I thought Iraq didn't have any WMD - Page 2

CCIP · 07-31-12, 03:06 PM

There is a slight difference between weapons and materials remaining from them. If these are weapons, then so are all the B-52s sitting at Davis-Monthan with their wings cut off, flagrantly in violation of previous treaties regarding them. Cause, you know, they'll be up and flying in no time...

Either way, the fact that Saddam DID have WMDs and did use them is not a question. The question is when. This doesn't add any evidence to the idea that he had any in 2003.

CCIP · 07-31-12, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

I had a friend in the weapons inspection team, he said that it was futile, the Iraqis knew when they were turning up and moved it. They knew it, we knew it, but what can you do?

Here's my friend next to a waxwork of Saddam, can't think why he was chosen for the team.

LOL

Did he ever dress up as Saddam to gain access into their facilities and/or Iraq's finest pubs?

Herr-Berbunch · 07-31-12, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

LOL

Did he ever dress up as Saddam to gain access into their facilities and/or Iraq's finest pubs?

That's the only pic of him with Saddam that I've seen, I've not seen him dress up, but surely it's only a matter of time. Maybe he was waiting for the threat of assassination to move on.

Takeda Shingen · 07-31-12, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

PHOTO

Wow. It's almost a perfect double.

vienna · 07-31-12, 03:19 PM

"BUMMER OF A BIRTHMARK, HAL"

EDIT:

Got the picture, but the caption didn't come with...

...

August · 07-31-12, 03:24 PM

Who said anything about justifying a war? The claim was made that Iraq had no WMD's. Not "No new WMD's", no WMD's. Obviously this is not true whether you want to admit it or not

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP

There is a slight difference between weapons and materials remaining from them. If these are weapons, then so are all the B-52s sitting at Davis-Monthan with their wings cut off, flagrantly in violation of previous treaties regarding them. Cause, you know, they'll be up and flying in no time..

Invalid comparison. There's a big difference between the remains of an aircraft and the remains of a Chemical weapon munition. For one thing just walking by the aircraft isn't likely to kill you...

JU_88 · 08-01-12, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

I guess that was all just a lie?

http://news.yahoo.com/uk-experts-hel...144204378.html

Do you still think Iraq was about WMDS? Come on, its common knowledge that Bush and Blair lied though their teeth.
Sadam likley had those "WMDs" since the 80s (Possibly when we or yourselves sold them to him) they are leftovers that got missed in 1991, they are nothing, not even worthy of front page news.
I hope you arent trying to tell us that this 'find' suddenly means the full scale invasion, recent war, loss of lives and fiancial cost to our nations was all 'worth it'.
If so, shouldnt N Korea have been a bigger priority? They have Nukes after all.

07-31-12, 03:06 PM	#1
CCIP Navy Seal Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Waterloo, Canada Posts: 8,700 Downloads: 29 Uploads: 2	There is a slight difference between weapons and materials remaining from them. If these are weapons, then so are all the B-52s sitting at Davis-Monthan with their wings cut off, flagrantly in violation of previous treaties regarding them. Cause, you know, they'll be up and flying in no time... Either way, the fact that Saddam DID have WMDs and did use them is not a question. The question is when. This doesn't add any evidence to the idea that he had any in 2003. __________________ There are only forty people in the world and five of them are hamburgers. -Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart)

07-31-12, 03:19 PM	#5
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,731 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	"BUMMER OF A BIRTHMARK, HAL" EDIT: Got the picture, but the caption didn't come with... ... __________________ __________________________________________________ __