Are Iraqi WMDs Now in Syria? Confirmation or Retraction of Claims?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter damgo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the claims regarding the potential movement of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) into Syria, as well as the confirmation or retraction of reports about chemical weapons found in Iraq. Participants explore the implications of these claims within the context of ongoing military operations and political narratives.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the claims that Iraq has moved all its WMDs to Syria, suggesting it may be a political maneuver to prepare for the absence of WMDs in Iraq.
  • Others report on recent findings by U.S. troops in Iraq, including potential chemical weapons, and argue against dismissing the possibility of WMDs still being present.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliability of media reports on WMD discoveries, with references to past instances where claims were later proven false.
  • Some participants speculate that if WMDs were found in Syria, there would still be disbelief among certain groups, indicating a divide in perspectives on the issue.
  • There are mentions of ongoing investigations into reported chemical weapons and the need for further analysis before drawing conclusions.
  • Participants note the potential for political implications surrounding the findings, with some suggesting that Congress is preparing for the possibility of no WMDs being found.
  • Several participants express frustration over the media's handling of WMD reports, calling for more caution in reporting unconfirmed findings.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion features multiple competing views, with no consensus on the existence of WMDs in Iraq or their potential relocation to Syria. Participants express varying degrees of skepticism and belief regarding the claims and the reliability of reported findings.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of current information, including the dependence on unconfirmed reports and the challenges in verifying the presence of chemical weapons. There are also references to the evolving nature of the situation and the time required for thorough investigations.

damgo
Several politicians, among them Sen. Warner (R-VA), the chair of the Armed Services Committee, have been saying today on CNN/MSNBC that they are sure Iraq has moved all its WMDs into Syria.

Now I am wondering if this is possibly true, or whether it's preparation for not finding any WMDs at all in Iraq -- which would be very embarrassing, to say the least, for this administration.

Also, has anyone heard confirmation or retraction of the claims of chem weapons found in the Euphrates? The story seems to have (surprise!) disappeared completely.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by damgo
Several politicians, among them Sen. Warner (R-VA), the chair of the Armed Services Committee, have been saying today on CNN/MSNBC that they are sure Iraq has moved all its WMDs into Syria.

Now I am wondering if this is possibly true, or whether it's preparation for not finding any WMDs at all in Iraq -- which would be very embarrassing, to say the least, for this administration.

Also, has anyone heard confirmation or retraction of the claims of chem weapons found in the Euphrates? The story seems to have (surprise!) disappeared completely.

Surprise, surprise...they want to attack Syria, they transfer their suspiscions there. After that, I wonder if the WMD will teleport to Iran?
 
I'm just reading on the latest news that
''troops in Karbala believe they have found chemical weapons in a drum rigged with explosives at a bridge''
and
''The US army says it has found evidence in an Iraqi training facility of what it belives are chemical weapons, including VX''
and that both discoveries are undergoing further investigation.

so I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss that they will not find any WMDs in Iraq. There are a lot of places still to look.
 
^^^ Where are you seeing that? It's not shown up on any of my sources yet.

Remember the 'chemical weapons plant' in Najaf that turned out to be bunk, and the 'suspicious white powder' that turned out to be explosives, and... I could go on, but some media outlets seem to be eager to keep immediately reporting WMD finds that later turn out to be bunk. I trust unconfirmed chem weapon finds now about as much as I trust the wacky Iraqi info minister when he claims the destruction of dozens of American tanks.
 
Originally posted by Mulder
I'm just reading on the latest news that
''troops in Karbala believe they have found chemical weapons in a drum rigged with explosives at a bridge''
and
''The US army says it has found evidence in an Iraqi training facility of what it belives are chemical weapons, including VX''
and that both discoveries are undergoing further investigation.

so I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss that they will not find any WMDs in Iraq. There are a lot of places still to look.

Report on the front page, the inevitable retraction...page 17?
 
Originally posted by Zero
Report on the front page, the inevitable retraction...page 17?
A little hasty I think, Zero. They are saying several soldiers have been sickened and tested positive for sarin exposure and they have pictures of the drums. We clearly need to see how the analysis of the drums plays out, but this at first glance appears to be the "smoking gun" Bush was looking for.
 
Originally posted by russ_watters
A little hasty I think, Zero. They are saying several soldiers have been sickened and tested positive for sarin exposure and they have pictures of the drums. We clearly need to see how the analysis of the drums plays out, but this at first glance appears to be the "smoking gun" Bush was looking for.

Well, there have been plenty of false alarms.
 
AARRRGGGHH!

Even I got taken by that bloody sarin story. But, then, again:
Coalition forces were briefly on alert Sunday for a suspected chemical-weapon attack, after U.S. soldiers evacuated an Iraqi military compound, after tests by a mobile laboratory of a substance in an oil drum showed evidence of sarin nerve gas. More than a dozen soldiers of the Army’s 101st Airborne Division had been sent earlier for chemical weapons decontamination after they exhibited symptoms of possible exposure to nerve agents. But U.S. military officials said later that what was in the drum was actually pesticide. NBC News’ Jim Miklaszewski reported that a later test confirmed that the contents were not sarin.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/870749.asp?vts=040620031900

Okay, what I want to know is how hard it can be to identify freakin sarin or mustard gas?! How many of these stories are we going to have to go through before the media realizes it oughtta shut the **** up until it can confirm? It's getting a tad old...
 
I don't see any further information about the two incidents of possible chemical weapons yesterday, so they appear to have been cleared as non-chemical. However, I repeat once again, there are a lot of sites marked out as possible WMD locations still to be searched.

It is quite possible that some WMDs have been moved to Syria - they have another terrorist supporting government. Some of you would refuse to believe that if VX was found in the middle of Damascus though.
 
  • #10
Some of you would refuse to believe that if VX was found in the middle of Damascus though.
<looks innocent> Now who would those people be?

Seriously, I do find it interesting that Congress is now covering it's ass in case none are found. I had always assumed Iraq had a few WMDs left... but now I'm not so sure.
 
  • #11
Originally posted by Mulder
I don't see any further information about the two incidents of possible chemical weapons yesterday, so they appear to have been cleared as non-chemical. However, I repeat once again, there are a lot of sites marked out as possible WMD locations still to be searched.

It is quite possible that some WMDs have been moved to Syria - they have another terrorist supporting government. Some of you would refuse to believe that if VX was found in the middle of Damascus though.

It is quite possibe that Iraq is hiding their weapons anywhere that we would like to invade anyways, huh? Nice logic, and it continues to put off the need to find proof, doesn't it?
 
  • #12
I suppose that when the military reports that WMDs have been found, many will dismiss the claims as lies by the 'Evil One' George Bush.
 
  • #13
Almost better than finding WMDs was killing Chemical Ali.

Horray for the Brits!
 
  • #14
Originally posted by Mulder
I don't see any further information about the two incidents of possible chemical weapons yesterday, so they appear to have been cleared as non-chemical.
It takes a little while to test the sites. Remember also there is very little media around to document all of this. Whenever something is found by a unit it is reported by their single imbedded reporter and all other news outlets get the information from them. Obviously all of these reports are unconfirmed and will take some time (maybe weeks) to sort out.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/895185_asp.htm is a story on the chemical agents ricin and botulinum, apparently found in northern Iraq.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/895392_asp.htm is a story on three separate chemical finds, including the one with 12 barrels of what appears to be sarin. The pics aren't on that link, but I saw them on tv.

It really seems like you guys WANT to believe there are no chemical weapons in Iraq just so you can see the egg on the face of the US. With evidence mounting, I am wondering how long you guys will keep avoiding the inevitable conclusion. Conspiracy theory anyone?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Chemical Ali is one death in this war I won't shed too many tears over.

Like I said, I had always thought Saddam had a few chems left... but this recent maneuvering by Congress and the spate of "now you see it, now you don't" chem reports has me doubting. While I would love to see Bush get caught looking like a moron (he gets away with it too often), it's not particularly important for how I judge Iraq's WMDs or lack thereof. I'll believe it as soon as I reports that are more confirmed than "military sources say they might have found some." For example, when (if?) CENTCOM comes out and announces it.

More interesting I think is why Saddam didn't use his WMDs, if he has them? With 3ID in his main palace now, it's not like he's got a whole lot to use. If he indeed chose not to use them -- for international opinion or other reasons -- should we have been afraid he would at any other point, when his back wasn't to the proverbial wall?
 
  • #16
Originally posted by damgo
I'll believe it as soon as I reports that are more confirmed than "military sources say they might have found some." For example, when (if?) CENTCOM comes out and announces it.
Fog of war, damgo. Like I said, these are all unconfirmed and certainly the media has jumped the gun on several, but we're starting to see some reports that appear legit. Regardless, wait a few weeks for confirmations.

More interesting I think is why Saddam didn't use his WMDs, if he has them? With 3ID in his main palace now, it's not like he's got a whole lot to use. If he indeed chose not to use them -- for international opinion or other reasons -- should we have been afraid he would at any other point, when his back wasn't to the proverbial wall?
Yeah, very interesting question. I have a theory. Wanna hear it? TOUGH, here it is:

Saddam is dead and his lieutenants (generals) aren't anywhere near as crazy or stupid as he is. Rumor has it they have been authorized to use the WMD - but I think for their own sake they are chosing not to.
 
  • #17
That fact that he (may)possess them and the fact that he is a rather evil dude adds up to a threat that shouldn't be ignored. Who knows, maybe his dog will bite the dust in the next fire fight and that will send Saddam over the edge.
 
  • #18
Originally posted by russ_watters
Yeah, very interesting question. I have a theory. Wanna hear it? TOUGH, here it is:

Saddam is dead and his lieutenants (generals) aren't anywhere near as crazy or stupid as he is. Rumor has it they have been authorized to use the WMD - but I think for their own sake they are chosing not to.


so the dead Saddam's henchmen are still risking their lives by fighting back; but not useing everything they have "for their own sake." that is funny russ, i have heard theories about ufos that held more watter.
 
  • #19
Originally posted by kyleb
so the dead Saddam's henchmen are still risking their lives by fighting back; but not useing everything they have "for their own sake." that is funny russ, i have heard theories about ufos that held more watter.
Gee, that's nice, kyleb. What is YOUR theory? That they don't have any?

In any case, its hard not to fight back when you have a gun to your back. But that gun in your back won't necessarily get you to turn yourself into a war criminal.
 
  • #20
^^^ I think you're stretching, russ. Thousands of Iraqis have been fighting to the death, often in suicidal attacks, like rushing tanks with AK-47s. I don't think they give a damn about being called a war criminal by the invading "infidel army."

The fact is, chemical weapons are just not effective against a modern army with MOPP suits and gas masks; they are really only good for killing civilians. All they would do is slow the US down, and probably Saddam doesn't even have enough left to do that very well.

Also, in Gulf War I, Saddam had huge stockpiles of chems that he never used: it seems highly likely to me that he just saw no point in doing so when it would open the door to massive retaliation.
 
  • #21
exactly damgo. besides if it was fear of being a war criminal, what would Saddam have held over that to make them react differently; and if Saddam was holding so much over their head, why did they not take him out themselves?
 

Similar threads

News Is the US Red Line in Syria Just Empty Rhetoric?
  • · Replies 298 ·
10
Replies
298
Views
74K
News Should the US intervene in world problems?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
News Pentagon confirms Iran-Contra figure in senior job(Article)
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
News Is a Standing Army Necessary for a Peaceful Future?
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
News Weapons of Mass Destruction found already.
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K