Tag: WMD

Topic

Weapons of Mass Desttruction

External Links: Wikipedia

Statements

  1 /  23 
Date 
2008-08 The United States went to war knowing that Iraq had no WMD.
-- According to Ron Suskind, in his book, “The Way of the World”
2008-02-02 First whether America will face this next rough patch without losing heart. Afghanistan cannot succeed as a democracy, nor as a new state defying centuries of tradition. To remake societies is beyond the capacity of any nation. America as a superpower has global responsibilities -- but that's not one of them. Utopias have no place in geopolitics.
-- Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's Minister Mentor, interviewed by Arnaud de Borchgrave
answering the question, "what concerns you most about the next 10 years, including WMD terrorism?"
2008 "The most significant reality was that the bomb promoted a culture of violence which . . . acquired the form of a monster with innumerable heads of terror
[ ... ]
Because of this bomb, we can definitely destroy India and be destroyed in its response. But its function is limited to this."
-- Pervez Hoodbhoy, Pakistani nuclear physicist
2007-11 "The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility that he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House. There was one problem. It was not true. I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself."
-- Scott McClelland
2007-09-18 "We're talking about a clear message to Iran – Israel has the right to self-defense – and that includes offensive operations against WMD facilities that pose a threat to Israel. The United States would justify such attacks."
-- John Bolton, former United Nations ambassador
2006-09-08 in the USA, three Republican senators on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- Orrin Hatch, Saxby Chambliss and Pat Roberts -- signed a letter attempting to counter Drumheller's revelation about Sabri on "60 Minutes": "All of the information about this case so far indicates that the information from this source was that Iraq did have WMD programs." The Republicans also quoted Tenet, who had testified before the committee in July 2006 that Drumheller had "mischaracterized" the intelligence. Still, Drumheller stuck to his guns, telling Reuters, "We have differing interpretations, and I think mine's right."
2006-07 In the USA, George Tenet, who had testified before the committee in July 2006 that Drumheller had "mischaracterized" the intelligence.
2006-06-21 "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons.
[...]
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."
-- Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., in a press conference, reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit
2006-04-23 CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."
2006-03 "If the United States' nuclear modernization were really aimed at rogue states or terrorists, the country's nuclear force would not need the additional thousand ground-burst warheads it will gain from the W-76 modernization program. The current and future US nuclear force, in other words, seems designed to carry out a preemptive disarming strike against Russia or China.
[ ... ]
The sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one - as an adjunct to a US first-strike capability, not as a stand-alone shield. If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal - if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes."
-- Kier Lieber and Daryl Press, US military analysts, in Foreign Affairs magazine












All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Stories, Arguments and Comments are owned by the Poster.
The Rest copyright © 2007 Argumentations.com. All rights reserved. Argumentations.com provides material for research or educational purposes only. We do not warrant the correctness of its contents. The risk from using it lies entirely with the user. While using this site, you agree to have read and accepted our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Argumentations.com is far from perfect so if you have any critiques, questions, comments or problems about this site please tell us. Click here to send your feedback. And if you like Argumentations.com please link to this site. It will really help a lot.
Embed this Tag Sphere on your website
Past the following code to your website or blog: