if saddam had wmd's...?

Question

it seems to me there's a lot of confusion on both ends as to what the official reports on iraq possession of wmd's both before and after the iraq war.  many people are citing findings by the iraq survey group as gospel that saddam definitely did not have have wmd's, nor the ability to produce them.  however, from what i've read of the report, all it says is that no wmd's were found during the isg's inspection.  not surprisingly, those opposed to the iraq war have used this as irrefutable proof that bush lied about wmd's to get us into war with iraq.  however, to say that no wmd's (or no evidence of wmd program) were found in a post-war inspection is not the same thing as saying there were no such programs at all.  
for the sake of argument, let's assume that wmd's did exist sometime before the inspection began.  is it at all possible that saddam, knowing inspections were imminent, could have ordered the removal of such weapons?  if so, would the amount of time between when bush announced his belief that saddam had wmd's and the time when the inspection by the isg began be enough time to remove such weapons and the facilities that produce them?
for historical context, bush gave his infamous "axis of evil" speech on jan 29, 2002, declaring saddam had wmd's.  the iraq war began mar 20, 2003, and the 3 month investigation by the isg ended around oct 2, 2003

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

We know he had WMDs my friend? Remember the gassing of the Kurds in the 1988 and the killing of Shia Muslims rebels in 1991 during the aftermath of the 1991 Gulf War?

Anonymous · Answer

Saddam used biological weapons on the Kurdish over the years killing hundred of thousands of them and his own people as well. I think he had them but when Bush announced the US was bringing in UN they were already making plans to move them. It's not real intelligent to ANNOUNCE to your enemy that you're coming to get them so to speak. 
The inspection teams they were probably already moving them that very day of the announcement and destroying the evidence (paper trail) of the wmd program (many warlords, dictators burn, destroy, demolition storage places, shred and burn records of culpable acts/activity when they think there is a legitimate threat to their organization, operation or country)  If they did exist I think it would have maybe taken a couple of months to move the wmd's as well as destroy the facilities. The news were always showing satellite images of suspected facilities but could not confirm whether these were actual facilities for wmd or something else. 
Also according to the news and UN officials there were places that they were not allowed to enter, with cameras or enter at all. Lots of Saddam's hiding places for weapons, certain people of interest and money were underground in bunkers.
Of course the UN didn't find anything they had plenty of time to move them to another country without any suspicion. 
Since it is the Middle East, there's a ton of corruption in the police/armies guarding the borders,(or lack of border patrols at all)  it wouldn't be hard to bribe a guard and take them across a border to a place like Iran where there is a nuclear program but at the time the US was not in direct conflict with Iran. If Saddam used wmd's it would have drawn attention to that region even more and to gave the US even more reason to monitor his activities and  put more military on the ground in Iraq.

? · Answer

Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. They even had names. Saddam, Uday and Qusay. Perhaps those that would defend him think not? Then remember... the Dujail Massacre of 1982, The Barzani Clan Abductions of 1983, The al-Anfal Campaign, The Campaign Against the Marsh Arabs, The Post-Uprising Massacres of 1991. These are only the most public. Remember also his tenure was characterized by day-to-day atrocities that attracted less notice. Hussein's "rape rooms," death by torture, decisions to slaughter the children of political enemies, and the casual machine-gunning of peaceful protesters accurately reflected the policies of Saddam Hussein's regime. Hussein was no misunderstood despotic "madman." He was a monster, a butcher, a brutal tyrant, a genocidal racist.

Anonymous · Answer

We know for sure he had chemical weapons. He used them in his own country. The Chemical attack against the Kurds killed approx. 5,000 and injured an estimated 7,000 to 10,000. Thousands more died of complications, diseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack.

These Chemical weapons are definitely WMDs.

Saam: He was innocent??? Please read the story below. Do you think he's innocent now?

These Chemical weapons are definitely WMDs.

Saam: He was innocent??? Please read the story below. Do you think he's innocent now?

jotacar · Answer

Using your logic, if a thorough search were to be made of your home, and *no* cocaine was found, that would provide proof that you were a drug dealer.

You need to learn about a feature of the brain that is called "cognitive dissonance".  It allows a person to look at any evidence at all, and come up with the answer that he or she was looking for in the first place.

You are determined to believe that G.W.Bush is one of the good guys, and nothing is going to change your mind is it?  Well, in this particular case he was a bad guy.  Accept it, and live with it.

clogher · Answer

If Saddam Hussein had WMDs, wouldn't he have used them to save his own butt?  No, he bluffed about them and that came back to bite him.  But he didn't have them.  We listened to morons who said he did to justify invading.  Bush wanted that war--bad.

kunchuk · Answer

He was innocent. He had nothing. He was blamed just because the U.S and other small fishes wanted the oil

Trending News

if saddam had wmd's...?

7 Answers