Point/Counter-point: WMDs



There are no WMDs in Iraq

Christopher Mead, Peace-activist

President Bush is a disgrace. He stole the election by using lawyers to stop the voting. He let down the nation by failing to do anything to try and stop the September 11th hijackers. And when the democrats in congress rallied behind their president, hoping that he might do something to stop the terrorists, he did a 180 and went after Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with terrorism or 9/11.



His reason? He claimed that peace-loving Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in preparation for using them against the U.S. or Israel. But you know what? We now know that Iraq had no WMDs. They never did and never would. The whole cause for war was completely bogus, and Bush knew that. He just wanted to be a big man and follow in his daddy's footsteps by needlessly killing U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians.



Thank goodness the November elections are coming up soon. Now we can replace Bush with a real President who won't lie about things that don't exist.



----------------------------------



WMD found in Iraq

From Fox News

<<Tests Confirm Sarin in Iraqi Artillery Shell

Tuesday, May 18, 2004

By Liza Porteus

NEW YORK — Tests on an artillery shell that blew up in Iraq on Saturday confirm that it did contain an estimated three or four liters of the deadly nerve agent sarin, Defense Department officials told Fox News Tuesday.



The artillery shell was being used as an improvised roadside bomb, the U.S. military said Monday. The 155-mm shell exploded before it could be rendered inoperable, and two U.S. soldiers were treated for minor exposure to the nerve agent.



Three liters is about three-quarters of a gallon; four liters is a little more than a gallon.



"A little drop on your skin will kill you" in the binary form, said Ret. Air Force Col. Randall Larsen, founder of Homeland Security Associates. "So for those in immediate proximity, three liters is a lot," but he added that from a military standpoint, a barrage of shells with that much sarin in them would more likely be used as a weapon than one single shell.>>



Read the full article here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html