5 ms·
There were no chemical weapons in Iraq and no babies were killed. There wasn't any connection with Al Kaida. The US lied about that and started a war. Why shou
by rmetzler 12y ago
There were no chemical weapons in Iraq and no babies were killed. There wasn't any connection with Al Kaida.
The US lied about that and started a war. Why shouldn't they lie about North Korea?
- pdabbadabba 12y agoMostly because, unlike with Iraq, it's difficult to tell what agenda is being furthered by pinning this on NK.
- kuhhk 12y agoThere WERE chemical weapons in Iraq as recently reported by the New York Times [1]. I'm not saying this was justification for war, but informing you of incorrect facts. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleea...
- shrikant 12y agoYou're technically correct in that chemical weapons were found, but the bigger picture is that that these were manufactured before 1991. Also, the US government itself deliberately suppressed knowledge of these findings because they made the "active WMD programme" basis for going to war look even more dubious. All of this is mentioned in the linked article.