Nothing to retract, Dave.
Whether it's old or more recent, Saddam said there were NO WMDs (he claimed he had destroyed them all).
The Dems have been saying for about three years there were NO WMDs.
If we're going to deal in absolutes, such as the war was ONLY about WMDs, let's deal in absolutes.
There were WMDs.
Furthermore, back in 2004,
CNN reported that the United States removed nearly two tons of radiological and nuclear materials from Iraq in the previous month and that this material "could have potentially been used to make a 'radiological dispersal device' -- a so-called dirty bomb -- 'or diverted to support a nuclear weapons program.'"
Furthermore, despite Jay's claims (which are second-hand and from a partisan blog), the defense department has not disavowed this report. According to the
Secretary of Defense:
What's been announced is accurate, that there have been hundreds of canisters or weapons of various types found that either currently have sarin in them or had sarin in them. And sarin's dangerous. And it's dangerous to our forces and it's a concern. So, obviously, to the extent we can locate these and destroy them, it's important that we do so. They are dangerous. And anyone, I'm sure, General Casey or anyone else in that country, would be concerned if they got in the wrong hands. They are weapons of mass destruction. They're harmful to human beings. And they have been found. And they had not been reported by Saddam Hussein as he inaccurately alleged that he had reported all of his weapons. And they are still being found and discovered.
So, despite the whole "Bush LIED" claim, Saddam hadn't destroyed all his WMDs. Saddam had nuclear materials. Bush didn't lie.
