Whodathunkit? The UN says WMD's that "didn't exist" have now gone missing.

Freemason

Banned
Whodathunkit? The UN says WMD's that "didn't exist" have now gone missing.

U.N.: Weapons Equipment Missing in Iraq

Jun 2, 11:03 PM (ET)
By EDITH M. LEDERER


UNITED NATIONS (AP) - U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors said in a report obtained Thursday.

U.N. inspectors have been blocked from returning to Iraq since the U.S.-led war in 2003 so they have been using satellite photos to see what happened to the sites that were subject to U.N. monitoring because their equipment had both civilian and military uses.

In the report to the U.N. Security Council, acting chief weapons inspector Demetrius Perricos said he's reached no conclusions about who removed the items or where they went. He said it could have been moved elsewhere in Iraq, sold as scrap, melted down or purchased.
Rest of story

So a bunch of WMD equipment that "never existed" has gone missing. How is this possible? How can something that never existed go missing? Doesn't that mean it was there in the first place. I'm very confused. Perhaps one of out lovable liberals can explain how something that wasn't there has gone missing? Wait a minute, let me strap myself in. I don't want to get dizzy from the spin
 

jmervyn

Diabloii.Net Member
Speaking of beating dead horses... C'mon Smeg, you should be able to sing it by this point: "It is all Bush's fault"
 

Garbad_the_Weak

Diabloii.Net Member
Freemason said:
could be used to make
Just like steel could be used to make guns, money could be used to buy guns, etc.

"Could Be used to made a WMD" is not "has WMDs and is an immedeate threat to use them"

Garbad
 

Freemason

Banned
Could be used to means a lot more when the guy who owns it has a long and storied history of making and using the stuff. His history speaks volumns.
 

Ranger14

Diabloii.Net Member
I'm hear you Smeg, but it is a dead horse. I don't see how anyone cannot believe that Hussein had WMD's and there is plenty of evidence of moving stuff and all, but it is pretty much too late to convince most people that they did exist. Even if they did find something, all the administration haters would claim it was planted or fake.
 

SirKnightmare

Diabloii.Net Member
Saddam didn't have WMD's, Bush was full of it. Leave it alone. He is going to get away with it though, so you can rest easy.
 

Keldaris

Diabloii.Net Member
Freemason said:
The UN just said otherwise.
NO, the UN said that " Materials that could be used to make WMDs" have gone missing. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS ACTUALL WMDs!!!!!
 

Necrolestes

Diabloii.Net Member
I can make a bomb out of a roll of toilet paper and a stick of dynamite.

When were the materials removed? In 2003? Right before the war started? Right after the fall of Baghdad? During the insurgency? Five minutes ago?

Without knowing when, I cannot speculate on how. As in, how they could be used to make WMDs without anyone's knowledge given the accuracy of those satellite photos that certainly would have shown where the materials were heading.
 

DurfBarian

Diabloii.Net Member
Why are you bringing up this story of stuff going missing while the US was in charge of Iraq? Are you trying to say that our soldiers are incompetent losers?

Why do you hate America?
 

jmervyn

Diabloii.Net Member
Suicidal Zebra said:
Nominates :deadhorse: for new smiley.
Seconded with vigour.

Smeg, nothing will convince anyone in denial at this point, just as nothing we can find that substantiates the truth will wipe the egg of the Shrub administration's face. Much of the stuff that is the article's subject are precursor items, like the insecticide find. So the quibbling will go on forever.
 

jimmyboy

Diabloii.Net Member
Freemason said:
U.N.: Weapons Equipment Missing in Iraq

Jun 2, 11:03 PM (ET)
By EDITH M. LEDERER


UNITED NATIONS (AP) - U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors said in a report obtained Thursday.

U.N. inspectors have been blocked from returning to Iraq since the U.S.-led war in 2003 so they have been using satellite photos to see what happened to the sites that were subject to U.N. monitoring because their equipment had both civilian and military uses.

In the report to the U.N. Security Council, acting chief weapons inspector Demetrius Perricos said he's reached no conclusions about who removed the items or where they went. He said it could have been moved elsewhere in Iraq, sold as scrap, melted down or purchased.
Rest of story

So a bunch of WMD equipment that "never existed" has gone missing. How is this possible? How can something that never existed go missing? Doesn't that mean it was there in the first place. I'm very confused. Perhaps one of out lovable liberals can explain how something that wasn't there has gone missing? Wait a minute, let me strap myself in. I don't want to get dizzy from the spin





From Smeg's article.
"In the report to the U.N. Security Council, acting chief weapons inspector Demetrius Perricos said he's reached no conclusions about who removed the items or where they went. He said it could have been moved elsewhere in Iraq, sold as scrap, melted down or purchased.

He said the missing material can be used for legitimate purposes. "However, they can also be utilized for prohibited purposes if in a good state of repair."

Here, notice the word "legitimate purpose" (second paragraph, first line). Therefore, the material could be use either to manufacture WMD, or for a legitimate purpose.

Or in another reasonble explanation... Sadam destroyed the material by melting it down (first paragraph, last line), because he feared an impending invasion. ... sorry, that's liberation.

In conclusion, this article fails to prove anything.
 

jmervyn

Diabloii.Net Member
rikstaker said:
Materials that could be used to make WMDs=WMD?????!!!

erm..I mean what the.. :lol:

Rik
To pick that bone, what would you consider insecticide which is deadly to humans (as the stuff found was), which could in turn be refined to make it even more deadly to humans? I've always been pissed off at the way in which the inaccurate term 'WMD' is bandied about. It's a term made up by the media, and redefined any which way they please. What we didn't find in Iraq (and claimed there was current evidence of) was plentiful stocks of ready-to-use weaponry

I'm well aware that comparison falls apart if we're talking about steel rails or aluminum pipe - but spray-equipped drones, nuclear centrifuges, and biological incubators all meet this overly vague criteria. I'd be interested to know exactly what is on the list, and what would be required to operate 'it' as a weapon...
 

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
I, too, am curious as to what constitutes a "weapon of mass destruction." It reminds me of the term "assault rifle" back when that was all the rage a couple months ago.
 
Top