Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
8 Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="diesel96" data-source="post: 766071" data-attributes="member: 9859"><p>These aren't the weapons we went to war for. The WMDs that the invasion were based on were expected to be new, and from an ongoing weapons program. And maybe you don't remember Colin Powell's presentation to the UN about Iraq's supposed WMD-making capabilities?</p><p>These are not WMDs but discarded shells. American men and women went to war to protect you and I from WMDs about as toxic as Easy-Off Oven Cleaner<em>. </em>Weapons of Mild Discomfort. Yes, sir. I've got Grasping for Straws on the phone for you guys.</p><p>If it were actually true, you don't think the GOP would jump all over this, as validation of bush's war? The worst part is that the dems are so cowed, they didn't even take advantage when it's handed to them on a silver platter.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Go ahead, ignore the Iraq Survey Group's (ISG) final report (also known as the Duelfer report), source..</p><p></p><p>The Duelfer report concluded that "old, abandoned chemical munitions" found in Iraq -- such as the ones hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra -- are not part of a "chemical weapons stockpile." According to the report [emphasis in original]:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong><em>While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991.</em></strong> There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad's desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.</p> <ul style="margin-left: 20px"> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The scale of the Iraqi conventional munitions stockpile, among other factors, precluded an examination of the entire stockpile; however, ISG inspected sites judged most likely associated with possible storage or deployment of chemical weapons.</li> </ul><p>Duelfer also appeared on the June 22 broadcast of National Public Radio's <em>Talk of the Nation</em>, where he stated that these munitions are not weapons of mass destruction:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px">NEAL CONAN (host): The report says hundreds of WMDs were found in Iraq. Does this change any of the findings in your report?</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">DEULFER: No, the report -- the findings of the report were basically to describe the relationship of the regime with weapons of mass destruction generally. You know, at two different times, Saddam elected to have and then not to have weapons of mass destruction. We found, when we were investigating, some residual chemical munitions. And we said in the report that such chemical munitions would probably still be found. <strong>But the ones which have been found are left over from the Iran-Iraq war. They are almost 20 years old, and they are in a decayed fashion. It is very interesting that there are so many that were unaccounted for, but they do not constitute a weapon of mass destruction, although they could be a local hazard.</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">CONAN: Mm-hmm. So these -- were these the weapons of mass destruction that the Bush administration said that it was going into Iraq to find before the war?</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">DEULFER: <strong>No, these do not indicate an ongoing weapons of mass destruction program as had been thought to exist before the war.</strong> These are leftover rounds, which Iraq probably did not even know that it had. Certainly, the leadership was unaware of their existence, because they made very clear that they had gotten rid of their programs as a prelude to getting out of sanctions.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">[...]</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">DEULFER: Sarin agent decays, you know, at a certain rate, as does mustard agent. What we found, both as U.N. and later when I was with the Iraq Survey Group, is that some of these rounds would have highly degraded agent, but it is still dangerous. You know, it can be a local hazard. If an insurgent got it and wanted to create a local hazard, it could be exploded. When I was running the ISG -- the Iraq Survey Group -- we had a couple of them that had been turned in to these IEDs, the improvised explosive devices. <strong>But they are local hazards. They are not a major, you know, weapon of mass destruction.</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="diesel96, post: 766071, member: 9859"] These aren't the weapons we went to war for. The WMDs that the invasion were based on were expected to be new, and from an ongoing weapons program. And maybe you don't remember Colin Powell's presentation to the UN about Iraq's supposed WMD-making capabilities? These are not WMDs but discarded shells. American men and women went to war to protect you and I from WMDs about as toxic as Easy-Off Oven Cleaner[I]. [/I]Weapons of Mild Discomfort. Yes, sir. I've got Grasping for Straws on the phone for you guys. If it were actually true, you don't think the GOP would jump all over this, as validation of bush's war? The worst part is that the dems are so cowed, they didn't even take advantage when it's handed to them on a silver platter. Go ahead, ignore the Iraq Survey Group's (ISG) final report (also known as the Duelfer report), source.. The Duelfer report concluded that "old, abandoned chemical munitions" found in Iraq -- such as the ones hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra -- are not part of a "chemical weapons stockpile." According to the report [emphasis in original]: [INDENT][B][I]While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991.[/I][/B] There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad's desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered. [LIST] [*]The scale of the Iraqi conventional munitions stockpile, among other factors, precluded an examination of the entire stockpile; however, ISG inspected sites judged most likely associated with possible storage or deployment of chemical weapons. [/LIST][/INDENT] Duelfer also appeared on the June 22 broadcast of National Public Radio's [I]Talk of the Nation[/I], where he stated that these munitions are not weapons of mass destruction: [INDENT]NEAL CONAN (host): The report says hundreds of WMDs were found in Iraq. Does this change any of the findings in your report? DEULFER: No, the report -- the findings of the report were basically to describe the relationship of the regime with weapons of mass destruction generally. You know, at two different times, Saddam elected to have and then not to have weapons of mass destruction. We found, when we were investigating, some residual chemical munitions. And we said in the report that such chemical munitions would probably still be found. [B]But the ones which have been found are left over from the Iran-Iraq war. They are almost 20 years old, and they are in a decayed fashion. It is very interesting that there are so many that were unaccounted for, but they do not constitute a weapon of mass destruction, although they could be a local hazard.[/B] CONAN: Mm-hmm. So these -- were these the weapons of mass destruction that the Bush administration said that it was going into Iraq to find before the war? DEULFER: [B]No, these do not indicate an ongoing weapons of mass destruction program as had been thought to exist before the war.[/B] These are leftover rounds, which Iraq probably did not even know that it had. Certainly, the leadership was unaware of their existence, because they made very clear that they had gotten rid of their programs as a prelude to getting out of sanctions. [...] DEULFER: Sarin agent decays, you know, at a certain rate, as does mustard agent. What we found, both as U.N. and later when I was with the Iraq Survey Group, is that some of these rounds would have highly degraded agent, but it is still dangerous. You know, it can be a local hazard. If an insurgent got it and wanted to create a local hazard, it could be exploded. When I was running the ISG -- the Iraq Survey Group -- we had a couple of them that had been turned in to these IEDs, the improvised explosive devices. [B]But they are local hazards. They are not a major, you know, weapon of mass destruction.[/B] [/INDENT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
8 Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act....
Top