WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday. "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon. Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
It's too late, they could find 10 nuclear bombs and the missles to deliver them at this point and it wouldn't change a thing, the Dems would still be crying that "Bush Lied".... BTW I saw Howard Dean yaking about how the Democrats were smart about war and that their leaders had all been in combat ....ummmm Howard you ran for President, I don't remember your war record, and Al Gore??? well he was a reporter in the Army.
The "veteran" argument is weak. We're FDR or Harry Truman veterans. We know Bill Clinton wasn't. So what? John Kerry and Jack Murtha are veterans. Now look at them.. two panty waists.
:idea: re:FDR FDR served as Secretary of the Navy re: Harry Truman Harry Truman was one of the few true war heroes to become President of the United States. Captain Truman led his forces against German mass gas attacks in WWI. He was wounded in combat and decorated for heroism. His outnumbered and surrounded unit fought its way out of several sticky situations in the Ardennes Forest, with him leading his troops to victory. It was his reputation as a combat soldier that launched his political career in Missouri... re: Al Gore Al Gore was a senator's son who was being groomed for politics during the Vietnam War. He was not a journalist, but he was assigned to a unit of Army journalists, where his job was to sit in the back room and stay out of their way until he had served enough time on station to get credit for "serving in Vietnam." The real soldiers who were there later complained about having to guard the senator's son who, like John Kerry, was simply padding his resume for later use in politics... re: WMD Please note that this intelligence report, which was only declassified recently, was dated 2003. That means that all of the ranking members of the Democratic Party, like Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Murtha etc, KNEW before the last election, that the United States had found WMDs in Iraq and yet still called the president a liar publicly and accused him of sending Americans to die for no reason. "Bush lied, kids died." "He went to war to get even for his daddy." "He did it for Big Oil." "He did it for Haliburton." "He just wanted to call himself a wartime president." For anyone who ever wondered why I'm a former Democrat, I would put this latest evidence of treason as exhibit 'A'. We were attacked. We're at war and the Democrats are doing what they always do when we're at war and they don't control the White House: they're aiding the enemy to help themselves. ....................TP :x
The thing that this doesn't address is the "on-going WMD program." We knew Saddam had gas and that he's used it before including on the Kurds. However, these finds do not rise to the level of jusitfying and on-going WMD program. No one would go to war over 500 or even 5,000 artillery shells with or without nerve gas in them. They pose a miniscule threat to us.This isn't news! These are NOT the WMDs we were talking about to start with. There's NO WAY IN HELL, that a country would go to war over 500 artilery shells - nerve gas or not.
Were those shells capable of reaching targets in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait? Were they in direct violation of the UN sanctions imposed ten years earlier and signed off on by the Iraqis? Does the fact that they have that technology infer that it could be used in other forms against us? If you answer Yes to any of those questions than no further discussion is needed.
Watch it TB, making sense that doesn't agree with the rightwing majority around here will get you many retorts as ineffectual as they may be.
Iraq chemical weapons too old to use: US intelligence officials Jun 22 3:12 PM US/Eastern Email this story The chemical weapons that have been recovered by US forces in Iraq were all made before the 1991 Gulf War and were too degraded for their intended use, US intelligence officials said. Republican lawmakers have cast the disclosure that about 500 chemical weapons have been found in Iraq as evidence that Saddam Hussein had a stockpile of the weapons before the March 2003 US invasion of Iraq. But the intelligence officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were too degraded to have posed a threat to US forces in March 2003. They said all chemical weapons found since 2003 were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and they had no evidence Saddam was producing or stockpiling chemical weapons after that. "Generally they are in poor condition," one official said. "We assess that they are not in condition to be used as designed. And detailed analysis of the toxic agents shows they are degraded and represent a much lower hazard," he said. The munitions have been tested and computer simulation models created to determine what effect they might have under a variety of scenarios, the officials said. Although not suitable for their intended purposed, the officials said such weapons remain a potential hazard if obtained by insurgents and modified in ways they would not discuss. The officials, however, said they had no evidence that any element of the Iraqi insurgency has possession of chemical weapons. "I would simply say we have seen a degree of improvisation on the part of the insurgency with regard to conventional munitions," said an official. "They might apply that same degree of improvisation if in fact they came in contact with these types of munitions. And again we have no evidence that they have," the official said. The weapons were found "in small numbers over time" since 2003, an official said. They were recovered in one, two or three at a time -- not in large caches, the officials said. "We would characterize these recovered munitions as being consistent with weapons that have been not maintained, that have not been part of an organized inventory," he said. Senator Rick Santorum and Representative Peter Hoekstra, both Republicans, on Wednesday made public information from a classified report prepared in April on the subject by the National Ground Intelligence Center that said 500 chemical weapons have been recovered. The intelligence officials said "key points" from the report were declassified at the request of Hoekstra, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee. The "key points," however, ommitted the fact that the 500 weapons all were of a pre-1991 vintage. The officials indicated that the age of the weapons was not considered classified but were unable to explain why it was not included in the key points given to the senators.
Now this... http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/25/iraq.wmd.reut/index.html This ex-CIA commie, liberal puke must be unstable himself. Whaddya think boys?
I wonder where that guy was in the food chain? If low, then I'm not at all shocked that a low level guys protestions might have been ignored if those up the food chain were saying he's all wet.
Krebsie, I believe these would be the same weapons that the Iraqis agreed to destroy as part of the original ceasefire agreements wherein we agreed not to kick his a$$ if he agreed to destroy - in its entirety- these weapons and the means for their delivery. Additionally, the international community agreed and mandated in a unanimous vote that Saddam destroy the weapons. The Iraqi regime then made representations to the world that they had in fact destroyed the weapons.....they lied. They had not......they were in intentional breach of their cease fire obligations and their committed obligations to the civilized world. We had an obligation to enforce those agreements. If not us, who? I guess this means that instead of killing the entire population of Tel Aviv, that in conjunction with the presence of the banned missiles, that they can only kill half the population of Tel Aviv...or lower Manhattan, or Washington, DC. Are you kidding me? The lib/Dems rally around this as validation of their position? Are you kidding me? Nothing more need be said..... Terry