"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..

Iraq *had* WMD. That is an undisputable fact.

Is it?


Perhaps you would present some evidence???

One of life's mysteries is that people who use cliched phrases like
"undisputable fact" are never able to back up their assertions.

It seems clear that Iraq had chemical weapons back in the early 90's.
However, chemical weapons were considered to be battlefield weapons. They
were never considered to be WMD until the Bush administration began to
realise that they had lied.

Nuclear and biological weapons have a destructive effect that extends far
beyond the geographical area of deployment. That is why they are termed
"WMD". Chemical weapons disperse rapidly.... therefore they are weapons of
local destruction.

Rednecks are convinced that Iraq posed a threat to the west. The rest of
us are aware that Saddam always asked for permission before he launched war.


Regards


Donal
--