Ion

I like your:

1.

Not much of a big weapon in number of casualties, compared to how delicate the anthrax handling is.

I thought Bush portrayed Hussein as a mass killer with threatening WMDs, not with 9 letters that are not known to be tied to Hussein anyway.

Ultron

Well that's because Hussein was a mass killer with WMD's. But my the point the other person made about biological and chemical weapons being easier to use than nukes is correct. Which is why I showed just one of the delivery systems to illustrate the point.

Ion

In the 80s, yes.

During the 21st. century, no.

Bush portrayed Hussein as having threatening WMDs in the 21st. century, and that's a lie that U.N. and C.I.A. told Bush not to do.
There are not many examples like that, and your example has no proven ties to Hussein.

On the big scale of big-time WMDs that were alleged by Bush against Hussein, Armchair dissident is correct.

Ultron

That's not a lie. Bill Clinton also made the same claim. And Hillary Clinton, and Tom Daschle, and so on. If you want I can dig out the quotes.

No I didn't say the Anthrax deaths were caused by Iraq. I said that is an example of a biological weapon delivery system.

Well I agree with the rest of the world that Saddam had WMD's and that it was his job to reveal what he did with them. He didn't, so we moved in.

Just think, if we didn't go in, right now we would STILL be asking Saddam to come up with all the WMD's we found before, that he never accounted for how he got rid of them.

Gawdawful

The US, Bush specifically, was claiming Iraq had WMD and Iraq, Saddam's spokespersons, denied having any, weapons inspectors had found none since they went back in last year, doesn't that put the onus on the US to prove they did indeed have them? Well, the US is in there, and still none have been find, who was right, Saddam or Bush? Right now, it's looking like Saddam.
Didn't UN weapons inspectors supervised the location and destruction of missiles and WMD made illegal by UN mandate from 1991-1998?


Warren in Oklahoma, still waiting...

Ion

More water went under the bridge since Clinton.

Specifically, U.N. told C.I.A. that the claim for a Hussein link to Niger in the nuclear, was wrong.
C.I.A. told Bush.
Bush lied, and pretended he was quoting U.K., but in fact when quoting U.K. he was endorsing the claim, which is lying.

Same about the al-Qaeda link.
After Powell's speech in U.N. in February, U.N. and the Germans denied the link.

Now, Bush improvises 'liberation' of Iraq because of lack of WMDs that he initially claimed to know about, and he tries to deliver this 'liberation' with a straight face.

And many more instances.
It is.
"Well I agree with the rest of the world that Saddam had WMD's..." would lead incorrectly to Hussein still having WMDs in 2003:

.) in 2003, Bush said he knows WMDs in Iraq, warred Iraq and found nothing;

.) U.N. said they don't know of WMDs in Iraq, and they want to inspect for them, not to war.

HeatherD

If I recall, from the anthrax incidents here in the US, you have to have some decent technology to make the anthrax a viable weapon. I think it requires a good lab setup to create finely micronized anthrax to deliver it*. Just taking some anthrax spores and mailing them out isn't going to do much damage.

*I'm a little vague on the specifics but that was the general idea.

Loren Pechtel

And note that it didn't do much damage even with weaponized spores. Bioweapons need a dispersal system to be more than terror weapons.

Zar

I just love authoritative self-styled experts who come out of literally nowhere special and, like the thunder of God, declare shit like this and expect people to go, "Duh, oh, mmmkay, whatever you say." For Christs's sake, man, what do you know about it? Everything I've heard, read, etc. points toward bio weapons as being difficult to weaponize, else everyone would do it in a heartbeat.

Explain yourself.

Better yet, don't. No one in here knows shit. Links to expert opinion are about the only thing worth reading.

Ion

Hello, Zar.

Longtime no see.

You are right to point that we lack expertise in order to make technical claims.

Where is Farren?