At 1/31/04 04:32 PM, Jimsween wrote:
I am still convinced he has WMD, because of the fact that he did have them, and there is no evidence whatsoever that he got rid of them.
There i sno eviudence what so ever the Bush still isnt an alcoholic and doing drugs.
First of all, Saddam kept no records whatsoever of his destroying the weapons, no files, no videotapes, nothing at all.
Disposal Log entery 2435: Today me and Mohammad Mohammad destroyed 3 tons of poison gas. M and M as I like to call him seems to be devloping some wierd skin rash.
Second, It is going to take 6 years for US to destroy just a few tons of chemical weapons in pennsylvania, and there is still going to be heavy concentrations of them in the air, but low and behold, Iraq was able to destroy a massive amount, in just a 10 years, without a trace of them in the air.
OK I cannot explain the reasoning behind nothing in the air, but the US hasnt been going non-stop, they take their time since they are in no rush. Plus the US has a bigger stockpile. Iraq could just have taken them all out into the desert one night and made a huge bonfire. Or perhaps it was dumped into the ocean.
Third, since the invention of GPS, Saddam would have been able to simply bury them, keep the coordinates, and they would be virtually invisible until the day he wanted to get them back.
I think someone would notice the excavation of that much land. If they can find a mass grave with four bodies in it Im sure they can find a bunker with several tons of poison gas.
And fourth, if Saddam didn't have weapons, why did he struggle so much? If he just rolled over and let the weapons inspectors go everywhere and let US do whatever it wants, he could have stayed in power for the rest of his life.
Matter of princeple maybe? HEy I dont have drugs in my room, but if the cops show up and want to take a peek in my room Im still saying not without a warrant.
It just doesn't add up.
Nothing ever does.