igloo Posted December 7 Report Share Posted December 7 But where are they?Iraqi Colonel: WMD Could've Been Launched in 45 Minutes Sunday, December 07, 2003Saddam Hussein (search) had weapons of mass destruction and his army was capable of firing them off in less than 45 minutes, according to an Iraqi colonel's statements in the London Telegraph.According to Lt. Col. al-Dabbagh, cases of WMD warheads were shipped under cover of darkness to front-line units, including his own, near the end 2002, the Telegraph reported Sunday. In September of 2002 the British government published a controversial intelligence report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, claiming WMD could be launched within 45 minutes. Al-Dabbagh said he believed he was the source of the claim, which was widely criticized as being a ploy by British Prime Minister Tony Blair (search) to gain support for military action in Iraq (search). "I am the one responsible for providing this information," al-Dabbagh, 40, told the Telegraph when shown the dossier. "It is 100 percent accurate." "Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half-an-hour," he was quoted as saying. Al-Dabbagh told the paper that the weapons were Iraqi-manufactured and were designed to be launched from hand-held rocket-propelled grenades. Whether the weapons contained biological or chemical agents was not made clear by al-Dabbagh, the report said. Iraqi military commanders could use the weapons only on the personal orders of Saddam, al-Dabbagh told the paper, adding: "We were told that when the war came we would only have a short time to use everything we had to defend ourselves, including the secret weapon." So why weren't the weapons launched against the allied forces encroaching on Iraq? Al-Dabbagh said the majority of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam. "The West should thank God that the Iraqi army decided not to fight," he told the paper. "If the army had fought for Saddam Hussein and used these weapons there would have been terrible consequences." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghhhhhost Posted December 8 Report Share Posted December 8 yes they decided not to fight and become enslaved........does Al-Dabbagh mean FICTIONAL SOURCE in urdu??i highly doubt Iraqi soldiers wouldnt pull the trigger on WMD's due to their integrity..or the fact that they wont be able to sleep at night... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seximofo2k Posted December 8 Report Share Posted December 8 So basically they are saying they had the weapons at their disposal, but decided not to fight for saddam. So why dont they know where the WMD's are? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghhhhhost Posted December 8 Report Share Posted December 8 the darling iraqi soldiers were so pissed at saadam that they dismantled them and turned them into flower gardens before the US troops came storming in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted December 8 Report Share Posted December 8 The flowers are the weapons of mass destruction Igloo is a weapon of mass dysfunction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted December 9 Report Share Posted December 9 Originally posted by ghhhhhost yes they decided not to fight and become enslaved........does Al-Dabbagh mean FICTIONAL SOURCE in urdu??i highly doubt Iraqi soldiers wouldnt pull the trigger on WMD's due to their integrity..or the fact that they wont be able to sleep at night... How about total annihilation? This is coming from a Iraqi general what more do you need? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 9 Author Report Share Posted December 9 Once again, these morons are exposed as nothing but hypocritical blowhards....They believe every conspiracy theory thrown around as long as it has to do with some evil plan by the U.S. or Bush, or some absurd bullshit promoted by anti-American assholes.............but as soon as something is offered that differs from their pathetic thinking and unrealistic world, they quickly diminish it without even giving it the slightest bit of thought (if they are capable of significant thought that is...which the data suggests otherwise)...And once again, the suckers are exposed easily and as planned........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted December 9 Report Share Posted December 9 Does not seem very credible - the article does not even attempt to address the key question - if "cases and cases" were shipped to the front lines, where are they now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted December 9 Report Share Posted December 9 Originally posted by igloo Once again, these morons are exposed as nothing but hypocritical blowhards....They believe every conspiracy theory thrown around as long as it has to do with some evil plan by the U.S. or Bush, or some absurd bullshit promoted by anti-American assholes.............but as soon as something is offered that differs from their pathetic thinking and unrealistic world, they quickly diminish it without even giving it the slightest bit of thought (if they are capable of significant thought that is...which the data suggests otherwise)...And once again, the suckers are exposed easily and as planned........ It's amazing what more do these loons need a gift wrapped scud full of SADAM'S goodies sent to the NY TIMES??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 9 Author Report Share Posted December 9 Originally posted by raver_mania Does not seem very credible - the article does not even attempt to address the key question - if "cases and cases" were shipped to the front lines, where are they now? I agree...that is why at the beginning of the article I wrote.."where are they then?....But my point is more credibility is given to the most absurd, unrealistic ideas and conspiracy theories by the left, Bush haters, and the anti-American brigade than something that is offered that can possibly have believability..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted December 9 Report Share Posted December 9 It's not about conspiracy theories. It's about probability and logic. If they're able to launch chemical weapons on US troops within "30 minutes notice" they(US troops) should have been able to find it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xpyrate Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 the fact that saddam didn't use these hypothetical wmd proves to me that he doesn't have them. if he is truly as ruthless as to execute his own people and stuff them into mass graves just for dissenting, i am more than sure he wouldn't hesitate to use them on our own troops which had come to take him out of power, in fact the reasons he executed people was because they were a threat to his strangle hold on power. logic dictates that he would've used them had he had wmd at the time of the invasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 10 Author Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by xpyrate the fact that saddam didn't use these hypothetical wmd proves to me that he doesn't have them. if he is truly as ruthless as to execute his own people and stuff them into mass graves just for dissenting, i am more than sure he wouldn't hesitate to use them on our own troops which had come to take him out of power, in fact the reasons he executed people was because they were a threat to his strangle hold on power. logic dictates that he would've used them had he had wmd at the time of the invasion. Son, you have to stop talking about things you have no clue about....you really do...Logic is never something you should try.......Lego perhaps or maybe Beach Barbie, but not logic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghhhhhost Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 all im saying is...if they were capable of doing it..why didnt they do it? if someone is invading my house..im throwin everything at u...from bullets to fuckin refrigerators... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 ...and if it's igloo invading my house I will be throwing bullets.............from an ak47, modified.and Igloo, please continue to show your childish behavior with your immature retorts. It makes xpyrates points even stronger. FASCIST!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xpyrate Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by ghhhhhost all im saying is...if they were capable of doing it..why didnt they do it? if someone is invading my house..im throwin everything at u...from bullets to fuckin refrigerators... exactly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmatas2277 Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by normalnoises ...and if it's igloo invading my house I will be throwing bullets.............from an ak47, modified. i doubt ur skinny tofu eating ass, can even fire off ONE accurate shot with AK-47...maybe a .22 is more up ur alley Rambo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 10 Author Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by ghhhhhost all im saying is...if they were capable of doing it..why didnt they do it? if someone is invading my house..im throwin everything at u...from bullets to fuckin refrigerators... Were they capable of launching a WMD attack in the first Gulf War?......Did they do it?..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 nope and nope.but america did use depleted uranium... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 10 Author Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by marksimons nope and nope.but america did use depleted uranium... Iraq was not capable of using WMD in 1991? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by igloo Were they capable of launching a WMD attack in the first Gulf War?......Did they do it?..... Don't waste your time bud these idiots are stuck in the concrete operational stage of development, they can't think hypothetical enough to imagine that Sadam wouldn't use the WMD 's because then in the Arab worlds view he really did have them and it was just to remove him... They can't fathom that maybe the Iraqi army were so discombobulated from the half ass orders they were recieving from those 2 goons Uday and Qusay, I mean doesn't it say they were restricted unless the order came from Sadam himself? Here's another thought, like I stated before..Maybe the army was just AFRAID to use WMD's... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 10 Author Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by mr mahs Don't waste your time bud these idiots are stuck in the concrete operational stage of development, they can't think hypothetical enough to imagine that Sadam wouldn't use the WMD 's because then in the Arab worlds view he really did have them and it was just to remove him... They can't fathom that maybe the Iraqi army were so discombobulated from the half ass orders they were recieving from those 2 goons Uday and Qusay, I mean doesn't it say they were restricted unless the order came from Sadam himself? Here's another thought, like I stated before..Maybe the army was just AFRAID to use WMD's... Like I have said before, it is amazing that they support every absurd, unrealistic idea in creation, as long as it has something to do with Bad Boy Bush or the evil American govt...and use their fuzzy logic to support the unsupportable...But when it is the other way around, it is amazing that they lose the power to apply their "selective" logic...They just get continually exposed as hypocritical blowhards who have a false sense of purpose by being critical of the U.S. (irrespective of foundation) cloaked in the protection of "patriotism". (for marksimon, simply anti-American) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seximofo2k Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by igloo Were they capable of launching a WMD attack in the first Gulf War?......Did they do it?..... Little different situation. The first Iraqi war our stated goal was to take Iraq only out of Kuwait and Saddam assumed we would stop their which we did as well as a threat from Nuclear retaliation which added the deterrent. Iraqi freedom's clear goal was to oust Saddam. The threat of Nukes was obviously still their yet in this round it was all or nothing what did he have to lose by using them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted December 10 Author Report Share Posted December 10 Originally posted by seximofo2k Little different situation. The first Iraqi war our stated goal was to take Iraq only out of Kuwait and Saddam assumed we would stop their which we did as well as a threat from Nuclear retaliation which added the deterrent. Iraqi freedom's clear goal was to oust Saddam. The threat of Nukes was obviously still their yet in this round it was all or nothing what did he have to lose by using them? What did WHO have to lose by using them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted December 10 Report Share Posted December 10 WMD is a shit term.with regards to nuclear weapons in Iraq.THEY DIDN'T EVER HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. EVER!let's just clear that one up.with regards to chemical weapons, yeah, they probably did have some at the time, but bear stuff like this in mind.they used them against the kurds, and against the iranians.however, I believe when they made these attacks they had satellite data from the US to help them, because, at this time saddam was one of 'our' despots.the amount of knowledge shown by people on this subject, both sides of the debate is starting to scare me...one historical annecdote which might be telling is that apparently washington gave the nod to saddam to invade kuiwiat, not overtly, but as these things are done in diplomatic circles.go on, hit him, *hits him*, right you bastard you hit him, get him!you see...Saddam was once given lists of communist dissident types by the CIA, wonder what happend to them!iraq was armed by the west, just like many other despots.remember, Bush Sr encouraged the Iraqi people to rise up, and then promptly left them pissing in the wind.this helped fill some of the mass graves which people have cited as 'evidence' that this war/occupation/theft/liberation/triumph of democracy is justified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.