WMD Could've Been Launched in 45 Minutes

[MrRant 0]

Saddam Hussein (search) had weapons of mass destruction and his army was capable of firing them off in less than 45 minutes, according to statements from an Iraqi colonel.

 

Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh told the London Telegraph that cases of WMD warheads were shipped under cover of darkness to front-line units, including his own, near the end of 2002, in a report published in Sunday editions.

 

In September of 2002 the British government published a controversial intelligence report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, claiming WMD could be launched within 45 minutes. Al-Dabbagh said he believed he was the source of the claim, which was widely criticized as being a ploy by British Prime Minister Tony Blair (search) to gain support for military action in Iraq (search).

 

"I am the one responsible for providing this information," al-Dabbagh, 40, told the Telegraph when shown the dossier. "It is 100 percent accurate."

 

"Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half-an-hour," he was quoted as saying.

 

Al-Dabbagh told the paper that the weapons were Iraqi-manufactured and were designed to be launched from hand-held rocket-propelled grenades. Whether the weapons contained biological or chemical agents was not made clear by al-Dabbagh, the report said.

 

Iraqi military commanders could use the weapons only on the personal orders of Saddam, al-Dabbagh told the paper, adding: "We were told that when the war came we would only have a short time to use everything we had to defend ourselves, including the secret weapon."

 

So why weren't the weapons launched against the allied forces encroaching on Iraq? Al-Dabbagh said the majority of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam.

 

"The West should thank God that the Iraqi army decided not to fight," he told the paper. "If the army had fought for Saddam Hussein and used these weapons there would have been terrible consequences."

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105086,00.html

 

OMG FAUX NEWS 2003 LOL~!

 

Dedicated to KKK.

[Guest Kamui]

.....So where are these weapons again?

 

/begins planning to search for WMD in the Dark Dimension. WATCH OUT FOR GOLDAR~!!

[Guest Skironox]

So if they had the capability to launch them in such a quick time, and they were in the armies hands, who were unwilling to fight, why didn't they just hand them over to the Americans?

 

Damn you Kam, you beat me.

[Guest Kamui]

So if they had the capability to launch them in such a quick time, and they were in the armies hands, who were unwilling to fight, why didn't they just hand them over to the Americans?

No no no, Skinrox, we need to give the inspectors more time. Another ten years or so, and then if they still haven't found anything in Iraq, MAYBE we can admit that it MIGHT have been a LITTLE too early to attack them. MAYBE.

[NoCalMike 0]

After being questioned about whether the weapons were of the chemical/biological or nuclear variety Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh then had a confused look on his face and said, "oh you mean hand grenades aren't considered WMDs? Sorry my mistake" *members of the media angerly file out of the press conference*

[Guest Kamui]

Wow, an actual liberal-dominated thread on TSM! I thought this day would never come.

 

/waits for the Conservative Brigade to come to their high chief's defense

[Guest Skironox]

*sniffs*

 

We must enjoy this party while it lasts.

 

*pops out a 30 pack of Milwaukees Beast and a bottle of Popov*

 

Damn, wish I had money.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Wait until when. The worthless UN does something. Hussein was in violation of numerous resolutions, and should of been removed from power even sooner than he was.

[Vern Gagne 0]

No no no, Skinrox, we need to give the inspectors more time.

That's a riot. Considering the Anti-War people demanded the UN inspectors get more time, because it might take up to 2 years to find WMD's.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I find it funny that the people against the War wanted to give the inspectors 6 months to a year to find something and then start screaming after the U.S. hasn't found something after a month. Please leave the double standards at the door.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I find it funny that the people against the War wanted to give the inspectors 6 months to a year to find something and then start screaming after the U.S. hasn't found something after a month. Please leave the double standards at the door.

Ditto.

 

Conservatives were boo hooing after a month when inspectors didn't find anything, and now they want years.

[Guest Skironox]

Wait until when. The worthless UN does something. Hussein was in violation of numerous resolutions, and should of been removed from power even sooner than he was.

Yeah, which is why he should have been removed during, you know, the first Gulf War.

[Justice 0]

.....So where are these weapons again?

 

/begins planning to search for WMD in the Dark Dimension. WATCH OUT FOR GOLDAR~!!

Aww, liberal love-in! Group hug, everyone! Group hug!

 

Question: If American troops were rushing towards you, would YOU want to be found in possession of WMDs? In all likelihood they probably buried them or hid them so they themselves wouldn't go down with Saddam as a war criminal. It's a better defense to say "We didn't have any!" compared to "Well, we did... but we SWEAR we weren't going to use them, no-siree."

 

So if they had the capability to launch them in such a quick time, and they were in the armies hands, who were unwilling to fight, why didn't they just hand them over to the Americans?

 

Damn you Kam, you beat me.

 

Again, they probably didn't want someone to even ASSUME that they had WMDs so there was a possibility they could get implicated in their potential use. But whatever.

 

Conservatives were boo hooing after a month when inspectors didn't find anything, and now they want years.

 

Tyler, we've been doing the same inspections in Iraq for 12 years and we've ALWAYS been jerked around. There is a difference between doing inspections while the Despotic regieme is there and when it isn't because the Despotic Regieme can thwart and block and move everything before yuo get there. I personally loved Blix's "I'm going to announce where we are going... the day before." just to make sure they could get everything out of the way.

 

Honestly, do you think we could do an accurate investigation of the Stalinist Purges with Stalin still in power?

[Justice 0]

Wait until when. The worthless UN does something. Hussein was in violation of numerous resolutions, and should of been removed from power even sooner than he was.

Yeah, which is why he should have been removed during, you know, the first Gulf War.

Exactly. But the UN didn't want to do anything more, and Colin Powell deterred Bush because he was extremely worried about how the power-vacuum would be filled. We all dropped the ball, admittedly. So are we just going to look at it sitting on the ground or actually pick it back up again?

[Vern Gagne 0]

I find it funny that the people against the War wanted to give the inspectors 6 months to a year to find something and then start screaming after the U.S. hasn't found something after a month.  Please leave the double standards at the door.

Ditto.

 

Conservatives were boo hooing after a month when inspectors didn't find anything, and now they want years.

People in support of the War, wanted Hussein removed from power for numerous reasons. So of course we wanted the inspections to stop.

[Guest Kamui]

Question: If American troops were rushing towards you, would YOU want to be found in possession of WMDs? In all likelihood they probably buried them or hid them so they themselves wouldn't go down with Saddam as a war criminal. It's a better defense to say "We didn't have any!" compared to "Well, we did... but we SWEAR we weren't going to use them, no-siree."

This is a great excuse, but it would sound more accurate if you guys were throwing it out there as a possiblity when the war was starting.

 

Conservatives Then: "We'll find those WMD right away- they've got them by the PILE FULL, right in a big storage facility with WMD R Us in big neon letters hanging over it, so we'll confiscate all of it then march into Washington with our heads held high!"

 

Conservatives Now: "......Well, umm, they got rid of it all before we made it there! Yeah...."

[Justice 0]

Question: If American troops were rushing towards you, would YOU want to be found in possession of WMDs? In all likelihood they probably buried them or hid them so they themselves wouldn't go down with Saddam as a war criminal. It's a better defense to say "We didn't have any!" compared to "Well, we did... but we SWEAR we weren't going to use them, no-siree."

This is a great excuse, but it would sound more accurate if you guys were throwing it out there as a possiblity when the war was starting.

 

Conservatives Then: "We'll find those WMD right away- they've got them by the PILE FULL, right in a big storage facility with WMD R Us in big neon letters hanging over it, so we'll confiscate all of it then march into Washington with our heads held high!"

 

Conservatives Now: "......Well, umm, they got rid of it all before we made it there! Yeah...."

Of course, I love how liberals refuse to acknowledge that while Bush cited WMDs to try and get international support, they completely forget the humanitarian reasons behind it. Bitch all you want about WMDs, but there are a dozen other reasons that justify the current action.

 

Then again, one could consider the fact that decades after the Nazis were defeated we were still finding documents and stashes of gold and such in the mountains of Austria, and they weren't in power as long as Saddam was.

 

Clue: I'm sure if the world and UN would have cared that the people of Iraq were suffering under Saddam he would have used that as his main reason. Of course, that flew out the window when they did practically nothing when Iraq booted them out in 1998.

 

Gotta love that Status Quo the world keeps so often...

[Guest Kamui]

Question: If American troops were rushing towards you, would YOU want to be found in possession of WMDs? In all likelihood they probably buried them or hid them so they themselves wouldn't go down with Saddam as a war criminal. It's a better defense to say "We didn't have any!" compared to "Well, we did... but we SWEAR we weren't going to use them, no-siree."

This is a great excuse, but it would sound more accurate if you guys were throwing it out there as a possiblity when the war was starting.

 

Conservatives Then: "We'll find those WMD right away- they've got them by the PILE FULL, right in a big storage facility with WMD R Us in big neon letters hanging over it, so we'll confiscate all of it then march into Washington with our heads held high!"

 

Conservatives Now: "......Well, umm, they got rid of it all before we made it there! Yeah...."

Of course, I love how liberals refuse to acknowledge that while Bush cited WMDs to try and get international support, they completely forget the humanitarian reasons behind it. Bitch all you want about WMDs, but there are a dozen other reasons that justify the current action.

And I love it how conservatives change the subject to humanitarian aide when this was barely spoken of back when things were getting started.

 

Here's a hint: It's not just other countries who wouldn't have gone along with this sort of thing. Do you really think Johnny Redneck cares if Iraq's a democracy or not? Bush wanted to bomb a country, so all of a sudden they have non-existant WMD to get the country up into a frenzy of Bush support for the war. At least, that's how it played out to me.

[Justice 0]

And I love it how conservatives change the subject to humanitarian aide when this was barely spoken of back when things were getting started.

 

Here's a hint: It's not just other countries who wouldn't have gone along with this sort of thing. Do you really think Johnny Redneck cares if Iraq's a democracy or not? Bush wanted to bomb a country, so all of a sudden they have non-existant WMD to get the country up into a frenzy of Bush support for the war. At least, that's how it played out to me.

Of course, when you say non-existant you are literally going against 12 years of something that was universally believed to be fact by the UN, the US, and NATO. To say that we just made this up all of a sudden by Bush is utter BS. The fact that people believed it then and still believe it now is because it is what every intelligence agency in the World and the UN has told us since the first Gulf War.

 

Actually, Kamui, a lot of people in the US probably would have supported a war in Iraq. We give out more international aid than any country in the world today and send troops just about anywhere and everywhere. We are a very compassionate nation. The fact was that we originally DIDN'T want go in without the UN and we had to drum up UN support somehow, so Bush focused on something that could disrupt the said Status Quo: WMDs. If we had just went in alone, though, humanitarian reasons would have been enough for the average US Citizen. Hell, I believe Tyler said he would have supported an action had Bush used the Humanitarian reasons. He's a pretty good chunk of what most liberals are. And most conservatives wuodl have no problem eliminating Saddam from the region.

[Guest Cerebus]

What do you think Saddam was doing inbetween the time the inspectors were totally gone and the time we actually attacked? Tidying up the Presidential Palaces for our arrival?

[Vern Gagne 0]

Man. a couple viles of anthrax deadly enough to kill 50,000 could of easily been smuggled into Syria inside a jacket pocket.

 

Given the time Hussein had to remove WMD's it shouldn't suprise anyone if he smuggled WMD's out of the country.

[Guest Kamui]

/waits for proof

 

Oh, you have none? That's good to know.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Bush wanted to bomb a country, so all of a sudden they have non-existant WMD to get the country up into a frenzy of Bush support for the war.

WTF? SO Bush just woke up one day and said, "Ah, look at that beautiful sunrise... holy fuck, I need to drop some BOMBS!" The entire UN Security Council agreed Saddam had WMD just over a year ago. I suppose he was a good boy and destroyed everything between then and our invasion? Are you really that naive?

[Guest Kamui]

Bush wanted to bomb a country, so all of a sudden they have non-existant WMD to get the country up into a frenzy of Bush support for the war.

WTF? SO Bush just woke up one day and said, "Ah, look at that beautiful sunrise... holy fuck, I need to drop some BOMBS!" The entire UN Security Council agreed Saddam had WMD just over a year ago. I suppose he was a good boy and destroyed everything between then and our invasion? Are you really that naive?

More than likely they HAD WMD. That doesn't prove they had it at the time we decided to attack them, and I still believe Bush twisted the facts around to get himself more support.

 

Did you completley miss the reports that came out from informants in that administration and the FBI that said there just wasn't enough evidence to support the claims that Bush was making? Are YOU that naive?

[Dr. Tom 0]

More than likely they HAD WMD. That doesn't prove they had it at the time we decided to attack them, and I still believe Bush twisted the facts around to get himself more support.

 

Did you completley miss the reports that came out from informants in that administration and the FBI that said there just wasn't enough evidence to support the claims that Bush was making? Are YOU that naive?

No; I simply don't care. Saddam needed to be dealt with and deposed, and the only thing we whiffed on was killing everyone in his administration and throwing them all in a mass pauper's grave. We had a laundry list of reasons to go in there, even if WMD are completely removed from the picture. I think he had them hoarded and that we'll find them eventually, but we're a little busy with other things over there at the moment.

[Guest Kamui]

More than likely they HAD WMD. That doesn't prove they had it at the time we decided to attack them, and I still believe Bush twisted the facts around to get himself more support.

 

Did you completley miss the reports that came out from informants in that administration and the FBI that said there just wasn't enough evidence to support the claims that Bush was making? Are YOU that naive?

No; I simply don't care. Saddam needed to be dealt with and deposed, and the only thing we whiffed on was killing everyone in his administration and throwing them all in a mass pauper's grave. We had a laundry list of reasons to go in there, even if WMD are completely removed from the picture. I think he had them hoarded and that we'll find them eventually, but we're a little busy with other things over there at the moment.

Well, I'm glad YOU don't care, but some of us still like that little 'ol thing called "honesty". I'll use the Democratic party line for a second here and say that if Bush had just been honest and said that we don't know whether or not he has WMDs now (not that HE DOES AND HE'S A THREAT TO US AND WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE IF WE DON'T STOP HIM RIGHT FUCKING NOW), but he's had them in the past and he's been a constant blight on the face of humanity, then I would have quite a bit more respect for him and there wouldn't be all this trouble about finding the WMDs in the first place.

 

Sure, it might have taken a bit longer to get the American people on his side, but at least it would have been honest.

[Guest MikeSC]

Well, I'm glad YOU don't care, but some of us still like that little 'ol thing called "honesty". I'll use the Democratic party line for a second here and say that if Bush had just been honest and said that we don't know whether or not he has WMDs now (not that HE DOES AND HE'S A THREAT TO US AND WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE IF WE DON'T STOP HIM RIGHT FUCKING NOW), but he's had them in the past and he's been a constant blight on the face of humanity, then I would have quite a bit more respect for him and there wouldn't be all this trouble about finding the WMDs in the first place.

 

Sure, it might have taken a bit longer to get the American people on his side, but at least it would have been honest.

And, you know, if WMD was the only reason Bush gave for doing this, you MIGHT have a point.

 

But it wasn't --- and you don't.

 

Bush mentioned the ignoring of U.N mandates as a reason for doing it. He mentioned the support of terrorism. He mentioned the usage of WMD in the past. He gave several reasons for doing it.

 

If you can't remember what Bush said, that is YOUR problem, not his.

-=Mike

[Guest Kamui]

Well, I'm glad YOU don't care, but some of us still like that little 'ol thing called "honesty". I'll use the Democratic party line for a second here and say that if Bush had just been honest and said that we don't know whether or not he has WMDs now (not that HE DOES AND HE'S A THREAT TO US AND WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE IF WE DON'T STOP HIM RIGHT FUCKING NOW), but he's had them in the past and he's been a constant blight on the face of humanity, then I would have quite a bit more respect for him and there wouldn't be all this trouble about finding the WMDs in the first place.

 

Sure, it might have taken a bit longer to get the American people on his side, but at least it would have been honest.

And, you know, if WMD was the only reason Bush gave for doing this, you MIGHT have a point.

 

But it wasn't --- and you don't.

 

Bush mentioned the ignoring of U.N mandates as a reason for doing it. He mentioned the support of terrorism. He mentioned the usage of WMD in the past. He gave several reasons for doing it.

 

If you can't remember what Bush said, that is YOUR problem, not his.

-=Mike

Oh, I realize unlike his British counterpart (who basically got fucked by Bush since he used that as his only reason) he had other ones. But saying the WMDs wasn't the primary reason is just stupid- were you not watching the same news programs as I was, where the thing he repeated over and over again was that SADDAM HAS WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION RIGHT NOW AND WE HAVE TO STOP HIM?

 

And don't even get me STARTED on the support of terrioism reason....

[Guest MikeSC]

Well, I'm glad YOU don't care, but some of us still like that little 'ol thing called "honesty". I'll use the Democratic party line for a second here and say that if Bush had just been honest and said that we don't know whether or not he has WMDs now (not that HE DOES AND HE'S A THREAT TO US AND WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE IF WE DON'T STOP HIM RIGHT FUCKING NOW), but he's had them in the past and he's been a constant blight on the face of humanity, then I would have quite a bit more respect for him and there wouldn't be all this trouble about finding the WMDs in the first place.

 

Sure, it might have taken a bit longer to get the American people on his side, but at least it would have been honest.

And, you know, if WMD was the only reason Bush gave for doing this, you MIGHT have a point.

 

But it wasn't --- and you don't.

 

Bush mentioned the ignoring of U.N mandates as a reason for doing it. He mentioned the support of terrorism. He mentioned the usage of WMD in the past. He gave several reasons for doing it.

 

If you can't remember what Bush said, that is YOUR problem, not his.

-=Mike

Oh, I realize unlike his British counterpart (who basically got fucked by Bush since he used that as his only reason) he had other ones. But saying the WMDs wasn't the primary reason is just stupid- were you not watching the same news programs as I was, where the thing he repeated over and over again was that SADDAM HAS WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION RIGHT NOW AND WE HAVE TO STOP HIM?

 

And don't even get me STARTED on the support of terrioism reason....

Iraq gave money to Palestinian homicide bombers --- so it's not like that's a lie or anything.

 

And Bush never said that WMD is the primary reason to go into Iraq. He cannot control how the media will spin a story.

 

Heck, more than once, he told the U.N that they HAVE to go in there if they wish for the body to have ANY legitimacy in the world.

-=Mike

[DARRYLXWF 0]

/waits for proof

 

Oh, you have none? That's good to know.

Exactly. The sheer thought of Saddam taking WMD out of the country is ludicrous, illogical and defies common sense. Why can't you people see this?