(Go: >> BACK << -|- >> HOME <<)

Jump to content

Talk:Iraq and weapons of mass destruction: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Merge proposal: New section
No edit summary
Line 28: Line 28:


It's worthy of note, that Iraq produced and turned over significant quantities of illicit material to the inspectors. [[User:Smb|smb]] ([[User talk:Smb|talk]]) 20:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
It's worthy of note, that Iraq produced and turned over significant quantities of illicit material to the inspectors. [[User:Smb|smb]] ([[User talk:Smb|talk]]) 20:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

==Discovery of WMD after onset of 2003 war==
Users are removing sourced entries from reputible sources (Fox News, Washington Post, US Congress, US State Department) which indicate that small numbers of chemical weapons and shells for their delivery were found in Iraq. They are replacing it with an unsourced, inaccurate personal analysis that the small numbers found count as "none".

Revision as of 02:56, 28 November 2007

WikiProject iconIraq GA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


Global conspiracy discovered

".. Saddam had hidden WMDs in Iraq but The Terrorists stole them as part of a conspiracy with China, Russia and Iran to build an Islamic Bomb and obliterate your children. We were right all along! Saddam had WMDs! The MSM doesn't want you to know!"[1] Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 10:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 2003 Iraq war

The section The 2003 Iraq war needs a lot of work (as does the rest of the page). It's somewhat fractured at the moment, having been written from the perspective that the jury is still out on Iraq's prohibited weapon status/compliance. I think we can now be more explicit. smb 21:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tag

The section "Only retained old weapons and equipment to develop later" needs cleaning/rewriting in keeping with WP:NPOV. The header is loaded. "ISG findings and/or conclusions" would be appropriate. In addition: 1. I see embedded links in the main body. 2. The section has repetitive statements. 3. There is an unrelated statement from David Kay about "terrorist groups and individuals" passing through Iraq. 4. Bill Tierney's conjecture is also redundant (why should we quote a man who claims God told him where to find WMD?). 5. Uranium compound had been sitting behind lock and key under IAEA safeguard at Iraq's gutted Tuwaitha nuclear for several years. Something to this effect should be included in the article, so not to mislead readers into believing it was a fresh discovery. Other sections are equally questionable. Do we really need to have a section on the legal justification for war? Shouldn't this page simply describe the relationship between Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, as per other nations listed in the WMD panel? smb 20:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that that has been a difficulty of this page; as the last few years have transpired, the topic has become too large to hold on just one article, so we have had to divide off sections, and perhaps we need to make a plan to get the article back to Iraq and WMD's, and then anything else should get transferred to its specific article. :) Judgesurreal777 21:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit like a giant jigsaw puzzle -- editors would insert a few different pieces here and there. But now we are in a position to make the picture more complete; describing the scene as accurately and concisely as possible. smb 06:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in favour of removing unsourced statements and anything controversial. If individual objections are raised, we can discuss things further and perhaps reword/reinsert information. It would nice to get this page looking like most of the others. smb 06:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, let's do it. Judgesurreal777 13:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

It has been suggested that Operation Sarindar be merged with WMD theories in the aftermath of the 2003 Iraq War. Please make your thoughts on the proposed merger known on the respective talk page. Thankyou. smb 21:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Significant cooperation

It says in the lead section that "the United Nations located and destroyed large quantities of Iraqi WMD throughout the 1990s in spite of persistent Iraqi obstruction", yet says nothing of Iraqi cooperation, as described here by former UNSCOM inspector and UNMOVIC commissioner Frank Cleminson:

"It is often said, sometimes with dubious authority, that Baghdad never cooperated in the UN quest to account for its nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. In fact, that is not entirely correct. Immediately following the termination of hostilities in 1991, Iraq did cooperate in a significant fashion. Not only did Iraq turn over militarily significant holdings of weapons of mass destruction to the United Nations as instructed, but it also participated effectively in a follow-on destruction process. The destruction of proscribed weapons and of associated facilities was carried out mainly by Iraq but under constant supervision by UNSCOM and the IAEA. Data from the archives in New York bear out the contention that UN inspectors proved to be extremely successful in effectively accounting for the disposition and ultimate destruction of nuclear materials and associated facilities as well as of proscribed missiles and of chemical weapons." [2]

It's worthy of note, that Iraq produced and turned over significant quantities of illicit material to the inspectors. smb (talk) 20:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery of WMD after onset of 2003 war

Users are removing sourced entries from reputible sources (Fox News, Washington Post, US Congress, US State Department) which indicate that small numbers of chemical weapons and shells for their delivery were found in Iraq. They are replacing it with an unsourced, inaccurate personal analysis that the small numbers found count as "none".