I don't and never did buy Hussain's statement "OOpps we forgot about those." He was a dictator and wanted to maintain control. He would not lose track of a poor man's nuke. He would not lose track of any of the componants to make a chemical weapon. I didn't believe him when the empty chemical shells were found last year and I don't believe the opinion that this is a "lost chemical shell."

 

"“Iraq does not have and did not ever have WMD’s”"

If anyone felt this was my position, I apologize for not communicating myself fully. It is not my position, I just don't feel this one device is what we've been looking for. As far as leftovers, I know people that fought in Korea and Vietnam that brought small weapons home with them, and still have them. Why wouldn't we think that some Iraqi soldiers took souveneirs?

 

I think I'll bring this 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin home and put it in my trophy case.

 

TXCoUnTrYbOy:

Thanks for the compliment I really appreciate it…

However, not that I would ever lie to someone because I wouldn’t I would tell you not to always believe everything someone says including me. In other words I have my opinion based on what I believe to be the real story and then with my values. It is easy to sometimes picks things up from reading one place or another and believe it is the truth but you always want to take a look on your own, check out a few or many takes on a subject and then form an opinion on what you believe to be true.

Both the right and left side of stories or web sites will have their own spin as to what they believe the facts are and sometimes the far right and far left can really make some unbelievable statements.

When you do that and then really think it out logically yourself it will be a position you can defend with not much trouble. Another thing to remember is even though you may have formed an opinion/position at this time based on what you have read and found always keep an open mind to any new news, facts or finds that may happen and then never be afraid to change your opinion. Not that you have to always change back and forth but just keep an open mind and think things out logically. You don’t always have to have a position either if you don’t think you have enough information to begin with.

Many people get themselves in trouble sometimes by just going off a few sound bites on TV, be it right, left or in the middle and then form their opinion. These types are easy to see because they can never really defend their position. They may be able to for a post or two but can never go into WHY they believe their position is correct. They will point to other websites, or “this person said so” etc.

Oh, and this post goes for anybody, don’t matter if you’re from the right, left or the middle.


momalle1:

I wasn’t implying that your position was “no or never any WMD’s ever in Iraq” I was implying the left in general has presented this argument and in doing so has now put themselves into a tough position.

However I would say for the time with just one weapon found the left may be ok with the ”May be a weapon that was unaccounted for”. However, my opinion is if any more are found then the left’s argument is over…

 

01 XLT Sport for president!!!!!!!!!!

 

you know if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance. overwhelm them with bull puckey :

j/k '01 it was just there


BTW i will admit the first thought i had at seeing the round being found was, i wonder if it's one of ours.

 

Along with the rest of the world. It would be nice to find a large trailer, in a government owned building, full of WMD's. That would be undisputable, then every nation that was against the invasion would have to at least shut up about WMD's.

 

Oh my dear lord. Did you just mesh Zaino into a WMD thread?

 

So when the second round is found the lefts argument is over?
You are too generous, giving that first one for free and allowing the argument to continue. I had better hurry and type before the war is justified.

Here is my argument. If Bush had sent Powell before the UN (really, the US audience) and said, "Saddam has 857 chemically charged artillary rounds." , 'We must attack now!' no one would have supported it.

This past Sunday, Powell was on Meet the Press. This is what he said in regard to WMD:
"It turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading and for that, I am disappointed and I regret it."

He may have had more to say but, there was quite a bit of comedy. He was on video remote from Jordon and a State dept staffer abruptly turned the camera away during the interview which someone later referred to as,
"a bizarre attempt at Soviet-Style censorship on Meet the Press,".

The problem I have is Powell hasn't written a book he's trying to sell. What could be his motivation for stabbing the President in the back?

 

Pretty good huh?

So are you asking for 2 freebees? Tell you what they find one more and I will let that go, when they find number 3 it’s ALL OVER…

I don’t think he is trying to stab the President in the back just be honest about the situation.

I have never put the blame on the Clinton administration for having lied or falsifying information about WMD’s in Iraq and the reason I haven’t is the same reason I haven’t done so for Bush. I do not believe either administration lied or deceived anyone.

President Bush simply used the very same evidence and information that Clinton had stated over and over for 8 years so logic would dictate if one wanted to find when this “conspiracy” began, as many on the left would have you believe, it looks like it began in the Clinton administration and President Bush simply followed Clinton’s lead.

Truth be told the facts we had were and are for a large part believed to be true, neither Clinton or President Bush lied about anything, the information we have is from our intelligence agencies as well as many others around the world.

Therefore either all the numerous intelligence agencies around the world were completely ignorant on the facts about Iraq for the past 10 – 12 years or the truth is yet to come out, time will tell…

 

I can only draw my conclusions from what the major players state, not from a preconceived idea that my government never screws up.

As to what the Secretary of State said Sunday, a lot of the intelligence used came from an engineer connected to Ahmed Chalabi, who is now part of the Iraqi Governing Council.

In regard to the WMD reports this is what Chalabi had to say:
"we are heroes in error....As far as we're concerned, we've been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone, and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important."

Got played by a towelhead.

 

I think it's pretty obvious to people that actually think that if you find one WMD, there are more, somewhere.

 

The way I see it, one less thing to be smuggled into the US.

 

According to Webster's dictionary, "trace" (as cited in the original articles) means "an extremely small amount."

According to a recent FoxNews article (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html), it was confirmed that the shell we are discussing containted "three or four" liters of sarin.

Several articles I've read on sarin also note that even a single drop on the skin can kill.

I tend to agree with most of the rational comments here that the contents of this shell were probably not known by those that used it for its unintended purpose. But, I also agree that if there was one, there are probably others.

And I know that many anti-Bush or anti-War folks will argue that "it is only one shell, it's insignificant."

But, thinking about this logically (and please forget about the political aspects and arguments of why we went to war) if there is even one more shell out there containing several liters of sarin and someone actually finds it and figures out the proper way to use it, shouldn't we be as concerned as ever about WMD's?

If just one drop on the skin can kill, how many drops can four liters produce...and how many can that possibly kill??

 

Sarin:

Is a colorless and odorless gas, has a lethal dose of 0.5 milligram for an adult. It is 26 times more deadly than cyanide gas and is 20 times more lethal than potassium cyanide. Just 0.01 milligram per kilogram of body weight a pinprick sized droplet will kill a human. The vapor is slightly heavier than air, so it hovers close to the ground. Under wet and humid weather conditions sarin degrades swiftly, but as the temperature rises up to a certain point, sarin’s lethal duration increases, despite the humidity.