So I lack comprehension huh, maybe you aren't explaining yourself well enough? And yes, telling me I lack all comprehension, can't state any arguments correctly (in your opinion), is kin to calling me stupid; you don't have to use the friggin word "stupid" to call someone stupid.
I formulate arguments quite well, I have had people far smarter and more knowledgable in current events than you compliment the way I state and argue for my positions (he was a political science major at OU actually) What you can't understand is that I don't have to agree with you to be correct.
I don't think you understand what an opinion is, or else you wouldn't be calling me stupid like you do (I don't know, mayne you want to bring other people down to make yourself feel better?) I am far from the only person with these beliefs, so don't try to make it like I am so far out there. There are many more people that believed we had enough evidence even before the shells were found. We wouldn't have gone into there if we didn't believe that.
I am far from uninformed, however I do react very emotionally, yes I am reactionary as I am oposed to liberal views. If I take things you say the wrong way CORRECT ME, DON'T SAY I AM STUPID BECAUSE OF IT. Some of your posts are tricky for me to understand exactly where you do stand on a subject, so if I get it wrong, correct me!
My assumptions about you were not just pulled out of my a$s, so if they are wrong then just TELL ME and I will go on, don't sit there and tell me I lack any sort of comprehension or ability to formulate an argument! If you don't agree with what I say, thats fine.
...
On to the actual topic of your post. No, the shell is not the killer app of the evidence, it is mearly one of many pieces of evidence that there were WMDs in Iraq. There doesn't have to be a "Law & Order"-esq confession by Saddam to have enough proof to say that he has had, and did have, WMDs at the time we invaded. He used chemical weapons against the Kurds in the North, killed a total of 300-500,000 people with them, so he has clearly had a large ammount of the stuff.
I heard on the news tonight one estimate that the chemical compounds in the shell were not stored correctly, and because of the breakdown of it, the preliminary reports said that they were stored improperly for about 2 years. We will see how this turns out, if it is true or not.
In 1991-1994, the U.N supervised the destruction of 690 tons of chemical agents, 3,000 tons of the chemical elements to make the agents, and 100 pieces of equipment. UNSCOM stated that Iraq's ability was hindered by this, however they recanted this statement in 1996 when they determined that there was equpiment that Iraq lied about what it was being used for; some of this equpiment was destroyed in 1997, but they couldn't tell for sure if there was more. In fact, they also stated that many of the scientists were ordered to bring the design specifications home with them for safe keeping. I can't remember the exact time, but there was also that scientist from Iraq that came foward and confirmed this (it was all over the news at the time)
The U.N. went back in Nov 2002, and March 2003. They found an additional 125 warheads, some of which were 155mm shells with mustard gas, which admittedly was made about 15 years before.
We also found those 2 burnt out vans which some believed were the mobile production facilities that were talked about, though this was not confirmed.
We also had evidence that Saddam was trying to purchase Uranium, Aluminum tubes, and powerful magnets from Africa. All of these by themselves don't ammount to much (well, maybe the Uranium) but put all three together and we get a small nuclear weapon.
So now we come to the past 1-2 years, people calling for Bush to resign as president because we have had "no proof" of the WMDs, as our searches of Iraq were not going well. People today want the smoking gun evidence that we will never be able to provide. All we are most likey going to be able to do is say, here is all of this evidence. By themselves they don't ammount to much, but together they clearly show both a history of creating WMDs of all types, and evidence that it had not been stopped.
Now that I have taken a breath and relaxed with your personal attacks, I have gotten out all I wanted to say. This is why I believe that there were and are WMDs in Iraq. -Nick
