WMD'S or NOT

[Duchess]

Let me preface my post by saying my family has/is sacrificing for the good ol' U S of A ...This is not a diss towards our military in any way, shape or form.

I've asked this question of congressmen, senators, representitives, soldiers, retired military & the media, not one person has been able to answer it so, I'll throw it out here for you Mockers to take a shot at it.

If the powers that be in our country were so damn certain that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction why were the troops that made the initial push into Baghdad not equipped with the necessary gear to protect them from exactly that ?...I know for FACT that they had nothing that could be considered "protective" so, don't become argumentive with me over that.

[Liquid]

Pertaining to your question above, this discussion IS NOT about if there were or were not WMD in Iraq. It is about the soldiers being protected from the use of the WMD if they were actually used.

Duch - the weapons you are talking about, like Nuclear or chemical weapons are a whole different world of destruction. No one thought they would be used (or hoped strongly they never would be). The goal was to find them if they were there and then stop their potential use or dismantle them from being operational. Also the actual technology to create a nuclear bomb is something that most countries do not have. But many are trying. So the other prevailing thought is/was to find the labs trying to create the bombs and stop the attempts.

On to your inquiry - IF those weapons were actually used in any situation it would not make a difference what the soldiers were wearing or what gear they had. The war would have escalated to a much higher level with those types of weapons being used on both sides, something we can not even think about or allow to happen ever. The initial push into Iraq was to find these weapons or weapon making labs. In hindsight we all know that the intel was potentially flawed and these weapons did not exist at the levels reported or were moved or whatever, but that is irrelevant in this discussion.

In the end the biggest issue was that once the military got onto "the ground" and it became a ground war (and not a war of just plains dropping bombs) the transport vehicles our military uses were not (and still are not as far as I know) reinforced enough to withstand the land mines and other bombs that they were driving over. 60 Minutes has done a few stories about the lack of reinforced metal trucks and transport vehicles and how many have died when in one of these and they hit a land mine or bomb.

[Duchess]

First, you are right, I should have titled this thread differently.

Thanks for the input, that is more than I have recieved from anyone who is in a position to tell me and I appreciate that more than I can express !..I'm excited to hear everyones opinion.

[Cynical Ninja]

Let me preface my post by saying my family has/is sacrificing for the good ol' U S of A ...This is not a diss towards our military in any way, shape or form.

I've asked this question of congressmen, senators, representitives, soldiers, retired military & the media, not one person has been able to answer it so, I'll throw it out here for you Mockers to take a shot at it.

If the powers that be in our country were so damn certain that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction why were the troops that made the initial push into Baghdad not equipped with the necessary gear to protect them from exactly that ?...I know for FACT that they had nothing that could be considered "protective" so, don't become argumentive with me over that.

The WMD factor was a complete lie, Saddam didn't have any chemical or nuclear weapons available otherwise he would have used them, all they found were some empty gas canisters and a small remote control glider that may have been used to drop small chemical/biological warhead bombs.
The British government told us that Saddam could launch chemical/nuclear attacks against London within 45 minutes ! ::lmao:: when in reality saddam could barely launch a scud against neighbouring Israel with any degree of accuracy.
The WMD lie was just another ingredient in the biggest lie ever told about why action against Iraq was necessary, the real reasons were - Oil - and the masses of money Bush and his cronies have made since the invasion and revenge - they needed arab whipping boys to punish in revenge for 9/11.

[AnonyMoose]

Let me preface my post by saying my family has/is sacrificing for the good ol' U S of A ...This is not a diss towards our military in any way, shape or form.

I've asked this question of congressmen, senators, representitives, soldiers, retired military & the media, not one person has been able to answer it so, I'll throw it out here for you Mockers to take a shot at it.

If the powers that be in our country were so damn certain that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction why were the troops that made the initial push into Baghdad not equipped with the necessary gear to protect them from exactly that ?...I know for FACT that they had nothing that could be considered "protective" so, don't become argumentive with me over that.

I was inSaudi Arabiaand we had MOPP suits. Nobody deployed to the Gulf without one.

[Liquid]

Let me preface my post by saying my family has/is sacrificing for the good ol' U S of A ...This is not a diss towards our military in any way, shape or form.

I've asked this question of congressmen, senators, representitives, soldiers, retired military & the media, not one person has been able to answer it so, I'll throw it out here for you Mockers to take a shot at it.

If the powers that be in our country were so damn certain that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction why were the troops that made the initial push into Baghdad not equipped with the necessary gear to protect them from exactly that ?...I know for FACT that they had nothing that could be considered "protective" so, don't become argumentive with me over that.

The WMD factor was a complete lie, Saddam didn't have any chemical or nuclear weapons available otherwise he would have used them, all they found were some empty gas canisters and a small remote control glider that may have been used to drop small chemical/biological warhead bombs.
The British government told us that Saddam could launch chemical/nuclear attacks against London within 45 minutes ! ::lmao:: when in reality saddam could barely launch a scud against neighbouring Israel with any degree of accuracy.
The WMD lie was just another ingredient in the biggest lie ever told about why action against Iraq was necessary, the real reasons were - Oil - and the masses of money Bush and his cronies have made since the invasion and revenge - they needed arab whipping boys to punish in revenge for 9/11.

your post has nothing at all to do with what she originally asked and does not address her question.

[AnonyMoose]

your post has nothing at all to do with what she originally asked and does not address her question.

You suggesting miss crumpet has an agenda? ::lmao::::lmao::