Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

underpants

(195,615 posts)
31. No - from the article
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 12:09 PM
Oct 2014

The discoveries of these chemical weapons did not support the government’s invasion rationale.

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Mr. Bush insisted that Mr. Hussein was hiding an active weapons of mass destruction program, in defiance of international will and at the world’s risk. United Nations inspectors said they could not find evidence for these claims.

Then, during the long occupation, American troops began encountering old chemical munitions in hidden caches and roadside bombs. Typically 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets, they were remnants of an arms program Iraq had rushed into production in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war.

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.

In case after case, participants said, analysis of these warheads and shells reaffirmed intelligence failures. First, the American government did not find what it had been looking for at the war’s outset, then it failed to prepare its troops and medical corps for the aged weapons it did find.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

K&R Solly Mack Oct 2014 #1
I read it. Everyone should. AngryAmish Oct 2014 #2
Everyone should - though it is sickening karynnj Oct 2014 #6
A very long time ago (a couple of decades) I was sitting on the metro reading The Washington Post Samantha Oct 2014 #8
From this Report...Further Snip: KoKo Oct 2014 #3
Wait, so Sadam really DID have chemical weapons? I thought that was suposed to be made up kelly1mm Oct 2014 #4
I'm confused too PAProgressive28 Oct 2014 #5
These are not the WMD. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #11
No the claim was for a then current active program - and nuclear was implied karynnj Oct 2014 #7
Link to reports on this incident: JHB Oct 2014 #16
Thanks - karynnj Oct 2014 #19
No, we mostly knew about these old ones SeattleVet Oct 2014 #9
No. Read. The. Article. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #10
Seconded n/t Strelnikov_ Oct 2014 #13
Yes, youre confused markpkessinger Oct 2014 #17
No- from the article underpants Oct 2014 #30
Yes, we gave them to Iraq when poppy bush was ruling in rayguns name. They were old and probably jwirr Oct 2014 #34
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2014 #12
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2014 #14
K&R ReRe Oct 2014 #15
So what they are saying is, Bush was right Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #18
If you read the article you will find that Bush was indeed wrong Johonny Oct 2014 #20
Then why are they reporting Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #21
If you read the article you will find that Bush was indeed wrong Johonny Oct 2014 #22
And you can keep making spinning Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #25
BULLSHIT Hissyspit Oct 2014 #27
Well unlike you Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #36
No. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #38
Saddam Hussein did not have WMDs. Gormy Cuss Oct 2014 #39
So having 5,000 chemical shells Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #40
All aged, some empty, many rusty, corroded, leaking pinboy3niner Oct 2014 #44
No, it doesn't. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #46
Youarenotthetruth, please read this article Hissyspit Oct 2014 #33
I did read the article Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #37
No there's not. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #41
Because Iamthetruth Oct 2014 #47
Let's look at it another way - why wouldn't we have heard about it? underpants Oct 2014 #45
They control the site that was a CW factory before 1991... JHB Oct 2014 #23
Saddam did not have an active WMD program. Hugabear Oct 2014 #24
That was one long article underpants Oct 2014 #35
NO. READ THE GODDAMNED ARTICLE. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #26
This explains the conversation I just heard at lunch underpants Oct 2014 #28
It's insane. Hissyspit Oct 2014 #29
He and others already got this packaged and spun underpants Oct 2014 #32
Check out this crap: Hissyspit Oct 2014 #42
No - from the article underpants Oct 2014 #31
K&R woo me with science Oct 2014 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Big NYT Story: The Secret...»Reply #31