Currently Online 
| BFR said: My reply: 1. Yes, Sadaam did possess chemical weapons and had used them in the past. 2. I don't recall any US gov't official saying that Sadaam had nuclear weapons, but that he highly desired them, and his guys were hard at work developing them. 3. Over the course of the war, the US did not find any of the WMDs, including the chemical ones. Which means, that either his guys destroyed them or sent them to another country like Syria. Bottom line is that Iraq had and used chemical weapons in the past, at the time of the war, and if the war had never happened, Sadaam could have had his guys restart the chemical weapons production line as well as continue development of nukes, and either used them again or passed them on to his sons. The world is safer today because Sadaam is dead along with his two sons. Sadaam was a mad leader, just like Hitler. |
1. Iraq had chemical weapons before 1991. The UN destroyed the facilities and the stockpiles. https://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/chap6_annxB.html">Cia.gov
In 1999, the UN did not believe that Iraq had any chemical weapons remaining, and even moreso did not believe they had any ability to recreate those.
2. Bush claimed that Iraq had a massive stockpile of biological weapons.
Knew that there were no nuclear weapons, and yet framed it as an uncertainty. There was no intelligence confirming that there were any weapons.
3. Yes, because the UN spent years investigating Iraq and destroyed any stockpiles and facilities that they could find.
4. No one is saying that Saddam was a good person. But the war killed some 100's of thousands. There was probably a better way to go about it.
Last edited by the-pi-guy - on 09 August 2024
