Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq: Foxnews.com

[nelms]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

WASHINGTON — The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference late Wednesday afternoon.

Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."

He added that the report warns about the hazards that the chemical weapons could still pose to coalition troops in Iraq.

"The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," Santorum read from the document.

"This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."

Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.

He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that "we had all known weapons facilities secured," has proven itself to be untrue.

"It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump," he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them.

Hoekstra and Santorum lamented that Americans were given the impression after a 16-month search conducted by the Iraq Survey Group that the evidence of continuing research and development of weapons of mass destruction was insignificant. But the National Ground Intelligence Center took up where the ISG left off when it completed its report in November 2004, and in the process of collecting intelligence for the purpose of force protection for soldiers and sailors still on the ground in Iraq, has shown that the weapons inspections were incomplete, they and others have said.

"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor.

"It is significant. Perhaps, the administration just, they think they weathered the debate over WMD being found there immediately and don't want to return to it again because things are otherwise going better for them, and then, I think, there's mindless resistance to releasing any classified documents from Iraq," Barnes said.

The release of the declassified materials comes as the Senate debates Democratic proposals to create a timetable for U.S. troops to withdraw from Iraq. The debate has had the effect of creating disunity among Democrats, a majority of whom shrunk Wednesday from an amendment proposed by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts to have troops to be completely withdrawn from Iraq by the middle of next year.

At the same time, congressional Republicans have stayed highly united, rallying around a White House that has seen successes in the last couple weeks, first with the death of terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, then the completion of the formation of Iraq's Cabinet and then the announcement Tuesday that another key Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, "religious emir" Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, or Sheik Mansour, was also killed in a U.S. airstrike.

Santorum pointed out that during Wednesday's debate, several Senate Democrats said that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, a claim, he said, that the declassified document proves is untrue.

"This is an incredibly — in my mind — significant finding. The idea that, as my colleagues have repeatedly said in this debate on the other side of the aisle, that there are no weapons of mass destruction, is in fact false," he said.

As a result of this new information, under the aegis of his chairmanship, Hoekstra said he is going to ask for more reporting by the various intelligence agencies about weapons of mass destruction.

"We are working on the declassification of the report. We are going to do a thorough search of what additional reports exist in the intelligence community. And we are going to put additional pressure on the Department of Defense and the folks in Iraq to more fully pursue a complete investigation of what existed in Iraq before the war," Hoekstra said.

[spjunkies]

bout time :doh:

[Slateman]

Interesting, but I'd like confirmation from other news sources

[autographcollector]

Interesting, but I'd like confirmation from other news sources

NY Times only reports on poor terrorists.... :doh:

It's time for everyone to wake up!

[Slateman]

NY Times only reports on poor terrorists.... :doh:

It's time for everyone to wake up!

All I'm asking for is another news source. Doesn't seem like too much to me. Its not that I don't believe it, I just . . . well . . . I'd like someone else to say it too

[MisterPinstripe]

All I'm asking for is another news source. Doesn't seem like too much to me. Its not that I don't believe it, I just . . . well . . . I'd like someone else to say it too

Unlike some other news sources they havent been known to make up stuff. And they actually have talked to people in the government with the papers... Is that not enough?

Heck even before this they had found a bunch of other stuff.

1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

1,500 gallons of chemical weapons

Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas

1,000 radioactive materials--ideal for radioactive dirty bombs

17 chemical warheads--some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin

People just dont want to accept that there were actually weapons in Iraq, cause then they cant bash Bush on that.

The report just came up an hour ago, and they might have had an exclusive.

Go here: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

[SkinsHokieFan]

Why is this not all over the news :whoknows:

Surprise surprise, media slow to report good news for the admin

[Redskins Diehard]

Why is this not all over the news :whoknows:

Surprise surprise, media slow to report good news for the admin

Check out cnn.com. Very telling.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Check out cnn.com. Very telling.

Indded.

"Medic, Marine charged with murder"

Going back to this foxnews article though, here is a key snippet

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

I would guess that is why its not bigger news

However it does demonstrate that the weapons were never destroyed, as Saddam asserted

[MisterPinstripe]

Check out cnn.com. Very telling.

Can you blame them? They are probably really sad right now. There are so many things they havent reported on its not even funny. They never report on anything positive, just things that bash anything and everything in America. The media disgusts me.

[codeorama]

"Medic, Marine charged with murder"

Going back to this foxnews article though, here is a key snippet

I would guess that is why its not bigger news

Exactly...

The military's definition of WMD's are nukes... FYI.

The other news services are probably slow to report because FOX news has a history of jumping the gun on WMD's being found if you guys remember...

[nelms]

Exactly...

The military's definition of WMD's are nukes... FYI.

Not true. Chemical and biological weapons fall under the WMD umbrella.

[jbooma]

who cares if there are WMD's or not, this is not what we need to worry about, what we do need to worry is to be able to stablize Iraq so we can bring our troops home

The reason it is not big news is we need to focus on other things.

[codeorama]

Not true. Chemical and biological weapons fall under the WMD umbrella.

They have probably adjusted that now, but before the war, Nukes were the only WMD's... I've got 2 family members in the military and both have indicated that as such, one's a marine, the other is in the army. 60 minutes did a spot on that as well about 2 years ago.

[nelms]

Indded.

"Medic, Marine charged with murder"

Going back to this foxnews article though, here is a key snippet

I would guess that is why its not bigger news

However it does demonstrate that the weapons were never destroyed, as Saddam asserted

One could argue that this is even more troubling. Because these weapons weren't part of the inventory that the U.N. inspectors were looking for, Saddam could have possibly been hiding these for possible use after sactions were lifted. Don't forget about this part of the article:

"We know it was there, in place, it just wasn't operative when inspectors got there after the war, but we know what the inspectors found from talking with the scientists in Iraq that it could have been cranked up immediately, and that's what Saddam had planned to do if the sanctions against Iraq had halted and they were certainly headed in that direction," said Fred Barnes, editor of The Weekly Standard and a FOX News contributor"

[jbooma]

Exactly...

The military's definition of WMD's are nukes... FYI.

The other news services are probably slow to report because FOX news has a history of jumping the gun on WMD's being found if you guys remember...

That isn't true, many think chemical weapons are more important because you can make a dirty bomb from them easier then with a nuke, they are easier to smuggle etc... and if terrorists are getting their hands on them that is bad news

[Prosperity]

Indded.

"Medic, Marine charged with murder"

Going back to this foxnews article though, here is a key snippet

I would guess that is why its not bigger news

However it does demonstrate that the weapons were never destroyed, as Saddam asserted

That story is on the front page of both those websites.

Secondly, someone said this could be an "exclusive" well perhaps it is. I wouldn't be surprised considering it is from Santorum.

Thirdly, you quote a sentence which is important.

Fourthly, towards the bottom of the article it talks about how the report is not declassified yet, is that signifigant?

Lastly, if all of this is true, one has to wonder about the efficacy of these weapons.

My thoughts on this, yes this does seem like a better situation but it is certainly not close to the point of vindication.

[nelms]

who cares if there are WMD's or not, this is not what we need to worry about, what we do need to worry is to be able to stablize Iraq so we can bring our troops home

The reason it is not big news is we need to focus on other things.

I wish we could say that. But, try telling that to the liberals that constantly say that this war is not justified because no WMD's were found.

[SkinsHokieFan]

My thoughts on this, yes this does seem like a better situation but it is certainly not close to the point of vindication.

Absolutley

Not vindication at all, but it does point to something significant

It is now very obvious that had nothing been done about Saddam, and sanctions were lifted, he would have re-started that program

Guess who would have been on top of the target list?

[Larry]

I wish we could say that. But, try telling that to the liberals that constantly say that this war is not justified because no WMD's were found.

Or to the conservatives who keep swearing that the war was never about WMDs. (Except when they think they've found some. Then suddenly WMDs prove that the war was justified.)

[DjTj]

This is stupid what everyone's arguing about.

Santorum called a late press conference that missed the afternoon news cycle. It's not even on an AP wire, and Agence France-Presse just picked it up within the last hour.

If Bush calls a press conference tomorrow morning or even if Frist or Hastert get behind a podium, this will be much bigger news. Santorum simply doesn't draw quite as much media, especially after most reporters have gone home. If it is big news, it will get its play tomorrow - it deserves a full day of coverage anyways.

This reminds me of when someone a while back posted in the Tailgate complaining that the Duke lacrosse story wasn't being reported and then like the next day it became a national story.

...a little patience people...

[nelms]

Or to the conservatives who keep swearing that the war was never about WMDs. (Except when they think they've found some. Then suddenly WMDs prove that the war was justified.)

For me, it was Saddam's POTENTIAL use of or distribution of WMD's. Who seriously thought that Saddam wasn't going to crank his WMD program up to full throttle once the U.N. inspectors left?

[Larry]

Absolutley

Not vindication at all, but it does point to something significant

It is now very obvious that had nothing been done about Saddam, and sanctions were lifted, he would have re-started that program

Guess who would have been on top of the target list?

Problem with your (unstated) theory that Saddam would've given the weapons to terrorists if we hadn't invaded is that he had 12 years in which to do so, and he didn't.

Doesn't prove that we wouldn't have done so, next year. But it argues against an automatic assumption that he would have.

[Slateman]

Since when are chemical weapons not WMDs?!?! I've never heard that

[nelms]

Problem with your (unstated) theory that Saddam would've given the weapons to terrorists if we hadn't invaded is that he had 12 years in which to do so, and he didn't.

Doesn't prove that we wouldn't have done so, next year. But it argues against an automatic assumption that he would have.

But you have to remember that Saddam didn't get into the international terrorism business until late into that 12 year period (remember, he started funding the families of Palestinian suicide/homicide bombers).