Still no WMDs found in Iraq

The BBQ Pit
21

I don’t know. There’s quite a few miles of empty desert that the US Army had to cross. Could’ve used them there. And why not use them on our own turf? (or, on their own turf) The choice is use them or lose your country to an invading army, and possibly, be hunted down like a dog.

And if you’re not going to use them, and a far superior army says it’s gonna come in and kick your ass if you don’t destroy them, why not make a public show of destroying them? Because you’re not gonna get to keep them once the invasion is over. You see my problem with this?

22

Seems to me that if they destroyed weapons on the eve of war, there weren’t that many to destroy. Thus calling into question the whole “mass” in weapons of mass destruction.

23

But… but… but…

I thought the weapons all loaded onto the Iraqi death ships!?!?!?

Anyone remember them? What in hell happened to them?

Or could this just have been a little “frightener” from the State Department?

24

There is of course, the possibility that the have found them, and are just waiting until Bush takes a hit in the run up to the election before declaring that they have them.

I doubt that this has any actual probability, but I really don’t trust the Bush Administration.

I’m still going for the angle that there weren’t any there in the first place.

25

I can’t imagine they’d be able to keep a lid on that with so many reporters embedded.

26

Well, there’s always the double cynical angle: embedded reporters get so involved with the troops that they no longer can be trusted to report objectively. Or, they are just as embedded as your average Joe Soldier, who probably doesn’t know what’s going on at the top levels of military intelligence anyway.

Not saying I necessarily subscribe to those views, but as long as we’re tossing out conspiracy theories anyway, right?

27

I have a hunch they won’t find much more then some Tilex residue in the tip of a bullet. Of course in the eyes of Rumsfeld, that was evidence enough.

28

Puh-leez. There’s a difference between weapons of mass destruction and mass weapons of destruction. Do you have any idea how small a single atom bomb can be? Or how much damage a single truckload of nerve agents can do?

29

JT, either you were whoosed or I was.

30

A summary:
The real reason for the invasion was Saddam Hussein’s support of the Al-Qaida terrorists! We have absolute proof of it, but we’re not going to tell anyone what it is. Of course never mind that countries like Saudi Arabia have a lot more sympathisers of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, and never mind that Iraq has a secular government that would be no friends of Islamic fundamentalists. They’re the enemy I tells you! (Libertarian nods vehemently in agreement) Actually we might not have proof after all, so let’s move on to the next reason.

The real reason for the invasion was the horrible weapons of mass destruction that were all over the country! Actually we can’t find any, and even though Saddam Hussein was at death’s door, he didn’t use them, but believe us, they were there! (Libertarian nods vehemently in agreement) Never mind that North Korea has actually come out and said that they are building WoMD. But some of you may not want to swallow this, so let’s move on the next reason.

The real reason for the invasion was the horrible human rights situation in Iraq! (Libertarian nods vehemently in agreement) Never mind that the US was quite happy to supply Iraq with financial aid and weapons when they were the enemy of our enemy of Iran. Never mind that we turn a blind eye to abuses in countries like North Korea, Tibet, Rwanda, Burundi, the Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, etc… Saddam must be stopped!

(whispering - Could the real reason be that Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and threatened the US’s oil supply? We might have had to pay $2.50 for a gallon of gas! Nah, couldn’t be.)

Actually, posts like the OP should be resumed to this:
The administration says: (insert drivel here)
The poster reponds: baa baa (insert sheepish noises here)

31

ZiggyB, while I sympathize with your inference, I must tell you that you’ve pegged the OP incorrectly. Lib has his own… rather unique reasons for deriding certain anti-war positions and government criticisms. He is quite far from an administration dupe. (F’rinstance, he was against the war himself.)

However, I’ve given up being a Libertarian apologist, so I’ll stop now (just didn’t want to see you continue to post assumptions out of ignorance).

BTW, though; could be that the reasons for the war include not only oil interests, but the other things, too, huh?

32

Oh! There’s an opening for being a Libertarian apologist? Nice! How’s the pay? :stuck_out_tongue:

33

The pay sucks, erl, but the work is steady! :wink: (I kid Lib because I luv…)

34

And now let us pause to note recent developments…

The US resists the idea of UN inspectors returning to Iraq. Gotta wonder why, don’t you think? If we really had solid intelligence, the kind you got to war about, we would know that there are 100 scud missiles tipped with nuclear anthrax nerve gas in a warehouse at the corner of Saddam Street and Saddam Blvd. After all, isn’t that what “solid intelligence” is?

To prove our point, and put to rest any nasty rumors about planted evidence, what better that to have UN inspectors on the spot when we break down the door? After all, we have solid intelligence, don’t we? Well, don’t we?

No. We don’t. We never did. The Bushistas fell for the oldest trap in the Big Golden Book of Intelligence Blunders: upgrading flimsy rumors to solid gold intelligence because it fits with your preconceptions. Please note that when the US finally broke down and shared some of this precious intel with the inspectors, they came back bitching that they’d been sent on the chase for le grosse canard, and our solid gold intelligence is revealed to be l’merde. Not the real shit. Just shit. Approximately on the level of the now famouse Nigerian Uranium.

The absolutely, positively totally undeniable intelligence was crapola. But since everybody in the inner circle agrees completely with everybody in the inner circle, they sold themselves thier own bridge. They believe it. They’ll find it. Takes time. Could take months. Iraq is a big place, might not even find them till after, say, November of next year.

But now its bet-hedging time. Time to emphasize the important things, like how this was really all about freeing the Iraqi people, nothing so selfish and sordid as self defense. The ol’ “lipstick on the pig” stratagem.

If they had solid leads, they would love nothing more than have the UN inpectors there to rub thier collective nose in it, and publicly prove us right, them wrong.

And as I never tire of pointing out, with a $200K cash reward just sitting there, waiting to be picked up by the first entrepreneur willing to take the risk of ratting out a dead man, the line outside the Army Intelligence tent should be a mile long.

Let me further emphasize: I thought he had 'em too. Wasn’t willing to go to war over it, but I figured he had 'em. But for no other reason that he is/was an evil old bugger.

And you know what? That just ain’t good enough.

35

Lib’s games aside, and just to clarify for some who hadn’t (yet) grasped the coup; You don’t comb anything, let alone a country. Instead, whacha do – month after month, year after year, post-UNSCOM - is track the movements and work patterns of yer all important boss scientists – the ones actually capable of overseeing major projects. Iraq had (to my understanding) only maybe 50 or so worth watching and wherever they were, the projects would have been cos no one else was able enough.

And that’s exactly what we did.

Hence we pretty well always knew there couldn’t really be any WMD.

… I suppose we’ll be reading more 'bout that stuff as the memoirs begin to hit the shelves.

36

elucidator, you took the words right out of my mouth. Well spoken. mr Calling, you’re no idiot either. :wink:

37

My question is, why has the media so cravenly adopted administration slang? Why are they talking about regimes and WMD in the first place?

And I agree with Clash-boy. :slight_smile:

38

Oh, but he’s not nearly not the idiot I’m not.

I gotta admit, I’m a little fixated on that question about nobody snitching on the sites where all this stuff is. I mean, Christ, two hundred thousand dollars to be had, just for picking up the phone and saying “Send a jeep, I’ll take you to it, cash, please.”

My experience of human nature is such that I am convinced that if a hundred people have this info, ninety-five of them would run straight to the phone. And if we’re talking big-time WMD’s, at least a hundred people must know something they could sell.

And if we really had The Shit, the genuine article, we would send a squad of Marines to fucking abduct Hans Blix and fly him straight to the site so’s we could gloat. So we don’t have it.

All that money. Sitting there waiting for someone just to walk up and start talking. And nobody does.

How very odd.

39

Of course, in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=178698), when someone does come forward, you complain that it’s not enough, and it’s highly suspicious. I’d advise patience.

40

Maybe they sent in the Spaceballs to comb the desert looking for them.

“How about you guys?”

“We ain’t found shit!”