US has found some 500 Chemical Weapons in Iraq

US has found some 500 Chemical Weapons in Iraq
Just saw it on Foxnews, waiting for a link to a website to popup...

Could this be linked to our latest Exclusive Interview? He said that the national news would be picking up on the info soon...

The Secret Battle over WMDs: Interview with Paul (Dave) Gaubatz (Exclusive)

I am anxious to read that link as well. But hey, we found them during the first gulf war - I was there. and I still think that they are and were real. To much going on to have not found any. I still remember that there was some talk (unsubstantiaited) about russian and syrian trucks hauling things away. Hey most everything is more than likely buried. We found Fighter jets buried as well as tons of munitions and lots of bodies, so not much is gonna surprise me. But I would like to read the link when it comes up.

Unfortunately I didn't get to read the Interview with Paul Gaubatz yet, and I hope I'm not the only one who just saw that on the news lol. I'm still waiting for a web-based article to appear...

Nothing on CNN yet...
humm....

you would think fox would be holding a ticker tape parade, and rejoicing for the second coming...

IMO something stinky is happening, since none of it is logical...

we should already have found them... and i do beleive they were there... hell, we still have the receipts of when they bought them... signed by saddam and rumsfeld...

This is interesting, the Fox report is of the US "finding WMDs" not suspected sites. So they have searched the sites under the Tigris and Euphrates in Nasiriyah? Well now that is interesting indeed.

Are we going to be inundated with reports of how George Bush was justified in invading Iraq or are we going to ask questions about why it took 3 years for these sites to be inspected? I presume the former.

I would like to know more about this. If I'm not mistaken, didn't we find chemical/chemical laced artillery this go-around? And I always thought the reason it wasn't fully disclosed is because it would have came up that WE (USA) were the one's that sold him this particular weaponry/chemical

Originally posted by subz
Are we going to be inundated with reports of how George Bush was justified in invading Iraq or are we going to ask questions about why it took 3 years for these sites to be inspected? I presume the former.

If this story turns out to be legit, and FoxNews is the network to break the story, I can guarantee you that their spin will be toward the former. This will be done to "pollute" the news item and ensure that is most heavily spun in that direction. Those who report on the latter will likely be the same who have continued to run stories on the false pretext of our invasion and will be vilified for those pieces in order to further bolster the initial spin efforts surrounding the discovery.

Darned if you do...darned if you don't.

Good point chaosrain...

I think that is why Fox had it first also...

Now lets see if they are successful in deflecting the reality of this embarrasment...

And as far as the USA selling the weapons to begin with, that is such old news

I think even the dyed in the wool conservatives beleive it, and the liberals are tired of hearing it...

It took them this long to plant weapons? Your government is slow if they took this much time to plant weapons. One would think they would have done it at the very beginning when they said you were invading to get the weapons.

Found this on the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence website

Unclassified Summary of the Army’s National Ground Intelligence Center Report
it's in pdf format.

Still waiting for the major news networks to post information online..

Hmm 45 minutes after you post a very specific claim there's still nothing on the fox website. I've checked the proper news organisations' sites too and there's nothing on them either.

Was it aired as news or just an opinion ?

Assuming you're not posting disinformation I think you must have mis-heard

Originally posted by Yumi
It took them this long to plant weapons? Your government is slow if they took this much time to plant weapons. One would think they would have done it at the very beginning when they said you were invading to get the weapons.

Okay...a few points here...

Iraq has been known to have WMD's...they were used during the Iran/Iraq war.

Clearly, if the goal was to prove that Iraq had WMD's they would have been found or planted earlier than now.

Since none have been discovered to date, a compelling argument can be made that WMD's were not as major a concern to the U.S. as the world was led to believe.

The question is not "why did they take so long to plant them" because your logic is good...there's no point in waiting this long if discovery is key to bolstering causus belli. The questions is "why did they take so long to find them?"

What is becoming more evident with each new revelation is that the U.S. was not concerned with WMD's from a strategic, warfighting perspective, only a propaganda one. If we were really concerned from a strategic perspective, we would have spent significantly more time and effort gathering intelligence on Iraq to ensure that those sites could be secured or destroyed in order to avoid having those weapons deployed against our troops. As one can plainly see with the underestimated insurgency and civil war underway in Iraq, taking the time to collect and analyze good intelligence was not a priority. Securing the oil fields was.

Now if you want to earn some conspiracy street cred, tell me why we would destabilize a major oil producing country like Iraq and nearly halt the overall supply of oil coming from there in parallel with an effort to secure their oil? Answer that question and you've started along the path of understanding a lot of what is really happening and denying ignorance.

Strangerous, review the links I just posted. It'll be on the web soon enough.

This is probably just more of the same weapons that have been found so far. They have found quite a few caches of old, degraded weapons that would not have worked if fired as they were degraded so much. Old stuff that has been around since the Iran/Iraq war.

www.cnsnews.com.../Nation/archive/20 0606/NAT20060621e.html

there ya go Strangerous

That report is very, very short on facts.

500 weapons filled with degraded 'mustard or sarin' - these are just the old mortar / arty shells often reported before.

There's a masive difference between mustard and sarin.

They were 'degraded' ie old, ie probably left over from the Iran / Iraq war

The inference of sales to terrorists and possible foreign powers is pure conjecture

This is an non-story / disinformation

Originally posted by aecreate
www.cnsnews.com.../Nation/archive/20 0606/NAT20060621e.html

there ya go Strangerous

Hardly a credible source (still not featured on a proper news organisation site) featuring mis-quotes from a highly-speculative report (report says mustard or sarin but doesn't give proportions, the website says 'mustard and sarin' - disinformation) announced by two republican senators.

All this convinces me is that people have piled assumption on conjecture to fit their own agenda.

Originally posted by Strangerous
All this convinces me is that people have piled assumption on conjecture to fit their own agenda.

Yeah, but that's SOP in the world of spin-doctoring. Expect no less.

www.foxnews.com...