Why do you think people are still believing the Lie that WMD were not found in Iraq?

Question

A few weeks back we learned that indeed nuclear material that could be loaded into missiles was found in the early days of the Iraq war, and that the Military didn't report it until it was safely removed from the country under concerns that terrorists would try to obtain, or sabotage the removal. Why is do you think the general public will not pay attention to this, and still believe The American people were lied to.

Answer 1

Mostly because they like to use good common sense and they've found that the Bush administration can't be trusted.

Answer 2

Because they believe what they want. No liberal has ever allowed anything like facts to get in the way of their agenda.

Answer 3

Why are the conservative propagandists still trying to play up small, deteriorated quantities of substances left over from Saddam's dealings with the Reagan Administration as proof of WMD's?

Answer 4

We invaded Iraq because Saddam Hussein's sons invaded the Pentagon.

I can't believe that someone who can read and write to a moderate level, can believe that Iraq was invaded because they had WMD, even Bush doesn't try that one any more.

Answer 5

Sweetheart because what they found was  from the 1st  gulf war and  contained by the UN

Answer 6

well...then you'll be glad to hear that thousands have been killed and billions have been spent to find them huh?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Answer 7

Why are people like you still insisting that WMDs were found when George Bush himself has admitted that they were not found (see link)?

The "nuclear material" to which you refer was yellowcake, which represents an intermediate step between raw uranium and refined uranium.  This is not something "that could be loaded into missiles."  Yellowcake is not a WMD, nor a weapon of any kind.

Think about it, just for a moment:  if what you're saying is true, then why hasn't the Bush administration trumpeted the fact?  For Pete's sake, shortly after the invasion began they tried to pass off as mobile chemical/biological weapons labs two trucks which were found , which were actually designed to produce hydrogen for artillery balloons.  They were identical to ones that Iraq had purchased from the British some years back.  They were tested and found to have not a trace of chemical or biological agents on them.   If Bush and Co. really had something substantive, why haven't they said so?

Look, no one ever said that Saddam did not, at any time, have WMDs, or an active nuclear program.  The issue was whether or not he had stockpiles of weapons and an active nuclear program at the time of the invasion.  As time has shown, that was not the case.

You want to know the best evidence that Saddam did not have these weapons before the invasion?  The fact that no such weapons were used, and that no such weapons have since been used by insurgents or terrorists.  I have studied military history for more than forty years, and I know of no occasion when a country did not use whatever weapons it could bring to bear when it's very existence was threatened.  The fact that Saddam used no WMDs when his back was to the wall is conclusive evidence that he didn't have them.

Answer 8

Alot of stuff was actually found. But it was neither in the quantity or it was in such bad shape-deteriorated over age that it was of little use. At one time Saddam did have a great WMD arsenal, but those days were back in the 1980s during his war with Iran. What little was found after America invaded was nothing compared to what he once had or what we were expecting to find. Thus it was ignored by the media and really not pushed foward by the administration.(which was a mistake on their part-they should have presented every crumb of what they found for justification)

This does not mean that Iraq/Saddam was not a threat. In fact it does point out that he was still interested in restarting his WMD program in time. Had we not hit Iraq back in 1991 when Saddam invaded Kuwait, and had we not stayed on his *** and finally put him out of power during this war the middle east would be in a much larger mess than it is today. He had his eyes on taking Saudi Arabia after he took Kuwait back in 1991 before we stopped him, to those against the war imagine if he had done just that.

Answer 9

Huh? This was yellow cake Uranium that had been under UN supervision since Gulf War I. So you are wrong about the secrets and the lying. And saying yellow cake Uranium is a WMD is like saying a pile of tin cans is a battleship.

Yes, the American public was lied too. Bush and company told us a small, impoverished, war ravaged, sanction ravaged, mismanaged, fractured country with an economy smaller than Belgium on the other side of the planet...was a threat to the USA. Yeah, right.

Not to mention that Bush and every right wing pundit in the country would be screaming it at the top of their lungs if they actually found evidence of a clandestine nuclear weapons program from the Saddam era.

Answer 10

Probably because they didn't hear about it.  There was little or no coverage of this among the liberal news media.