javaguru
Banned
Calling chemical weapons WMD's in comparison to nukes is like comparing firecrackers to dynamite. Conventional weapons were used in those operations against the Kurds, napalm is a much better casualty producer than mustard gas. During WWI less than 10% of casualties were produced by the widespread use of chemical weapons, a wet rag over your mouth can protect you from many chemical weapons. Sarin, a 2nd generation nerve agent, was released in a subway...a confined environment is optimal because gas dissipates rapidly under enviromental conditions(wind/rain) and only killed twelve people in the Japanese terrorist attack. Yes, about a thousand went to the hospital but that's hardly a weapon of mass destruction.mountain muscle said:Maybe you should ask the thousands of kurd who died if they are wmds. Oh that's right, you would have to ask one of the nearly 8k who were just injured. Maybe ask their children, if they have any ears to listen.
Perhaps you should stay away from wiki and google and stick to painting figurines of space soldiers.

It's also the worst possible reason to start a pointless war in the quagmire of the middle east.....Saddam didn't attack the US and had no connections to Al Queda. We're more at risk from our "ally" Pakistan when it comes to WMD's and ties to Al Queda; Don't fall for the Neo Con bullshit.