Did Bush lie about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?

Question

Something to keep in mind . . . Sadam used chemical and/or biological weapons on his own people and televised it on his state controlled tv as a warning to other Iraqis. He also used the same WMD on the Iranians during the Iran Iraq war.

In the early eighties, the Isrealis bombed Iraq's nuke plant just before it went online.

By the way, for those who don't know . . . Biological and Chemical weapons as well as nuclear weapons are considered WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction).

Answer 1

I love this. Okay. Do you honestly think that they would tell us even if there were any? It would instill panic into the general population if someone were to just walk out and say "Yeah, the guys that blew up the world trade centers with relative ease now have WMDs." I'm sure the CIA didn't actually get their hands on any, simply because the terrorists aren't stupid. They're not gonna store them all in one fixed location. Sadam tortured the criminals with acids and such, but that doesn't mean it was mass produced. Do you know how much weapons-grade Small Pox it would take to affect much more than a few blocks? It's alot! Unless the Iraqis had one h**l of a delivery system (for the actual weapon not transport), then we would have found that much of it by now. I'm not saying that we didn't find any, just that it would be unwise to broadcast it to the world.

Answer 2

Mr. Hans Blix, the leading weapons of massive destruction inspector at the time, said there were none.  He did cite two  minor violations, when they found chemical residue in canisters from the first gulf war(just enough to blow up a small car) but, they later determined that the residue was left over from the first gulf war, not recently developed.

So, who would you believe?  A political, oil rich leader in an office in Wash. DC or a weapons inspector who actually inspected the country?

Answer 3

U S A and ISRAEL has many hundreds OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND THEY HAVE USED IT AGAINST INNOCENT CIVILLIANS EVERY NOW AND THEN.

IF ONLY ONE COUNTRY HAS TO BE DESTROYED FOR POSSESING WMD IT MUST BE U S A

Answer 4

There's big distinction between having used chemical weapons in the past and having ready to use stock pile of chemical weapons now. The claim was they had stock pile of chemical weapons ready to be sold/given to terrorist therefore pose immediate threat to us. But that wasn't the case. Key point is Saddam posed immediate threat to the US. Not may be, but immediate danger to us is what Bush claimed.

Both side can make some claims on this since Bush did have some evidence later found to be either bogus or wrong. And Bush's opponents have lot to say since they never found any recently produced chemical/bio weapons. It doesn't count if you find old moldy dusty duds sitting in storage since 1980s. Everyone knew that.

Bush can claim simply he was wrong. But to many, things that went on behind the scene really mounts to big lie. I think Bush's opponent does have stronger argument. I mean it does appear Bush administration just went out to go do whatever it wants, but made effort to cover its track in legal stuff.

Answer 5

No.

Don't think so.

No one lied out there.

The misery was exposed after the Asian Tsunami on what went wrong out there.

At that time.

All info did look real.

With time exposed the misery of the young one.

Through no faults of theirs .

Without being aware of faulty communication system.

Getting kick on the butts by Mr. Big Brother hiding behind the closet

Luke 8-5-8,10-17

What do you think?

Answer 6

he did

Answer 7

Well that assumes that Russian And British Intelligence lied also, and i dont see that as realistic

Answer 8

First off..."WMDs" is a term that journalists made up, the dictionary for journalists is the "AP Stylebook" which is their bible. In military jargon, it's "Nuclear, Biological, Chemical"

Yes and No is a difficult answer, so I'm going to shorten it as much as possible, but hopefully still give enough to answer your question.

Throughout the Cold War the United States did many highly illegal and morally questionable things, mainly to maintain its perceived most powerful nation status -- even to its own citizens! Look up Project MKUltra (for example) - which had to be investigated by congress 3 times before the CIA claimed to have stopped testing average American citizens without their permission/knowledge. And ended with nearly 400 sub-projects (almost all of which involved illegal and dangerous tests on Americans.)

In fact...you'll be surprised to know that at one point the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) even requested that all units within the CIA alert him of their doing anything potentially illegal. That document is known as the "Family Jewels" and under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is now available online to the public. (see link under source section)

NOW...one of the shady things the United States did during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) was play both sides to make sure neither side came out on top. From 1982-1984 the United States SOLD Iraq Biological and Chemical weapons under the authorization of President Ronald Reagen, meanwhile we sold Iran then top of the line F-14 Tomcats (jet of Top Gun film fame).

So...to really answer your question, I'm going to leave you with another one.

Do you think it was in Bush's best interest to tell the world that we knew Saddam had Biological and Chemical weapons because we sold them to him? Esp. Weapons that were used for genocidal purposes. But then again, it wouldn't be the first time we've been involved with genocide. (see IBM and the Holocaust, and the Phoenix Project).

Also...another thing to consider is what Bush's proclaiming that would've resulted in. Because it most likely result in thousands of Desert Storm/Shield veterans suing the US Govt over our denial of the existence of "Gulf War Syndrome" from exposure to American made chemical and biological weapons.

As well as being guilty of crimes against humanity for the genocide of the Kurds by Saddam's usage of OUR weapons.

Answer 9

Yes.

He knew there had been wmds in Iraq because you supplied them.  He also knew that they had been used for the purpose for which you supplied them ie. against Iran and against his own Kurds and Marsh Arabs.  The UN inspectors were also reporting no sign of any.  Bush sent back an accurate CIA report and told them to come up with indications that there MAY be WMD whereupon he flourished it as proof there were.

Knowing the Israelis, they probably bombed a wedding party and then claimed ...  They have learned well off their partners in international crime.