07-19-2016, 11:40 AM
(07-19-2016, 11:21 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: How does that prove your point? WMDs can be chemical weapons. They found chemical weapons that were considered WMDs.
This is directly from the NY Times article you are talking about.
Mr. Duelfer agreed that the weapons were still a menace, but said the report strove to make it clear that they were not “a secret cache of weapons of mass destruction.”
“What I was trying to convey is that these were not militarily significant because they not used as W.M.D.,” he said. “It wasn’t that they weren’t dangerous.”
No where in the story are theses munitions called WMD. So what exactly are you talking about?
