Britain admits there may be no WMD's in Iraq

[MarkA]

http://english.aljazeera.net/topics/article.asp?cu_no=1&item_no=1858&version=1&template_id=263&parent_id=258

[Nick]

...and I would be the first to admit that there may be intelligent life in the Universe but it is getting more and more difficult to find.

The phrase in the thread topic that reduces the so-called 'admission' to mere speculation is "may be".

Apparently AJ is down at the moment. Do you have another source for this admission?

[John Hodgson]

... another source for this ??? You've got to be kidding Nick.

[BobMurdoch]

Except for the barrels of chemical weapons they found yesterday, the missile weapons that have already exceeded the maximum range allowed by the UN, the trace chemical agents found on the army boots at the training facility, the anti nerve gas syringes, the missiles Blix found designed to deliver chemical weapons BEFORE the war.

Other than that, you're right they've found nothing. Sheesh.

Oh by the way, this country is the size of California. Do you have ANY idea how long it takes to search every basement and storage facility in a country that size? It will take snitches from Iraq's military to probably find them but they will.

How do you tell an Iraqi is lying? His lips are moving. (apologies to all the lawyers who were previously ridiculed in that old joke... Baghdad Bob makes you all look like Mother Theresa)

[Danny R]

The reporter certainly twisted the words.

"Britain admits there may be no WMD's in Iraq" is NOT equal to the actual quote of "no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction may after all be found".

Just because we can't find them doesn't mean they aren't there. Iraq has had years to build underground tunnels to hide these things in.

[Karl Foster]

I'm guessing that "Chemical Ali" used every drop of chemical weapons when he killed the Kurds. Right. :shrug:

[toenail]

Originally posted by BobMurdoch
How do you tell an Iraqi is lying? His lips are moving. (apologies to all the lawyers who were previously ridiculed in that old joke... Baghdad Bob makes you all look like Mother Theresa)

Finally, SOMEONE who can make me feel morally superior! :lol: Apology accepted.

[James_F]

Originally posted by Nick
Apparently AJ is down at the moment. Do you have another source for this admission?
How about this one Nick? ;)

http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=6761&TagID=2

[lastmanstanding]

The anti-war crowd doesn't care about what is found or not found in Iraq. All that matters is that Bush is opposed, his victories degraded, and that the hidden drumbeat of Marxism goes on and on. Marxism=Socialism=Poverty Shared Equally, except for the elites.
I would have at least a little respect for them if they would just come clean and say what they are after, instead of hiding behind the skirts of 'high moral principles' and 'just war'.

But no. They spin and spin and spin; losers united for false equality.

[jcrash]

Well, I guess it would be more accurate to say that chemical weapons are the least destructive type of WMD and typically have a much less significant impact than the other types. But what about Libya, N. Korea, Syria, Sudan, Thailand, Vietnam, and the other 20+ countries?

Federation of American Scientists Assessment (http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm)

Come on, the only reason we are there is because daddy failed.

[Jacob S]

Maybe they cannot find them because they had already used them. Even if they havent they probably have them hidden underground somewhere and it could be anywhere. Just because they have not found it yet does not mean that it is not there. They used them before havent they?

[MarkA]

"Apparently AJ is down at the moment. Do you have another source for this admission?"

Al Jazeera's site is working fine here; regardless, James_F's link is the same article so there ya go.

[Bogy]

Originally posted by lastmanstanding
I would have at least a little respect for them if they would just come clean and say what they are after, instead of hiding behind the skirts of 'high moral principles' and 'just war'.

But no. They spin and spin and spin; losers united for false equality.
So what exactly is this war for again? The danger of WMD? Liberation for the downtrodden Iraqi people? To punish Saddam for using the weapons we game him to kill Iranians? Construction contracts for Haliburton? Democracy for all Arab states? The administration has come up with so many varied reasons for this war I'm dizzy. Of course the answer to each of them is "War is necessary." Kind of like, "The answer to any economic problem is "tax cuts."

[MarkA]

Except, Bogy, a tax cut is nowhere NEAR as serious of action as a war. To compare the two is a little off.

[lastmanstanding]

So there is spin on both sides.

And there are WMDs, and the Iraqis will benefit from their liberation, and Saddam abused the resources we had given him and needed to feel some pain for it, and Haliburton needs to offset those asbestos losses somehow. Sure wouldn't want to give them a TAX BREAK, would we?

Get the despots and socialists out of the way, and democracy will flower.

The war on terror is complex to the point of tedium, and so far, it is working. Yemen helped track down terrorist elements they had been hiding after the USS Kole and before Afganistan. They do not want to be next, and they don't have to be.

This war has raised the price of subversion, hopefully to the point where nation states will no longer look the other way when terrorists set up camp.

Without a place to hide, terrorism becomes much more difficult, and everyone who is not a terrorist wins.

But by far more importantly, Afganistan and Iraq operations have let the world know in no uncertain terms that the United States has the will to protect itself and its allies, and to not run and hide with the first squeak of the protestors, and oh yes, we will accept casualties.

Gotta go gas up the SUVs. I leave both of them running 24/7 to use the most fuel possible.

After all, it IS about oil.

[ERSanders]

I'm still wondering what was in those three ships that Iraq leased from Egypt and set sailing in circles in the south Indian ocean.

I would expect that they is a high probability that they are loaded with WMD parts. Most likely with the orders to return home to Iraq when the dust settles, or to go to a new port when Saddam escapes or to scuttle when the regime is gone.

Is there any new info on these ships?

[lastmanstanding]

I've seen nothing on the ships, but rumors have it that a lot of trucks crossed into Syria during the inspections.

Suddenly the noise coming out of Syria is a little less combative. Maybe they are deciding, like Yemen, that they don't want to be next. After looking at the map, it would be so easy to roll to Damascus to see what was in those trucks.

But more likely, Syria can be dealt with without firing a shot.

It is a different world now.

The war on terror is working.

[Richard King]

I'm still wondering what was in those three ships that Iraq leased from Egypt and set sailing in circles in the south Indian ocean.I had forgotten about those. I wonder if they are still out there and if we have plans to capture them if they are.

[ERSanders]

Originally posted by Rking401
I had forgotten about those. I wonder if they are still out there and if we have plans to capture them if they are.

The last I heard...about three weeks ago...was that they were afraid to try a capture for fear of sabatage and an ecological disaster:down:

[gcutler]

Originally posted by lastmanstanding
I've seen nothing on the ships, but rumors have it that a lot of trucks crossed into Syria during the inspections.

I'd say that is probably the best bet also.

[lastmanstanding]

Where is Hans Blix when you need him?

I wonder if he has trouble finding his keys in the morning?