Quote:
Originally Posted by Khorum  Yeah, I thought so. Go "succeed" in using a calendar, idiot. |
You are mentally challenged. Let me explain this to your feeble mind a little clearer you fucking nutcase.
You claimed that 1.77 tons of "WMD" were discovered in Iraq. However, the
IAEA had already sealed that material and knew where it was located after the first Gulf War. Do you understand that Khorum, should I get crayons for you?
You claimed that 500 "WMD" munitions were found in Iraq based on this
article dated June 29, 2006.
That article was written after the
CIA's final report in April of 2005 finding that there were no WMD found in Iraq. As such, you think I "don't know how to use a calendar". Now look at the facts you bumbling fool -
The June 2006 Defense link article states clearly IN THE FIRST FUCKING SENTENCE that:
Quote:
| The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 .....
|
The article goes on to state that:
Quote:
|
The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added.
|
Those old inoperable rusted weapons were leftover artillery shells from the Iran - Iraq war. We had run into various munitions of this type since 2003. As such, the CIA's report from 2005 took them into account and dismissed them as evidence of WMD in Iraq.
Do you have down's syndrome? If you admit you have a learning disability, I might stop picking on you. You really are embarrassing yourself.
