So there was no mention of WMD's?

[JanMichael]

Sorry if I'm being dense but I didn't watch the scumbag's address and the transcripts made my eyes bleed.

WMD's? No mention? What's the story?

EDIT~ I meant NEW (as in since we Invaded and Occupied Iraq) finds of chemical or biological weapons, not 15 damned years ago, we already know that.

[Maple]

1. Nope

A collection of cliches...oh and btw he wants $87B.

[Ouabache]

3. Congress ought to impeach his slimy ass

NO WMD and he needs another 87B$$ ?? WTF is that about?

[Terwilliger]

5. they cant

you cant even get the Democrats to call for that

[not systems]

2. He did mention WMD

From the CNN transcript:

"And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror,
possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years
defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council."

Got it?

They sponsored terror.

They possessed and used weapons of mass destruction.

I wonder why people believe anything he says ever.

[HereSince1628]

8. "Sponsored terror" refers to allegations that old Iraq sent money to

families of Palestinians who had members that were suicide bombers or otherwise killed in attacks against or by Israel.

[not systems]

12. I'll buy that line.

But it contributes to the 70% of americans who
think Saddam had a roll in 911.

Unless it is made more clearly and it is not
on purpose, I think.

[disgruntella]

4. YES - they were presented as *fact*

Here is a quote from the transcript

"And we acted <b>in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction</b>, and for 12 years defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council. Our coalition enforced these international demands in one of the swiftest and most humane military campaigns in history. "

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030907-1.html

(Edit: I'm too slow with the copy-n-paste!)

[fabius]

10. Sure there were WMD's...

...12 years ago. Gimme a frickin break!!!

70 percent of Americans still think Saddam plotted 9-11, but guess what...more than 50 percent don't want to re-select the Chimp.

Maybe if they figure out Saddam has nothing to do with it and was no danger to us he'll drop another 25%...

[E_Zapata]

6. In the PAST, Saddam used WMDs

Bush even said Saddam "had" them and "used" them. He would know; we gave them to Saddam and showed him how to use them.

By the end of the speech, it was Saddam had "terrible weapons". A rock through my window would be terrible.

[rasputin1952]

7. The allusion of WMD's, was that...

he used them.

What was not mentioned: that Saddam had used Chem weapons, on the Kurds, some 12 years ago; after we didn't back them up in an uprising against Saddam that was pushed for by Bush 1.

We all know about that, but as for current WMD's......we all know about that too.

[Maple]

9. I assumed

JanMichael wanted to know if Bush announced the finding of any weapons...if that was what this announcement was all about.

[disgruntella]

11. yeah i meant to imply

That Bush referred to the WMDs as an established fact of the PAST, and therefore evaded the issue of whether further proof was forthcoming. (Gawd, that was an awkward sentence)

Of course, as posters have pointed out, WMDs in Iraq are an established fact of the PAST - just not within the last three years.

(Edit: is "Iraw" a country? Not!)

[JanMichael]

14. You assume correctly.

I corrected my thread starter to reflect that too.

[leftofthedial]

13. yes

He stated, without qualification or elaboration, that Iraq had possessed and used WMDS.