30km from Bagdad and still no WoMD

I predict that not long after Baghdad is taken, we will find WMD in Iraq...

Even if the CIA has to plant them.

I think he actually meant South Africa, to my knowledge, there are the only country that has completely gone through a UN-verified disarmament process.

It's easy if the USA don't find any chemical or biological weapons the just find some...
(don't ask how - the USA WILL FIND SOME)

This post illustrates the nature of the problem. With or without actual WMD stockpiles, there is a substantial part of the Left that will never "turn around" and agree to what has happened in Iraq. No evidence will ever be enough.

I think that either (1) the WMD have been moved to other countries (at least in part) or (2) the French and Russians have managed to persuade what's left of the Iraqi command structure to keep them without using them. I wouldn't be surprised if those screening "oil fires" were actually being used to dispose of WMD as well. It's logical to assume that Iraq is doing all it can to cover up and destroy WMD at this point, and they might have plenty of time to do that if the coalition has to go house to house.

From today's Wall Street Journal opinions page:



Dakel says:



I'm sure Saddam got rid of all his toxic agents between 1991 and now. I see no reason to believe otherwise. Why would he lie?

Wouldn't that be meeting on of the "Collation of the Willing's" goals then?

Africa? The whole continent? There's a slight difference between South Africa (where I come from), and Africa, the continent. And no, no one even threatened to attack South Africa, no one even asked South africa. They did it on their own without any prodding. But your wonderful country did threaten South Africa a number of times on the subject of Helmet mounted sights for jet fighters. Your country demanded South Africa hand the technology over to the USA because it can be fitted into existing planes that don't have them with ease. South Africa refused. Your country then went ahead and developed it's own Helmet Mounted Sights of Mass Destruction, which will equip your country's next generation of helicopters and fighters.

The way Rumsfeld has been shooting his mouth off (they should get him a muzzle) I would not be surprised if Iran is in fact next on the list of Countries to be Invaded (tm).

Yeah. What happened to that mystery ship? :/

I would not be the least surprised.

No, I wouldn't be surprised if the US finds WMD and the liberals claim the US planted them. Would Not surprised at all.

If you read your own post, you'll note it is referring to a time period during the first Gulf War, when no one doubted that Iraq had Chemical and Biological weapons.

However, your post has just made you eligable for a job as dossier writer for Tony Blair.

Glad to know that we've cleared that one up then. The war was just in the nick of time then?

A liberal friend of mine was discussing the whole war issue. He said that the US would find WMD even if we had to put it there ourselves. I was like, what are you smokin!!!???

Then I come here and realize that this is more common than I thought.

Does anyone else find that way of thinking cynical?

Yes, it is. Though I would think it's partly humerous (admit it - conspiracy theories are funny) and partly understandable given the level of rhetoric (founded or not) being thrown around and politicians' (in general) distaste of losing face in the public view.

And though I wouldn't be suprised to find out that happened myself - I'm not expecting it to happen either.

You might or might not have noticed that your government made a huge deal out of documents which they found claiming to prove the Iraq was aquiring Uranium from Niger (the first is a radioactive metal, the second is a country in Africa). The documents were then proven to be faked.

You might alos remember (or prefer not to) the dossier that Tony Blair was frantically handing around the UK parliment, supposedly proving Saddams evilnes (claimed that the profession of "Rapist" was a genuine Iraqi job, amongst other things). The UK's own MI6 was the one who then, tired of that crap, actually blew the lid on dear old Tony. The dossier had in fact been taken almost verbatim from a thesis of a student almost 10 years earlier.

NO, I don't think it at all cynical. Tony and George were so horny to get this war started that they were prepared to lie to the public, or at the very least, not bother to check their evidence. Can you perhaps tell me why they wouldn't do it again?

It has to do with a few things. If we found WMDs they would have to admit Bush was right. That can't happen. They would also have to admit they was wrong. That can't happen. If this is true, Bush would also gain more popularity, and that def can't happen.

So they draw in the conspiracy theories.

The 2001 election all over again.

Are we all forgetting about the UN-banned SCUD missiles that Saddam claimed he didn't have, then fired towards Kuwait in the first few days of this conflict?

actually, AFAIK, that wasn't a scud, though it was reported as such initially. That report was later corrected.

totally as a tangent, Iraq indeed has a uranium mine in western Iraq, so if they only needed low grade uranium for "dirty" bombs, they'd have no need to get it elsewhere. I just learned that this week by looking at old maps from the original desert storm.