You’re being obtuse and misleading. OP is clearly referring to alleged Iraqi WMDs in the lead up, and justification for, the 2003 invasion.
Stockpiles of WMDs were never found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.
The ISG has not found evidence that Saddam possessed WMD stocks in 2003, but [there is] the possibility that some weapons existed in Iraq, although not of a militarily significant capability."
You don’t have to be a jerk about it. And after reading about this briefly I think that your presentation is misleading (and possibly factually incorrect; I didn’t immediately find sources that ISIS terrorists died from chemical exposure, though I didn’t look long).
And it was not far-fetched that Hamas could have been using tunnels under hospitals as a command center. Most people just don’t think attacking the hospital on the surface is justified even if so, since the people on the surface had no way of avoiding it. But any excuse to ethnically cleanse Palestine will do for right-wing Israelis.
There was never any enriched uranium found and there were no enriched uranium processing plants or enriched uranium processing operations found before, during or after the Iraq war.
Iraq produced various chemical weapons and had production warheads in various configurations including for their Short Range Ballistic Missile platform… Production was suspended in the 90’s. Many of these warheads are still present in Iraq today within sealed vaults which ISIS attempted to gain access to within the last five years.
Also… Yes they absolutely did pursue enrichment of uranium per their IAEA announced plans for a nuclear power program…
That article is all about unenriched uranium , and it’s one of the articles I’m referencing.
There’s no evidence of enrichment or enrichment operations going on, that announcement you talk about is the only “step” iraq ever took to enrich uranium, and they never made it further than bluster.
I’m talking about the evidence of WMDs in Iraq leading to the invasion by the US in 2003, of which there was none, and as you confirm in the article you’ve linked that I referenced, there was never any enriched uranium before, during or after that invasion.
This just repeatedly says that if Iraq ever was able to enrich uranium, it could be bad down the line, being the first step, not the final step, into the production of wmds
Nobody is denying that.
What there is zero evidence for is that there was ever enriched uranium or operations to enrich uranium happening before, during or after the 2003 Iraq invasion.
The latest article you reference agrees with every other credibly sourced article about Iraqi WMDs, including every investigative team from the UN and the US that went into Iraq following the 2003 invasion and confirmed that there is no or was no enriched uranium in iraq or any method by which Iraq could produce enriched uranium, entirely lacking the necessary infrastructure, resources, and most importantly, technical expertise and scientific personnel.
Thank you for this simple, clear, propaganda-free answer. I stopped trying to find one because it was buried under wildly different kinds of bullshit depending on the perspective of who responded. I’m not surprised that OP had to ask.
I dont think its hard to find accurate information on this war, you just need to know which sources have creditability.
Theres even great Israeli news sources, such as 972 magazine and human rights groups B’tselem and Breaking the Silence.
In the UK theres Middle East Eye. And in the US theres Mondoweiss, The Electronic Intifada, Democracy Now, and The Intercept. Also Human Rights Watch and Amnisty International have published excellent reports.
On the ground in Gaza, Aljazera probably has the best daily coverage.
If you trust that random person’s opinion I guess. Not saying they’re wrong (I don’t know) but just because this person trusts these sources, doesn’t make the sources trustworthy automatically. Always question the perspectives and motivations of the writing.
They found underground shafts that were built by Israel. They did not find evidence of it being used as a Hamas command center
oh, Iraq produces wmd
Removed by mod
You’re being obtuse and misleading. OP is clearly referring to alleged Iraqi WMDs in the lead up, and justification for, the 2003 invasion.
Stockpiles of WMDs were never found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3718150.stm
You don’t have to be a jerk about it. And after reading about this briefly I think that your presentation is misleading (and possibly factually incorrect; I didn’t immediately find sources that ISIS terrorists died from chemical exposure, though I didn’t look long).
Wikipedia says weapons there were being decommissioned, and The Guardian says when ISIS took the facility the US wasn’t particularly concerned because there was nothing usable or intact there.. We didn’t invade Iraq for decommissioning old weapons.
And it was not far-fetched that Hamas could have been using tunnels under hospitals as a command center. Most people just don’t think attacking the hospital on the surface is justified even if so, since the people on the surface had no way of avoiding it. But any excuse to ethnically cleanse Palestine will do for right-wing Israelis.
Removed by mod
It is entirely false that wmds were produced and stored in Iraq. You’ve got the story wrong.
All of the “evidence” for wmds is based off of the admittedly false testimony and drawings of one guy:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war
There was never any enriched uranium found and there were no enriched uranium processing plants or enriched uranium processing operations found before, during or after the Iraq war.
Iraq produced various chemical weapons and had production warheads in various configurations including for their Short Range Ballistic Missile platform… Production was suspended in the 90’s. Many of these warheads are still present in Iraq today within sealed vaults which ISIS attempted to gain access to within the last five years.
Also… Yes they absolutely did pursue enrichment of uranium per their IAEA announced plans for a nuclear power program…
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-secretly-takes-yellowcake-from-iraq/
That article is all about unenriched uranium , and it’s one of the articles I’m referencing.
There’s no evidence of enrichment or enrichment operations going on, that announcement you talk about is the only “step” iraq ever took to enrich uranium, and they never made it further than bluster.
I’m talking about the evidence of WMDs in Iraq leading to the invasion by the US in 2003, of which there was none, and as you confirm in the article you’ve linked that I referenced, there was never any enriched uranium before, during or after that invasion.
What do you think WMD means with regard to types of weaponry?
You need to reread my original reply.
Also here you go bud… https://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/iraqs_fm_history.html
GF
This just repeatedly says that if Iraq ever was able to enrich uranium, it could be bad down the line, being the first step, not the final step, into the production of wmds
Nobody is denying that.
What there is zero evidence for is that there was ever enriched uranium or operations to enrich uranium happening before, during or after the 2003 Iraq invasion.
The latest article you reference agrees with every other credibly sourced article about Iraqi WMDs, including every investigative team from the UN and the US that went into Iraq following the 2003 invasion and confirmed that there is no or was no enriched uranium in iraq or any method by which Iraq could produce enriched uranium, entirely lacking the necessary infrastructure, resources, and most importantly, technical expertise and scientific personnel.
Thank you for this simple, clear, propaganda-free answer. I stopped trying to find one because it was buried under wildly different kinds of bullshit depending on the perspective of who responded. I’m not surprised that OP had to ask.
I dont think its hard to find accurate information on this war, you just need to know which sources have creditability.
Theres even great Israeli news sources, such as 972 magazine and human rights groups B’tselem and Breaking the Silence.
In the UK theres Middle East Eye. And in the US theres Mondoweiss, The Electronic Intifada, Democracy Now, and The Intercept. Also Human Rights Watch and Amnisty International have published excellent reports.
On the ground in Gaza, Aljazera probably has the best daily coverage.
That was the trouble - I didn’t know which sources were credible. I do now, though! Thanks!
If you trust that random person’s opinion I guess. Not saying they’re wrong (I don’t know) but just because this person trusts these sources, doesn’t make the sources trustworthy automatically. Always question the perspectives and motivations of the writing.
They’ve got the word “library” right in their username! They must be factually correct about everything!