Did Saddam have WMDs after all? : ISIS Overruns Iraq Chemical Weapons 'Mega-Facility'

a reply to: crazyewok

or 4 options,, they were moved through a network of Intermediatories. u know for a price,,Back,sheesssh it never ends.

originally posted by: BobAthome
a reply to: crazyewok

or 4 options,, they were moved through a network of Intermediatories.

u know for a price,,Back,sheesssh it never ends.

There is no evidence of that.

And don't say chemical weapon use in Syria cause Syria has its own chemical weapons program.

In fact it stupid as why would Syria have taken that risk? He had hes own WMD that were legally owned (up until he used them) so why take the illegal WMD of a failing nation 100% guaranteed to be obliterated by the USA and risk painting a huge target on yourself too?

Makes no sense.

Even if Syria were hoping that the USA would leave Iraq and Saddam to come back in power there would be no point in keeping them as the all the transport and waiting times would be high risk and the weapons likely degraded. May as well supply Iraq with fresh new ones off the Syrian production line instead.

Makes no sense.

In fact why did Saddam not use his WMD when invaded! He knew if Iraq fell that was it for him, it was win or die. It was a war of survival against a for 100x more powerful! Thats what WMD are meant for! And dont use the "o but the USA would have nuked Iraq" line. We both know Russia and china would not have allowed nuclear use, Especialy if the WMD's were used on Iraq soil in defence not USA soil (IF WMD had been used in the USA diffrent game), plus Saddam was dead anyway may as well have gambled.

Makes no sense.

a reply to: crazyewok

actually Syria just allowed there passing through there territory,they were headed for,,

Lebanon i believe.

From what i remember.

a reply to: crazyewok

and if these wmds were independently verified as Russian Made WMDs
the bombs would have fell on Moscow,, not Bagdad.
and the SHTF.

a reply to: crazyewok

What I question is your apparent utter certainty their was no WMDs in Iraq at the time in question. At best, at that can be stated accurately is none were found...that we know of/were told.

Allowing this very thread may be based on more garbage, the very idea that there MAY be some left?/returned to the site? strikes at your premise of Bush's lied or was "mistaken".

You may very well be right! MAY.

I, for one, would take your posts on the subject a lot more seriously if you qualified you position with "probabilities", rather than asserting absolute certainty where no certainty is possible.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I Allowed the probabilty that US forces are inept and failed in there duty thats why no WMD were found.

But the comander in cheif should take responsibility in faluire of his military.

Of course obama being president in the later stage of the Iraq occupation would bare blame along with bush.

a reply to: butcherguy

This is total utter male oxen feces.

This is more pro-war propaganda. ISIS is controlled opposition in a infinite war.

a reply to: crazyewok

Fair enough.