As I said, all news coverage is not internet archived (beyond abstracts from LEXUS-NEXUS), and I can again give you the search criteria for for LEXUS-NEXUS and/or some books that would cover it more fully. If you want a quick link that you will accept as ‘proof’ from 1991, you simply won’t get it (as it doesn’t exist). The Internet feature such things until the mid-90’s (94-96 depending on which source you like, and if that source even existed at the time)
There is no proof for this, nor any arguement for it (outside some very very biased websites); I would be able to handle such if it were 1-2 planes, but since it was a systematic movement it is much more likely that it was an order high on the food chain.
Most consistant with highly trained Military members, who just 3 short years ago had used some of those planes to drop chemical weapons on that country? I would say no, but that would be an opinion.
Some crap left over by UNSCOM is evidence of WMD?? So, if I find an empty Dominos box in your trash can, that’s evidence that you have in your possession a pizza?
It’s far past time to get real about this. If there was any active WMD program – whether storing it, hiding it, transporting it, or actually building it, there would be evidence of it somewhere. But there isn’t. Allow me to quote from the definitive CIA report:
[QUOTE=Ravenman]
Some crap left over by UNSCOM is evidence of WMD?? So, if I find an empty Dominos box in your trash can, that’s evidence that you have in your possession a pizza?
It’s far past time to get real about this. If there was any active WMD program – whether storing it, hiding it, transporting it, or actually building it, there would be evidence of it somewhere. But there isn’t. Allow me to quote from the definitive CIA report:
[QUOTE]
If you have a pizza box in your house, with a piece of leftover pizza, even a moldy one; it is evidence that pizza exists in your home.
It would be a stuid reason to storm your house and take pizza, and certainly no thread to Pizza Hut; but the pizza would still be there.
The WMD arguement for war was a bad one (IMHO), in fact even when we believed they had stockpiles of the stuff it was a bad reason (again in my humble opinion).
Just to clarify a couple of points. Your first cite starts with
Empty being the most significant word in that sentence.
Your second cite discusses the same issue, empty war heads.
Your third cite claims that munitions with chemical agents **were **found. The fourth one is the updated story and says
The clarification that no chemical agents were found being issued two hours after the initial claim that they were.
Now, are you going to explain to me how do you deliver chemical weapons in empty warheads? And are you going to explain to me how the evidence you provide could lead us to reasonably suspect that WMD were moved to Syria? Aside from the 'well they could’ve ‘cause Saddam was a nutcase’ argument?
No. It is evidence that pizza existed, not that it exists. We already knew Saddam had a WMD programme. The debate is about whether or not prior to the war Saddam could’ve transported WMD to Syria. We knew he had WMD once upon a time. We also have reason to believe that by 2003, and before the invasion, Saddam no longer had said weapons. Thus, non-existent weapons could not have been moved to Syria.
Aside from the fact that all were forboden under the WMD sections of the UN resolutions? It gives a delivery system, chemcials not withstanding…
The Forth is talking about Serin the thrid is talking about Cyclosarin; but the part I found interesting in the forth was:
Just a point of reference, chemcicals are rearly stored IN the warheads unless they are being readied for use; not that it matters, we haven’t found any significant chemcial stores to worry about…
Secondly my ‘Saddam was a nutcase’ arguement had NOTHING to do with him HAVING or MOVING anything, but rather a counter to the ‘it would be stupid for him to send military items out of his reach’; posted eariler.
You and I agree that Saddam was known for being erratic, to put it mildly. We agree that during the eighties and much of the nineties, until the defection of Hussein Kamel, Saddam had an active WMD programme. We agree that no significant stockpiles of weapons were found in Iraq after the invasion, just rusted warheads and the like; stuff that was not a tangible threat to the coalition forces attacking him in Iraq, let alone Israel or the US itself. Nonetheless, it was evidence of an old WMD programme defunct by the time of the invasion. The subject of this thread is whether or not we could suspect Syria of holding WMD once possessed by Saddam.
I say that given the lack of evidence of any significant weapons programme in Iraq, nothing of value could have been transported to Syria. What do you say, EEMan?
I say we agree on alot of the really important points.
If the question is, was there anything to move; I must honestly answer “I have no idea”.
We do not have evidence that all of the stockpiles were destroyed (as evidenced by most of the UN resolutions against Iraq in the mid to late 90’s); but we also have no evidence of ‘new’ development.
It is very possible that Saddam was playing a game of chicken, where by he wanted people to believe he had things he didn’t (as to save his own neck from his long term enemies, er neighbors), and secretly destroyed the weapons (so as to not have inspectors find anything). It is also possible that the weapons were moved, though it seems silly to have done so, SO late in the game.
I have seen no convincing evidence that anything was moved to Syria (WMD or other items); and thus can’t comment on them being moved there, nor have I seen any convincing arguements that they were destroyed (though there might not be any existing evidence that they WERE destroyed).
I would not put it past him to send weapons to another country (as he did in the past), but I also see no evidence of it.
With your permission, I’ll interpret that as “no, I don’t have a cite.” Saddam was a dictator, but I can just as easily imagine some of his top thieves trying to get their valuables out of Iraq with Saddam’s attention occupied by an impending invasion. I might as well use my imagination once in this thread, too.
Yesterday I was surprised to read stories like this one, in which it appears that Saddam knew he didn’t have any weapons.
The transcripts come from tapes translated by the USA. While it yet again shows that he didn’t want to come completely clean, I had figured his advisers had lied to him about the country’s capability and told him he had stockpiles of whatever he wanted.
When General Sada appeared on the Daily Show last night, Jon Stewart asked him why the Bush administration has not told the American people that the weapons were moved to Syria. His answer was painfully lame - something to the effect of ‘I’m sure they’re waiting until they’ve gathered all the evidence.’
I agree with the gist of everything you said. Though I am more likely than you are to dismiss any chance that weapons existed by 2003, as you say, in the absence of conclusive evidence, I would not put anything beyond Saddam and his regime.
And next time I’m in GD, I’ll waste my time with someone a little more fun.
