A thought about the WMD...

[RoeBear]

...I know that nothing has been found but something occured to me recently. Our troops are being attacked with various types of weapons; guns, bombs, RPG's, etc. We don't know where they are hidden prior to their use so is it possible that WMD's are still out there?

Or is the flaw in my theory that the WMD's require much more space to be hidden compared to hiding what are basically small arms.

[ogminlo]

1. Well, kind of.

The weapons themselves are not necessarily large in size, but the means to contain them for storage tend to be. You don't just dig a hole and throw some warheads in it. For weapons to be useful (and thus a threat), they must be maintained in a such a way that pretty much excludes the idea that they are squirreleed away in a hole somewhere in the desert...

They aren't there. Iraq hasn't had any usable unconventional weapons since 1998.

[alcuno]

2. They're not hidden; they're everywhere.

Someone once said that Iraq was an ammo dump run by a government. Now it's an ammo dump with no government. WMD's? Even if they find something it was obviously of no threat to us.

[loudnclear]

3. And guess whose ammo is in the dump?

A lot of it was US made and sold to Saddam.

[RoeBear]

5. What kind of explosives...

...have been used for the car bombings over there? Surely your not saying that explosives are just laying around like an old tire. They must be hidden and the people who hid them obviously know how to find them when they want them. Isn't it possible that the WMD's are just well hidden?

[alcuno]

9. For a long period of time, the US did NOT secure the stockpiles

of weapons all over that country. They said they didn't have enough troops to guard them. Some of the car bombings contained explosives that were left out for anyone to take. The US has said it will take them many months more and perhaps years to get rid of all the unexploded ordinance.

People have checked these sites for WMD's but they haven't found any yet. Could they be hidden? The chief weapon's inspector (and propagandist) doesn't seem to think so. But I guess that anything is possible.

[peachy]

4. If the had them...

If there were still WMD in Iraq that anyone in the resistance could make use of it sure seems to me that they would have used them by now.

There are none - they destroyed the program 12 years ago just as they said they did.

[RoeBear]

6. That would seem to make sense...

...if what is hidden is let's say nerve gas. But what if what is hidden is the equipment to make nerve gas. I don't claim to be anything resembling an expert, but couldn't the equipment be hidden but not able to be used to manufacture because of the raw materials not being available?

[Dr Fate]

7. Saddam would have used them to keep from being captured...

...the "Butcher of Bagdad" who "gassed his own people" would have no problem attacking the troops with WMDs to keep from losing the war- except he apparently did NOT have the WMDs...

[RoeBear]

8. He had them in the first Gulf (oil) War...

...but didn't use them then. Whatever reason for him not using them then could apply now.

[Solomon]

10. How Many Times I Gotta Say This.

Nukes are weapons of mass destruction, not nerve gas, or biological weapons. They purposely coined the term "weapons of mass destruction" so they could avoid admitting that Saddam had no NUKES. He never did, and they know he didn't. Okay!?

[AZCat]

11. Sure, Sure...

Saddam had no nukes? Haven't you listened to the great emperor Cheney? That's why we need the moon base- in case the Saddam Clone Army turns the USofA into a "Mushroom Cloud"!

[RoeBear]

12. I guess if nukes are the only WMD...

...that counts then it shouldn't be too hard to sweep the country with a geiger counter to find them. I just thought that WMD's included more than just nukes. Nerve gas, chemical agents, biological weapons; fun stuff like that

[oneighty]

15. Right.

The only weapon that destroys 'mass' is an atomic weapon, reducing its fissionable parts to natures basic building blocks with a terrible side product; 'binding energy'.

A finished nuclear weapon could certainly be hidden. The facilities to manufacture nuclear weapons would be very difficult to hide from the eyes in the sky. Of course Saddam may have bought nukes from other countries. Maybe we go bomb those countries too.

Which nuclear owning states would one bomb first?

180

[maggrwaggr]

13. well, what Kay made clear in his testimony

when Warner kept asking him a similar question was --

That it's not just the weapons themselves that are the evidence. It's the records, the manufacturing facilities, the transportation and storage facilities, etc. etc. etc.

The million fingerprints of their existence.

He said none of it was there.

[RoeBear]

14. This is what's missing from my theory..

"That it's not just the weapons themselves that are the evidence. It's the records, the manufacturing facilities, the transportation and storage facilities, etc. etc. etc."

Thanks for your insight,
RoeBear