Reprehensible Murtha must be pissed that his stash was found before it could kill U.S. Marines.

More good news for America, and bad news for the loony left.

You really are an idiot, no where in the article does it mention WMD and no one in any post said that mortar rounds were WMD. They said the WMD that Saddam supposely had to use against our soldiers. Moron, learn to read.

.....

.....

Wow...

...just wow.

Talk about irony.

QED

Jay

If we had controlled the several hundred ammo dumps we knew about, we would have prevented MOST of the dead and injured Americans. No one said there were no weapons just not nuclear etc that Bush claimed!

If we had controlled the several hundred ammo dumps we knew about, we would have prevented MOST of the dead and injured Americans. No one said there were no weapons just not nuclear etc that Bush claimed!

But then you wouldn't have dead Americans to celebrate over.

wow hanoijohn, mirthlessmurtha and cluelessgene must be pissed no americans were killed through the use of the waepons, and just as a side note metric tonnage is a WMD.

#13 by TARSIER Wednesday, January 04, 2006

and just as a side note metric tonnage is a WMD. Hmmm, never knew that. According to who?

wmd= weapons of MASS destruction ok? explode metric tonnage and there will be mass destruction, we clear yet?

Not RPG grenade launchers.

---Tarsier

Either of which, actually, with a little ingenuity, could easily be tainted with any of those items mentioned.


Thanks for posting this, Shadow. Another victory for our side.....ignored as usual by the MSM, and belittled by the doomcriers on JU.

If we had controlled the several hundred ammo dumps we knew about, we would have prevented MOST of the dead and injured Americans. No one said there were no weapons just not nuclear etc that Bush claimed!

---Col. Green

Col., Col., Col....way to cast a dim(witted) shadow on what should be a happy occasion. Way to go, guy.
Now, who's to say that the "ammo dumps we knew about", were where these particular weapons came from, originally? There are lots of guns in the world, Col., and lots of ammo to fill them.
Also, there are lots of Arab sheiks giving lots of cash to lots of poor bearded sots who use it to buy some of those guns and ammo for use in Iraq and in blowing themselves up in the hope of killing innocent Iraqis and Amercian troops.

You one-eyed perspective makes me sick, Col.

At the risk of having to side with TARIER here, WMD is just another name for Nuclear, Biological & Chemical weapons. That is one of the problems when people start talking in political buzzwords, they become bogged down in the quagmire of interpretation.


Colon Bin Gangrene:

Is it so hard for you to just congratulate our troops for this little victory? Apparently, acknowledging any job well done is beyond your pathetic Bash Bush myopia.

I would you taint an RPG to become a WMD? I seek to be enlightened (truthfully, I do).

I know of only one meaning for the word "taint" and it has nothing to do with RPGs or WMD... ;~D

But if someone loaded a Rocket Propelled Grenade with Nuclear, Chemical or Biological armament, then yes, it would be WMD, however, if it was a standard C4 loaded round, then no, (no matter how massive the destruction) it wouldn't be WMD.

This cache didn't contain any WMD, but how many more caches are still left undiscovered? How can those "experts" say that none of them contain any Nuclear, Biological or Chemical payload

Care to answer this one col clueless? And no "matter" what "your" experts say....there is "plenty" of proof around showing that not all of Saddam's WMD's were accounted for! They may not have found any WMD's however, that in itself is NOT proof that they do not exist!

Terp:

This isn't possible. There are no weapons in Iraq. Just ask the clueless liberals. Iraq was not a danger to us. They didn't have weapons that could harm us. At least that is what they said once we went in, before that they were crying that we'd lose needless lives to the WMDs that Saddam was sure to unleash upon us.

Tarsier:

WMDs? Must have missed that in the article. You are so intelligent to call liberals clueless, because it says right in the article that they found MORTAR ROUNDS. Oh, I forgot, mortar rounds ARE weapons of mass destruction. Good thing we found those WMDs, otherwise the insurgents would launch mortar rounds thousands of miles over the ocean and hit the U.S., or another target on their hit list.

DJBandit (quoting Tarsier in his comment):

You really are an idiot, no where in the article does it mention WMD and no one in any post said that mortar rounds were WMD. They said the WMD that Saddam supposely had to use against our soldiers.

Okay, okay, boys... while WMDs are bad and, like conventional munitions, can kill many people, they are not the same thing. The article (anybody remember the article?) said that a huge weapons stash was found. Mortar rounds and bullets and stuff. Nothing about those rounds being NBC. While a WMD can, by definition, be classified as anything that could hypothetically kill more than one person at a time (mass being more than one, apparently), "Weapons of Mass Destruction" encompass only nuclear, biological, and chemical agents that could be used against large quantities of people.

Yes, I saw through the multiple levels of sarcasm on this one, and I also saw where a simple misunderstanding had ballooned out of control. Let's not try to redefine WMD simply to justify a misunderstanding.