems and residue.

What's missing to this point are the active ingredients and the manufacturing equipment. Since the manufacturing equipment can be dual use they are going to be hard to identify.

So what you're really saying is that we haven't found significant amounts of weapons grade biologics or chemicals

In this you are correct but that's a long stretch from "No WMD's were found" .

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

Who is still talking about WMDs aside from a few bloggers and DUers and Saloners and callers to talk-radio and a mere handful of thoughtful posters on FR?

Can we recall why Iraq was invaded? Wasn't it because Saddam's WMD were endangering our freedom? If WMDs aren't found... could it mean that Iraq was not posing a danger to our national security? And, if that's the case... why waste 138 Americans and $80 billion?

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

In this you are correct but that's a long stretch from "No WMD's were found" .

I listen to the 7 a.m. military briefing once or twice per week and there's always a reporter asking the WMD question and the answer is always 'not yet' but... maybe soon...

[PBRSTREETGANG]

He gave the WMD as the reason to invade Iraq. If he can't find them, regardless of what other reasons he now gives, it will look like a "bait and switch" operation.

I agree. Although I supported the war in Iraq and would have done so without all of the WMD rhetoric, Bush committed himself here. I fully believe that if WMD's are not found and the economy continues to falter Bush II could be closely following the blueprint of Bush I, which would be sad.

[billbears]

Although I supported the war in Iraq and would have done so without all of the WMD rhetoric, Bush committed himself here

Why is that again? Without the WMDs, how would Iraq have presented a threat to our national safety? I think nations that have burgeoning nuclear weapons programs are a bit more of a threat. Of course we're giving them 40,000 tons of food a year

[RightWhale]

It was very complicated in 1099 and many decisions and events since WW II have complicated it all still more. There comes a time to cut the Gordion knot, and the cutting is far from over at this time.

Those chem- and bio-weapons weren't that much of a problem. Sure, terrorists could have some fun with them and disrupt a lot of lives. But the nuclear bomb program was too much. The almost certain nuclear exchange between Israel and Iraq would have been horrific in itself and might have sucked others into the maelstrom through treaties. Just a matter of time. It's much better this way.

[Hillary? Hell no!]

Who is still talking about WMDs aside from a few bloggers and DUers and Saloners and callers to talk-radio and a mere handful of thoughtful posters on FR?

President Bush.

[John Lenin]

As I remember the real reason was "Regime Change", mission accomplished. The left can play the "no WMD found" card to the hilt but that video of the Saddam statue coming down and the Iraqi guy pounding on it with a sledgehammer is what everyone will remember.

[RightWhale]

Is he? I'll take your word for it. Maybe he'll come to Eielson AFB one of these days and say a few words and we'll all go out to listen.

[deport]

Shhh, don't be a killjoy. This is already an amusing thread.

---

LOL...... heck all malcontents need something to crow about once in a while. Especially when their candidates can't get elected.....

I wonder what they'll find in the other 900 or so locations that they've not inspected yet. Someone from the military was talking about the process and said they've maybe been to 100 or so locations that had been identified as potential sites for WMD. You reckon a dog kennel will turn up yet?

[Jorge]

However, we need to find them. Otherwise any American intelligence used to justify other actions will be looked at with much suspicion by not only the intl community, but by the American public.

Good point.

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

Let's not re-imagine reality. The reason was NOT 'regime change'. As we all still remember, W was going to disarm Iraq of its WMD with the UN or without the UN.

Well...

[PBRSTREETGANG]

Why is that again?

I was speaking to the rhetoric regarding WMD which will be harped on by a significant percentage of the American public and the world community. I fully believe that Saddam has produced WMD's in the past and has supported international terrorism and would continue to do so without our intervention. That is a significant enough threat to our national security to justify what was done here whether or not WMD's are found at this point in time.

I don't think that this precludes us from dealing with nations with burgeoning nuclear weapons programs, as necessary.