Hundreds of WMDs found - declassified documents reveal

[WBOB]

Now what do you have to say?

.....let the naysaying begin.

No matter what good news comes
from over there, seems that it's either
not reported, stuck on the backpage
or skewed...

if it bleeds, it leads.

[Massage...Bored]

Now what do you have to say?

.....let the naysaying begin.

No matter what good news comes
from over there, seems that it's either
not reported, stuck on the backpage
or skewed...

if it bleeds, it leads.

The truth is that these were small arms, not the WMDs we have been promised.

I'm glad they found this stuff, its good news alright.

Don't try and make it into what its not.

[WBOB]

Don't try and make it into what its not.

Thank You!

[bassjones]

Serin gas and mustard gas are not small arms - they are WMDs. And while the delivery systems were deteriorated, the chemicals themselves were not and were still capable of doing a great deal of damage if new delivery systems were utilized.

[Massage...Bored]

Serin gas and mustard gas are not small arms - they are WMDs. And while the delivery systems were deteriorated, the chemicals themselves were not and were still capable of doing a great deal of damage if new delivery systems were utilized.

You don't think the US has some of that sh*t stockpiled?

And what the Hell doesn't count as a WMD these days?

From Wiki:

Current definitions

Today, the term WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) means different things to different people. The most widely used definition is that of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons (NBC). http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/tr ... r_anx.html]), although there is no treaty or customary international law that contains an authoritative definition. Instead, international law has been used with respect to the specific categories of weapons within WMD, and not to WMD as a whole.

The acronym NBC is used with regards to battlefield protection systems for armored vehicles, because all 3 involve insidious toxins that can be carried through the air and can be protected against with vehicle air filtration systems. However, there is a persuasive argument that nuclear weapons do not belong in the same category as chemical, biological, or radiological weapons, which have limited destructive potential (and close to none, as far as property is concerned), whereas nuclear weapons are famously colossally destructive and belong in a class by themselves.

The NBC definition has also been used in official US documents, by the US President ([2], [3]), the US Central Intelligence Agency ([4]), the US Department of Defense ([5], [6]), and the US General Accounting Office ([7]).

Other documents expand the definition of WMD to include radiological or conventional weapons. The US military refers to WMD as:

Weapons that are capable of a high order of destruction and/or of being used in such a manner as to destroy large numbers of people. Weapons of mass destruction can be high explosives or nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological weapons, but exclude the means of transporting or propelling the weapon where such means is a separable and divisible part of the weapon.([8])

While in US civil defense, the category is now Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE), which defines WMD as:

(1) Any explosive, incendiary, poison gas, bomb, grenade, or rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces [113 g], missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce [7 g], or mine or device similar to the above. (2) Poison gas. (3) Any weapon involving a disease organism. (4) Any weapon that is designed to release radiation at a level dangerous to human life. This definition derives from US law, 18 U.S.C. Section 2332a and the referenced 18 USC 921. Indictments and convictions for possession and use of WMD such as truck bombs, pipe bombs, shoe bombs, cactus needles coated with botulin toxin, etc. have been obtained under 18 USC 2332a.

The US FBI also considers conventional weapons (i.e. bombs) as WMD: "A weapon crosses the WMD threshold when the consequences of its release overwhelm local responders". Gustavo Bell Lemus, the Vice President of Colombia, called small arms WMD because bullet fatalities "dwarf that of all other weapons systems - and in most years greatly exceed the toll of the atomic bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki".

Chemical weapons expert Gert G. Harigel considers only nuclear weapons true weapons of mass destruction, because "only nuclear weapons are completely indiscriminate by their explosive power, heat radiation and radioactivity, and only they should therefore be called a weapon of mass destruction". He prefers to call chemical and biological weapons "weapons of terror" when aimed against civilians and "weapons of intimidation" for soldiers. Testimony of one such soldier expresses the same viewpoint ([9]). For a period of several months in the winter of 2002-2003, US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz frequently used the term "weapons of mass terror," apparently also recognizing the distinction between the psychological and the physical effects of many things currently falling into the WMD category.

An additional condition often implicitly applied to WMD is that the use of the weapons must be strategic. In other words, they would be designed to "have consequences far outweighing the size and effectiveness of the weapons themselves" ([10]).

The Washington Post reported on 3/30/2006 :"Jurors asked the judge in the death penalty trial of Zacarias Moussaoui today to define the term "weapons of mass destruction" and were told it includes airplanes used as missiles". Moussaoui was indicted and tried for the use of airplanes as WMD under 18 USC 2332a (see above).

Next to be added......handguns! Oh they have a WMD pointed at us, fire!

[bassjones]

Next to be added......handguns! Oh they have a WMD pointed at us, fire!

The UN's going to take those away, didn't you hear