Did Iraq have weapons of mass destruction? If they did, where are they? If they didn’t why did the entire world think that they did?  Lets think about it...

Here is what we know:

1 Iraq used air-based chemical weapons in the late 1980’s against the Kurds and Iranians.

2 After the 1991 ceasefire American soldiers accidentally destroyed chemical based artillery shells while destroying Iraqi munitions, injuring themselves.

3 The UN has believed that Iraq had WMD for the last 15+ years.

4 All the major intelligence agencies of the world (USA, Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and Israel) all believed that Iraq had WMD.

5 Saddam expended massive efforts to thwart UN attempts to verify Iraq’s WMD status from 1991 to 2003.

6 After American and British entry into Iraq in 2003, we found missiles capable of 700 to 1000 mile ranges including warheads that could carry chemicals. Why have the delivery systems if you don’t have the weapon?

7 Numerous WMD chronicled by the UN have never been found. One example being the 660 kilos (about 1500 lbs) of anthrax that Saddam claimed to have destroyed, without UN inspector’s knowledge or presence, in the early 1990’s.

8 American intelligence agencies and soldiers heard numerous references to WMD in radio intercepts involving Iraqi front line army units before and during the recent war.

9 No military sized stockpiles of WMD have been found in Iraq. This includes operational level artillery shells that would have been found in destroyed/abandoned vehicles if Iraqi units had them.

Did Iraq have WMD?

It is beyond doubt that Iraq had WMD in 1991. From the facts listed above it also seems apparent that most, possibly all, of its stockpiles were destroyed in the 1990’s due to the war, UN inspections, and/or in an Iraqi attempt to conceal its activities.

It is possible, and rumored, that some WMD has been moved to Syria but this would only be possible if the amount of chemicals, etc. were much smaller than the world expected. If this turns out to be the case we will eventually learn of it.

Small amounts of chemicals or precursors could also be hidden in the desert somewhere but once again this can only have been done to small amounts of WMD not large military levels of weapons. This to will also be born out with time if it is true.

Did Iraq NOT have any WMD at all?

From the facts listed above, it would seem implausible to me that Saddam’s Iraq didn’t have any WMD at all. To believe this is to believe that a man who is an admirer of Hitler and basically a NAZI himself would destroy all his WMD without being forced to do so by the world community.

It does now appear that his stockpiles were much reduced due to the first gulf war and the subsequent UN inspections, but this does not mean that all WMD had been destroyed or that all development had been halted.

It is also obvious from the facts listed above that Saddam Hussein wanted VERY MUCH for the world to think that he had large combat capable weapons of mass destruction. Why would he do this? To keep his enemies guessing about Iraq's military capabilities of course.

Iraq is in a very tough neighborhood with Iran to its east and Turkey to its north. Both of these countries have large effective armies that were ongoing, constant threats to Saddam’s Iraq. Saddam also needed a perceived military threat to maintain his status within the Arab world as a major political player. Iraq would also want to keep the U.S.A. wondering about his military capabilities. Hence, it appears, Iraq ran an ongoing intel op through out the 1990’s and up to 2003 to keep the world guessing as to its true WMD capabilities.

Unfortunately for Saddam, with the advent of the 9/11 attacks upon the United States his intel operation became a liability rather than a strength. The entire world thought he had active WMD and no one would listen or believe anything to the contrary because he was a known liar and buffoon.

Thus, the U.S.A. entered Iraq because Saddam’s posturing and lies had worked so well that President Bush decided that Saddam was a threat that needed to be removed. The President didn’t lie about Iraq’s WMD…he was merely wrong because the CIA, Mosad, et al, had fallen for an extremely effective intelligence operation that had fooled the world.
 

After a number of trips to the People’s Republic of Massachusetts and several years of listening to the main stream media, the only logical conclusion I can come up with is that Bush is a metaphor for something else that they truly, truly, hate. After much thought I have had to conclude that what they truly hate is the so called "Red States."  The Liberal elites HATE middle America and Americans with Middle American values.

Think about it. For 30 years the Liberal Elites have been preaching and telling middle Americans in every way possible that

1) Being religious means your stupid and crude,
2) Being anti-abortion means you’re a Neanderthal sexist,
3) Voting for small government and low taxes is anti-social.
4) Believing in marriage and “family values” is for idiots.
5) Being pro-American or Nationalistic in any way means you’re a fascist.

The list could go on and on…I am sure you can think of examples of your own.

Well, after 30 years of lecturing, Middle America had the audacity to impeach that epitome of Liberal Social values Bill Clinton (social sex, lying for personal benefit, asking others to commit perjury, sliming opponents, “Spinning”, pardoning people for contributions, etc, etc.) AND then to elect a conservative Republican from of all places…the despised land of TEXAS!!!

So, basically, they hate Bush and through him middle America because millions of us have refused to listen to them and be indoctrinated.

Don’t we KNOW that they are better, kinder, more educated, and just plain more entitled to power and consideration then we ARE?