Blair - Weapons of mass distruction not found.

[Vanhalen 0]

Before people jump on my back, I know that you guys in the states were a little more open about the reasons for going to war, and the regime change, but here it was only about WMD and nothing else, thats why a lot of people in the UK are upset because we feel we have been lied to, and also in the vote in parlimant which was won by a very narrow margin, many people voted only because of WMD, nothing else

 

Tony Blair has said Iraq's weapons of mass destruction "may never be found".

Mr Blair said he had "to accept we haven't found them and we may never find them" - but that did not mean Saddam Hussein had not been a threat.

 

He said the former Iraqi leader had been in breach of UN resolutions and his weapons may have been "removed, hidden or destroyed".

 

Mr Blair also said US security concerns had to be tackled before British detainees at Guantanamo Bay are freed.

 

'Clear evidence'

 

The prime minister was being grilled by senior MPs in his twice-yearly appearance before the Commons liaison committee.

 

His comments come eight days before an inquiry reports on the pre-war intelligence about Iraq's weapons.

 

He said Saddam Hussein had previously had weapons of mass destruction and there was "very clear evidence" of his desire to develop and use them.

 

But he added: "I have to accept we haven't found them and we may never find them, We don't know what has happened to them.

 

"They could have been removed. They could have been hidden. They could have been destroyed."

 

In an interview broadcast later on BBC Radio 2, Mr Blair said there was no doubt Saddam Hussein had been a threat - even if the nature of the threat turned out to be different in some respects.

 

Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy argued Mr Blair was diminishing his office by continuing to believe the weapons existed at the time he had tried to make the case for the war.

 

And Tory shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram said Mr Blair owed the country an explanation after being so clear about Iraq's weapons before the conflict.

 

 

But US President George Bush told reporters later: "I know that Saddam Hussein was a threat."

 

The former Iraqi leader had possessed the intent and capability to produce weapons of mass destruction and had harboured terrorists, added Mr Bush.

 

Mr Blair mounted a robust defence of Britain's relationship with the US, saying other countries would "give their eye-teeth" to be in a similar position.

 

He said progress on security issues in Libya, Iran and North Korea would not have been possible "without Iraq".

 

But he added: "If I did not believe that the security of this country was enhanced by taking the action in Iraq, I would not have done it, irrespective of how many compliments the president [George Bush] paid me."

 

Guantanamo Bay is an 'anomaly', says Blair

 

The prime minister argued that Guantanamo Bay was "an anomaly that at some point has to be brought to an end".

 

He admitted the UK Government still did not have the "machinery" in place to ensure the remaining British prisoners there would not pose a security threat if they were released.

 

He confirmed that he had personally discussed the case of the four detainees with Mr Bush.

 

But he said he believed that the US was being obstructive in holding on to the detainees until the UK could give assurances that they would not be a security threat to it or any other country.

 

"I don't think the United States is being totally unreasonable. We need to make sure that there is proper security in place for these people," he told MPs.

 

Mr Blair confirmed a Cabinet committee on US-UK relations had been set up. He also said there would be no defence cuts in next week's spending review.

[CBright7831 0]

Bush: We'll find them weapons of mass destruction sooner or later.

 

 

Bush: ...

[Vanhalen 0]

Fucking post of the year

[Guest Cerebus]

This just adds to the fact that nobody here or in the media knows jack shit about NBCRs.

 

Fucking incredible.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Well, enlighten us then. When I, and I'm sure many others think the phrase "Weapons of Mass Destruction," there's a canister of toxic gas, some germ laboratory, a nuclear warhead or some weapons-grade plutonium inside of a thing...basically, some active horrible substance ready, or within a few steps of being ready for delivery.

 

A crappy old artillery shell that might've been laying out in the desert doesn't really show me that they had a full working program when we said they did. It could've been a rusty relic from when they were gassing the Kurds like scumbags.

 

WMD, sure. Imminent danger to american civilians? Not so much.

[NoCalMike 0]

Of course Saddam was a threat. I heard he could shot-put a rock pretty far.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Since I've discussed this with him a few times, I'll paraphrase what he's likely to say:

 

"This 'leaky Sarin shell' that was found in the desert was a shell from a program that no one knew Saddam had. It was a binary shell that mixed the components in the air, and thus, it would be just as dangerous as it was ten years ago if it was fired properly. The scary part is that since we didn't know he had these in the first place, we don't know if he had more. And it's not likely that he only made (or left) one of them."

 

But he'll probably have more than that, heh.

[Justice 0]

Of course Saddam was a threat.  I heard he could shot-put a rock pretty far.

Well, he did have a missile program that allowed him to hit Cairo. But hey, I guess that's just like a rock, right?

 

Edit: And where the hell does Blair say "They never had any"? He says that they probably had them, but they were moved, hidden, or possibly even destroyed.

[Guest INXS]

Blair saying "they probably had them, but they were moved, hidden, or possibly even destroyed" doesn't help anyone in the slightest. It proves that Blair was either a) misled or b) lying.

 

If the tories had any back bone, and they pressed the issue, this matter could signal the end of Blair's run as prime minister.

 

Blair was banging on and on about WMD in parliament, in TV interviews..everywhere, in an attempt to justify going into Iraq. He now looks very foolish and untrustworthy.

[Guest Cerebus]

It's amazing what people will say and ignore to score cheap political points.

 

Nothing is sacred, apparently, not even eliminating weapons that could condemn thousands to a horrible death I wouldn't wish on my very worst enemy.

 

A prison lab devoted to testing biological weapons on human subjects.

 

97 vials of biological organisms found in a scientist's personal home used in the production of BW agents.

 

Equipment and documents for the enrichment of uranium.

 

Propellent for banned SCUD missles.

 

Evidence of buying 1300 km range missles from North Korea.

 

UAVs converted for chemical delivery.

 

Revolutionary Guard headquarters, labrotories, and intelligence headquarters with piles of destroyed documents.

 

About 2 dozen projects related to delivery systems, including cruise missle technology assisted by a fair amount of support from foreign companies.

 

The fact is, Kay and Duelfer are pretty clear on one thing, Saddam was very much committed to rebuilding his NBCR warfare technology after kicking out UNSCOM. Even now, does anyone believe its a coincidence that nine former top Iraqi scientists (who have been interviewed by the ISG) have been assassinated, most likely by Zaraqawi? There is STILL a huge list of weapons nobody knows what happens to. Whether they are still in Iraq, moved out, destroyed, or hidden somewhere nobody knows.

 

And people, THAT IS NOT GOOD. If people would stop having a circle jerk over the fact that we havn't found them, and saw that we don't know where the fuck they are or who has them we would all be better off. This is a hell of a lot more important than how many times Bush said "imminent" or whatever garbage spews out of Ted Kennedy's mouth. We should be worried about where these weapons are and who has access to them. It's too important to be left to buzzwords and politics.

[Vanhalen 0]

And whats wrong with a circle jerk may I ask?