Apolitical Staples

Pre 1991 shells don’t matter politically. Even the stuff from the mid-90’s can be discounted. If a serious sized program from 2000 or later is discovered, that will bring major fireworks.

I think the Bush Administration is making a huge error by not publicizing this.

What has been found, useful or not, dangerous or not, is in violation of the ceasefire agreement (as was preventing inspectors from finding this stuff earlier).

Besides, what’s the most likely explanation for what we’ve found? That Iraq violated the ceasefire in order to retain pretty much useless WMDs? Or that Iraq violated the ceasefire in order to retain and expand a useful arsenal, and that the best stuff was smuggled out of the country (Syria is often suggested) and only older stuff was left behind to eventually be found.

Greg tell your friends to watch ABC’s 9/11 on the 10th and 11th, partly filmed in Toronto. That is going to shake things up.

Greg.. I thought I knew you better then you would put stock into a theory only deemed credible by the wingnuts in the US right-wing blogosphere.

This is what the US Administration’s investigative team said:

“While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible Indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.”

Bush himself said this:

“The chief weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, has now issued a comprehensive report that confirms the earlier conclusion of David Kay that Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there.”

A Defense Dept official, also asked about these.. said this:

“But a defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age. Also, Democrats said a lengthy 2005 report from the top U.S. weapons inspector contemplated that such munitions would be found.”

In otherwards Greg, Santorum was (as usual) full of it and trying to find something that wasnt even there.. and is one reason he is likely to be bounced from the Senate this November.

I’ll await your retraction on claiming this was anything significant and hopefully your return from the wingnutosphere.

Why would I retract a question? I didn’t claim anything - I asked a question and you answered it.

Weren’t you paying attention when this non-story was a story a few months back? It didn’t become a bigger story because the military and the US administration themselves quickly debunked it.

The WMD question is lost ground, and reopening it gains nothing.

Publicizing what has been found (including the claims earlier this year in the book by former Iraqi General Georges Sada that most WMD were transported into Syria) doesn’t “interest” people, who have made up their minds on the situation in Iraq.

But publicizing this current information keeps those questions in front of voters: how accurate is this information, now? Why couldn’t “they” get it right, even after all these years? Are these the WMD which were cited to the UN? Sadly, at this point all these questions and more only serve to further question the credibility of the US administration, rather than to reinforce it.

1) The amounts are a couple orders of magnitude smaller.

2) The Bush Administration has already owed up to the “lack” of WMD. Their first priority then, overwhelmingly so, is to keep it behind them.