Is the proof the WH lied to us about WMD's this easy?

I've been mulling over the information that was given by a caller on the Malloy show a couple of days ago (I think it was Malloy... could be wrong there). This guy said that he had a friend in the military who was involved in procurement of equipment for the soldiers prior to the invasion of Iraq. This military guy confirmed to him that there was no particular focus on equipping the soldiers with things that would address the deployment of those WMD's which WH officials promised us were present in Iraq.

This got me thinking....

If there was a REAL belief that WMD's existed, why would we send our soldiers into combat without even the basics to deal with WMD's? Also, wouldn't the basic attack plan have been totally opposite to what we did? Why would we send all the foot soldiers into a battlefield, unprotected, if we were sure WMD's were there? Wasn't that sending them to their quick and gruesome death if those weapons were used? How could we attack a country that absolutely, positively HAD (sarcasm) WMD's without "knowing" where they were, and sending more than a hundred thousand of our soldiers to poke around the country in search of them, with no protections from them, while hoping they weren't used against them?

This seems like a simple, though overwhelming, argument to prove to the sheeple that the gov't knew there was no WMD threat.

Maybe this point has been discussed... if it did I missed it. Another thing that makes you go hmmmmmmmm.

Why, oh why would they every do that.

Why, oh why would they every do that.

about the troops & how he is more than willing to cut back on tax breaks for his friends to supply the troops with.....
Oh never mind!

border, well within SCUD missile range, if you really thought there was a possibility of a nuclear attack, would you?

embedded reporters filming training rehearsals ect...

There were a number of sights, Tuwaitha and Al Qaqaa being two of the biggest that we basically threw the barn doors open and let everyone take whatever they wanted. Seems Rummie and Co were more interested in make sure there was plenty of fuel for an insurgency and could care less about WMD's.

to look for WMD's (or lack of). You know, the ones that can read a license plate from orbit. Everything about the run-up to Bush's war was BS.

were any of the soldiers going into combat given supplemental training about how to deal with an WMD attack, how to recognize what type of attack it was, or instructed on what to DO with WMD's if they found them?

I'm gonna hazard a guess and say none of that happened.

http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1027nj1.htm

Vice President Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, overruling advice from some White House political staffers and lawyers, decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence that erroneously concluded Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, according to Bush administration and congressional sources.

"Why would we send all the foot soldiers into a battlefield, unprotected, if we were sure WMD's were there? Wasn't that sending them to their quick and gruesome death if those weapons were used?"

Yes, it would be sending them to a quick and gruesome death. Think of the moral outrage it would cause at home and the political capital that it would generate. Then ask yourself, who might benifit from such an outcome.

but I believe the populace would have turned against the administration if masses of our soldiers were killed by WMD's when they were sent into a war without protection or instruction. Think Katrina x a brazillion.

The populace would only know of the deaths...until maybe 2 years later when rumors of the missing protection and training finally begin to emerge.

They spent so much time telling us exactly what type of WMD's were there, how could they justify tons of our soldiers dying from those same WMD's? Not like they could have claimed it was a surprise.

Gruesome, absolutely. Quick is not guaranteed when dealing with WMD's--airborne pathogens and/or toxins can produce painfully gruesome effects spanning hours or days before the victim dies.

....I think it was in the Melbourne daily The Age.
There were confirmed stories that Australian troops were told by their superiors (in March '03) not to worry about gasmasks because it was already known that there were no WMDs.

still looking for the link....