USA Guilty of War Crimes

[!@#$%]

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/200...d_journal9.html (http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2005/02/baghdad_journal9.html)
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf...=15&ItemID=6772 (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=6772)


The United States is using napalm in Falluja. So far, the military has denied the allegations, but the proof is mounting. On Nov. 28 The Daily Mirror’s political editor, Paul Gilfeather filed a report stating: “US troops are secretly using outlawed napalm gas to wipe out remaining insurgents in and around Fallujah. News that President George W. Bush has sanctioned the use of napalm, a deadly cocktail of polystyrene and jet fuel banned by the United Nations in 1980, will stun governments around the world.”

For over a week rumors have circulated in the Arab press that both napalm and other chemical weapons were used mainly in the Jolan district of Falluja, a major area of the fighting. Now, despite a US media blackout, more evidence is leaking out and causing a furor in the British Parliament. As Gilfeather reports: “Last night Tony Blair was dragged into the row as furious Labour MPs demanded he face the Commons over it. Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh.”

..The US has already admitted that it used napalm during the siege of Baghdad. The truth was reluctantly confirmed by the Pentagon after news reports corroborated the evidence. The military has tried to conceal the truth by saying that there is a distinction between its new weapon and “traditional napalm”. The “improved” product carries the Pentagon moniker “Mark 77 firebombs” and uses jet fuel to “decrease environmental damage”. The fact that military planner’s even considered “environmental damage” while developing the tools for incinerating human beings, gives us some insight into the deep vein of cynicism that permeates their ranks.


we are becoming what we are supposedly trying to destroy
fucking tyrranical.
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fior...5/02/intel.html (http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fiore/2005/02/intel.html)

[Æ°]

I understand that Bush is too FUCKING STUPID to realize that he creates more terrorists than he destroys.

But what's 50% of this country's fucking excuse?

[s.urkaleeno]

I don't agree one bit w/ what is going on over there in Iraq / Cuba... I have fam over there. I think it is wrong for us to torture captives, it does nothing but increse the dangers for all Americans. With that said, there is no country in this world that could hold the United States accountable for it's actions. China may come close becuase they own so much of our dept, but I don't think this administration would hesitate to drop a couple of nukes on H.K./ mainland CH. After all the poor chinese our are new slaves. If the American people were faced w/ a destroyed economy or destroying a country I think this fine christian country of ours would choose the latter.

[dojafx]

anyone have any major news sources on the use of napalm in iraq?

[villain]

Here's some.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...sp?story=432201 (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=432201)

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/militar...99_1n5bomb.html (http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20030805-9999_1n5bomb.html)

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/images/030805firebombs_big.gif

[!@#$%]

Originally posted by dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 03:38 PM
anyone have any major news sources on the use of napalm in iraq?
Quoted post



uh why? the pentagon admitting it isn't good enough proof huh?

[POIESIS]

Originally posted by Æ°@Feb 18 2005, 09:12 AM
But what's 50% of this country's fucking excuse?
Quoted post


it's called 'emotionally potent oversimplification'..
as you know, it was used by the admin with some success.
this is what happens when there is a long history
of an avid and conscious campaign to indoctrinate
and marginalize democratic countries populations.
would you be surprised to know that there is a history
of leading psychiatrists having top secret security
clearances?

[CACashRefund]

I didnt know napalm was banned, its kinda hard to play by the rules when the people you are fighting play by no rules whatsoever.

[dojafx]

^I'm not sure what you expect them to do?
Dudes dont have tanks, they dont have fighter planes, they dont have cruise missles
Its kind of hard to play by the rules when you're a group of unorganized muhfuckas with small arms going up against the worlds foremost superpower

[dojafx]

Originally posted by symbols+Feb 18 2005, 10:18 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (symbols - Feb 18 2005, 10:18 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 03:38 PM
anyone have any major news sources on the use of napalm in iraq?
Quoted post



uh why? the pentagon admitting it isn't good enough proof huh?
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

because if i'm telling someone about this and they ask me where i heard about it, an anarchist rag doesnt seem as credible as reuters, the ap or the bbc

[POIESIS]

zmag is the shit. i used to read it all the time
at my library a couple years ago. check it if you
can, it's packed to the tittles.

[KING BLING]

Originally posted by dojafx+Feb 18 2005, 04:26 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dojafx - Feb 18 2005, 04:26 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>Originally posted by symbols@Feb 18 2005, 10:18 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 03:38 PM
anyone have any major news sources on the use of napalm in iraq?
Quoted post



uh why? the pentagon admitting it isn't good enough proof huh?
Quoted post


because if i'm telling someone about this and they ask me where i heard about it, an anarchist rag doesnt seem as credible as reuters, the ap or the bbc
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

Mother Jones, The Daily Mirror, and The Independant are all credible media outlets.

[CACashRefund]

Originally posted by dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 05:24 PM
^I'm not sure what you expect them to do?
Dudes dont have tanks, they dont have fighter planes, they dont have cruise missles
Its kind of hard to play by the rules when you're a group of unorganized muhfuckas with small arms going up against the worlds foremost superpower
Quoted post


The insurgents in Iraq are by no means unorganized, theyre trained, resourceful, and clever fucks. And people shouldnt be surprised if America decides to use any means at its disposal in an attempt to neutralize them.

[KING BLING]

Originally posted by CACashRefund+Feb 19 2005, 03:39 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CACashRefund - Feb 19 2005, 03:39 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 05:24 PM
^I'm not sure what you expect them to do?
Dudes dont have tanks, they dont have fighter planes, they dont have cruise missles
Its kind of hard to play by the rules when you're a group of unorganized muhfuckas with small arms going up against the worlds foremost superpower
Quoted post


The insurgents in Iraq are by no means unorganized, theyre trained, resourceful, and clever fucks. And people shouldnt be surprised if America decides to use any means at its disposal in an attempt to neutralize them.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

This logic throws out nuclear proliferation agreements, the Geneva convention, the entirety of the U.N and all laws and agreements made within...you have no scope or rational perspective...

The insurgents in Iraq are by no means unorganized, theyre trained, resourceful, and clever fucks.

-Than what the hell are we?

[CACashRefund]

The insurgents in Iraq are by no means unorganized, theyre trained, resourceful, and clever fucks.

-Than what the hell are we?


I dont know you tell me, since i was only referring to dojafx's comment on the insurgents.

[effyoo]

I'll post this here instead of making a new thread, especially since there is talk of media outlets and such:


THE PASSIONATE EYE SHOWCASE: CONTROL ROOM

Originally Broadcast: Sunday September 26, 2004 at 10pm ET/PT on CBC Newsworld

Repeating: Sunday February 20, 2005 & Saturday February 26 at 10pm ET/PT on CBC Newsworld

Award-winning Egyptian-American filmmaker Jehane Noujaim travels to the headquarters of Al-Jazeera in Qatar to look at the media's vital role in writing history during the war with Iraq.

With exclusive behind-the-scenes access to the Arab broadcaster, American journalists, and the players at U.S. Army Central Command, Control Room takes an unprecedented look at the media and the business of war.

-------

this should be interesting considering I've never heard any talk of what Al-Jazeera contributes to the Iraqi media frenzy.

[Dick Quickwood]

Originally posted by CACashRefund@Feb 19 2005, 04:39 PM
neutralize
Quoted post



have a bucket of napalm, asshole

[KING BLING]

Originally posted by effyoo@Feb 19 2005, 07:39 PM
I'll post this here instead of making a new thread, especially since there is talk of media outlets and such:


THE PASSIONATE EYE SHOWCASE: CONTROL ROOM


this should be interesting considering I've never heard any talk of what Al-Jazeera contributes to the Iraqi media frenzy.
Quoted post


Yeah this is really a great movie. It's good because it shows that A) Al-Jazeera is not at all as radical as our government wants us to believe and B) It shows where many of the reports we Americans see are coming from...It won't blow your mind with controversy, but it is a glimpse into something we rarely see.


And CashRefund, the question was rhetorical - my point: by using there behavior as justification for our actions you justify theres as well. Instead of thinking 'might makes right' and assuming things have to be as they are, consider some alternatives - there is a reason the rest of the world still does not support us on this campaign. The whole world isn't just selfish, arrogant and stubborn but maybe one of the countries involved here is...

[villain]

Napalm is not exactly the type of precision smart weaponry we need in dense urban environments.
Al Jazeera is actually the most liberal media in the middle east, but if you ask a republican, they would swear it's the devil.

[knuckle_game]

Originally posted by CACashRefund@Feb 18 2005, 05:49 PM
its kinda hard to play by the rules when the people you are fighting play by no rules whatsoever.
Quoted post


Thats a very good arguement. If, for example, you were an ordinary iraqi civillian, you could use this very good arguement to explain why you were wearing a vest full of explosives after the US army came through and "neutralized" your mom, house, goat and left eye, earlier in the day.
I still don't understand how all these "bomb those towel heads back into the stone age" types act all suprised when people start fucking shit up in response.

[!@#$%]

control room was a good flick.

[AW]

I think that story is blown out of proportion.

The Marines say that in March, U.S. warplanes dropped dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River in central Iraq to clear the way for troops headed to Baghdad.

The firebombs were used again in April against Iraqis near a key Tigris
River bridge, north of Numaniyah, the Marines said.

The Mark77 Firebomb isn't Napalm by the way, and it's not outlawed to be used.

[!@#$%]

it's like NIXON said : "americans don't believe anything until they see it on tv"

pull off the wool babies.
anything that turns human flesh into an incendiary device is basically napalm.

i tell you what, let me douse you in a mark77 firebomb, then napalm
and you can tell me the difference.



:rolleyes:

[AW]

Welcome to Politics!

[krowone]

Originally posted by dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 07:24 PM
^I'm not sure what you expect them to do?
Dudes dont have tanks, they dont have fighter planes, they dont have cruise missles
Its kind of hard to play by the rules when you're a group of unorganized muhfuckas with small arms going up against the worlds foremost superpower
Quoted post


YOU SHOULD EXPECT THEM TO LAY DOWN THEIR WEAPONS AND STOP KILLING OUR TROOPS.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE DEALING WITH TERRORISTS.
THE MAJORITY OF IRAQIS WANT THEM OUT, AND THE ONLY RESAON WE ARE THERE IS FOR THE OIL, BUT WE ARE THERE AND WE NEED TO FINISH THE JOB.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS GOING TO TAKE TEN PLUS YEARS TO DO IT.
IM FOR ANYTHING THAT WILL PUT AN END TO THIS BULLSHIT.
ITS UNFORTUNATE THAT INOCCENT PEOPLE ARE BEING KILLED.
BUT THESE SAME PEOPLE KNOW WHERE THE INSURGANTS ARE HIDDING AND SHOULD LET THE IRAQI POLICE KNOW WHERE THEY ARE.
THAT WAY THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE U.S. DROPPING RANDOM BOMBS ON THEIR HOODS.
AND AS FAR AS YOU CATS BEING SURPRISED THAT THE U.S. IS USING NAPALM.
YA NEED TO WAKE UP TO THE FACT THAT THE U.S. DOES THE SAME SHIT THAT EVERY OTHER NATION DOES. ARE COUNTRY DOES EVIL SHIT . THEY ARE REAL GOOD ABOUT HIDDING IT.
HOPFULLY YOU GUYS ALL VOTED.
AND IF NOT THEN GET OF THE COMPUTER AND REGISTER.
ON A FINAL NOTE, WHAT DO ANY OF YOU THINK THE ANSWERS ARE?
WILL YOU BE SO QUICK TO JUDGE THE U.S. WHEN THE NEXT ATTACK TAKES OUT THE BUILDING YOU OR YOUR PEEPS IS IN!!!
LIKE TALIB KWELI SAYS" NIGGA'S DIDN'T BECOME AMERICAN TILL NINE ELEVEN"

[villain]

why do people keep saying they should narc the terrorists? Don't you know that snitches get stitches?
This is not like telling on your sister....

[GnomeToys]

Styrofoam & Jet Fuel

vs.

Sodium Palmitate & Gasoline


GEE I CAN SEE WHY THE FIRST IS SO MUCH LESS FUCKING ILLEGAL.

assholes.

[AW]

Incendiary devices have their place on the combat field!

White Phosphorus (willy P) is a bad mother fucker to.
It will eat through a jeep, and doesn't stop burning no matter what you do.

[CACashRefund]

White phosphorus is nasty nasty shit. Water only makes it burn stronger, id hate to have a drop of that shit on me.

[GnomeToys]

Phosphorous burns are a bitch, too. Even a simple burn with red P. will take months to heal.

I have the scars to prove it.

[ledzep]

Originally posted by krowone@Feb 22 2005, 04:41 PM
YOU SHOULD EXPECT THEM TO LAY DOWN THEIR WEAPONS AND STOP KILLING OUR TROOPS.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT BLAH BLAH BLAH...
Quoted post


Is it just me, or is seeing a paragraph of all caps really make me not want to read it?

[ODS-1]

I bet people wouldn't care. Most Americans probably think it's a good idea.

[seeking]

we're some chicken shit motherfuckers.

[InfiniteWisdomOfThePezDispenser]

actually, I think its more of a God complex kinda thing.

[383]

Originally posted by krowone+Feb 22 2005, 08:41 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (krowone - Feb 22 2005, 08:41 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-dojafx@Feb 18 2005, 07:24 PM
^I'm not sure what you expect them to do?
Dudes dont have tanks, they dont have fighter planes, they dont have cruise missles
Its kind of hard to play by the rules when you're a group of unorganized muhfuckas with small arms going up against the worlds foremost superpower
Quoted post


YOU SHOULD EXPECT THEM TO LAY DOWN THEIR WEAPONS AND STOP KILLING OUR TROOPS.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE DEALING WITH TERRORISTS.
THE MAJORITY OF IRAQIS WANT THEM OUT, AND THE ONLY RESAON WE ARE THERE IS FOR THE OIL, BUT WE ARE THERE AND WE NEED TO FINISH THE JOB.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS GOING TO TAKE TEN PLUS YEARS TO DO IT.
IM FOR ANYTHING THAT WILL PUT AN END TO THIS BULLSHIT.
ITS UNFORTUNATE THAT INOCCENT PEOPLE ARE BEING KILLED.
BUT THESE SAME PEOPLE KNOW WHERE THE INSURGANTS ARE HIDDING AND SHOULD LET THE IRAQI POLICE KNOW WHERE THEY ARE.
THAT WAY THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE U.S. DROPPING RANDOM BOMBS ON THEIR HOODS.
AND AS FAR AS YOU CATS BEING SURPRISED THAT THE U.S. IS USING NAPALM.
YA NEED TO WAKE UP TO THE FACT THAT THE U.S. DOES THE SAME SHIT THAT EVERY OTHER NATION DOES. ARE COUNTRY DOES EVIL SHIT . THEY ARE REAL GOOD ABOUT HIDDING IT.
HOPFULLY YOU GUYS ALL VOTED.
AND IF NOT THEN GET OF THE COMPUTER AND REGISTER.
ON A FINAL NOTE, WHAT DO ANY OF YOU THINK THE ANSWERS ARE?
WILL YOU BE SO QUICK TO JUDGE THE U.S. WHEN THE NEXT ATTACK TAKES OUT THE BUILDING YOU OR YOUR PEEPS IS IN!!!
LIKE TALIB KWELI SAYS" NIGGA'S DIDN'T BECOME AMERICAN TILL NINE ELEVEN"
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]
One persons terrorist is anothers freedom fighters.... If arabs and afrikans didn't use terrorism in the 50's against the occuppying collonial powers africa the middleeast and asia whould all still be collonies terrorism is the only ressponse to for a people that have no other option its the first step to revolution you can't get down on people for persuing there own freedom ...I mean isn't that what america said they were going into iraq for to let the people persue there own destiny... i mean it was bull shit but thats what the "terrorists" are doing... and saying that the iraq people don;t want them there is bull shit ... the numbers of forighn fighters there is fuckin tiny its just that its been told to you by the media so many times you belive it ... more then 80% of the people that have been arrested in iraq and are being held as insurgents are fukin iraqi ...the news just dosn't want americans to think that the insurgents are iraqi... and you know what even if they weren't pan arab nationalism will probablly unite outside arabs together with outraged iraqi people against a mainly white american occupying army that has killied over 100,000 iraqi civilians at the lowest totals as of 3 months ago.... bloods thicker than water boys

oh yeah we all write prolly so don't we all pretend like were terrorists half the time anyway ??????????

[383]

fucked up pictures of the war and first hand accounts
http://www.thenausea.com/usa-iraq.html
and one last thing it should be taken into account that the iraqi revolution that kicked out the british didn't happen till 1958 so you gatta understand that revolution is fresher in their mind and more of an option than it would be to us mainly north american people who don't have to live the 3rd world struggle

[postmodernism]

Originally posted by Æ°@Feb 18 2005, 12:12 PM
I understand that Bush is too FUCKING STUPID to realize that he creates more terrorists than he destroys.

But what's 50% of this country's fucking excuse?
Quoted post


Snapback.... not that JK would have done things any different but atleast i sleep knowing that i didnt give him my vote.

[bobthebuilder]

SO i guess the targeting of civilians by the insurgents is not a war crime?

Get a fucking life.



Its not napalm you retard, its gelly gasoline. Which is not Banned by anything.

[knuckle_game]

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Mar 8 2005, 11:45 AM
SO i guess the targeting of civilians by the insurgents is not a war crime?
Quoted post


This is the debating equivilant of "I know you are but what am I".

Hitler cooked millions of people in ovens, does that mean that the US would've been justified in torching all the german immigrants during WW2?

[hobo knife]

This whole war was illegal. And based on lies. But, for the argument sake, The insurgents are primarily targeting kurds signing up for the American-Iraqi army or those who support the American-Iraqi forces...so in essence they are enemy troops or at least enemy sympathizers.

[sexontoast]

USA is a beautiful woman, she just needs to clean up her act a bit]
-Immortal Technique

[lovestick]

Originally posted by knuckle_game+Mar 8 2005, 09:55 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (knuckle_game - Mar 8 2005, 09:55 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-bobthebuilder@Mar 8 2005, 11:45 AM
SO i guess the targeting of civilians by the insurgents is not a war crime?
Quoted post


This is the debating equivilant of "I know you are but what am I".

Hitler cooked millions of people in ovens, does that mean that the US would've been justified in torching all the german immigrants during WW2?
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]


Well, the allies only managed to firebomb 40 thousand civillains and displace millions in one night in Hamburg during World War II.

Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of civillians who were burned to death in Kobe by firebombs.

But hey, we gotta stop these 'terrorists' by any means necessary. Right? Right?

[seeking]

not to mention the what? 56 japanese cities we carpet bombed, killing millions of civillians (before hiroshima and nagasaki).

[bobthebuilder]

They attacked us. We needed the philiphines back, so we fucked them up.


Heres a kicker. At the same time that the surrender of japan was being signed, the second h-bomb was being flown over.

We are the only country to ever use Nuclear weapons. We regulate who can have how many, how many do you think we have? Blow the world up 266 times. At LEAST.

[BiGRoN]

[quote=hobo knife,Mar 8 2005, 11:11 AM]
This whole war was illegal. And based on lies.



Here's a little history that seems to have been completely forgotten. Shortly after the first Gulf War in 1991, U.N. inspectors discovered the existence of a surprisingly advanced Iraqi nuclear weapons program. In addition, by Iraq's own admission and UN inspection efforts, Saddam's regime possessed thousands of chemical weapons and tons of chemical weapon agents. Were it not for the 1995 defection of senior Iraqi officials, the UN would never have made the further discovery that Iraq had manufactured and equipped weapons with the deadly chemical nerve agent VX and had an extensive biological warfare program.
Here is what was known by 1998 based on Iraq's own admissions:
* That in the years immediately prior to the first Gulf War, Iraq produced at least 3.9 tons of VX, a deadly nerve gas, and acquired 805 tons of precursor ingredients for the production of more VX.
* That Iraq had produced or imported some 4,000 tons of ingredients to produce other types of poison gas.
* That Iraq had produced 8,500 liters of anthrax.
* That Iraq had produced 500 bombs fitted with parachutes for the purpose of delivering poison gas or germ payloads.
* That Iraq had produced 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas.
* That Iraq had produced or imported 107,500 casings for chemical weapons.
* That Iraq had produced at least 157 aerial bombs filled with germ agents.
* That Iraq had produced 25 missile warheads containing germ agents (anthrax, aflatoxin, and botulinum).
Again, this list of weapons of mass destruction is not what the Iraqi government was suspected of producing. (That would be a longer list, including an Iraqi nuclear program that the German intelligence service had concluded in 2001 might produce a bomb within three years.) It was what the Iraqis admitted producing. And it is this list of weapons--not any CIA analysis under either the Clinton or Bush administrations--that has been at the heart of the Iraq crisis.

Clinton knew Saddam was developing WMD. Thats why he bombed numerous suspected facilities in 1998. The U.N. knew it. Thats why they passed some 15 resolutions imposing a total ban of WMD production in Iraq, all of which were ignored.

Now the media spoonfeeds this "Bush lied" crap to you kids and you eat it up. Do the research, then ask yoursef who the real liars are.

[bobthebuilder]

The media is a business, its not an information source. What will make more money- as in will we buy more newspapers and watch more TV NEWS if we invaded a country for the right reasons OR We invaded a country for the wrong reasons. DOnt think too hard, your brains still need power to comprehend whats going to occur within the next 4 years.

[hobo knife]

http://www.12ozprophet.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=62180

Bob/BIGRoN ...read this thread and find out some history that you may have forgotten...

I wish the media was spoonfeeding "bush lied" but they aren't.

" And it is this list of weapons--not any CIA analysis under either the Clinton or Bush administrations--that has been at the heart of the Iraq crisis."

So the weapons that we sold to Iraq are the reason we invaded??? Look, Iraq was under heavy sanctions literally slowly killing the country, two-thirds of Iraq was under a no-fly zone which was patrolled by international forces, we had enough weapons inspectors there to find any major nuclear operation going on, Saddam wasn't threatening anyone untill we threatened him in late 2002...Iraq was obviously not a threat to the U.S. or Israel...The genocide we accused him of was only made possible by weapons we sold him...Iraq had nothing to do with 911...they appearantly didn't buy enriched uranium from afirca... sorry man but you are completely brainwashed by the military, but thats not your fault.

[sneak]

Originally posted by hobo knife@Mar 8 2005, 06:11 PM
This whole war was illegal. Quoted post

i dont understand why a war can be illegal. surely the mass killings (which is what usually happens in wars) would be illegal under most laws?
if i were to start a war it woul dbe illegal, but a group of people (ie. a govt.) could and it would be fine?

a sample of the questions popping round my head while reading this/

[villain]

I would like to know where BigRon is getting his information from because while it echos some truths such as Operation Desert Fox in 1998 that targeted suspected facilities, I've seen nothing like the other claims you've made either by UNSCOM, IAEA, ISG or anybody.... in fact their claims are quite the contrary. Stating essentially that when we invaded Iraq had no WMD capability, they had an increasingly atrophied WMD capability, and they had not even attempted to restart WMD programs. While there was a small quantity of WMD unaccounted for, it is believed that if that wasn't destroyed in 1998, it would most likely be expired by now.

*I would like to add, since this thread has been jacked into talking about Iraqs WMD, that the poor planning by this administration could potentially have made things WORSE (as far as WMD goes) by neglecting to secure weapons caches (which got a fair amount of media play) and WMD equipment (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-10-12-iraq-looting_x.htm) (which didn't get much media play at all)