Have we found any "Weapons of Mass Destruction" In Iraq yet?
373722
PROOF - WAR ON IRAQ IS FOR OIL\n\nBush decided to invade Iraq in April 2001, six months before September 11th, and the official reason was to improve Western access to Iraqi oil.\n\n      "President Bush's Cabinet agreed in April 2001 that 'Iraq remains\n      a destabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets\n      from the Middle East' and because this is an unacceptable risk to\n      the US 'military intervention' is necessary."[1] \n\nThe decision for military action had nothing to do with 9/11, the war on terrorism, the UN weapons inspections, weapons of mass destruction, Iraqi human rights, or any of the factors that the US government would like you to believe are the true motives for war.\n\nThe only people who will benefit from the war on Iraq are the elite wealthy oil men who finance Bush's election campaigns, and people like Bush who have huge personal investments in the oil industry. Oil company profits have already increased by fifty percent this year because of the war, and the invasion hasn't even started yet!\n\n      "Profits in the fourth quarter soared 50% to $4.09bn (£2.5bn),\n      beating analyst expectations."[2] \n\nWar-time propaganda tells you what you want to hear; that your politicians have noble motives for the war on Iraq.
23786
hello frnds.i fully agree that the iraqi war was all due 2 the oil rights.it had nothin 2 do with any nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction said 2 be possesed by iraq.it was just a rumour created by the greedy US politicians 2 justify their cause of attackin iraq and in the process gainin control over the iraqi oil wells.as such it has been 2 yrs since iraq has been under the control of the US.no weapons of mass destruction has been found uptil date.so it goes on 2 show the farce the US played.
302567
We went to Iraq based on the belief that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction and the belief that Saddam was a terrorist.\n\nSo far there has been no sign of weapons of Mass destruction.  Some believe there never were any, others believe they were mobile and were moved out of the country before the U.S. came in.\n\nCurrently the United States is rebuilding Iraq's government and entire infrastucture because they came in a tore it down.  They are training police, and military men.  They have helped the Iraqis write a constitution, and have had nation wide elections.  They are currently waiting for the elected officials to ratify the constitution.\n\nGeorge Bush and his followers try to focus most of the attention on the forward movement of Iraq and what progress is being made for the Iraqi people and how the world is better for it.  Others beleive we are waisting our time and our military men and women's lives over in Iraq.\n\nI tried to be as unbiased as I could be.  That is my belief of the current situation.
996474
Yes they found them in Iraq, however it was proven some time ago that the WMD's had been relocated into Syria prior to our attack.  What does it really matter?  There are several other reasons why we NEEDED to enter Iraq, all really good, but it doesn't matter because the Dem's and Lib's hate War and they HATE Bush, so they will hang onto this a little longer.
797345
Yes.\n\nI also believed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
1068089
The story has been reported on various news media. The problem is that the version of story that Fox "news" is running isn't the whole truth. The WMD we went to war for have not been found. We did not go to war to find decades-old chemical weapons that had been buried since the Iran-Iraq War. We were looking for WMD proving an ongoing weapons capability that could pose a threat to world peace, not these aging remnants. President Bush has already accepted the findings in the Duelfer Report dismissing these weapons as irrelevant. (See link below)\n\nMore importantly, we already knew about those weapons and turned the other cheek when they were originally produced. Google "Rumsfeld" "Reagan" and "Saddam Hussein" and you'll learn all about the U.S. support of the Iraqi ruler during the Iran-Iraq War, when we supported one monster (Hussein) in the hopes of defeating another (Khomeini). We knew at that time that Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people, but we did nothing about it. Or more accurately, we signed a piece of paper saying we disapproved of his use of chemical agents, but we continued cutting deals with him because he was fighting a common enemy. We even sold him some of the chemicals that he used to construct these weapons because he seemed like the lesser of two evils at the time. Ironically, we were therefore partly responsible for creating the monster that he is today.\n\nAs a result, the real reason why the WMD story isn't any bigger is because the Republicans want it just big enough for their conservative supporters to hear it and say to themselves, "They found WMD!" but not so loud that people actually start asking questions about where and how these chemical weapons were manufacture or, more importantly, about who supplied Iraq with the raw materials to make them. That would make Reagan, Rumsefeld, and by extension, the Republican party as a whole look like hypocrites. So it's best to keep the story just large enough for Fox news addicts but not so large that the rest of the world hears about it.\n\nIncidentally, I don't suppose you remember what the liberal response was when Bush originally announced his intention to break international law in order to attack a sovereign nation, claiming that  we "knew" Iraq had WMD? One of the most quoted responses at that time was, "Of course we knew he has WMD! We sold them to him!!!" \n\nOnce again, if you people had only been listening to the liberals in the first place, you'd be so much farther ahead in the game.
706253
FFS!! Here it is, yet again...\n\nWho lied??\n\n"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. \n\n"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."  President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. \n\n"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." \nMadeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. \n\n"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."  -  Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 \n\n"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." \n    Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. \n\n"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."  \nRep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. \n\n"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."  \nMadeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. \n\n"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." \n    Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001. \n\n"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." \n    Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. \n\n"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." \n    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. \n\n"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." \n    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. \n\n"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction." \n    Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002. \n\n"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." \n    Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002. \n\n"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."\n    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002. \n\n"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop n
908322
OMG you are so uninformed it's almost scary. First of all, "This is about as bad as drinking and driving with a car load of friends and they all die but you in an accident." You mean like Ted Kennedy and Mary Jo? \n\nWMDs - International intel ALL said Saddam had WMDs. The United Nations (HA!) thought he had WMDs. The fact that there weren't a lot of WMDs found could be due to the fact that Saddam was given months of notice before the allied forces swooped in. \n\nShouldn't Bill Clinton have to face charges for not taking Bin Laden from the Sudan when they offered him? Shouldn't Clinton have to answer to the country for slashing our military and intel budgets? How about the fact that he cut and run from Somalia, teaching terrorists that all they have to do is hit us really hard, and we'll run with our tails between our legs. \n\nWho lied?!?!?\n\n"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. \n\n"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."  President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. \n\n"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." \nMadeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. \n\n"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."  -  Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 \n\n"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." \n    Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. \n\n"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."  \nRep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. \n\n"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."  \nMadeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. \n\n"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." \n    Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001. \n\n"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." \n    Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. \n\n"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." \n    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. \n\n"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." \n    Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. \n\n"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction." \n    Sen. Ted Kennedy (
808853
No, not yet. But the media hounded them to be released to the public and that's where the item about making a bomb came from. It was in the news right before the election.
767052
When I foreigner asked me why did USA attacked Iraq. Where are the weapons of mass destruction, Where are the chemical weapons.
624254
At least New York exists.  The only WMDs in Iraq are the ones the US military uses.
288652
I wonder who really believes Iraq had weapons of mass destruction(WMD). Supposedly, the americans went to war to prevent Saddam from giving WMD to terrorists.  No WMD has been found, meaning either the iraqis never had WMD or somehow, the terrorists got the weapons. The american population was misled, not the government.  The government always had the reports saying Iraq had no WMD.  At the same time, there was a conflict about nuclear programs with North Korea.  Here they do have nuclear weapons.  Weird I don't see american troops in N. Korea.  So, was it for oil?  Definitely YES.\n\nIs it worth it?  Oil price has never been so high because constant supply from Iraq is not available.  Ask the families of the soldiers who died in that war, if it is worth it?  Ask the families of everyone else (workers or diplomats) who has died or been kidnapped if it is worth it?  Ask the American people who pay billions as tax money to support the military, if it is worth it?  \n\nThis war has been a complete failure.  There is only one reason:  The war was not necessary.
78527
yes, they are developing "bunker buster" cruise missles that "dig" underground and explode. They also make "tactical nukes" which are essentially low yeild nukes fired from a cannon. and there is of course the uranium shells used by U.S. tanks in Iraq. They use uranium to harden the steel of the shells to better pierce armor, although these are not specifically "nukes" they have a lot of the nasty side effects like cancer causing radiation. I don't know if the U.S. still makes ICBM's, but I'm pretty sure they do. I know the most recent ICBM's are multiple warheads essentially 7 nukes in one, each with a blast zone exponentially larger than Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
538584
32% lol  there's a good change on it's way this November~!\nbecause re pukes are going to look at this  Question the most this is for you...\nLIE NUMBER 1) Simply stated, there is no doubt that\nSaddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.\n(Dick Cheney)\n<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/08/20020826.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 2) Right NOW, Iraq is expanding and\nimproving facilities that were used for the production\nof biological weapons. (George W. Bush)\n<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 3):If he declares he has none, then we will\nknow that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the\nworld.(Ari Fleischer)\n<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021202-6.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 4):We know for a FACT that there are\nweapons there.(Ari Fleischer)\n<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030109-8.html>\n\nLIE  NUMBER 5):Our intelligence officials estimate\nthat Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as\nmuch as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.\n(George  W.\nBush)<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nLIE NUMBER 9):Intelligence gathered by this and other\ngovernments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime\ncontinues to possess and conceal some of the most\nlethal weapons ever devised. (George W. Bush, March\n17,2003)<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 10):Well, there is no question that we have\nevidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass\ndestruction, biological and chemical particularly. . .\nall this will be made clear in the course of the\noperation, for whatever duration it takes.(Ari\nFleisher, March\n21,2003)<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030321-9.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 11):There is no doubt that the regime of\nSaddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction.\nAnd . . . as this operation continues, those weapons\nwill be identified, found, along with the people who\nhave produced them and who guard them.( General Tommy\nFranks, March 22,2003)\n\nLIE NUMBER 12: I have no doubt we're going to find big\nstores of weapons of mass destruction.(Kenneth\nAdelman,  March 23,2003)\n<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A12217-2003Mar22¬Found=true>\n\nLIE NUMBER 13: One of our top objectives is to find\nand destroy the WMD There are a number of sites. (\nVictoria Clark, March 22, 2003)\n<http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/t03222003_t0322osdpa.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 14):We know where they are. They're in the\narea around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south\nand north somewhat.(Donald Rumsfeld, March 30,\n2003)<http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/t03302003_t0330sdabcsteph.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 15):Obviously the administration intends to\npublicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S.\nforces find -- and there will be plenty.( Neocon\nSholar, Robert Kagan, April 9,2003)\n<http://www.ceip.org/files/Publications/2003-04-08-kaganpost.asp?p=11&from=pubdate>\n\nLIE NUMBER 16):I think you have always heard, and you\ncontinue to hear from officials, a measure of high\nconfidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass\ndestruction will be found. (Ari Fleisher,April 10,\n2003)<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030410-6.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 17):We are learning more as we interrogate\nor have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people\nwithin the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed\nsome, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find\nthem.(George W. Bush, April\n24,2003)<http://www.talkingproud.us/EditorChoice042603.html>\n\nLIE NUMBER 18):There are people who in large measure\nhave information that we need .. . so that we can\ntrack down the weapons of mass destruction in that\ncountry. ( Donald Rumbsfeld, April 25, 2003)\n\nLIE NUMBER 19): We'll find the
1002260
Typical partisan bulls***. There have been reports of chemical and biological weapons being found since the war started. All have been determined to be either pre-1991 or post-2003 invasion. \n\nWhere are the nuclear weapons we were talking about with a "mushroom cloud"? Saddam lied? Who would have though that a politician could be dishonest? The point is that we have NO evidence he was pursuing chemical or biological weapons while he was prohibited from doing so, and only doctored and falsified evidence he was pursuing nuclear weapons. All we have is a bunch of old, degraded munitions.\n\n"Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications for coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out," \nI cannot rule out that North Korea has the capacity to launch nuclear missiles at the US, either. Should we attack them next? Israel and India have nuclear and biological weapons and the capacity to strike the US. Are they next?\n\nWhere do we draw the line?\n\nWould we have found these weapons without the loss of 2500+ American lives and 100,000+ Iraqi lives? I guess we'll never know, will we?
947001
They haven't found any (please list your source), and even if they did, is that an excuse for going in and killing 10000's of Iraqi's?  That makes him no better than Saddam.
93493
There isn't any.  Only the tin-foil-hat crowd that looks for some kind of justification for attacking Iraq, ( outside of oil ) even care to try.  Note they offer no direct evidence, just misleading and unsupported claims and maybe a link to a conspiracy website or two.