"500 WMD Munitions, Not Stockpiles"

I remember reading about 12 munitions filled with Sarin gas which had been found in Iraq just after American troops arrived. If I remember correctly the delivery systems were found to have a stamp of a French company.

Listening to Hugh Hewitt this evening on the way home from work and dinner I heard the last segment of an interview with (R) Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. I learnt there had been found approximately 500 total munitions thus far since 2003 and more were likely to be found. Read the information released thus far on Rick Santorum's website.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060621e.html

While this information appears to me as critical, I am anticipating the arguments now of their legitamcy. Two possible arguments;
1) "This information and the declassified report has been cooked up by the Bush Administration. It is awfully coincidental as President Bush's pole numbers have sunk to recent lows, he now brings this information out to prop himself up."
2) Yet the most anticipated argument is: "500 munitions is by no means "stock piles".
I anticipate Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi or Edward Kennedy to chant this fight song.

My argument is this; "How do you define weapons of mass destruction." How few or many munitions are needed to a nation to officially contain WMD? When the 12 munitions of Sarin gas was found in 2003, I agreed this was by no means stock piles of Sarin gas. But is it still not a WMD munition?

I argued with a friend over the definition of WMD. We discussed the definition of WMD and we agreed a quality definition for your everyday American may be; A weapon of non-conventional (gases, nuclear) means which has the ability to cause mass casualties. We then further defined mass casualties. It took some deal making but we agreed, if in one episode or instant, 1000+ people were killed by a non-conventional weapon, then this could be considered WMD.

Neither one of us knew whether one Sarin filled munition could kill 1000 people, however my gut feeling is it could. At minimum the use of 10 or 12 Sarin filled munitions in one attack would most definately meet the definition of the use of WMD.

Now apparently 500 have been found. Could any reasonable person still say, "there was no threat from Saddam... there were no WMD?" We shall see.

If the Democrats continue to circle the wagons around the "Bush lied, people died" camp. They will be slaughtered in the next elections and beyond.