Apparently: http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,200499,00.html

6/22/2006 3:40:56 AM

fauxnews comment in
3...
2...
1...

6/22/2006 7:38:39 AM

omg Faux News

[Edited on June 22, 2006 at 7:46 AM. Reason : regardless, Bush lied people died...]

6/22/2006 7:42:21 AM

look you sheep...Obviuosly bush planted those there because cheney and rove told him to...he probably got the jews to do it for him....excuse me....the edomites

for real though...im waiting for the libs to respond to this one...

6/22/2006 7:52:24 AM

Quote :

""This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.""

-These are not the weapons of mass destruction that you are looking for

6/22/2006 8:01:49 AM

there were WMD's in iraq

6/22/2006 8:29:33 AM

THESE ARE NOT THE Js YOU'RE LOOKING FOR

6/22/2006 8:59:15 AM

point is next person to go on TV and say there were no WMD is the real "liar"

6/22/2006 9:05:36 AM

my stinky feet are an imminent threat to national security

6/22/2006 9:23:47 AM

THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS
THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMDS

6/22/2006 9:31:20 AM

bush said there were no WMD

so is he wrong again?

6/22/2006 9:42:58 AM

I say who cares?

This war was a fucking waste of tax money. My tax money.

I hate paying taxes at all, and it fucking incenses me to see my money wasted on a worthless fucking war to oust a camel fucking Corleone wannabe.

6/22/2006 9:43:44 AM

you would rather be fighting the terrorists here in raleigh?

6/22/2006 9:47:00 AM

now the war wasnt about not finding WMDs

now its about wasting tax money

whats the trendy liberal talking point gonna be next week?

6/22/2006 10:06:25 AM

The Pentagon came out and said that those shells were pre-Gulf War, and were buried because they were mostly useless. I think they've suffered too much decay to have been of any use. It's kind of like how Saddam just buried other shit he didn't have a use for -- deserts are good for that.

I don't really think these are the WMD's that would validate Republican claims pre-Iraqi Freedom, unless "M" stands for "Minor" and we live in bizarro world.

6/22/2006 10:08:23 AM

so if they sold those pre-91 WMDs to a terrorist organization...the terrorist organization couldnt use any of the chemical agents in the weapons? its one thing to say that all the mechanisms of the weapons arent perfect enough to use in their original intended way...but i guess a terrorist couldnt turn a pre-1991 airplane into a missile either

6/22/2006 10:10:54 AM

^I think the point of that post was to say that:
1) They were throw aways, not real WMDs
2) Deserts are good for burying things
3) The real WMDs couldn't possible be buried out somewhere in the desert

6/22/2006 10:14:19 AM

well ive agreed with that since before the war

but some people like to hate on the usa and think the united nations is competent with their lax halfassed weapons inspections

"Hello, McDonalds? Yes, this is the local health department. We are going to come into your restaurant to check on health and sanitation. But just to let you know, we arent coming for 3 more months. I trust you trustworthy people wouldnt do anything special for our visits"

6/22/2006 10:17:03 AM

Quote :

"the terrorist organization couldnt use any of the chemical agents in the weapons?"

I don't think they could. I think more potent stuff is under your kitchen sink, due to the fact that this stuff suffered such decay.

6/22/2006 10:18:17 AM

^ Correct, a 100lb odd artillery shell is not easily concealed in most urban areas in the US, and extracting the agent would be no simple task and probably more hazardous to the terrorist than his target. Finally, chemical armed artillery shells were meant to be fired as part of a larger fires plan at the battalion or above level to be effective against large numbers of people, one or two decrepit shells wasting in the Iraqi desert are hardly WMD.

6/22/2006 10:25:53 AM

Quote :

"one or two decrepit shells wasting in the Iraqi desert are hardly WMD."

so now WMD's are not WMD's. very interesting logic.

6/22/2006 10:30:43 AM

Quote :

"I say who cares? This war was a fucking waste of tax money. My tax money. I hate paying taxes at all, and it fucking incenses me to see my money wasted on a worthless fucking war to oust a camel fucking Corleone wannabe. "

This is basically my stance as well.

6/22/2006 10:33:35 AM

Quote :

"so now WMD's are not WMD's. very interesting logic."

I don't believe these shells have "mass destruction" capabilities. Neither does the Pentagon.

6/22/2006 10:34:16 AM

i dont know about that, i think the pentagon could do a pretty good bit of destruction.

6/22/2006 10:35:25 AM

so we find wmd's, however old and out of commission they are

yet people are still denying that saddam ever had wmd's

ridiculous

6/22/2006 10:37:40 AM

Quote :

"jbtilley: 1) They were throw aways, not real WMDs 2) Deserts are good for burying things 3) The real WMDs couldn't possible be buried out somewhere in the desert "

jbtilley is my new favorite TSB poster

6/22/2006 10:45:39 AM

Quote :

"so now WMD's are not WMD's. very interesting logic."

Please show me how a bunch of corroded shells full of sarin from 1991 or before are going to cause anything considered close to "mass destruction".

Quote :

"Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

As the report says, these are PRE-WAR munitions. This is the shit we left behind the last time we fucked it up over there. They contain degraded mustard gas or sarin.

If you continue to read the article, it discusses the danger these weapons pose as an environmental hazard. It's hazardous trash.

Quote :

"Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions. "This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.""

This is a defense department official saying this. These were not useable as weapons.

6/22/2006 10:46:46 AM

Quote :

"i dont know about that, i think the pentagon could do a pretty good bit of destruction."

Quote :

"so we find wmd's, however old and out of commission they are yet people are still denying that saddam ever had wmd's ridiculous"

Nobody claims that Saddam never had WMD's. We sold them to him. He used them on the Kurds. We know this. I think those reasons alone were good enough justification along with the song and dance Saddam played with the inspections to go to war.

What I'm saying is, these have been buried for years and years with no intention (or capability) of ever being used in an effective manner. To claim that this find is suddenly the WMD's that prove the war was just is beyond wishful thinking.

6/22/2006 10:48:56 AM

well for one thing, some people DO claim that they never had them

but the more important thing is that some of the weapons they found were in better condition than others...but if you are comfortable with some al qaeda terrorists buying a mustard gas bomb because its "old" then i feel sorry for your mother

6/22/2006 11:20:32 AM

Quote :

"THERE are the weapons of mass fucking destruction"

No shit. We have the receipt.

6/22/2006 11:23:25 AM

Quote :

"well for one thing, some people DO claim that they never had them"

Yes, idiots.
We could argue that point that some people may claim that they never had any chemical agents but most people would concede that those people are idiots and just ignore that point.

6/22/2006 11:25:51 AM

Quote :

"Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq. Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions."

In any case, Bush Co. has already acknowledged they screwed up on the WMD issue.

6/22/2006 11:31:30 AM

Quote :

"but if you are comfortable with some al qaeda terrorists buying a mustard gas bomb because its "old" then i feel sorry for your mother"

No, I'm not comfortable with those guys having any weaponry. Islamic extremists aren't mature enough to be trusted with grade school scissors.

However, to claim that these weapons were either a) operable or b) going to be sold is just silly. Just give this up, man. Fight the good fight on something that makes some damn sense. You should get out of the habit of rabidly supporting/arguing for anything that supports your claims, regardless of the authenticity or common sense of the situation.

6/22/2006 11:47:15 AM

^^in any case, Dem Co still hasnt acknowledged that the WMDs were just one of the dozen plus reasons for the war

^again, the point is that if the UN inspectors come into Iraq and search for months and dont find any WMDs...not even these pre-1991 defunct WMDs...yet our soldiers find over 500 of them by accident...again logic would say if you find something, its proof it exists...if you dont find something, its not proof it doesnt exist...sigh

6/22/2006 12:25:35 PM

Supporters of the war have been saying this since the first broke-ass artillary shell was found.

Santorum is just trying to make it news by holding a press conference. Hey, it might even help him catch up to Casey

6/22/2006 12:53:08 PM

6/22/2006 1:11:25 PM

Quote :

"again, the point is that if the UN inspectors come into Iraq and search for months and dont find any WMDs...not even these pre-1991 defunct WMDs...yet our soldiers find over 500 of them by accident...again logic would say if you find something, its proof it exists...if you dont find something, its not proof it doesnt exist...sigh"

Jesus Christ, you are the most intellectually bankrupt member of these forums.

You didn't even read what I said. I'm not saying the WMD's didn't exist. I'm saying that these certainly aren't them. What mass destruction could you cause with those expired, abandoned shells?

6/22/2006 1:16:34 PM

Quote :

"While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal"

you didnt read the declassified report, did you

6/22/2006 1:21:46 PM

He called you intellectually bankrupt. You just gonna' take that, bitch?

6/22/2006 1:22:33 PM

Quote :

"chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal"

you fuckers dont read shit unless its anti-bush do you

6/22/2006 1:34:56 PM

so uuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh what does this change?

6/22/2006 1:38:22 PM

well for one thing, the declassified report says the chemical weapons, while old, are still hazardous and potentially lethal

so they're not as safe as these jackasses wish they were

course these guys hoped they were never found

6/22/2006 1:40:48 PM

Quote :

"well for one thing, the declassified report says the chemical weapons, while old, are still hazardous and potentially lethal"

Yes, if you fucking huff them. Those shells could not be used for "mass destruction". This has already been illustrated.

Anytime something comes out against the President, you're the first spin goon to rush into the thread and fuck it up. Just because a lot of people use tired, inadequate arguments against the President doesn't mean that tired, inadequate arguments in favor of the President are any more okay.

You pretty much suck at intelligent thought.

6/22/2006 1:44:11 PM

Hahah, those agents that could kill tens of thousands?

Yeah, they're potentially lethal now. MASS POTENTIAL FOR SOME small DESTRUCTION

6/22/2006 1:44:30 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

read the report you fucking idiot

6/22/2006 1:44:49 PM

Hey I did read the report. Those shells were potentially lethal, but extremely degraded. Any terrorist would be better off getting their materials elsewhere, these obviously were not the WMD's we went to war over. Shit, this was barely annouced before the Pentagon came out and said the exact same thing.

6/22/2006 1:48:37 PM

1. we didnt go to war over WMDs
2.

Quote :

"Any terrorist would be better off getting their materials elsewhere"

ok expert

6/22/2006 1:50:45 PM

Quote :

"now the war wasnt about not finding WMDs now its about wasting tax money whats the trendy liberal talking point gonna be next week?"

Um, hasn't every conservative said since 2004 that we aren't there for WMDs?

Quote :

"I'm not sure that WMDs were the major reason we went to war."

--Bill Frist

Quote :

"Our mission in Iraq is clear. We're hunting down the terrorists. We're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East"

--George W Bush

Quote :

"It may seem confusing why we're in Iraq; it's not to me. I'm here helping these people so they can live the way we live, not to have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. Others have died for my freedom; now this is my mark."

--George W Bush

Damn those liberals for saying we didn't go to war for WMDs.

[Edited on June 22, 2006 at 1:56 PM. Reason : I said damn them]

6/22/2006 1:55:19 PM

You have smoked yourself god-damned retarded. ^^

Those weapons would not mass-destroy anything, there's a reason they've been in the dirt that long. They weren't being used. They weren't going to be used. They couldn't be used. They're defunct, just like the rotting cantaloupe between your ears.

[Edited on June 22, 2006 at 1:56 PM. Reason : .]

6/22/2006 1:56:25 PM

why don't you guys spend sometime digging up which companies sold him those chemicals

6/22/2006 3:56:31 PM