Looks like they found plenty of WMD's. So Bush and the democrats didn't lie after all.


WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq – With Surprising Results
By Noah Shachtman  October 23, 2010  |  9:25 am  |  Categories: Iraq

By late 2003, even the Bush White House's staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

But for years afterward, WikiLeaks' newly-released Iraq war documents reveal, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins, and uncover weapons of mass destruction.

An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn't reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration's most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam's toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.

In August 2004, for instance, American forces surreptitiously purchased what they believed to be containers of liquid sulfur mustard, a toxic "blister agent" used as a chemical weapon since World War I. The troops tested the liquid, and "reported two positive results for blister." The chemical was then "triple-sealed and transported to a secure site" outside their base.

Three months later, in northern Iraq, U.S. scouts went to look in on a "chemical weapons" complex. "One of the bunkers has been tampered with," they write. "The integrity of the seal [around the complex] appears intact, but it seems someone is interesting in trying to get into the bunkers."


Meanwhile, the second battle of Fallujah was raging in Anbar province. In the southeastern corner of the city, American forces came across a "house with a chemical lab ... substances found are similar to ones (in lesser quantities located a previous chemical lab." The following day, there's a call in another part of the city for explosive experts to dispose of a "chemical cache."

Nearly three years later, American troops were still finding WMD in the region. A armored Buffalo vehicle unearthed a cache of artillery shells "that was covered by sacks and leaves under an Iraqi Community Watch checkpoint. "The 155mm rounds are filled with an unknown liquid, and several of which are leaking a black tar-like substance." Initial tests were inconclusive. But later, "the rounds tested positive for mustard."

In WikiLeaks' massive trove of nearly 392,000 Iraq war logs, there are hundreds of references to chemical and biological weapons. Most of those are intelligence reports or initial suspicions of WMD that don't pan out. In July 2004, for example, U.S. forces come across a Baghdad building with gas masks, gas filters, and containers with "unknown contents" inside. Later investigation revealed those contents to be vitamins.

But even late in the war, WMDs were still being unearthed. In the summer of 2008, according to one WikiLeaked report, American troops found at least 10 rounds that tested positive for chemical agents. "These rounds were most likely left over from the [Saddam]-era regime. Based on location, these rounds may be an AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] cache. However, the rounds were all total disrepair and did not appear to have been moved for a long time."

A small group — mostly of the political right — has long maintained that there was more evidence of a major and modern WMD program than the American people were lead to believe. A few Congressmen and Senators gravitated to the idea, but it was largely dismissed as conspiratorial hooey.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/


Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/#ixzz13C2aHZjQ

Interesting article.  Scares me though to know they had/have this stuff. :o :o

Colin Powell was right after all!

But it is the left that will get us killed.

Had it not been for Bush standing his ground, much of these WMD may have found there way to our very own shores.

Bush Lied, People Died?...My Ass.

The Left Lied, and We Would Have Died, is more like it.

Quote from: Solar on October 23, 2010, 08:57:02 AM
But it is the left that will get us killed.

Had it not been for Bush standing his ground, much of these WMD may have found there way to our very own shores.

Bush Lied, People Died?...My Ass.

The Left Lied, and We Would Have Died, is more like it.

After over 10 years of the democrats screaming about Saddam and his weapons programs, and that he should be removed from power. Then they had the audacity to politicize the issue,  so they could use it against Bush. That was one of the most dishonest and disgusting things they did. Even after they voted for the war, knowing full well many of these weapons existed. They played it like there would be warehouse's full of WMD in specif locations. But of course they knew that wouldn't be the case. This was spread across the country in small caches and small labs that would be much harder for inspectors to uncover.

Quote from: Indy on October 23, 2010, 10:15:44 AM
After over 10 years of the democrats screaming about Saddam and his weapons programs, and that he should be removed from power. Then they had the audacity to politicize the issue,  so they could use it against Bush. That was one of the most dishonest and disgusting things they did. Even after they voted for the war, knowing full well many of these weapons existed. They played it like there would be warehouse's full of WMD in specif locations. But of course they knew that wouldn't be the case. This was spread across the country in small caches and small labs that would be much harder for inspectors to uncover.

Correct Indy.
It's like the left thinks people are as stupid as they are.
If say we were invaded, the enemy would spend the next hundred years uncovering secret underground bunkers where we have things stored or secret labs.

The UN actually thought they had all of Iraq mapped out, but were shown to be the fools they really are.
They were played like a cheap fiddle, but our intell wasn't about to tip their hand, and announce to the World where most were actually hidden, that's why were still uncovering them.

Quote from: Indy on October 23, 2010, 10:15:44 AM
After over 10 years of the democrats screaming about Saddam and his weapons programs, and that he should be removed from power. Then they had the audacity to politicize the issue,  so they could use it against Bush. That was one of the most dishonest and disgusting things they did. Even after they voted for the war, knowing full well many of these weapons existed. They played it like there would be warehouse's full of WMD in specif locations. But of course they knew that wouldn't be the case. This was spread across the country in small caches and small labs that would be much harder for inspectors to uncover.

BUSH didn't push back nearly hard enough.  If he had access to this information, why didn't he use it?  The  Cindy Sheehan crowd dominated the 'debate' with their accusations that "Bush lied us into war" and that Saddam Hussain had no WMD's.  If you ask the average teenager, even if they believe the prewar intlligence was faulty, they believe that the main premise for our taking out Saddam Hussain was to prevent him from using WMD's and that he actually had none.

It's just liek the fraud of "Global Warming", there is not enough push back with factual information to refute the propaganda of the left!  Can anyone explain why?

Anyone going to read Bush's memoirs that is coming out after elections?

Quote from: wally on October 23, 2010, 11:31:49 AM
BUSH didn't push back nearly hard enough.  If he had access to this information, why didn't he use it?  The  Cindy Sheehan crowd dominated the 'debate' with their accusations that "Bush lied us into war" and that Saddam Hussain had no WMD's.  If you ask the average teenager, even if they believe the prewar intlligence was faulty, they believe that the main premise for our taking out Saddam Hussain was to prevent him from using WMD's and that he actually had none.

It's just liek the fraud of "Global Warming", there is not enough push back with factual information to refute the propaganda of the left!  Can anyone explain why?

That was one of the most irritating things about Bush. Some of the most outrageous things that where said about him, and he never really stood up for himself. It's funny when you think about the way he conducted himself under pressure and ridicule, but never pointed a finger at anyone. Then inter Obama, the biggest whinner this country has ever had. His policies are devastating to this country, and when the economy reacts negatively he blames it on Bush.

We rely on what the MSM says and what policains want us to hear too much, losing the power of deductive reasoning. Common sense is what keeps one alive.

To quote an old Asian Philosopher:

"Fear what should be be feared, man was not meant to wrestle a tiger, and only a fool treads on a cobra. For each, by its nature, is danger."

Saddam was a threat with chem weapons or without, (which he obviously had) and had the means to manufacture more, the facilities were still there, the delivery systems were there, that was the smoking gun which we ignored.

The guy tried to have an American president assasinated smuggled in billions of counterfeit dollars, T bills and other negotiables to wreck our economy, many ways to wage war, we ignored them all.

Stupid, truely stupid.


Billy