doublegunshop.com - home Forums NY Times admits Iraq had WMD'S after all !

Denial, Dismissal, Demonization, and Distortion. Really, was anyone expecting anything different?

Throw in a pointless rationalization about Vietnam, and there you go, the perfect Statist Religious Response...

Now really, if Chivers hadn't "Spun" his story to the Left, do you think the NYT would have printed it?

Great take King. All along, you have told us the puppet masters had duped powell in to testifying before the un about a couple old chem decontamination vans to rally the world against sadam. Now you're saying you had inside info all along about trivial old rusty cans of bug spray that the cdc of the radical islamic state told their citizens not to touch?

Allow me to spin a bit, and please confirm this with your daughter. It's the ole 'tip of the ice berg'. There was so much good stuff, that the bad guys just grabbed what they wanted because it wasn't worth their time or effort to deal with the garbage. You see their cdc is smarter than our cdc. Hmmm, even their leaders are smarter than ours, they'll save chem wmd's for use against their own as needed, because history shows the 'world' won't care one bit.

This is possibly a preemptive move by the NYT. It sets up the "Blame Bush" (or Republicans, or Conservatives, or Christians, or Heterosexuals, or Oil Companies, or whoever it is on their "Demonize du Jour" list) narrative for if any of the weapons are used. They can claim that they weren't 'The WMDs we went to war over", just some rusty old leftover junk that we weren't concerned with.

No, Craig, I said nothing about having "inside info" about what Iraq covered with sand long before the US ostensibly invaded to remove WMDs.

I said earlier that Powell had been duped and that I had been following the story from the day my friend Jerry Bull went whacky and built enormous sabot-lined cannons for Hussein to terrorize the region.

I don't mind if you spin a bit but don't see where the bad guys relate to the discoveries---unless you're referring to speculation that some of the stuff went to Syria. It probably did.

Liberals suppress the fact that Bush's Iraq coalition was much more multilateral than Obama's


�But Bush�s coalition that went into Iraq included more than 30 nations, most of them democracies. Kerry�s and Obama�s coalition against the Islamic State includes maybe eight, mostly autocracies.�

What I would have liked to add, but didn�t have space for, was a reference to the description, made by Kerry as a presidential candidate in 2004, to Bush�s coalition as a �trumped-up, so-called coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought and the extorted.� That description was recalled by my American Enterprise Institute colleague Marc Thiessen in a blogpost titled �Kerry�s coalition against the Islamic State fails his �global test� �: the last two words quoting him in one of the presidential debates.


It was vicious of Kerry, and undermined the credibility of the United States, to characterize Bush�s very large coalition in such negative terms � terms that insulted democracies, including many NATO allies. Thiessen provides a much longer list of those who stood with us and sent ground troops into Iraq in 2003: �the United Kingdom, Italy, Poland, Ukraine, the Netherlands, Australia, Romania, South Korea, Japan, Denmark, Bulgaria, Thailand, El Salvador, Hungary, Singapore, Norway, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Mongolia, Latvia, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Slovakia, Albania, New Zealand, Tonga, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Spain, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Honduras, the Philippines, Armenia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.�

And the absolute B.S from the left that the were no WMDs in Iraq just goes on and on.
Jim

Has ISIS looted chemical weapons from former Iraqi nerve agent factory that US failed to destroy?

Daily Mail [UK], by Ted Thornhill

ISIS controls a vast compound in Iraq containing 2,500 rusting chemical weapons rockets, according to the Iraqi government.

The site was bombed by the US during the 1991 Gulf War, but the munitions there were only partially destroyed, according to the UN - then left to Iraq to take care of.

However, Iraqi officials wrote to the United Nations this summer claiming that abandoned weapons containing the lethal nerve agent Sarin are still in the ruins of the Muthanna State Establishment, which made chemical weapons in the 1980s and early 1990s, and that this is now in the hands of the violent jihadists.

The last major report by U.N. inspectors on the status of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program was released about a year after the experts left in March 2003. It states that Bunker 13 contained 2,500 sarin-filled 122-mm chemical rockets produced and filled before 1991, and about 180 tons of sodium cyanide, 'a very toxic chemical and a precursor for the warfare agent tabun.'

Defence Department spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby said 'Should they even be able to access the materials, frankly, it would likely be more of a threat to them than anyone else.'

It was revealed this week that about 5,000 chemical weapons were recovered or destroyed in Iraq following the 2003 invasion but the Pentagon chose to keep the findings top secret.

But the information wasn't made public for several embarrassing reasons including the fact some of the weapons were U.S.-made, plus they had been sitting dormant since the early 1980s and therefore didn't support President George W. Bush's rationale for going to war. (How�s that for nonsense? Dangerous enough to be �more of a threat to them than to anyone else,� 11 years after their discovery; dangerous enough to be kept top secret for those 11 years; but not dangerous enough to support one of the many reasons GWB gave for going to war against Saddam.)

At least 17 American military personnel and seven Iraqi police were sickened by poisons - usually sarin and mustard gases. Many of the shells would leak liquid during transportation, exposing the soldiers to the potentially-lethal fumes. Symptoms ranged from disorientation and nausea to blindness and huge, seething blisters. Jarrod Taylor, a former Army sergeant on hand for the destruction of mustard shells that burned two soldiers in his infantry company, joked of 'wounds that never happened' from 'that stuff that didn't exist'.

'I love it when I hear, ''Oh there weren't any chemical weapons in Iraq'',' he said. 'There were plenty.'

How can you be absolutely positive this is an operation against Kurds?

Here we go again! Look at the Daily Mail lead mentioning 2,500 rusting chemical weapons rockets. Nowhere does the NYT story, the Daily Mail follow-up or anyone else refer to them as WMDs. Only Jim and Dave.

Sure, there's lots of spin because of US embarrassment, Iraq panic with IS at Baghdad's gates, and Iraq's US-trained and equipped 300,000-military disappeared like driven smoke. They surrendered the site.

From the Daily Mail again:

"Defence Department spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby said 'Should they even be able to access the materials, frankly, it would likely be more of a threat to them than anyone else.'

"It was revealed this week that about 5,000 chemical weapons were recovered or destroyed in Iraq following the 2003 invasion but the Pentagon chose to keep the findings top secret.

"But the information wasn't made public for several embarrassing reasons including the fact some of the weapons were U.S.-made, plus they had been sitting dormant since the early 1980s and therefore didn't support President George W. Bush's rationale for going to war. (How�s that for nonsense? Dangerous enough to be �more of a threat to them than to anyone else,� 11 years after their discovery; dangerous enough to be kept top secret for those 11 years; but not dangerous enough to support one of the many reasons GWB gave for going to war against Saddam.)"

One of the many reasons but not as WMDs!

Yeah: "Here we go again".
They wern't rusting weapons when G Bush went after them. And:
Furthmere anyone want to bet those chemicals are no longer active as implied above?
You lefties can't admit the truth even when it's staring you right in the face.
An expert in deactiving weapons blew himself up here a couple of years ago. What was he defusing? Why it was a 150 year old piece of ordnance left over from the Civil War.
Not WMDs?? Go tell that to the Kurds.
Jim

To me, this is an awkward thought.

Didn't this issue come up because of a news report that the radical islamic state took control of the chemical weapon dump. You know, these folks that are the ideal enemy.

bo's admin. has stripped all reference to islam out of any military action, conflict or any civil unrest, but everyone knows who the enemy is. If a reporter or two decides to strike all references to wmd's from their articles, then multiple thousands of artillery shells filled with chemicals known to be weapons of mass destruction are no longer wmd's. Why can't these things be loaded in trucks to be carted off in a clean up effort, then accidentally be diverted and blown up in a suicide terror attack.

Some kirby spokesman fellow says don't worry, these things are not usable. How dangerous would it be for a suicide bomber to load 'em up and set 'em off before he got too sick. Are these the same folks that're saying 'don't worry about our allies'. US trained and supplied syrian rebs won't veer off to tend to their own interests against asad. Our partners the turks spectate on the border while 'coalition kurds' are being slaughtered, and then attack kurds within turkey. Are these spokesfolks for the admin. ever going to give us a believable story.

I never mentioned syria, but are you pretty confident that non rusty chemical wmd's made there way to that country. Interesting, the 'facts' are either these things are old junk or accounted for in syria. No other possibilities?

If you believe the articles, and stand by the fact that they are not usable, are you confident that these materials are completely unusable for isis related work place violence. Because the article hints that these materials are hazardous and potential criminals have taken control of them, shouldn't we send the fbi in to at least investigate if a crime has been committed.

Once again BULL

just some facts for ya King,

Bush went to congress and they voted (INCLUDING Kerry,Clinton and others) to go to invade Irag
your BOY Obama (and Reid) are afraid to vote because of politics !

Bush had a coalition of 30 nations-democracies when he went to war A coalition of the WILLING
Obama and Kerry have 7 or 8 autocracies and they ARE losing the war with ISIS.



Saddam Hussein HAD WMD's,he used them several times against his own people and threatened to us them against others !

http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2013/03/22/news/saddam-hussein-had-wmd-after-all/

What we knew about Saddam Hussein and WMD

Saddam Hussein certainly had WMD many years before Operation Iraqi Freedom. He used them on Kurdish towns and villages in northern Iraq. (Incidentally that�s the one part of Iraq that has stayed relatively calm lately.) The suffering of those villagers prompted the Northern No-fly Zone during the Clinton administration. It also prompted then-President Bill Clinton to say that Saddam Hussein had to go.