Printable View
Front and center. No avoiding John
Here is factcheck.org another in the long list of places where it is stated that he is wrong. He will quote fox i will quote many other sources.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec...struction.html
Dont tell me you dont believe or trust factcheck.org? Let me quess. LOL.
Most reasonable people know what the answer is. You lost John. Sorry buddy.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec...struction.html
John. Stop nuancing it. Read it from this NEUTRAL SOURCE and let it go. I know you will at least agree that there are plenty of more important things to argue about.
I cant wait to see how you try to argue this one. lol.
If he did he would have seen that this answers all the questions he puts to the subject and answers his FactCheck.org
WASHINGTON--
The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.
"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.
Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
• Click here to read the declassified portion of the NGIC report.
He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.
"The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," Santorum read from the document.
"This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.
Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."
Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."
The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.
He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.
"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.
Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.
"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.
"It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don't want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there's mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq," Barnes said.
The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.
At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq's Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, "religious emir" Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.
Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday's debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.
"This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false," he said.
As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.
"We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war," Hoekstra said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligent people do not doubt that these weapons were found. What intelligent people doubt is that they were the weapons that the US went to war over. That was not the question that was asked in your surveys and that is why your surveys are not valid. Which is the reason this thread was started, if I recall.
Now anyone reading this knows without a doubt that there were chemical weapons (WMDs) found in Iraq. Which was the question asked. Only a twit would try and say anything else after just being give this information (information FOX viewers had already).
Once again FOX veiwers acorrding to the surveys you have given are more knowledgable about this issue then not only the other news outlets but the ones giving the surveys. Really to be honest I find it to be ironic that the ones giving the surveys are ether trying to mislead people on purpose or they are truely that dumb themselves.
I already did dumbass in the thread it was started with. Guys I told him to read it but unlike me he did not. He also once again is trying to mislead people goto the thread and what was discussed.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2006...eds-wmds-iraq/
As I said before this is something that is done by someone that trys to mislead others because they have lost the arguement in the other thread.
Anyway here is the article and link to what was found the amount was not at question but that there were some found it is something I have been trying to get this dumbass to understand from the beginning but he is useless and I am beginning to think a waste of a human skin.
WASHINGTON--
The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.
"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.
Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."
• Click here to read the declassified portion of the NGIC report.
He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.
"The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," Santorum read from the document.
"This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.
Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."
Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.
"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."
The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.
He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.
"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.
Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.
"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.
"It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don't want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there's mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq," Barnes said.
The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.
At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq's Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, "religious emir" Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.
Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday's debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.
"This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false," he said.
As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.
"We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war," Hoekstra said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligent people do not doubt that these weapons were found. What intelligent people doubt is that they were the weapons that the US went to war over. That was not the question that was asked in your surveys and that is why your surveys are not valid. Which is the reason this thread was started, if I recall.
Now anyone reading this knows without a doubt that there were chemical weapons (WMDs) found in Iraq. Which was the question asked. Only a twit would try and say anything else after just being give this information (information FOX viewers had already).
Once again FOX veiwers according to the surveys you have given are more knowledgable about this issue then not only the other news outlets but the ones giving the surveys. Really to be honest I find it to be ironic that the ones giving the surveys are ether trying to mislead people on purpose or they are truely that dumb themselves.
Here is the link;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2006...eds-wmds-iraq/
Just so you know Charles I know this is becoming what it is. I am just trying to show that to lloyd that if he wants to to this kind of bullshit I can also.
LOL My answer to you is factcheck.org a neutral and reputable firm that says you are wrong Nothing more one can do. You will ONLY BELIEVE FOX NEWS.
LOL. The only difference between you and me is that i dont put words like dumbass in the headings. But then again you have never shown yourself to have any class.
John you are rather unique. i have never met a guy who when presented with facts from an organization like factcheck.org (a reputable, neutral and established arbiter of facts) refuses to acknowledge any possibility that they may be wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
Dumbass, try reading Tucker Max "I hope they serve beer in hell" you really need it. I have never seen someone wound so tight in my life.
Facts, I told your dumbass before even your own factcheck.org says that there where WMDs, just not that many. My article not only gos passed the intelligence agency that factcheck.org used but tells you which one and exactly what else was found.
You have gotten so lost in trying to defend your opinion that you have forgotten what the original opinion was. I made it clear from the beginning that while the WMDs were not many (500) I also made it clear that they where old from the begining, I also made it clear that these WMDs were not the WMDs that the US went to war over. Finally I also made it clear that weather it is 5 or 500 or 5,000 does not change the logical answer to a survey question that you put up, which was was there WMDs found in Iraq and that answer is YES.
To remind you, this is exactly what I said on the subject
http://siriusbuzz.com/forum/showthre...?t=2410&page=2
Here I will give it to you in a simple analogy so even you understand it;
There is a bunch of grapes, you eat the worst 5 grapes of the bunch. If I asked you did you eat grapes, your answer is YES. Does it matter that it was only 5 of a bunch or that they were old and a little rotten, No, the answer is still YES you ate grapes.
Here because you maybe even dumber then I think, is another way to put it. If you are in Iraq and your job was to find a bunch of grapes and you only find 5 out of the bunch and they are old and rotten ones. Then I asked did you find grapes what would your answer be? It would still be YES.
Here is exactly what I said to you in my second post to you dumbass in that thread. (the first post was that I told you that there were WMDs in Iraq). just follow the link;
http://siriusbuzz.com/forum/showthre...?t=2410&page=2
I dont care, I dont have the time to care, I will just moderate you and if you guys cant have a somewhat civil conversation, I will simply put the kibosh on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by john
I cant take the time to read the whole post but I can tell you that they do/did have weapons of mass destruction because the US sold them the weapons long ago. Granted they could have been moved out of the country by now but, I doubt it.
The only reason you never hear about this is because our government cant stand up and say "we know you have weapons even though we cant find them because WE SOLD THEM TO YOU."
Read the whole post by FACTCHECK.org before you comment next time.
Isnt that the least you can do?
Me? I dont know if that was directed at John. I studied this issue heavily in college both inside and outside of the classroom, I dont need a website to tell me that we sell weapons to countries to fight other countries and keep other countries in line, only to then have those weapons tuned against us. Just look at Afghanistan, we had no problem helping them out back in the 80's now they are using those weapons against us. We gave Iraq the weapons, there is no denying that they have them, we just couldn't find them (not surprising).
Yes it was directed to you Mr. SiriusBuzz. After the last dumbass heading by John i decided that guy has absolutely no class and is simply not worth engaging with.
"We gave Iraq the weapons, there is no denying they HAVE them we just couldnt find them (surprising)"
Well i quess you know things without being an expert (yes i know you studied it in college. So did i)on the subject that many REAL EXPERTS (weapons inspectors etc) KNOW DIFFERENTLY!
I know they GAVE weapons to IRAQ years ago that is not the issue.
Read the FACTCHECK.ORG (more than just another website) article and then if you want to stick to your original point of view fine.
You sound rather close minded for the head honcho of a website.
How is that not the issue? If I hand you a dollar bill, is it not safe for me to say that you have a dollar? Even if you hide it, I can still say with certainty that you have it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
How is that website any better or worse than any other? It is often simple to find article that agrees or disagrees with any point online. Its such a mass of information that its almost harder to not find two opposing points of view. That is why having a diverse knowledge of all the information is so important. I have read both sides of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
I dont know what open mindedness has to do with running a website nor do I see why my educated opinion (whether you agree with it or not) makes me close minded? You are entitled to your opinion based on facts you believe to be true, just like I am entitled to mine. You wont get any fight from me on this topic, I was tossing in what I find to be the most important fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd Handwerker
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
They had them but it is argued that they were destroyed. Again read the
article. You assume they were hidden and are still there. Certainly one point of view.
I have read both points of view as well.
I have always looked for what could be considered the most neutral of
sites. Factcheck.org fits the bill for me and i have sometimes disagreed with them. You find the ones that work for you.
Understand. Just thought before commenting you could have read the article. Know your busy but it takes 2 minutes and you took at least that time to think about and comment on the subject. Anyway.....