What is a WMD?

If the rockets filled with chemical weapons are confirmed, and these rockets violate UN regulations, and they are “weapons of mass destruction” (and that does not mean the same or less destructive than a conventional weapon), then I will admit I was wrong. But until that happens, I have to maintain what I have continued to say — I do not believe Iraq has WMD. They have weapons, yes, some very nasty weapons, but not weapons of Mass Destruction, with a capital M and a capital D. And if our major justification for invading Iraq rests on Iraq having WMD, our justification is wrong.

5 replies on “What is a WMD?”

  1. Personally, I never understood why chemical weapons were included in WMD. We used them quite extensively in WWII, and they are generally less destructive than a MOAB.

    Now what if chemical weapons were banned specifically regardless of their WMD status by the UN resolution. Would that be reason enough for invasion?

  2. I don’t think so. Iraq has been avoiding UN resolutions since the day the Gulf War ended, and many other countries have for far longer. Diplomacy, inspections, etc., could still be effective enough, IMHO.

  3. We Never used Chemical weapons in WWII. Nor biological. These weapons, particularly biological, have a destructive power (pound for pound)then nuclear weapons. That’s why are the ONLY class of weapon that is internationally banned.

    sanctions, diplomacy would have never worked with Saddam. Have patience and we will see we were justified on the WMD point. I beleive we will be.

Comments are closed.