PDA

View Full Version : Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq


ObiShawn
06-22-2006, 01:23 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

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."

Click here to read the declassified portion of the NGIC report. (
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf )

He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.

"The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," Santorum read from the document.

"This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."

Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.

He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.

"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.

Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.

"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.

"It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don't want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there's mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq," Barnes said.

The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.

At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq's Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, "religious emir" Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.

Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday's debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.

"This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false," he said.

As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.

"We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war," Hoekstra said.

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 07:36 AM
Hmmm, and to think those really didn't exist, and that the Administration (most commonly referred to as The Man), went to war over nothing, just so they could kill innocent women and children.

I think that article is a fake, you made that up:rolleyes:

Mr.Elwood
06-22-2006, 07:42 AM
Hmmm, and to think those really didn't exist, and that the Administration (most commonly referred to as The Man), went to war over nothing, just so they could kill innocent women and children.

I think that article is a fake, you made that up:rolleyes:
it's about the oil you nimrod... it's about keeping the fuel cheap and flowing... DUH!!:rolleyes:

HotWireD
06-22-2006, 07:46 AM
These are weapons from the days when Iraq was supported and supplied by the West - they are out of date, old weapons (a German arms supplier was recently imprisoned in Germany for the supply of the materials to make the chemical weapons - so we know Saddam had them). Saddam Hussein is currently on trial for mass murder with these chemical weapons - ironically these murders were commited when he Iraq was an ally of the West.

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

I am pretty certain that the reason given (ref WMDs) for the recent invasion of Iraq was 'current' WMDs, not old ones in stores that may have been forgotten about. It would be difficult to prove that the Authorities even knew about these ones.

That is not to say that I do not believe that there are fresh, newly made and ready to use WMDs in Iraq - still to be located.

it's about the oil you nimrod... it's about keeping the fuel cheap and flowing... DUH!!:rolleyes:

This would, in my opinion, be the reason we went in.

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 07:47 AM
it's about the oil you nimrod... it's about keeping the fuel cheap and flowing... DUH!!:rolleyes:

Ohhhhhhh, that's what it's about. Okay, cool.

Let me publicly apologize for the apparent lack of respect you were shown, and I am undertaking ways to ensure that does not happen again.;)

HotWireD
06-22-2006, 07:50 AM
By the way, what is a nimrod? (i thought it was the UK equivalent of an AWAC).

Edit:
Definition of a Nimrod
Webster's Dictionary
1.) a descendant of Ham represented in the Old Testament book of Genesis as a mighty hunter and a king of Shinar
2.) hunter

Nimrod aircraft - much cooler than having a mushroom on the top...

AWAC
http://www.namsa.nato.int/gallery/systems/awac-e_3.jpg
Nimrod

Sharon
06-22-2006, 07:51 AM
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.




Why am I not surprised????? :rolleyes:

Mr.Elwood
06-22-2006, 07:56 AM
By the way, what is a nimrod? (i thought it was the UK equivalent of an AWAC).
it is... it's a way to call someone really big and ugly without calling them fat and nasty in public..

see, I do care about treating people with respect in this public forum...:p :D

HotWireD
06-22-2006, 08:00 AM
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.




Why am I not surprised????? :rolleyes:

I do not know much about this John Kerry, but is he willing to accept the consequences of leaving Iraq whilst it is in the middle of a civil war, or, if it escalates after he has pulled out the US armed forces, will he go back in on humanitarian grounds?

I may not fully agree with going in when we did (I think it should have been finished properly in 'Gulf War One'), now we are there we cannot abandon the good Iraqi people who have finally got a chance to be free, and who have also revealed themselves to the Saddam Regime, who will know who they all are if we leave.

('we' meaning the coalition forces - I am not over there myself).

Sharon
06-22-2006, 08:03 AM
I do not know much about this John Kerry, but is he willing to accept the consequences of leaving Iraq whilst it is in the middle of a civil war, or, if it escalates after he has pulled out the US armed forces, will he go back in on humanitarian grounds?

I may not fully agree with going in when we did (I think it should have been finished properly in 'Gulf War One'), now we are there we cannot abandon the good Iraqi people who have finally got a chance to be free, and who have also revealed themselves to the Saddam Regime, who will know who they all are if we leave.

('we' meaning the coalition forces - I am not over there myself).

John Kerry...the one who ran for President last time. The one who threw is "hard-earned" medals :rolleyes: over the white house fence

middletree
06-22-2006, 08:03 AM
it is... it's a way to call someone really big and ugly without calling them fat and nasty in public..


It's more than that. Nimrod had an affair with his mother.

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 08:05 AM
it is... it's a way to call someone really big and ugly without calling them fat and nasty in public..

see, I do care about treating people with respect in this public forum...:p :D

Greatly appreciated!!!:D

It's more than that. Nimrod had an affair with his mother.


Oh borther!!!! Well, thanks for that bit of info James.;)

Sharon
06-22-2006, 08:11 AM
It's more than that. Nimrod had an affair with his mother.


*shudders* *starts looking for "vomit" smiley*

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 08:14 AM
*shudders* *starts looking for "vomit" smiley*


Let me help!!;)

Sharon
06-22-2006, 08:17 AM
Let me help!!;)

you're useful for soemthing....:D

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 08:36 AM
you're useful for soemthing....:D

I'm also a good spell checker for something;)

Sharon
06-22-2006, 08:40 AM
I'm also a good spell checker for something;)

Oh hush....lol

Grank
06-22-2006, 10:36 AM
nimrod - the last good cd from green day



does it matter why we went to war? it's kind of already happened...

cheewiee
06-22-2006, 10:48 AM
....does it matter why we went to war? it's kind of already happened...

Yes, Why?

Intelligence failures led to 9-11... Our intelligence said Hussein had WMD's... So if he didn't have WMD's, our Intelligence still SUCKS... and that NEEDS to be addressed...

TheBus36(Retired)
06-22-2006, 01:10 PM
Yes, Why?

Intelligence failures led to 9-11... Our intelligence said Hussein had WMD's... So if he didn't have WMD's, our Intelligence still SUCKS... and that NEEDS to be addressed...

Please don't include me in with your intelligence, I have hard enough time convincing people I actually have some!:eek:

Evanescence
06-22-2006, 11:02 PM
I'm sure its true but the majority of any WMDs and any info attached to them, likley went to Syria or some other rogue nation, just before we invaded. I think it was an ill conceived plan to begin with.....borders left open and a showdown allowing the WMDS to escape.

It was all about the power...showdown, Oil and rebuilding Iraq....

Very ill conceived. I think we need to be cautious about pulling out....we made the mess, we need to help claen it up. Baby steps to withdrawal is my opinion.

E

mcgreen311
06-23-2006, 07:57 PM
Has anyone seen the story anywhere besides Fox? The only other news site I frequent with any regularity is the BBC and I haven't seen it there.

ObiShawn
06-23-2006, 08:09 PM
I doubt you see it anywhere else. The only other news sources I've heard mention it were a few talk radio stations.

Whether they do it for ratings or because they are biased, most news companies won't tell you the good things happening in Iraq.

NotMyOwn
06-23-2006, 08:10 PM
Has anyone seen the story anywhere besides Fox? The only other news site I frequent with any regularity is the BBC and I haven't seen it there.

The BBC is real anti-American, so they would not likely mention it.

mcgreen311
06-23-2006, 08:14 PM
The BBC is real anti-American, so they would not likely mention it.

I thought mayyyyybe there would be a leetle tiny link somewhere, but anything relating to Bush/Iraq is about closing Guantanamo Bay and other things I don't feel like looking up at the moment. I'm not terribly surprised that it wasn't there though.

Valpo
06-23-2006, 08:17 PM
im a big time conservative and huge fan of this administration, but heres the clue, the administration isnt making a big deal out of it, they are not the weapons we went in looking for and its election year/future presidential run politics that senator santorum is playing, yes the weapons may have been dangerous still but theyre from '91..point is we have a mess and need to fix it, the death of al zarqawi helps a lot because he did a lot of hands on things there, just pray for peace above all else

HotWireD
06-24-2006, 01:39 AM
The BBC is real anti-American, so they would not likely mention it.

I live in the Uk and I would say that in my opinion, the BBC have never been more pro US than now.

I would trust the BBC over FOX any day. Not saying I trust the BBC - they have been too pro Blair and Bush recently.

I prefered them when they were more impartial, but I doubt that will ever happen again.

HotWireD
06-24-2006, 01:43 AM
im a big time conservative and huge fan of this administration, but heres the clue, the administration isnt making a big deal out of it, they are not the weapons we went in looking for and its election year/future presidential run politics that senator santorum is playing, yes the weapons may have been dangerous still but theyre from '91..point is we have a mess and need to fix it, the death of al zarqawi helps a lot because he did a lot of hands on things there, just pray for peace above all else


I agree with Valpo, they are not playing it up because the weapons found are not they ones they are seeking - if they claimed they were, the left would accuse them of falsifying the evidence, particularly in an election year.

They cannot win either way :mad:

WiredFor3rdDay
06-24-2006, 05:11 AM
I just think this Iraq war is a big mess if we pull out now it will get out of hand over there and then we will have to go back get it cleaned up and we don't need that we need to finnish what we started and get the job done ASAP!
And with Al-Zarkaui out of the way it makes it easier for clean up!
We just need to get head guy Osama.....

Right now think I'll pray for peace for an outcome of this situation and to get our troops home safely.
I know they have fought this thing whole heartedly and seen alot of turmoil and are ready to come home!

Grank
06-24-2006, 06:14 AM
Yes, Why?

Intelligence failures led to 9-11... Our intelligence said Hussein had WMD's... So if he didn't have WMD's, our Intelligence still SUCKS... and that NEEDS to be addressed...
well seeing as how improving forgeign intelligence should always be a top concern while constantly being improved i fail to see how this would change any course of action we might have taken in that depatment. the only that that would change with the finding of wmd's in iraq would be the perception of the american peopleand possibly the perception of a few country's in the world. seriously though... as important as perception is, i really don't care about it. whether you perceive us being in iraq as for the greater good or not... i don't care. i know that the soldiers over here for the most part are doing a great job of helping the people with schools, water, preventive medicine, etc...

NotMyOwn
06-24-2006, 02:27 PM
I live in the Uk and I would say that in my opinion, the BBC have never been more pro US than now.

I would trust the BBC over FOX any day. Not saying I trust the BBC - they have been too pro Blair and Bush recently.

I prefered them when they were more impartial, but I doubt that will ever happen again.

Show me a link to prove your side.

kiwisongbird
06-24-2006, 11:37 PM
No media is unbiased - it is operated by people who have their own 'bent' on all things... media is about making money... the 'gentlemanly' art of impartial news reporting is DEAD! :D