Support NeoGAF

[MIMIC]

Washington -- A new report on Iraq's illicit weapons program by the chief U.S. weapons inspector is expected to conclude that Saddam Hussein's government had a clear intent to produce nuclear, chemical and biological weapons if U.N. sanctions were lifted, government officials said Thursday. But the report finds no evidence that Iraq had begun any large-scale program for weapons production by the time of the U.S. invasion last year, the officials said.

The most specific evidence of an illicit weapons program, the officials said, has been uncovered in clandestine labs operated by the Iraqi Intelligence Service, which could have produced small quantities of lethal chemical and biological agents -- though probably for use in assassinations, not to inflict mass casualties.

A draft report of nearly 1,500 pages that is circulating within the government essentially reaffirms the findings of an interim review completed 11 months ago, the officials said. But they said it adds considerable detail, particularly on the question of Iraq's intention to produce weapons if U.N. sanctions were weakened or lifted, a judgment they said was based on documents signed by senior leaders and the debriefings of former Iraqi scientists and top officials, as well as other records.

[...]

In its current form, the report reaffirms previous interim findings that there is no evidence Iraq possessed stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion in March 2003, the officials said. Prewar intelligence estimates that said Iraq actually possessed chemical and biological arsenals and was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program were cited by the Bush administration as the major rationale for war.

San Francisco Chronicle

For the American public to have such confidence in Bush's proclamation about Saddam's WMD, without having seen a shred of evidence to corroborate his claims, is scary.

For the love of God, don't believe everything you hear.

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

This information will have no effect on the President.

 

[pnjtony]

sadly your right...GW is made of teflon, NOTHING sticks to him

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Bush has been 100% wrong in every prediction and assumption about the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism. Yet people still find him capable to lead the country during this war. Boggles the mind really if you think about it. That's like being in a Taxi when the driver can never get you to your location but, still paying him because he "knows" where he is going.

 

[Celicar]

WTF!? You serious?? Saddam didn't have any WMDs?

That is some weird, wild stuff.

How about BLTs? Did he have any BLTs?

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Is it ever worth going to war over sandwiches?

 

[Phoenix]

Is it ever worth going to war over sandwhiches?

Depends on what's on it. I hear that a Broodwich is worth going to war over.

 

[levious]

I see no mayo, You call this a SANDWICH?!?!!

 

[Phoenix]

I see no bacon, You call this a SANDWICH?!?!!

fixed

 

[Synbios459]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

 

[MIMIC]

Rumsfeld is holding out on us

We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

 

[firex]

I love that quote. "We know where they are. They're in any possible direction, somewhat."

 

[duderon]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

Let the excuses begin.

WELL TIME TO INVADE THE SURROUNDING COUNTRIES

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

then why dont they go get them?

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Synbios459 is that sarcasm?

 

[sc0la]

Perhaps the Earl of Sandwich, but other than that no.

Nice job derailing the thread though. The real news isn't that there was no WMDs. The real news is that it wasn't that GWB knew the allegations were tenuous, but that he didn't give a shit to try and figure out the truth becasue he and his crew of duplicitous bastards had been planning on doing this for a long ass time, and they simply piggybacked the effort onto the shoulders of approx. 3000 dead Americans that had nothing at all to do with it.

The same poor fact checking we rip Dan Rather for today, the president couldn't be bothered with persuing with thousand or more (additional) American, and perhaps as many as ten thousad Iraqi lives at stake.

 

[Drinky Crow]

perhaps as many as ten thousad Iraqi lives at stake.

Try 39,000.

 

[Shinobi]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

When? And how? And why didn't the US spies see this? And why would Saddam hide weapons that he could've used during the invasion?

 

[sc0la]

Try 39,000.

Thanks I heard some numbers the other day but the span was totally huge (I guess it was 10 to 60 thousand depending on estimate, instead of 6-10, transliteration and all that). I was in the car at the time and wasn't giving it my full attention.

Where, if I may ask, does this estimation originate from?

 

[Tommie Hu$tle]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

A basic history lesson would tell you that this is near impossible. All those WMDs he used aginst his own people were for use on the Iranians. Iraq killed tens of thousands or Iranians. There is no real love between Iraq and Iran. He would be comitting sucide by handing his weapons to them.

 

[cvxfreak]

No WMDs?

Oh. I absolutely had no clue or logic about that.

 

[BlackMage]

but but my government wouldn't lie to me!!!

 

[xsarien]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

I love this little gem, because it'd take days of every intelligence agent in the world to simultaneously close their eyes, cover their ears, and shut down every satellite that's peering down at Iraq.

If the WMDs were moved, we would've noticed.

 

[MIMIC]

I thought he was just being sarcastic (which is why I didn't respond).

 

[CrimsonSkies]

"For the love of God, don't believe everything you hear."

I guess we should just fire our intelligence agencies and invest that money into the UN then.

 

[ErasureAcer]

What pisses me off more so than Bush's stupidity, his loyal and blind followers and the thousands of casulaties (American and Iraqi) is the cost of this whole fucking war. 200 Billion already and no end in sight.

Before we ever put an end to this war...we'll have spent a good 1 trillion dollars on this. You know what we could do with 1 trillion dollars? A shit load of stuff. And what is this all for? Nothing. We've just thrown away 1 trillion dollars and killed thousands of lives.

How can people be for this war? The facts are clear. Saddam was not a threat. Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was not in cahoots with Osama Bin Laden. Saddam had no intentions to attack America. Saddam had no missile capable of reaching Europe yet alone the USA.

Why? I ask anyone who is still thinking that attacking Iraq was a good idea...why? Do you like throwing money away? Do you like knowing thousands of people have died by our actions? Do you like to know that even as I type this US planes are still attacking Iraq's cities and harming civilians? Really, I don't get it. There's so much more we could have done with 1 trillion dollars, 200 billion now.

Please, let's get rid of Bush before he decides to attack another nation and commits another trillion dollars to a pointless war.

 

[RaymondCarver]

It's the San Francisco Chronicle. I don't even have to read the article to know that there's a bias.















Can you come up with a more credible source? Eh? Figures.

 

[Baron Aloha]

Guys, Saddam hid all of them, some of them are in Iran, and the surrounding countries.

Yup. He buried one in my back yard.

 

[xsarien]

Can you come up with a more credible source? Eh? Figures.

Like what? San Francisco Chronicle's about as mainstream a news source as you can get. Who isn't "biased?"

 

[Chony]

Is it ever worth going to war over sandwiches?

For a BLT, if it's made right, you sure the fuck yeah.

 

[brooklyngooner]

OMG this WMD thing is like so totally last year. Six months ago it was like all about how Saddam was like a totally brutal dictator who like tortured his prisoners and shit, and now it's that it will take 10-20 years for us to harvest the fruits of democracy in the Middle East.

Dork.

 

[MIMIC]

It's the San Francisco Chronicle. I don't even have to read the article to know that there's a bias.















Can you come up with a more credible source? Eh? Figures.

Find your own source and we'll take a look at it.

 

[alejob]

Sadam couldn´t even lunch a missle to hit Kuwait and Bushy made evertone think he was going after the US.

 

[Father_Brain]

Please, let's get rid of Bush before he decides to attack another nation and commits another trillion dollars to a pointless war.

I take it you've changed your mind about supporting Nader, then?

 

[Phoenix]

It's the San Francisco Chronicle. I don't even have to read the article to know that there's a bias.

Can you come up with a more credible source? Eh? Figures.

Pretty soon now we should have access to the actual report that they are referencing. Since it wasn't the Chronicle that made the report - I don't think we need them to be un-biased in this particular case.

 

[explodet]

I hope you're all happy, now I want a BLT in the worst way.

 

[DarienA]

No WMD's..... well why the hell didn't we PLANT some then? Geez do I have to think of EVERYTHING around here?!?!?!