blargblog

More Line by Line Rebuttal

This time from Stephen Zunes, who tops Mitch Radcliffe's immediate response (linked below)—although Mitch should get props for passion and promptness. Zunes goes not only line by line, but clause by clause:

“…possessed and used weapons of mass destruction,…”

Iraq did use weapons of mass destruction in the 1980s when the regime was being supported by the U.S. government, but not since then.

It also appears that virtually all of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were destroyed or otherwise made unusable some time between five and eight years ago. Neither the United Nations nor the Bush Administration has been able to show any evidence that Iraq possessed such weapons in more recent years.

Weapons of Massawhatawhowa? Who said anything about WMD? It was all about terrorism, remember. But since we're on the subject, Bill Connolly digs up an ABC report that suggests an explanation for all those WMD the Iraqis failed to account for:

Ex-inspectors now say, five months after the U.S. invasion, that the "unaccountables" may have been no more than paperwork glitches left behind when Iraq destroyed banned chemical and biological weapons years ago.

...It was always a "fragile assumption" to expect Iraq to provide a highly detailed, fully consistent and well documented account of all its weapons work, said U.S. defense analyst Carl Conetta. No military can do that, he wrote in a report recapping the Iraq inspections.

The article goes on to mention record-keeping failures by The Pentagon regarding such items as biochem suits and three tons of plutonium! Obviously they were all sold to Al Qaeda. The Pentagon will commence bombing itself shortly.

Posted by kevinmoore at September 8, 2003 01:02 PM | TrackBack