Safe Mode: On
WMD attack in Iraq

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722855.stm
The Americans say that a 155mm artillery shell containing two constituents of sarin was used by insurgents in Iraq as part of an improvised explosive device

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722255.stm

An artillery shell containing a small amount of the nerve gas sarin has exploded in Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3635381.stm Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists planned a chemical attack on Jordan's spy headquarters that could have killed 20,000 people

Loading the player ...
Embed Code
Plays: 8998 (Embed: 0)

Added: Nov-26-2007 
By: Dat1111
In:
Iraq, Middle East
Tags: WMD, iraq, kurds, genocide, murder, war crimes, Saddam hussein, 1441, UN, sanctions, nuclear, biological, Operation Iraqi freedom, Decade
Marked as: approved
Views: 10140 | Comments: 75 | Votes: 4 | Favorites: 4 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • 180 000 killed if I may correct.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • "Fuck the international community and all who listen to them" - sounds kind of like bush :o

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • thats not really a good way to take care of business

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • cutulu: "The only WMD in middle east is the US Army, near 1.000.000 death civilians..."
    True too many people have died but not 1 million more like 100,000 plus.. And most at the hands of thugs, death squads, etc

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • infinit: "Thing is, with the new reclassification you are "technically" correct. But the American people were led to believe Iraq had Nuclear Weapons (or at least the capability of making them) before the invasion, and when they weren't found, look what happened, the actions of this government speak for itself, you don't need the news to tell you what to think."
    Thanks for the laughs. Why is it that some people on this site believe that they know something the others do not. More..

    Posted Nov-27-2007 By 

    (0)

  • If they weren't traitors to their country this would have never happened.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • dems193: ""Fuck the international community and all who listen to them" - sounds kind of like bush :o"
    Read the wording of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. It sounds to me like Bush did exactly what the world community wanted.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • infinit: "Good job dodging the issue of what WMDs are in the first place, what a piece of work you are, still not able to define WMD's pre-911?

    Let me help you ...

    NUCLEAR FUCKING BOMBS

    And they weren't found. Plain and simple.

    Stop saying they were... it's like arguing income tax law, people will come back with "so you shouldn't pay taxes?" NO THE INCOME TAX IS CERTAIN SINGLE TAX, UNAPPORTIONED AS THE CONSTITUTION DEMANDS.

    You're talking about WMDs like there are fucking (pre-9/11) NUKES! THERE ARE NONE IN IRAQ, AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. Chemical weapons (among others) were reclassified to WMD status after the attacks. Saddam had chemical weapons before the attacks, then why didn't we send our entire army in there...? Oh yeah, that little thing called the Cold War... Russia had HUNDREDS of nukes pointed right at us, and did you see the US trying to invade Russia? No, because we would've been toast. Saddam (and Iraq as a country) has never been a viable threat to this country, and should ever be one. The attacks happening to our soldiers is because we are an invading force, and now with Saddam gone, Iraq is becoming more of a haven for "terrorists" that want to kill our men and women in uniform. We needed to never have gone into that country, MINDED OUR OWN BUSINESS LIKE THE FOUNDING FATHERS SUGGESTED. We wouldn't have nearly as many American soldiers die in vain."
    t More..

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • Most civilian deaths are caused by suicide and vehicle bombs, MORE than ALL artillery and airstrike caused deaths.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • infinit: "Thing is, with the new reclassification you are "technically" correct. But the American people were led to believe Iraq had Nuclear Weapons (or at least the capability of making them) before the invasion, and when they weren't found, look what happened, the actions of this government speak for itself, you don't need the news to tell you what to think."
    There was a whole pile of reasons to invade Iraq, the nuclear issue being just a small part of that. With every o More..

    Posted Nov-27-2007 By 

    (0)

  • BigBoss1: "If they weren't traitors to their country this would have never happened."
    LOL I bet you think the holocaust was justified as well eh...

    How are these people enemies? IF we measured by that standard we would of nuked baghdad by now

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • of course, the coaltion of the willing /end sarcasm.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • ChristianLeb: "
    infinit: "Good job dodging the issue of what WMDs are in the first place, what a piece of work you are, still not able to define WMD's pre-911?

    Let me help you ...

    NUCLEAR FUCKING BOMBS

    And they weren't found. Plain and simple.

    Stop saying they were... it's like arguing income tax law, people will come back with "so you shouldn't pay taxes?" NO THE INCOME TAX IS CERTAIN SINGLE TAX, UNAPPORTIONED AS THE CONSTITUTION DEMANDS.

    You're talking about WMDs like there are fucking (pre-9/11) NUKES! THERE ARE NONE IN IRAQ, AND THERE NEVER WILL BE. Chemical weapons (among others) were reclassified to WMD status after the attacks. Saddam had chemical weapons before the attacks, then why didn't we send our entire army in there...? Oh yeah, that little thing called the Cold War... Russia had HUNDREDS of nukes pointed right at us, and did you see the US trying to invade Russia? No, because we would've been toast. Saddam (and Iraq as a country) has never been a viable threat to this country, and should ever be one. The attacks happening to our soldiers is because we are an invading force, and now with Saddam gone, Iraq is becoming more of a haven for "terrorists" that want to kill our men and women in uniform. We needed to never have gone into that country, MINDED OUR OWN BUSINESS LIKE THE FOUNDING FATHERS SUGGESTED. We wouldn't have nearly as many American soldiers die in vain."
    t More..
    and one more thing u think the amricans are that fukin stupid if they wanted to really find wmd's they would have planted some and say there u go but i think there is a game plan that we all dont know about

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • BigBoss1: "If they weren't traitors to their country this would have never happened."
    yeah, sure, would you have followed a dictator?
    wtf am i saying, you're obviously a callous dick, of course you would have. that flag doesn't suit you, you need something less neutral i think.

    Posted Nov-26-2007 By 

    (0)

  • Bronson80: "
    infinit: "Thing is, with the new reclassification you are "technically" correct. But the American people were led to believe Iraq had Nuclear Weapons (or at least the capability of making them) before the invasion, and when they weren't found, look what happened, the actions of this government speak for itself, you don't need the news to tell you what to think."
    Thanks for the laughs. Why is it that some people on this site believe that they know something t More..
    If I may borrow a line from ZenB*tchen:

    Quoted for truth.

    Posted Nov-27-2007 By 

    (0)