8 Comments

Roger,

The great mystery of the whole WMD issue is why the Bush administration has done such a poor job of laying out what we do know in great detail.

Retired General Tommy Franks memorably characterized the “missing WMD’s” by comparing the situation to a person in possession of a disassembled handgun. Such a person cannot meaningfully be characterized as being “disarmed,” but that’s how the Democrats and their media have successfully portrayed Saddam.

Jamie Irons

The chemical weapons are probably in Syria or still buried in Iraq. I believe that Saddam had outsourced his nuclear development to Libya. That’s why Khaddafi burped them up right after Saddam fell. He didn’t want to be found holding those puppies. and the OFF funding was going to be shut down.

I heard a weapons inspector from Australia say that the most dangerous job in Iraq for many years to come would be that of backhoe operator.

I think Saddam hid the weapons, probably in Syria… and then he killed the people who knew.

If the mob can hide Jimmy Hoffa, Saddam can a few thousand litres of chemical weapons.

After all we did not sneak up on the son of a bitch.

Some of the WMDs are probably in Kojo Annan’s missing car. No wonder Kofi is upset with cheeky schoolboy reporter’s questions.

Even if Saddam did not have WMD at the time of the invasion, it is a well-known fact that he not only *had* had them but used them to slaughter 10’s of thousands of Kurds. Amnesty International (in the long-ago days when it was still, uh, “fair and balanced”) pointed this out before the *first* Gulf War, for crying out loud. And Saddam had two vigorous young sons ready to succeed him who by all accounts were even more bloodthirsty than he was. The idea that if we had just left him alone everything would have been hunky-dory is lunatic.

It’s hard to take the missing WMD story seriously as an indictment of the Bush Administration and the war. Everybody knows Saddam had them, so why isn’t what happened to them the Big Story, as opposed to Bush Lied? My suspicion is that most of this has more to do with hating Bush than loving Saddam. The mysteries to me are what happened to the WMD’s Saddam did have; why would someone hate Bush so much as to support Saddam (where are their priorities?); and why would anyone think the USA has *any* incentive to go to the UN again (given that the US gained nothing while giving Saddam plenty of time to hide the evidence and thereby embarass Bush).

How can these a–holes be so blind? It must take a heavy dose of narcicism to be more concerned about GWB than Saddam. This calls to mind France, 1940, when representatives in the parliament were more concerned with criticizing each other than with the presence of German panzers at the gates of Paris. I understand the superficial attractiveness of ignoring painful truths, but it hardly seems fitting for the Reality-Based Community to have its collective head this far in the sand.

Ben has a point: where are the weapons?

We know that enriched uranium was found, thousands of gallons of chemicals were founds, in fact things were dug up in rose gardens and found in personal homes that were not supposed to be there.

So where is the rest of it?

How many more are there?

Check out here:

http://afhr.org/en/about.html?lang=en

“….Known mass grave sites in Iraq

One of the most threatening challenges facing the new Iraqi government and the Iraqi society is the horrible heritage of the Baath terror. Until now more than 260 mass graves have been located all over Iraq and their number increases daily.“”

not covered in MSM however…