Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Um no. Jennifer Burke wrote the article to which the OP linked. You seem to be mistaking a secondary source (Julian Barnes) for the author of the article (Jennifer Burke).
Certainly you can comprehend the difference between Burke's article and Barnes' article, can you not?
How fine are going to split this hair?
You wanna argue the source, OK, it's the State Department...not some Tea Party blog as you seem to be trying to assert.
It was first published in the WSJ, so we're not talking about a tin foil conspiracy by people who put tape over their laptop webcams so the CIA can't see them.
The story is legit.
The munitions contain an unknown quantity of sarin.
It was there before the Iraq War started.
Last edited by Ibginnie; 06-21-2014 at 04:51 PM..
Reason: profanity
Actually, it's sarin and since when do suicide bombers care about leaky sarin containers?
"Although the damaged Bunker 13 at Muthanna contained thousands of sarin-filled rockets, the presence of leaking munitions and unstable propellant and explosive charges made it too hazardous for UNSCOM inspectors to enter. Because the rockets could not be recovered safely, Iraq declared the munitions in Bunker 13 as “destroyed in the Gulf War” and they were not included in the inventory of chemical weapons eliminated under UNSCOM supervision."
UNSCOM left Iraq in 19-bloody-98. The ammunition predates 1991. Seriously, is it the idea of time progressing linearly that has Republicans so befuddled? Or do you think sarin won't degrade? Gasoline won't stay stable for that long.
Frontpagemag is deliberately feeding you bad information, yet I sense you're not going to stop trusting them. Sad.
You wanna argue the source, OK, it's the State Department...not some Tea Party blog as you seem to be trying to assert.
It was first published in the WSJ, so we're not talking about a tin foil conspiracy by people who put tape over their laptop webcams so the CIA can't see them.
The story is legit.
The munitions contain an unknown quantity of sarin.
It was there before the Iraq War started.
Bush was right and the ****in' retards that have been running around telling us they knew there were no WMDs in Iraq are not only wrong about the weapons but also lied about what they know.
You should really contact Julian Barnes and tell him he is burying the lead and that Jennifer Burke scooped him with "Bush Vindicated!"
And, by the way, the other words in an article, like those placed around a primary source like the State Department and a secondary source like Julian Barnes, make a difference. If you actually took the time to read them, you'd know that.
You wanna argue the source, OK, it's the State Department...not some Tea Party blog as you seem to be trying to assert.
It was first published in the WSJ, so we're not talking about a tin foil conspiracy by people who put tape over their laptop webcams so the CIA can't see them.
The story is legit.
The munitions contain an unknown quantity of sarin.
It was there before the Iraq War started.
Bush was right and the ****in' retards that have been running around telling us they knew there were no WMDs in Iraq are not only wrong about the weapons but also lied about what they know.
So, how come in the 6 years he was "in control" of Iraq, he never ordered those things you're calling "wmds" destroyed?
Come on!
That was the whole purpose of that brilliant military move, according to him, Chicken Dick Cheney, and Condi.
They had to save the world from the peril of Saddam's wmds! More than a little odd that he'd just leave 'em in place when they're SO deadly.
So Bush the Lesser just messed up the mission, is that it? A bunker known since at least 1998 to contain OMG!-scary WMD, and Duhbya's team just plain forgot to deal with them? Is that the bill of goods you're selling now? And that's supposed to vindicate the war somehow? 4000 dead, 30,000 maimed, untold suffering and bereavement, AND the single example of WMD was just overlooked?
Think before you spin, because you've just accused the GWB admin of being less competent than even I would. And I maintain they couldn't pour p.ss out of boot if it had written instructions on the heel.
Haven't been paying attention?
The bunker was deemed too dangerous to investigate and sealed in place.
The people there now don't care about dangerous.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
