Glenn Reynolds point out an interesting article on the discovery of hidden WMDs in China.
An accident in China involving chemical weapons allegedly left behind by Japanese troops in World War II has left at least 36 people ill. Metal drums containing what is thought to be mustard gas were found on a construction site in the city of Qiqihar in Heilongjiang province.
So, here’s a bunch of drums containing chemical weapons buried near a relatively populated area that had been hidden for over fifty years, and they hadn’t been discovered until now. What does that tell us about WMDs in Iraq? One of Reynold’s readers has a succinct answer:
The lessons?
[1] Things can stay hidden for a long long time.
[2] Just because a chemical weapons program may have closed down years ago doesn’t mean that barrels of product weren’t stashed away for use.
Of course, the usual suspects will argue that Iraq never had a WMD program (despite the fact that the UN said they most certainly did.) Then when the program is uncovered, they’ll argue that they didn’t have the weapons themselves. Then if those are found, they’ll argue that they weren’t a threat. (Despite the fact that even a few grams of biological agent can kill thousands.)
The attacks on the Bush Administration are essentially projection: critics of the war have been shown time and time again to be willing to ignore or manipulate evidence to attack the coalition and the war on Iraq. Despite being constantly proven wrong, they continue to manipulate the facts to serve their partisan agenda.
Again, you’re failing to realise how easy it is to hide something when no one is looking for it.
Just as the burden was on Christopher Columbus’ shoulder to prove the world wasn’t flat, the burden is on the shoulders of those insisting Iraq HAS weapons of mass destruction to prove it. I realize the conservative worldview has never been as bass-ackwards as it is now, but you guys need to start producing results before you start talking about other people manipulating facts that you have yet to produce. :))
Just as the burden was on Christopher Columbus’ shoulder to prove the world wasn’t flat
I should point out (before somebody who disagrees with you does) that Columbus wasn’t trying to prove that the world wasn’t flat – that wasn’t even an accepted view at the time – but rather that the world was so small that it was closer to sail to the Indies towards the west than it was to circle around Africa. In this he was spectcularly wrong.
But you’re right, the burden of proof is on he who makes the positive claim – ala, “Iraq has weapons right now.”