Kay Says No WMD Stocks Found in Iraq

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

dexvx

Diamond Member
Feb 2, 2000
3,899
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Um, it proves that 1) the UN was hapless in determining if Saddam was in compliance and 2) that he was keeping the programs alive.

It does not prove, as your deluded mind thinks, that there are no WMD.

Actually, it proves that:

1) The UN needed more time. The US Inspection teams with their unfettered access has already had twice the time the UN team had and produced the same results (some possible evidence, but we need to be more sure...).

2) This groundbreaking report is basically the same report the UN team wrote. Basically, we think there is evidence, but we need mroe time to justify that claim.

I just find it ironic that when the UN, which produced reports very similar to this, called for more time for inspections, the neocons were b!tching away. Now that the US needs more time (they've already had ~2x the time of the UN team), the neocons say, "Give them more time [and money]."
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,272
1
0
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Nice title, you sap.

The team has discovered dozens of WMD-related activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during inspections that began in late 2002, Kay said in his statement.

Surprised you didn't edit that out.

The title says "No WMD stocks found in Iraq"

Does WMD related activities = WMD?

Significant amounts of equipment = WMD?

Why does he need to edit that out? What's wrong with his title?

You Bushies can't handle the truth can you. Now see if you guys and Bush can repay us the hundred something plus billion we just spent on this sorry excuse of a war.

Um, it proves that 1) the UN was hapless in determining if Saddam was in compliance and 2) that he was keeping the programs alive.

It does not prove, as your deluded mind thinks, that there are no WMD.

Wait, first things first. We were not told Iraq had WMD programs, we were told Iraq had WMD specifically. Where are the WMD, and I am talking about the WMD not the program that you guys are so sure Iraq had?

Second, leave the determination if Saddam was in compliance to UN. Like Kay and the Bush admin is an impartial judge if those "WMD related activities" or "Significant amount of equipment" are really WMD related, or if they have been disclosed by Iraqi gov. or if they really violate any resolution.

Third, it's true that Kay's report does not prove that there are no WMD, but where is the proof that there WAS WMD? Bush was either lying or just an idiot who didn't know what he was talking about when he said Iraq had WMD (again, WMD and not programme) when there was/and still is no fact to support that. Who is gonna be responsible for the lives lost, billions spent for the war started by lie or incompetancy.

As far as I recall, we were told that Iraq had not accounted for materials that could be used to develop biochem WMD. Is Iraq not a threat if they don't have any WMD but have the capacity to manufacture it on short notice?
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

As far as I recall, we were told that Iraq had not accounted for materials that could be used to develop biochem WMD. Is Iraq not a threat if they don't have any WMD but have the capacity to manufacture it on short notice?

This argument is so tired. Of course Iraq could be considered a threat. So could a dozen other countries that don't like us. The TRUE question is whether Iraq constituted a clear and imminent threat to our country, and whether it was absolutely necessary to launch a pre-emptive unilateral war. That's the question up for debate. It always was and always has been. By trying to spin it as either "War right now" or "total appeasement of Saddam" you insult the intelligence of every single thoughtful person in the world.

There were many many many more solutions to the threat Saddam posed than preemptive unilateral war. I don't understand why people for the war refuse to understand that.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

As far as I recall, we were told that Iraq had not accounted for materials that could be used to develop biochem WMD. Is Iraq not a threat if they don't have any WMD but have the capacity to manufacture it on short notice?

This argument is so tired. Of course Iraq could be considered a threat. So could a dozen other countries that don't like us. The TRUE question is whether Iraq constituted a clear and imminent threat to our country, and whether it was absolutely necessary to launch a pre-emptive unilateral war. That's the question up for debate. It always was and always has been. By trying to spin it as either "War right now" or "total appeasement of Saddam" you insult the intelligence of every single thoughtful person in the world.

There were many many many more solutions to the threat Saddam posed than preemptive unilateral war. I don't understand why people for the war refuse to understand that.


Because it gives them hard ons to sit at home wrapped in the flag and watch all those pretty high tech toys and tough all American soldiers woop up on some foriegners in some other country.

It makes them feel strong and safe. Watching some diplomats or weapons inspectors doesn't really do much for the ego does it?
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Nice title, you sap.

The team has discovered dozens of WMD-related activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during inspections that began in late 2002, Kay said in his statement.

Surprised you didn't edit that out.

The title says "No WMD stocks found in Iraq"

Does WMD related activities = WMD?

Significant amounts of equipment = WMD?

Why does he need to edit that out? What's wrong with his title?

You Bushies can't handle the truth can you. Now see if you guys and Bush can repay us the hundred something plus billion we just spent on this sorry excuse of a war.

Um, it proves that 1) the UN was hapless in determining if Saddam was in compliance and 2) that he was keeping the programs alive.

It does not prove, as your deluded mind thinks, that there are no WMD.

Wait, first things first. We were not told Iraq had WMD programs, we were told Iraq had WMD specifically. Where are the WMD, and I am talking about the WMD not the program that you guys are so sure Iraq had?

Second, leave the determination if Saddam was in compliance to UN. Like Kay and the Bush admin is an impartial judge if those "WMD related activities" or "Significant amount of equipment" are really WMD related, or if they have been disclosed by Iraqi gov. or if they really violate any resolution.

Third, it's true that Kay's report does not prove that there are no WMD, but where is the proof that there WAS WMD? Bush was either lying or just an idiot who didn't know what he was talking about when he said Iraq had WMD (again, WMD and not programme) when there was/and still is no fact to support that. Who is gonna be responsible for the lives lost, billions spent for the war started by lie or incompetancy.

I will agree there has been intel failure, but there has been a worldwide intel failure. I dont think there was a member of the security council that Saddam was not hiding something. The CIA needs to be investigated for this failure.

If UN had been willing to back the use of force, I think we would have seen Saddam capitulate. The UN was not willing to use force and was quite willing to give saddam the benefit of a doubt.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
quotes from Kays report:

We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002. The discovery of these deliberate concealment efforts have come about both through the admissions of Iraqi scientists and officials concerning information they deliberately withheld and through physical evidence of equipment and activities that ISG has discovered that should have been declared to the UN.
* A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

* A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.

* Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

* New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.

* Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).

* A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.

* Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.

* Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.

* Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.

With regard to biological warfare activities, which has been one of our two initial areas of focus, ISG teams are uncovering significant information - including research and development of BW-applicable organisms, the involvement of Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) in possible BW activities, and deliberate concealment activities. All of this suggests Iraq after 1996 further compartmentalized its program and focused on maintaining smaller, covert capabilities that could be activated quickly to surge the production of BW agents.

A very large body of information has been developed through debriefings, site visits, and exploitation of captured Iraqi documents that confirms that Iraq concealed equipment and materials from UN inspectors when they returned in 2002. One noteworthy example is a collection of reference strains that ought to have been declared to the UN. Among them was a vial of live C. botulinum Okra B. from which a biological agent can be produced. This discovery - hidden in the home of a BW scientist - illustrates the point I made earlier about the difficulty of locating small stocks of material that can be used to covertly surge production of deadly weapons. The scientist who concealed the vials containing this agent has identified a large cache of agents that he was asked, but refused, to conceal. ISG is actively searching for this second cache.

There are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous.


Kays conclusions:

1. Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons.

2. In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn.

3. In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre.


And this what earned Saddam a B for cooperation.
linkage
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Nice title, you sap.

The team has discovered dozens of WMD-related activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during inspections that began in late 2002, Kay said in his statement.

Surprised you didn't edit that out.

The title says "No WMD stocks found in Iraq"

Does WMD related activities = WMD?

Significant amounts of equipment = WMD?

Why does he need to edit that out? What's wrong with his title?

You Bushies can't handle the truth can you. Now see if you guys and Bush can repay us the hundred something plus billion we just spent on this sorry excuse of a war.

Um, it proves that 1) the UN was hapless in determining if Saddam was in compliance and 2) that he was keeping the programs alive.

It does not prove, as your deluded mind thinks, that there are no WMD.

Wait, first things first. We were not told Iraq had WMD programs, we were told Iraq had WMD specifically. Where are the WMD, and I am talking about the WMD not the program that you guys are so sure Iraq had?

Second, leave the determination if Saddam was in compliance to UN. Like Kay and the Bush admin is an impartial judge if those "WMD related activities" or "Significant amount of equipment" are really WMD related, or if they have been disclosed by Iraqi gov. or if they really violate any resolution.

Third, it's true that Kay's report does not prove that there are no WMD, but where is the proof that there WAS WMD? Bush was either lying or just an idiot who didn't know what he was talking about when he said Iraq had WMD (again, WMD and not programme) when there was/and still is no fact to support that. Who is gonna be responsible for the lives lost, billions spent for the war started by lie or incompetancy.

As far as I recall, we were told that Iraq had not accounted for materials that could be used to develop biochem WMD. Is Iraq not a threat if they don't have any WMD but have the capacity to manufacture it on short notice?

As far as you recall? You are excercising selective recall. Would you like to read what your the lies your fearless leader said in his own words? Bush's words contradict what you recall. I think you know that. That would make you just another in a very long and rapidly growing line of Bush supporting liars.

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
United Nations Address
September 12, 2002
"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons."
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
Radio Address
October 5, 2002
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons."
"We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."
"We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States."
"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his "nuclear mujahideen" - his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."
Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
October 7, 2002
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003


"As far as I recall, we were told that Iraq had not accounted for materials that could be used to develop biochem WMD. Is Iraq not a threat if they don't have any WMD but have the capacity to manufacture it on short notice?"

You are ridiculous.
 

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2001
4,260
0
0
Where are the Conservative spin doctors

why don't you read the actual report before you draw your uninformed conclusions..oh i forgot, liberals
don't like to hear/read facts, you just start yelling conservatives are "stupid" and "immoral"

actual report!

executive summary of article: after three months of searching, lots of extremely disturbing facts have come to light, all of which support Bush's decision (authorized by a overwhelming majority of democrats and republican congressional members) to invade Iraq.

the search so far has been far from comprehensive (example - "there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous."

Conservative Spin? - Read the freaking report..it doesn't sound anything like the spin that has been put out there by the Democrats.....

 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Where are the Conservative spin doctors

why don't you read the actual report before you draw your uninformed conclusions..oh i forgot, liberals
don't like to hear/read facts, you just start yelling conservatives are "stupid" and "immoral"

actual report!

executive summary of article: after three months of searching, lots of extremely disturbing facts have come to light, all of which support Bush's decision (authorized by a overwhelming majority of democrats and republican congressional members) to invade Iraq.

the search so far has been far from comprehensive (example - "there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous."

Conservative Spin? - Read the freaking report..it doesn't sound anything like the spin that has been put out there by the Democrats.....


The report itself was spun by the White House. They delayed the report so they could "re-write it" with Kay. They couldn't just leave out the little part about NO WMD IN IRAQ but they did manage to tweak it so they could get some of their supporters to still stay on the bandwagon. Looks like it's working on some of you.

How can we believe them about anything? They've lied before. They continue to lie. They will always lie.


 

heartsurgeon

Diamond Member
Aug 18, 2001
4,260
0
0
i forget to include the latest liberal mantra about conservatives..."liar!"

so basically, conservatives are immoral, stupid liars...

I suppose liberals (Clinton and Gore come to mind) and the liberal media (the New York Times comes to mind) are the only ones you can count on
for the truth these days.
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN

The report itself was spun by the White House. They delayed the report so they could "re-write it" with Kay. They couldn't just leave out the little part about NO WMD IN IRAQ but they did manage to tweak it so they could get some of their supporters to still stay on the bandwagon. Looks like it's working on some of you.

How can we believe them about anything? They've lied before. They continue to lie. They will always lie.
Therefore, you actually expect us to believe YOUR propaganda?
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
i forget to include the latest liberal mantra about conservatives..."liar!"

so basically, conservatives are immoral, stupid liars...

I suppose liberals (Clinton and Gore come to mind) and the liberal media (the New York Times comes to mind) are the only ones you can count on
for the truth these days.

All politicians are liars (some more so than others), but Bush is far from conservative as evidenced by his irresponsible spending and trouncing of our liberties. Why do people still insist on applying this label to Bush? I am more conservative than liberal, but I'm ashamed to admit it if Bush is a true reflection of what being 'conservative' means now.

Personal responsibility and freedom
Upholding of the constitution
Smaller, less intrusive government

Do these things mean nothing to today's conservatives? Because they sure as Hell haven't meant much to Bush and his ilk.