Iraq Did Have WMD
Some people think Iraq did not have WMD. They are wrong.
The moral of this story is twofold. First, "WMD" is inspecific. We know Iraq had some WMD agents and delivery systems. What is in question is whether they had *significant* programs for *NBC* weaponry (that is, nuclear, biological, chemical): and the answer to that question, by all indications, is No. But that doesn't mean there were no WMD: in fact, there were.
And second, following from the first, don't jump all over people who say Iraq did have WMD. Be specific, and first agree on specifically what you mean by "WMD." NBC weaponry and delivery systems? Significant quantities of material, or significant programs? Simply going by "WMD" is far too vague to draw conclusions from when people use it, without clear context.
Update: You people are all retarded. I make an absoultely accurate point about the fact that WMD does not have a specific meaning to many people, and that therefore a survey must define it for the survey to be valid, and you idiots all attack me for things I never said. Really, screw you. If you are going to intentionally or carelessly attack me over your pet straw men, go the hell somewhere else.
I realize the general rule is that when communication fails this badly, that it is rarely one side that is to blame for it. But I never even came close to saying the things you're accusing me of saying, and further, I continually denied I was saying those things. Yet you morons kept attacking me for them anyway. <cartman>Screw you, I'm going home.</cartman>
The moral of this story is twofold. First, "WMD" is inspecific. We know Iraq had some WMD agents and delivery systems. What is in question is whether they had *significant* programs for *NBC* weaponry (that is, nuclear, biological, chemical): and the answer to that question, by all indications, is No. But that doesn't mean there were no WMD: in fact, there were.
And second, following from the first, don't jump all over people who say Iraq did have WMD. Be specific, and first agree on specifically what you mean by "WMD." NBC weaponry and delivery systems? Significant quantities of material, or significant programs? Simply going by "WMD" is far too vague to draw conclusions from when people use it, without clear context.
Update: You people are all retarded. I make an absoultely accurate point about the fact that WMD does not have a specific meaning to many people, and that therefore a survey must define it for the survey to be valid, and you idiots all attack me for things I never said. Really, screw you. If you are going to intentionally or carelessly attack me over your pet straw men, go the hell somewhere else.
I realize the general rule is that when communication fails this badly, that it is rarely one side that is to blame for it. But I never even came close to saying the things you're accusing me of saying, and further, I continually denied I was saying those things. Yet you morons kept attacking me for them anyway. <cartman>Screw you, I'm going home.</cartman>
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment