3 ms·

The pretext for the war was Iraq having an active WMD program. What ISIS has are stockpiles from before Iraq dismantled their WMD program (which was prior to t

by ta74747 12y ago

The pretext for the war was Iraq having an active WMD program. What ISIS has are stockpiles from before Iraq dismantled their WMD program (which was prior to the invasion).

runjake 12y ago
WMD stockpiles supplied by the US for use against the Iranians in the 1980s. So in fact, we had a pretty good idea that Saddam had WMDs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Western_help_with_Iraq.27s_WMD_program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destru...
- csorrell 12y ago
  I was under the impression that the shelf life on most of these WMDs (chemical nerve agents) is only 5 years or so. So we had a pretty good idea about what Saddam was holding, but they were almost certainly unusable at the time of the invasion.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
gadders 12y ago
The active WMD program that Clinton believed in as well? So don't need to worry about these WMDs then if they're not part of an active program?
- rhino369 12y ago
  Iraq was sort of bluffing about having chemical weapons after the Gulf War and before the second invasion. It wasn't crazy to think they had an active program. The Bush administration didn't think they could just make up WMD. They assumed the WMD was there. Their real failure was that they pressured the intelligence community into giving a fast confirmation that WMD existed. It's sort of like when a cop lies on the stand by bolstering his evidence. The cop usually isn't trying to rail road an innocent person but insuring (in his mind) the conviction of a guilty person. That is what Bush's administration thought. Turns out the program was finished after the Gulf War and never restarted. And a real hard intelligence look should have shown that. But dissenters were quieted. The "WMD" that was found was lost, pre Gulf War munitions that were degraded to uselessness. They were for most purposes, useless. It was shitty, old as fuck mustard gas. So yes, really no need to worry.
  - gadders 12y ago
    Weird. Everyone seems worried about them now. So Bush managed to pressure Clinton into believing into Iraqi WMDs even before he was elected? That's a neat trick.
- washadjeffmad 12y ago
  It's more of a semantics issue from bad intel and some FUDdy massaging of the definitions along the way, but I see how you got there. Iraq had chemical weapons, and, if you've seen the news, we found them in 2006, although it wasn't publicly confirmed until recently. The use of the label "WMD" is the matter in contention. Some chemical weapons can be WMDs, but these weren't. They also weren't active, and they weren't the type or scale that could be used in modern warfare. The situation was closer to cleaning out an old chemical factory than a race against time to find and disarm fleets of intercontinental missiles primed for launch from secret subterranean silos across the country.

by ta74747 12y ago

The pretext for the war was Iraq having an active WMD program. What ISIS has are stockpiles from before Iraq dismantled their WMD program (which was prior to the invasion).

runjake 12y ago

WMD stockpiles supplied by the US for use against the Iranians in the 1980s. So in fact, we had a pretty good idea that Saddam had WMDs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Western_help_with_Iraq.27s_WMD_program http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destru...

csorrell 12y ago
I was under the impression that the shelf life on most of these WMDs (chemical nerve agents) is only 5 years or so. So we had a pretty good idea about what Saddam was holding, but they were almost certainly unusable at the time of the invasion.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

gadders 12y ago

The active WMD program that Clinton believed in as well? So don't need to worry about these WMDs then if they're not part of an active program?

rhino369 12y ago
Iraq was sort of bluffing about having chemical weapons after the Gulf War and before the second invasion. It wasn't crazy to think they had an active program. The Bush administration didn't think they could just make up WMD. They assumed the WMD was there. Their real failure was that they pressured the intelligence community into giving a fast confirmation that WMD existed. It's sort of like when a cop lies on the stand by bolstering his evidence. The cop usually isn't trying to rail road an innocent person but insuring (in his mind) the conviction of a guilty person. That is what Bush's administration thought. Turns out the program was finished after the Gulf War and never restarted. And a real hard intelligence look should have shown that. But dissenters were quieted. The "WMD" that was found was lost, pre Gulf War munitions that were degraded to uselessness. They were for most purposes, useless. It was shitty, old as fuck mustard gas. So yes, really no need to worry.
- gadders 12y ago
  Weird. Everyone seems worried about them now. So Bush managed to pressure Clinton into believing into Iraqi WMDs even before he was elected? That's a neat trick.
washadjeffmad 12y ago
It's more of a semantics issue from bad intel and some FUDdy massaging of the definitions along the way, but I see how you got there. Iraq had chemical weapons, and, if you've seen the news, we found them in 2006, although it wasn't publicly confirmed until recently. The use of the label "WMD" is the matter in contention. Some chemical weapons can be WMDs, but these weren't. They also weren't active, and they weren't the type or scale that could be used in modern warfare. The situation was closer to cleaning out an old chemical factory than a race against time to find and disarm fleets of intercontinental missiles primed for launch from secret subterranean silos across the country.