# Still no WMD **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 17, 2003, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311 "2003-04-17T14:28:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 8:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/21 "2003-04-18T08:26:16Z")
I’m thinking back to the evidence the U.S. showed to the U.N. all of it was quite damning in terms of showing they had “some” weapons (phone transcripts of people saying, "Don’t use the word “Vx in our conversations”, sat photos of decontamination trucks outside of suspected weapons sites, convoys of vehicles leaving suspected sites before U.N. weapons inspectors arrive). But none of that gives us any hard data as to the quantities involved. A decontamination truck could be there because they were moving 55 gallons of the stuff. But certainly the Bush Administration suggested large quantities, so I think from the standpoint of their credibility, finding one or two shells or a bag full of precursor material or whatever just won’t do. Biological materials could be present in much smaller quantities and still be the ‘smoking gun’ because they would imply a pretty big threat. Probably less than an ounce of Anthrax crippled the postal system for a while, and cost hundreds of millions in cleanup, lost labor, etc. If Iraq had say, 100 lbs of the stuff, that could do quite a lot of damage if distributed properly. Chemical weapons I would expect to see in much larger quantities. A couple of drums won’t cut it, I don’t think. ---
**Author:** ![Susma\_Rio\_Sep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/35a633/32.png) [@Susma\_Rio\_Sep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susma_Rio_Sep)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/22 "2003-04-18T11:38:28Z")
Weapons of mass destruction might still be discovered by the U.S. military now occupying Iraq, and that in strategic quantity and of strategic quality. Until the discovery as described above is made, I still am troubled by the following thoughts: 1. The U.S./U.K. partnership launched a war and turned Iraq into shambles and chaos, with the landscape littered with cadavers and collapsed buildings, and peoples giving themselves over to the most base instincts of the jungle: namely, to prove to themselves that there could be weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – the campaign is totally bereft of all sense of proportions. 2. In my grade school days I read that Genghis Khan was buried in secret, and all laborers engaged in the work were slaughtered (correct me if I am wrong here), so that no one would ever know the location of his grave; maybe something similar was done by Saddam to prevent anyone ever discovering the weapons of mass destruction he has – that includes himself. So, what the heck with those weapons of mass destruction? 3. When I was taking some vocational training in highschool on electricity, our instructor kept drilling into us not ever to turn on the switch to any circuit unless and until we know with absolute certainty what to expect, and that it is not going to blow up in a short. The U.S. and the U.K. have fought wars before, so they should know what to expect when they toppled the government in every area they invaded; if anything they are guilty of criminal negligence for the looting and general mayhem prevailing in Iraq today. 4. In college, I had a course in ethics and there was this thesis on the justification of killing for self-defense; the professor told us that killing in self-defense is only allowed if and when the assailant is certainly in the act to kill us, not just to hurt us, and we cannot escape. Was Saddam certainly in the act to launch war on the U.S/U.K. partnership? 5. When I joined a hunting expedition I was told by the organizer that I should never shoot anything that moves, until I am absolutely sure that it is a legitimate animal target; shooting anything that moves or into the direction of any movement can bring me a charge of homicide. I think in a very horrible way the U.S./U.K. partnership is guilty of innumerable homicides in Iraq. Susma Rio Sep ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/23 "2003-04-18T13:11:04Z")
If and when WMD are found, the Left will alternate between denying that they are WMD (“That sarin was really for - uh - pest control! Yeah, that’s the ticket!”) and telling us that there aren’t enough WMD to justify a war (“It was only a few kilos of anthrax - not enough to kill more than a few hundred people - Saddam only kept it to defend himself against the US - yeah, that’s the ticket?”). Or simply claim it is dual use, no matter what. > [@](#): > > 1. When I was taking some vocational training in highschool on electricity, our instructor kept drilling into us not ever to turn on the switch to any circuit unless and until we know with absolute certainty what to expect, and that it is not going to blow up in a short. The U.S. and the U.K. have fought wars before, so they should know what to expect when they toppled the government in every area they invaded; if anything they are guilty of criminal negligence for the looting and general mayhem prevailing in Iraq today. And if the US had immediately adopted a “shoot on sight” policy for looters, you could have condemned them for causing civilian casualties. Isn’t moral ambiguity fun? > [@](#): > > 1. In college, I had a course in ethics and there was this thesis on the justification of killing for self-defense; the professor told us that killing in self-defense is only allowed if and when the assailant is certainly in the act to kill us, not just to hurt us, and we cannot escape. Was Saddam certainly in the act to launch war on the U.S/U.K. partnership? Your college professor was wrong. Force is justified also in defense of an innocent third party, or else all use of force by the police is immoral. > [@](#): > > 1. When I joined a hunting expedition I was told by the organizer that I should never shoot anything that moves, until I am absolutely sure that it is a legitimate animal target; shooting anything that moves or into the direction of any movement can bring me a charge of homicide. I think in a very horrible way the U.S./U.K. partnership is guilty of innumerable homicides in Iraq. And I think in a very horrible way you are ignoring the strenuous efforts by the US/UK to minimize civilian casualties - about as opposite to “shooting anything that moves” as can be imagined on a modern battlefield. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/24 "2003-04-18T13:24:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > **Hell, Sam, huge evil facilities or teeny tiny ones craftily built into VW minibuses, we should have found them weeks ago.** I disagree. I feel there’s no way for you to speak authoritatively on what _should_ have been accomplished. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/25 "2003-04-18T13:33:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > **If and when WMD are found, the Left will alternate between denying that they are WMD (“That sarin was really for - uh - pest control! Yeah, that’s the ticket!”) and telling us that there aren’t enough WMD to justify a war (“It was only a few kilos of anthrax - not enough to kill more than a few hundred people - Saddam only kept it to defend himself against the US - yeah, that’s the ticket?”).** By all means, **Shodan** , feel free to make stuff up. If and when WMD are found, **Shodan** will send me a million bucks. Gee, that makes me feel better. Even if I just made it up. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > \*\*And if the US had immediately adopted a “shoot on sight” policy for looters, you could have condemned them for causing civilian casualties. > > Isn’t moral ambiguity fun? \*\* I didn’t notice **Susma Rio Sep** calling for a “shoot on sight policy”. That seems to be your own invention. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Shodan \* > \*\* Your college professor was wrong. Force is justified also in defense of an innocent third party, or else all use of force by the police is immoral._\* That’s fair enough. But who’s the innocent third party that you imply is being protected here? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > \*\*And I think in a very horrible way you are ignoring the strenuous efforts by the US/UK to minimize civilian casualties - about as opposite to “shooting anything that moves” as can be imagined on a modern battlefield. \*\* **Susma Rio Sep** ’s statement can be interpreted in a number of ways. One was the way the you did. Another is in terms of the broader “war on terror”. The US shot at Iraq, when maybe it shouldn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/26 "2003-04-18T13:37:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > \*\*If and when WMD are found, the Left will alternate between denying that they are WMD (“That sarin was really for - uh - pest control! Yeah, that’s the ticket!”) and telling us that there aren’t enough WMD to justify a war (“It was only a few kilos of anthrax - not enough to kill more than a few hundred people - Saddam only kept it to defend himself against the US - yeah, that’s the ticket?”). > > Or simply claim it is dual use, no matter what. \*\* Gee, Shodan, maybe someday, somehow, WMD will be found. Then you could test this theory out. Until then… ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/27 "2003-04-18T15:11:24Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. In college, I had a course in ethics and there was this thesis on the justification of killing for self-defense; the professor told us that killing in self-defense is only allowed if and when the assailant is certainly in the act to kill us, not just to hurt us, and we cannot escape. Was Saddam certainly in the act to launch war on the U.S/U.K. partnership? The implication here is that you absolutely know whether or not you will be hurt or killed. What about the case where you have to interpret the threat? Say, a mugger comes at you with a club. Now, he could kill you, or just beat you a bit. But if the mugger is much larger than you and menacing, the law would tend to support the use of lethal force to stop him. Likewise, if you startle an intruder in your home and he brandishes a knife and starts running at you, it’s both legally and morally justifiable to shoot him dead. But hey, maybe he just wanted to carve his initials in your forehead to teach you a lesson, and had no intention of killing you. But that’s irrelevant. Likewise with Saddam. It’s not just that he had WMD, but that he had used them in the past, he had invaded his neighbors, AND he was not cooperating with the U.N. That lack of cooperation is evidence of a desire to hide something - a desire so strong that he risked losing his regime over it. Perhaps you have another plausible reason why he refused to cooperate? ---
**Author:** ![cameraboy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/aca169/32.png) [@cameraboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cameraboy)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/28 "2003-04-18T15:25:32Z")
Perhaps the motivation in not cooperating was based on pride, and the fact that Mid-East countries feel like Eruope and the US are attempting to keep them down. I mean, would we let somebody inspect us? Hell no. I don’t think this is the only motivation. I do think that they will find some WMDs, though not the huge threatening stockpile that we have been led to believe. But a desire to keep foreigners off of your own soil is also a pretty strong reason to not cooperate. (though it resulted in LOTS of foreigners, with guns, on Iraq soil). ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/29 "2003-04-18T15:30:30Z")
> [@](#): > > It’s not just that he had WMD, but that he had used them in the past, he had invaded his neighbors, AND he was not cooperating with the U.N. It’s not yet clear that Saddam was not cooperating with the UN. Until we actually find a significant cache of WMD, or evidence of their destruction or dispersal, there’s a good likelyhood that Saddam _was_ cooperating with the inspectors, to the best of his ability. His methods of keeping track of WMD’s, and their destruction, sucked, but turning over all the data he had, however limited, cannot blithely be construed as lack of cooperation. His destruction of the disputed Al-Samoud missles continued virtually up to the day the war started. How does that fit in with your theory that Saddam was defying the UN ? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/30 "2003-04-18T15:37:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*Perhaps you have another plausible reason why he refused to cooperate? \*\* **Susma Rio Sep** may or may not, but I have. The WMDs really were destroyed, but it was important for Iraq leave the question open. By doing so, Iraq was still able to discourage attacks by its own neighbouring states. As long as Israel, Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia and Kuwait _thought_ that Iraq had the WMD’s, Iraq was able to threaten a retaliation it couldn’t carry out. Plus, the kudos of _appearing_ to stand up against the US. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/31 "2003-04-18T15:39:12Z")
The thing is, we’ve had control of a good chunk of Iraq since the first few days of the war. We’ve had special units in the US-controlled portions of Iraq specifically looking for bio/chem weapons, with testing equipment and so forth. And now they’re “free to move about the country”, as the Southwest ads say. The UN inspectors, which “all you right-wingers” crapped all over, never had it anywhere near that easy. Their failure to find what we expected them to find was attributed to _purported_ incompetence, unwillingness to push very hard, alerting Saddam’s people ahead of time to where they were looking, and who remembers what else. **Our** inspectors, with no Saddam agents in the way, the run of the country, and presumed access to US intelligence, haven’t found jack in the past month. I’d always assumed that Saddam had bio and/or chem weapons; now I’m starting to wonder. Maybe he didn’t. Of course, if he didn’t, my expectation is that the GOP will claim the war was never really about WMD, but all about liberating the Iraqi people. (Yep, that’s the GOP - always for liberating oppressed Third Worlders from beneath the tyrant’s boot. In countries that have oil.) The whole Syria excuse smells to high heaven, IMHO. We’ve got spy satellites. We’ve had air recon. We didn’t inform Syria, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc. at war’s onset that the borders were **closed** , and that any cross-border traffic would be assumed to be up to no good? Surely we could spot any vehicles headed from Iraq into Syria or Iran, and put a crater in the road ahead to get them to stay put. Hell, we could’ve put craters in _all_ the roads into Syria, and hired Halliburton without competitive bids to fill the holes after the war. But the point is, it appears to be completely within the capabilities of our military to shut down those borders from the air, particularly the Syrian border where the terrain isn’t particularly challenging. So I’m not buying this whole “they snuck all the WMDs into Syria” bushwa. If there were strategic stockpiles of bio/chem weapons, they should still be in Iraq. Or we left the door open for them to be rolled out of there. One or the other. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/32 "2003-04-18T15:40:37Z")
No, we absolutely know he was not cooperating. The entire world agrees that his ‘full and accurate’ declaration was a joke. Hans Blix said so. Even France and Germany agreed with that. Then there was his refusal to allow scientists to be interviewed outside the country, his bugging of rooms where scientists were interviewed, etc. Hans Blix had tough words for Iraqi lack of cooperation in his second-last report to the SC. His last report said that cooperation was improving. IF nothing is ever found, and no evidence of these programs turns up, we’ll have to re-evaluate Iraqi non-compliance as something other than a desire to hide WMD. Until then, the most reasonable assumption is that Iraq had something to hide. We’re just going to have patience. A year from now, all this will be much clearer. And for those who thought this was all about Bush’s re-election, consider that if there are no WMD, the final conclusions about that will be coming out right near the 2004 elections. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/33 "2003-04-18T15:49:57Z")
As a political gotcha, the overall effect will be diminished when the WMDs that don’t exist–actually smuggled out past our troops–go on their US tour (as per **mrblue92** ). Then we can second guess everything about US policy from pre-1979 (the big year) until today. Well, those of you with duct tape safe rooms can consider it. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/34 "2003-04-18T15:52:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Squink \* > \*\*His methods of keeping track of WMD’s, and their destruction, sucked, but turning over all the data he had, however limited, cannot blithely be construed as lack of cooperation. \*\* _Good point._ There’s little doubt in my mind that noone in Iraq ever knew exactly how much was made of what and where the remnants - if any - may be. The temptation to adjust production figures must be pretty damn overwhelming under a regime like Saddam’s. It’s not unknown in command economies for people to lie their asses off to prevent reprisals. Of course, that could lead to some embarrassing discrepancies - if plant A told that they produced 10 tons of Vx while really making 2, the central figures wouldn’t add up. And unless they’re carefully stored, nerve agents dissipate and break down. I wouldn’t be surprised if some chemical agents are eventually found. But the fact that no WMD were used in a war where the Iraqi military sure as hell fought dirty makes me very, very doubtful that anyone succeeded in actually weaponizing chemical agents. Now personally, I’m just wondering what happened to the nuclear program. Weapons-grade nuclear material enrichment takes some serial industrial infrastructure - no nebulous “mobile labs” here. But it seems that Iraqi nukes aren’t quite the hot subject they were three months ago… ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/35 "2003-04-18T16:00:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Beagle \* > \*\*As a political gotcha, the overall effect will be diminished when the WMDs that don’t exist–actually smuggled out past our troops–go on their US tour (as per **mrblue92** ). Then we can second guess everything about US policy from pre-1979 (the big year) until today. Well, those of you with duct tape safe rooms can consider it. \*\* Are you saying that the war failed to accomplish its mission ? IIRC, this little adventure was supposed to make the world **safer** from the spectre of Iraqi WMD ending up in the hands of terrorists. (That was one of the reasons, anyway…) Now it seems that you’re speculating that the war has in fact triggered that very scenario. (IIRC, that risk was aired by some of us anti-war pinko leftist hippies as an argument against the war here on the SDMB. I’ll see if I can dig up a link.) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/36 "2003-04-18T16:01:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > Likewise with Saddam. It’s not just that he had WMD, but that he had used them in the past, he had invaded his neighbors, AND he was not cooperating with the U.N. We were his accomplice when he invaded one of those neighbors, and held his coat while he gassed the Kurds. In your ‘intruder’ analogy, how does the law treat accomplices again? ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/37 "2003-04-18T16:03:03Z")
> [@](#): > > Not why i oppose the war, chief, but thanks for playing. So i’ll just counter by saying you support murder in Cuba/Congo/Zimbabwei/Most of Africa/Pakistan/Iran/China/North Korea since i don’t see you harping for us to invade them. Your logic… That was rather rude and uncalled for, and displays a complete non sequitur. the other poster was merely pointing toward a site with cites, along with some other issues. Why did you feel the need to insult him for that? ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/38 "2003-04-18T16:04:26Z")
What do you mean there are no weapons of mass destruction? Fox News found them at least a dozen times. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/39 "2003-04-18T16:22:23Z")
Was in DC a couple of weeks ago, and while touring the Capitol with my family, I had the pleasure of hearing Rep. Kucinich deliver this speech. [http://truthout.org/docs\_03/040403E.shtml](http://truthout.org/docs_03/040403E.shtml) But for the “house-to-house fighting in Baghdad” still holds pretty true IMO. It seems so easy for so many to forget that there were ample grounds for opposing this invasion independent of the existence or nonexistence of WMD. ---
**Author:** ![jackie\_lee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f17d59/32.png) [@jackie\_lee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackie_lee)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311/40 "2003-04-18T17:42:07Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by rjung \* > \*\*The only quote I’ve heard from a captured Iraqi scientist is that Iraq doesn’t have WMDs. Since I can’t imagine offhand what motivation he’d have to lie(_) at this time, I can only surmise that it doesn’t look too good for the war hawks. > > (\* = On the other hand, a defecting scientist has lots of reasons to tell the U.S. anything it wants to hear, to increase his value to the FBI/CIA/etc.) > > I still think that there are _some_ WMDs in Iraq, but not a whole lot, and definitely not enough to justify this damn fool war. \*\* I agree. Many lives lost and interrupted on an assumption. How Sad! He Bush, was determined to have this war right or wrong. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-no-wmd/169311.md?page=3)