Before Invading Iraq: Did you think Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

[soccercruiser87]

im not really sure

 

[lw49033]

No, I thought it was a charade right from the start. Even if Iraq had had WMD, they would not have used them on us. Them threatening us is like a gnat threatening a giraffe.

 

[Chuck S]

I'll say that I was somewhat undecided about the possibility of WMDs...I mean I think Americans want to believe their leaders. But, there was just so much conflicting evidence, including reports from the UN weapons inspectors that indicated that Iraq was no threat, that I certainly opposed the action we took from the very beginning.

 

[mom2rb]

No, I thought it was a charade right from the start. Even if Iraq had had WMD, they would not have used them on us. Them threatening us is like a gnat threatening a giraffe.

You said what I was thinking.

 

[lw49033]

I mean I think Americans want to believe their leaders.

And that's the great tragedy of America. At least in dictatorships they have the dignity of recognizing that their leaders are bums. Here we are expected to pretend that just because they got elected that they aren't the gangsters they so obviously are.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

No, I thought it was a charade right from the start. Even if Iraq had had WMD, they would not have used them on us. Them threatening us is like a gnat threatening a giraffe.

 

[marybet]

I really didn't think they had WMD, but I felt that even if they did that they were not a threat to us. They had no way to attack us, no delivery system for their weapons.

Every one likes to complain that the media isn't telling us the good things in Irag, just the bad. If the media had done their job before the war, there might not have been a war. The Bush gang was very good at making anyone who disagreed with them look like a traitor.

 

[Stacerita]

 

[dragonfly18]

If nothing else, Sadam proved that HE was a weapon of mass destruction with all of the death and destruction he caused! This world is a better and safer place without him in power.

(And they have a really big sand box to hide stuff in - we may never find half the stuff they could have buried...weapons, treasures, whatever!)

 

[LauraR]

Well, when Colin Powell went before the UN and said we had clear evidence of weapons of mass destruction I figured we must have solid intelligence showing that. I also figured Saddam had just gotten really good at hiding stuff, which is why the weapons inspectors hadn't found anything when they went back in. I didn't realize the neo-cons had an agenda to invade Iraq and get rid of Saddam even before 9/11. Clearly I gave George Bush way too much benefit of the doubt.

 

[anewvance]

I think they are hiding something big... and doing a good job. Not saying weapons of mass destruction, but something.

 

[JennaTX]

I always thought that they were getting there, I did not think that had achieved anything yet, until like another poster stated when Colin Powell went before the UN and said there was clear evidence. Then I thought, well they obviously had more than we thought. Now I think I was right before, they maybe were getting there but had nothing.

 

[EltonJohn]

No, I thought it was a charade right from the start. Even if Iraq had had WMD, they would not have used them on us. Them threatening us is like a gnat threatening a giraffe.

Agreed.

 

[HaleyB]

I don't see how anyone can still be unsure on this issue. All the evidence has shown that they did not. The inspectors were doing their jobs and the UN plan was working.

Ignor all the evidance if you like, riddle me this. If he had them, then wouldn't the time to use them have been when we were closing in on Bagdad? What was he saving them for?

Ok, maybe they were hidden and he couldn't get to them. So how, exactly, is that a threat?

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

I don't see how anyone can still be unsure on this issue. All the evidence has shown that they did not. The inspectors were doing their jobs and the UN plan was working.

You mean the UN oil-for-food bribe program was working??

 

[Tiziminchac]

I thought they had them. And I still think they had them. I do think they had less than we assumed they had and what they did have was either smuggled out of the country or buried. I've never seen any evidence of their destruction other than the Iraqis saying they were destroyed. Where's the proof they were destroyed? It's a fact that they did indeed have them at one time (they used them). So what happened to them?

I heard a news story the other day that said that Saddam told his generals only a few weeks before they were attacked that they had no WMDs. The generals had supposedly believed they did indeed have these weapons and were disheartened to hear they didn't. If it's true, even the Iraqis thought they had them. I think it was in the NY Times.

 

[lw49033]

I heard a news story the other day that said that Saddam told his generals only a few weeks before they were attacked that they had no WMDs. The generals had supposedly believed they did indeed have these weapons and were disheartened to hear they didn't. If it's true, even the Iraqis thought they had them. I think it was in the NY Times.

The Israelis have 100-200 nuclear weapons. When we disarm them, then I'll listen to crap about how we have to disarm Muslim states.

 

[Nancy]

Based on the intelligence at the time, I thought there just might be something there...wasn't sure it was a reason for us to go there though. I really, really, really wanted them to find anything...big or small so the intelligence was right.

 

[Teejay32]

I said Saddam was a WMD. I underestimated him.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

The Israelis have 100-200 nuclear weapons. When we disarm them, then I'll listen to crap about how we have to disarm Muslim states.

Do you think Israel is going to hit us with a nuclear weapon?