Iraqi WMDs revisited

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Abraham

Well actually they were there in the first place.

Of course, we have the receipts.

They were there when Kurds were gassed by Saddam.

Right, the revolt the US encouraged but then stood by and did nothing when it occured or was subsequently brutally surpressed. In any case, it predates the disarmament inspections so it doesn't prove that Iraq still had them.

They were there when Iranian soldiers were gassed in the Iraq-Iran war.

Well we know gas was used, that this war went on for 8 years, but we don't know for certain who (first) used gas. Let's assume that only Iraq used gas though, an ironic assumption considering the current debate to pre-emptively nuke Iran to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. But I guess we can give them the benefit of the doubt when it suits us. However its irrelevant since this also predates the disarmament inspections.

They were there when Iraqi Scud's were fired at Israel - although they were not used (I have a gut feeling I know why).

See above.

They were there during the First Gulf War - although they were not used (I have a gut feeling I know why).

See above.

They were there when many were found and destroyed after the First Gulf War.

Found and destroyed after the first Gulf War. Now we seem to be getting somewhere.

And it turned out that there was a widespread WMD-program on it's way after the First Gulf War.

Which, like the WMD, was destroyed after the first Gulf War.

And yes, with hindsight it seems that they are not there anymore - although only a small part of all the confiscated Iraqi documentation on the subject is translated yet.

History will eventually teach us how far the WMDs were develloped or ready or non-existant.
History also teaches us to err preferrably on the safe side...

I guess we have very different opinions as to what erring on the safe side is. My opinion at the time, and to this day, was that it was safer to remain focused on the people who actually had something to do with 9/11 (Bin Laden, remember that guy?) rather than spend enormous resources invading a country that had no connection; that it was safer to continue the ongoing weapons inspections than it was to inflame the already volatile region by invading a sovereign country on the most transparent of pretexts and thereby motivating a new generation of extremists for absolutely no gain whatsoever; that a disarmed and contained Iraq was safer than the terrorist breeding ground that, to date, has claimed the lives of over 2,300 service personnel - and counting.