<p>“Destroyed” probably is sealed. Not hard to crack it back open</p>
<p>But again, i hope I’m wrong</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Sounds Shakespearean to me. Think about it: The King, in a loss of nerve on the battlefield, fails to destroy some evil, leaving it in place to fester - which is soon seen as obviously a big mistake. Years later the Prince, having inherited his father’s office, sets out to redeem his father’s error. But despite his good intentions, he, like his dad, falls short of success and instead becomes ensnared in the whole mess, eventually bringing him to ruin. </p>
<p>Doesn’t that sound like the plot summary of a Shakespearean tragedy?</p>
<p>
I’m sure the CIA Shakespeare Desk has already gone over it.</p>
<p>“Destroyed” probably is sealed. Not hard to crack it back open</p>
<p>But again, i hope I’m wrong</p>
<p>Actually, it is quite hard to “crack it back open.” Most WMD’s have a relatively short shelf life. Anything produced prior to 1998 would be useless by this point.</p>
<p>Finally, Saddam’s checmical weapons plant was compeltely destroyed during Gulf War 1 and was never rebuilt, thus the only material he could have had would have been nearly 12 years old by the time GFII rolled around.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And the award for the person who has watched too much CNN and FoxNews goes too…</p>
<p>Yeah okay! I wonder, those vast gravesites in Iraq of Shiites? What has been completely proven is the fact that Hussein did indeed possess nerve gas and used them on Iraqi people in the 70s and 80s. Even the liberal newsmedia admitted that!</p>
<p>How difficult would it be to have a bunker in the desert, hmmm? Iraq, I do declare, has vast uninhabited desert regions where underground chambers could be located. How is that impossible? What about the vast mountain ranges in the area? I am sure all of the tiny crevaces and caves have been thoroughly searched, right? Still, curious though, but how are underground bunkers not feasible?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I may be mistaken, but are not bunkers typically stationed underground?</p>
<p>Roswell would have to have underground bunkers. Where else would they store those UFOs.</p>
<p>^^^FWIW, not a comparrison I would have drawn ;)</p>
<p>“Except that Saddam was virulently secular and on <em>that</em> score Saddam wasn’t a problem”</p>
<p>Having the Koran written in your blood is a secular act? Please. Saddam was nothing but an opportunist and even he saw the writing on the wall vis a vis the coming Islamist hurricane.</p>
<p>“Here’s the problem: Saddam had completely dismantled his WMD project before the war. He just refused to let investigators in to verify it. It has since been verifyed.”</p>
<p>Not true at all.</p>
<p>Great job of posting the DNC talking points, though.</p>
<p>It’s worth remembering that Saddam buried his ultimate WMD–himself–expecting to ride things out. Then along came Task Force 121.</p>
<p>Most bunkers are not buried. If this link works, you can see for yourself what bunkers look like. FYI, the link is to the US Pantex site outside Amarillo, TX. It is the US’s prime nuclear weapons manufacturing facility. Zoom in for a closer look if you want.</p>
<p><a href=“Google Maps”>Google Maps;
<p>
Some are, some aren’t. The fact remains, Saddam had an established history of burying stuff and/or sneaking it out of the country. Doesn’t prove/disprove anything, one way or the other.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay, thanks! You admitted now that it is possible that an underground bunker exists in the vast desert of Iraq packed with kilos of WMDs. Great, now let’s take care of these insurgents and begin searching the desert and mountain regions of Iraq. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You know, Saddam did a pretty good job of concealing himself too seeing that he was never found for almost a year. Oh wait, he was in an underground bunker. ;)</p>
<p>Look up in the sky! It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s a BUNKER!</p>
<p>Justinian,</p>
<p>Maybe you should spend more time on UFOs or some other flight of fancy. </p>
<p>You just don’t seem to understand how hard it is to hide this stuff, AND keep it in functional form and be able to find it again. </p>
<p>The Saddam comparison is a terrible one. People are small; masses of weapons are not. It is easy to disguise people; it is hard to disguise weapons. It is easy to move people…</p>
<p>You get the idea. </p>
<p>But go ahead. Dream on about stuff being hidden. </p>
<p>Me? I’d rather we spent time on the REAL dangers, like terrorists outside Iraq, like Iran and Korea. (or Pakistan, who still seems to be training a lot of terrorists…)</p>
<p><a href=“or%20Pakistan,%20who%20still%20seems%20to%20be%20%5Bb%5Dtraining%20a%20lot%20of%20terrorists%5B/b%5D…”>quote</a>
[/quote]
Oh please! Statements like this are just plain silly made by either ignorant people or deviously meant persuade ignorant people. Yet the proponents of such statements feel sufficiently superior to criticize those that believe that there were WMD in Iraq. How ironic. I suppose that with similar logic one can conclude that the UK and Germany are “training terrorists” as well.</p>
<p>I believe that all the terrorists rolled up were UK citizens. One reportedly had a “highest level” security clearance at Heathrow.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If he did have it, I bet it would still mess you up</p>
<p>Considering that we have complete access to Iraqi records, complete control of scores of high-ranking Iraqi military officers and government officials with leverage such that many would happily tell whatever they knew, it strains credibility beyond the breaking point to suggest that hidden bunkers exist and everyone is just being vewy vewy qwiet. In short, it’s a fantasy. </p>
<p>But as with Aristotelian epicycles upon epicycles to sustain an Earth-centered universe in the face of observation after observation, the fantasies will be sustained and elaborated upon in an effort to cling to a central premise without which one’s whole world view falls apart.</p>
<p>“Considering that we have complete access to Iraqi records, complete control of scores of high-ranking Iraqi military officers and government officials with leverage such that many would happily tell whatever they knew, it strains credibility beyond the breaking point to suggest that hidden bunkers exist and everyone is just being vewy vewy qwiet”</p>
<p>ANd out of the other side of your mouth you’ll criticize the administration for not having enough translaters to actually know what those records say, right?</p>