# So the Neocons had no real evidence of WMD in Iraq. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 30, 2003, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643 "2003-05-30T22:43:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/141 "2003-06-03T04:56:02Z")
Not to harp on a point, [but Americans don’t care](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,454771,00.html) if there were WMD in Iraq or not. From the article: > [@](#): > > A recent Gallup Poll shows that 79% of Americans believe the war was justified even if no hard evidence of weapons of mass destruction is found. I suppose it is a usefull exercise to discuss what GW really knew about Iraqi WMD prior to the war, but keep it in perspective. This is not an election issue, and in the world of politics, what else matters? ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/142 "2003-06-03T05:11:41Z")
Sam Stone said > [@](#): > > But as I said, there are too many developments going on right now to warrant a judgement. That’s where we part company, Sammy Boy. On April 11,2002, I posted a thread [Going out on a limb. There AIN’T any WMD, you stupid shits.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=176694&highlight=shits) So, in over seven weeks I have yet to be proved wrong, (not counting the stupidity uttered by Bush on Polish tv) Sam. Can you give me a timeframe? How long should I wait? After the election in 2004? Is that long enough? . :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/143 "2003-06-03T05:12:58Z")
Shit! Even I’m not that prescient. It was 2003. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/144 "2003-06-03T05:16:12Z")
**Brutus** said > [@](#): > > I suppose it is a usefull exercise to discuss what GW really knew about Iraqi WMD prior to the war, but keep it in perspective. This is not an election issue, and in the world of politics, what else matters? So, _WHAT_ matters in your moral view? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/145 "2003-06-03T05:22:58Z")
**Brutus** , would it be ok with you if you found out that Americans were sent to die under under false pretenses? ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/146 "2003-06-03T06:03:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Brutus \* > \*\*Not to harp on a point, [but Americans don’t care](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,454771,00.html) if there were WMD in Iraq or not. From the article: “A recent Gallup Poll shows that 79% of Americans believe the war was justified even if no hard evidence of weapons of mass destruction is found.” I suppose it is a usefull exercise to discuss what GW really knew about Iraqi WMD prior to the war, but keep it in perspective. This is not an election issue, and in the world of politics, what else matters? \*\* [My link](http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-06-02-poll-usat_x.htm), which is dated June 2 to your May 27, has this statement: “56% say the war in Iraq would be justified even if weapons of mass destruction were not found; 41% say it would not.” That makes it a far more substantial issue than your link would have us believe. I don’t know if one of us has a gimpy link, or if the numbers have changed that drastically in a week, or what. But dismissing it as “not an election issue” seems to be wishful thinking. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/147 "2003-06-03T06:06:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*So you’re saying we should have let Hitler kill all the jews? \*\* Godwin’s law has been invoked. Sorry, you lose the argument. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/148 "2003-06-03T06:22:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\ ***Brutus** , > would it be ok with you if you found out that Americans were sent to die under under false pretenses? \*\* No, it would not. But I don’t see the ‘false pretenses’ here. WMD were a reason for going in, but not the only reason. I was (and am) more concerned by Pakistani nukes than Iraqi Anthrax. The overthrowing of Saddam, and his Baath party, was more than enough reason for me, for the myriad benefits that a Saddam-Free Iraq would present. **Samclem** , what was moral to me was the removal of Saddam’s regime. Immoral would have been to dork around with more sanctions (criminal, IMHO), and pop the occassional cruise missle in, never really resolving the problem. ---
**Author:** ![Aro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b3f665/32.png) [@Aro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aro)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 8:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/149 "2003-06-03T08:06:42Z")
[US Senate opens Iraq weapons probe](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2958138.stm). Does anyone think this will be a useful exercise, or is it the establishment investigating the establishment? ---
**Author:** ![elfje](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19b73/32.png) [@elfje](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfje)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/150 "2003-06-03T10:37:04Z")
Hopefull, it will. I can’t help but fear that it’s going to be more likely now than ever, that WmD evidence will be planted, as this is potentially very very serious for both Bush and Blair. They just cannot afford NOT to find any WmD. All those who’re yelling “give them time”, well, according to White House officials vbefore the war, they knew all the locations of possible WmD storage places, or they claimed they did, anyway. You’d also think this (finding of WmD) would be a priority, as the credibility of both the Bush&Blair administrations hinges on the existence of them. It’s going to be an interesting few weeks. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/151 "2003-06-03T11:25:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elfje \* > \*\*Hopefull, it will. > I can’t help but fear that it’s going to be more likely now than ever, that WmD evidence will be planted, as this is potentially very very serious for both Bush and Blair. > They just cannot afford NOT to find any WmD. > All those who’re yelling “give them time”, well, according to White House officials vbefore the war, they knew all the locations of possible WmD storage places, or they claimed they did, anyway. > You’d also think this (finding of WmD) would be a priority, as the credibility of both the Bush&Blair administrations hinges on the existence of them. > > It’s going to be an interesting few weeks. \*\* Absolutely. I will believe nothing from those two without independent verification. As for giving them time, that’s all the French and Blix wanted but no, we couldn’t wait, the threat was so imminent. So how come now there’s no hurry? Any WMD’s are now either loose in the environment while the looted containers are used for storage, or on their way to the terrorist bazaar because the allies did not secure the sites. Those who sow the wind will reap the dirty bomb whirlwind at some point, and that makes me as mad as hell. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/152 "2003-06-03T12:14:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\*So you’re saying we should have let Hitler kill all the jews? \*\* You are of course aware, being an educated and well-read man, that America’s involvement in WWII had nothing whatsoever to do with rescuing the Jews? Zero, zip, nada. We declared war against the Japanese, there was no mention of Germany. Germany declared war on _us_, not vice versa. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/153 "2003-06-03T12:57:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\* > Shodan Just because someone uses the word “regime” does not mean they are saying “regime change.” “Regime” is not shorthand for “regime change”. Its kind of like someone slamming thier thumb with a hammer and screaming “Mother!”. \*\* Someone drawing a very clear distinction between a ‘regime’, meaning Saddam and his sons, and the Iraqi people, and saying that Saddam and his sons (and the “evil men” who support them) have to leave Iraq within 48 hours or be attacked, is clearly talking about ‘regime change’. I have no idea what the last sentence of your post is supposed to mean. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by quixotic78 \* > \*\*…Even if I concede that they’re just like Colin Powell described, that proves jack and shit… > Okay, Question 2 – suppose tomorrow they do test positive for trace amount of anthrax, or whatever. > > (Emphasis added) I simply **have** to disagree that this is a valid _causus belli_, and I don’t think we’re ever going to see eye-to-eye on this point. > \*\* I think we have hit on the problem. Even if it is absolutely true that these are mobile weapons labs for the production of bio-weapons, you will not admit that the war to overthrow the regime possessing them is justified. In other words, even if the administration is right, it is wrong. As I have said earlier, the process of hand-waving and dismissing evidence out of hand can be applied to almost anything the US is likely to discover. No matter what is found, those determined to do so can always say, "Well, that is not good enough evidence. Two mobile weapons trailers is not good enough. UN inspectors’ reports - not good enough. Intelligence intercepts detailing the process of hiding and destroying WMD - not good enough. Chemical munitions shells are not good enough. Illegal missiles are not good enough. " This is especially true if you are willing to say things like: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by quixotic78 \* > \*\* > He also destroyed the mobile trailers that Colin Powell talked about for the same reason… Regardless, you can be sure of this – had we not removed him, he would have started right back up again." > > The sad thing is that, since we can’t find him, he COULD start back up again. This was one helluva war \ \*\* Now finding the mobile trailers is evidence that they were destroyed, and overthrowing Saddam’s regime and either killing him or sending him into hiding means that he will have no trouble starting back up collecting weapons of mass destruction. As I said elsewhere, this is like arguing with creationists. They tend to deal with facts inconvenient to their position by pretending really hard that they don’t exist. Sigh indeed. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/154 "2003-06-03T13:52:50Z")
**Shodan** despite you jumping up and down, there is no **EVIDENCE** that these trailers were used for the production of biological or chemical weapons. I know it is inconvenient to you and you can pretend all you like that Iraq _did_ have tons of the stuff and you weren’t lied to. But some people just want **EVIDENCE**. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/155 "2003-06-03T14:10:54Z")
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60140-2003May30.html?nav=hptop\_tb](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60140-2003May30.html?nav=hptop_tb) > [@](#): > > KRAKOW, Poland, May 30 – President Bush, citing two trailers that U.S. intelligence agencies have said were probably used as mobile biological weapons labs, said U.S. forces in Iraq have “found the weapons of mass destruction” that were the United States’ primary justification for going to war. > > In remarks to Polish television at a time of mounting criticism at home and abroad that the more than two-month-old weapons hunt is turning up nothing, Bush said that claims of failure were “wrong.” The remarks were released today. > > “You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons,” Bush said in an interview before leaving today on a seven-day trip to Europe and the Middle East. "They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two. > > “And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on,” Bush said. “But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong. We found them.” See, **Latro** , it _must_ be true because GWB _said_ so. That’s all the evidence that a party hack or an undergraduate fool _needs_. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/156 "2003-06-03T14:44:45Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by quixotic78_ > \*\*Shodan, Sam Stone, and whoever else… > > There’s really two issues at hand concerning the trailers: > > (1) What are they, exactly? Are they mobile weapons lab facilities? > > (2) If they were used to produce prohibited weapons, is that enough of a reason to invade?\*\* (1) I don’t know for sure - because nobody can say for sure without independent verification - but imo it’s a good bet that they are, as suspected, mobile bioweapons production facilities and not just labs. I think we did also find a mobile lab earlier but that’s different. And if they are facilities, that were probably designed to have a plausible cover use in addition, like for hydrogen, in case the weapons inspectors had ever found them. (2) The One Real Reason to Invade may not exist. I couldn’t have named just one last year, can’t do it now. But this is not to be confused with the One Real Reason for Supporting the War, which many have claimed to be the presence of WMD. Actual production of these weapons trumps mere presence, doesn’t it? If WMD were really the issue overriding people’s normal objections to war, then this should also qualify…we had the same level of intelligence that we’d find either, right? Saddam, specifically, being able to produce them is a heck of a lot more worrisome than finding what the inspectors couldn’t account for throughout the 90’s…isn’t it? I do think it is a reason to invade in a straw-breaks-camel’s-back sort of way. If the intelligence was compelling - and so far it is panning out - then it suggest the negation of UNSCOM’s past efforts, and Saddam’s unwillingness to disarm, it suggests non-compliance and deception of UN controls, and puts that many more people in harm’s way via biological weapons…and that’s without getting into what his intent may be, for these things, because he’s in full Holy War mode at the time. It must be viewed in the context of Saddam being a total shit with a record of atrocities humanitarian and environmental, and one by which no other means will remove him from power. Then yes, I do think it is reason enough, and will stick by that no matter what is found three months or a year from now - he himself would have to prove his _innocence_ to _me_, imo, where some of you here are expecting Bush to conclusively prove his _guilt_ to _you_. And there’s the divide. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/157 "2003-06-03T14:53:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\* > he himself would have to prove his _innocence_ to _me_, imo, where some of you here are expecting Bush to conclusively prove his _guilt_ to _you_. And there’s the divide. \*\* You are correct, that is the divide. You and the Bush admin. have a total disregard for legal proceedings. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/158 "2003-06-03T14:59:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > **I do think it is a reason to invade in a straw-breaks-camel’s-back sort of way. If the intelligence was compelling - and so far it is panning out - then it suggest the negation of UNSCOM’s past efforts, and Saddam’s unwillingness to disarm, it suggests non-compliance and deception of UN controls, and puts that many more people in harm’s way via biological weapons…and that’s without getting into what his intent may be, for these things, because he’s in full Holy War mode at the time.** Earth to planet **Tee**. The intelligence _wasn’t_ compelling. It was made up. That’s what this thread is about. And no, it _hasn’t_ panned out. There’s someone that’s in full “Holy War mode”, but it isn’t Saddam. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/159 "2003-06-03T15:32:30Z")
Demo: > [@](#): > > Earth to planet Tee. The intelligence wasn’t compelling. It was made up. That’s what this thread is about. Was it made up when Bill Clinton and Al Gore were going on about it in 1998? Are you suggesting that Bill **was** just launching those cruise missiles to distract attention from his domestic problems? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2003, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/160 "2003-06-03T15:34:59Z")
Just a quick update on the Gulf War 2 Scoreboard: **Total WMDs Found In Iraq As Of June 3, 2003:** 0 **Total People Killed In War And Occupation:** 5,000 - 10,000 **Ratio of People Killed Per WMD Found:** Can’t divide by zero. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643.md?page=9)