Chemical weapons site taken in Iraq

[BoringGuy45]

There were WMDs found even during the war, and I remember it was even reported on TV. The argument was that the ones they found lacked the delivery systems Bush claimed Saddam had, and the weapons they found were in so few numbers and of such low quality, it in no way justified a full scale war. I think Bush misunderstood Saddam; he assumed that Saddam was like al-Qaeda in that he would be willing to die and have his own country turned to glass if it meant killing just one of his enemies. Saddam was like most dictators: All about keeping his power and doing what he felt was in his best interests. When he invaded Kuwait in 1990, he did so under the belief that many "experts" had, which was that the Iraqi Army was large enough, well trained, and well equipped enough to possibly defeat the West. He wouldn't have done it if he had known he was going to get his ass beat. Now 13 years later, his country and military are crippled by sanctions, America is more technologically advanced, pissed off as hornets after 9/11, and has troops now battle hardened from Afghanistan. Even if he had WMDs, Saddam wouldn't have used them because it would mean his doom.

How do we know that Saddam was no threat? If he had WMDs, he would have used them on us during the Clinton administration, which had set the precedent for half-assing all military conflicts and not responding to attacks. He certainly wasn't going to use them during a time when the U.S. had shown that it would respond with full force in response to an attack.

[WillBrink]

There were WMDs found even during the war, and I remember it was even reported on TV. The argument was that the ones they found lacked the delivery systems Bush claimed Saddam had, and the weapons they found were in so few numbers and of such low quality, it in no way justified a full scale war. I think Bush misunderstood Saddam; he assumed that Saddam was like al-Qaeda in that he would be willing to die and have his own country turned to glass if it meant killing just one of his enemies. Saddam was like most dictators: All about keeping his power and doing what he felt was in his best interests. When he invaded Kuwait in 1990, he did so under the belief that many "experts" had, which was that the Iraqi Army was large enough, well trained, and well equipped enough to possibly defeat the West. He wouldn't have done it if he had known he was going to get his ass beat. Now 13 years later, his country and military are crippled by sanctions, America is more technologically advanced, pissed off as hornets after 9/11, and has troops now battle hardened from Afghanistan. Even if he had WMDs, Saddam wouldn't have used them because it would mean his doom.

How do we know that Saddam was no threat? If he had WMDs, he would have used them on us during the Clinton administration, which had set the precedent for half-assing all military conflicts and not responding to attacks. He certainly wasn't going to use them during a time when the U.S. had shown that it would respond with full force in response to an attack.

You mean a cruise missile showing up an hour after the target left the camp does not constitute decisive military action in your view?!

But seriously, I think we all know the Iraq action was a trumped up case on various fronts to remove Saddam which re routed important assets from where they were needed. Saddam was a self serving strong man sociopath of a classic and predictable ilk, was not allied to the groups we wanted (quite the opposite supposedly), to convert to red mist for 9/11 and prior attacks we did essentially nothing about. He either had some WMDs he wouldn't have used against us, or he didn't have them, etc.

Iraq: we all hoped it would go differently, we all knew it wouldn't.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Why was that crap kept there to begin with and not removed when Saddam was removed?

Where else could McCain and Obama get chemical weapons to give to their AQ friends so they could spring a false flag by gassing Syrians and blame it on Assad?

[BBossman]

The handwriting was on the wall for Iraq when GWB selected his VP and then picked his cabinet after being elected.

Well, usual possible reasons, minus actually knowing the answers:

-They thought they were there but were not
-They pretended they were there and were not
-They were there but moved them by the time we got there
- They made more in secret

Or some variation there of. I'm unclear if any but a small handful knows the exact answer. I have personally always felt the key players didn't give a damn if there really were WMDs or not and put together a story based on flimsy evidence to justify the action, which took essential and important assets away from the Afgan theater, but that's another issue.

Meanwhile...

[montanadave]

The handwriting was on the wall for Iraq when GWB selected his VP and then picked his cabinet after being elected.

W didn't pick his VP. His VP (and neocon cronies) picked him.

[Iraqgunz]

Before everyone goes crazy about these so-called chemical weapons I would suggest people do a bit of research on the topic.

[interfan]

Before everyone goes crazy about these so-called chemical weapons I would suggest people do a bit of research on the topic.

IG, you're right. The chemical facility was a ruin and ISIS taking it over was more for symbolism than anything. On the other hand, the radiological material they have now from Mosul University (a small matter of 30Kg of Uranium) is much more troubling, since this wasn't something that was abandoned and sat out in the desert for years. This is something that was in a lab last week and can and will be used.

[Magic_Salad0892]

They do not have the capability to enrich to weapons grade.

[NWPilgrim]

I think the concern is use for a dirty bomb(s).

[interfan]

They do not have the capability to enrich to weapons grade.

They may not, but Pakistan does and Syria was trying to build a nuclear weapon prior to Israeli air strikes a number of years ago. They may have someone allied with their cause that has the scientific understanding on enrichment and technology can be bought.

The other issue is that a lot of mischief can be had with rumors of dirty bombs, poisoning food and water, radiation releases, etc. Terror groups terrorize, so having specific capabilities to build a nuclear weapon doesn't make much difference since you can use other means to deliver radiological materials - or threaten to do so.