Aylee
Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote:
ORIGINAL: Aylee quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery No, hysteria is jumping to all sorts of "solutions" when the evidence doesn't support the trumped up imminent danger. Like the pretend WMDs. Or the murderous Muslim hoard. Oh my. Even the NYT admitted that they found WMD in Iraq. You do know that several servicemen were hurt by chemical WMDs, right? https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1 But you forget what era those weapons were from that caused the casualties. From YOUR link From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein’s rule. In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. From the link at your link https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/03/world/middleeast/chemical-weapons-iraq-pentagon-secrets.html During the Iraq war, at least 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers were exposed to aging chemical weapons abandoned years earlier. These weapons were not part of an active arsenal. They were remnants from Iraq’s arms program in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war. Many troops who were exposed received inadequate care. None of the veterans were enrolled in long-term health monitoring. Munitions are unaccounted for in areas of Iraq now under control of ISIS. So that means that they were NOT there? Or were NOT found? The question is, "Were WMD found?" The answer is yes.
_____________________________
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.
|