WMD's found in Iraq

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by strk

Maybe I misunderstand you, are you saying that the entire world should disarm?  

[/b]
Not only are you missunderstanding me, you are raising a very serious question as to whether you should be in this discussion at all.

By definition, a WMD is either a biological, a chemical or a nuclear weapon. If you take a MOAB and load it with chemicals...then fine, it is a WMD.

I think probably flying a plane into a skyscraper qualifies.

Then you are wrong.

Blister agents are not deadly unless they are not treated.  Period.

Inhale it, the treat it. Good luck.

[deSelys]

On a side note, it will be hard now to blame UN investigators for not having found WMDs when SH was ruling the country when it took months for the US to eventually find 150 old mortar rounds while they are controlling Iraq.


As I haven't participated to those threads since a looooong time let me resume my opinions before they are questioned:

1) SH is a total bad guy. Glad he is gone.
2) US has still to prove me that Iraq was an imminent threat to the Western countries justifying a premptive invasion
3) I fear that the invasion of Iraq will
3.a.) fuel the US hate in the arab world
3.b.) now that SH's tyranny is history, leave the room to a Taliban-like influence amongst the population who seems to be more and more hostile to the US presence as time passes. Between two enemies, I prefer a 'classic' dictator with WMDs than religion-freaks with WMDs...because the latter don't fear to die and would gladly do so if they can take out a lot of their enemies with them. So if there are really WMDs in Iraq, I would like them to be found before another bad guy puts his hand on them.

[Kieran]

I won't argue with that. Bush had better make good on being gone from Iraq this summer. We'll see.

To Orel, how many lies from Iraq do you have to hear before you'll entertain the possibility that maybe, just maybe Bush didn't lie? You are aware the missiles being developed by Iraq had a range outside the limits set by the UN, right? There have been precursor materials found here and there. Now we find shells that shouldn't exist. Nope, no way Iraq was misbehaving, no way.

And please, continue to ignore the rest of the reasons laid out by Bush for going to war. Please focus intently on the imminent threat line, you might see there was more to it than that if you don't focus too hard.

[Godzilla]

Originally posted by deSelys
On a side note, it will be hard now to blame UN investigators for not having found WMDs when SH was ruling the country when it took months for the US to eventually find 150 old mortar rounds while they are controlling Iraq.

 

You mean  the same UN inspectors that said inspections were working? The same UN inspectors lead by Hans Blix, who said he needed 2 more weeks ( or something like that) to certify Iraq in compliance?  

[Nakhui]

Originally posted by Kieran
You are aware the missiles being developed by Iraq had a range outside the limits set by the UN, right?  

Yep Iraq had plans to build a missile...
they were still in Autocad format... never made it to prototype....

In fact, the analysis from weapons experts discovered the design was significantly flawed.

Having plans and having real weapons are two different things.

So far, that brings the total Iraqi WMD stock pile to....

150 rusted mortar shells
1 Auto CAD drawing

over 6,000 US wounded and maimed
Over 500 dead

Over 20,000 Iraqi dead

Pyrrhic victory

[Saurdaukar]

Nak/Nex, how many of the wounded/dead did you know personally?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Godzilla
The US did what the UN was supposed to do and did not: ensure Iraq complied with the resolutions. The UN failed and the US succeeded in making Iraq comply.

The UN regarded Iraq as a threat . The UN was once again proven to be worthless, offering tough words and no action to stand behind them.

In other words, the U.S. exists as the strong arm of a useless organization.

I don't think so.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Kieran
Agree with MiniD on this one. WMD was the thing that caught the American attention, the item seized by the left as a weapon to villainize the war, but make no mistake, numerous reasons for the war were given.  

The only ones that matter are the existence of a threat. We cannot afford to take down every oppressive government. The tax burden is too great. This was a war of convenience.

[Godzilla]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
In other words, the U.S. exists as the strong arm of a useless organization.

I don't think so.

The worthless organization only exists because of the USA's strong arm and money.

The US doesn't need the UN's permission to act on a threat which even the UN agreed was a threat.

[Kieran]

Originally posted by Nakhui
Yep Iraq had plans to build a missile...
they were still in Autocad format... never made it to prototype....

In fact, the analysis from weapons experts discovered the design was significantly flawed.

Having plans and having real weapons are two different things.

So far, that brings the total Iraqi WMD stock pile to....

150 rusted mortar shells
1 Auto CAD drawing

over 6,000 US wounded and maimed
Over 500 dead

Over 20,000 Iraqi dead

Pyrrhic victory

Wrong, Nexus. They tested missiles that flew over the limit. We found weapons that supposedly didn't exist. We found evidence scientists were hiding pieces of a centrifuge. University laboratories were for some reason scrubbed only hours before inspectors arrived (circumstantial evidence, I agree)... and the biggest thing of all, SH sure played like he had WMD.

Truth is, Iraq breached the ceasefire and sanctions many times and many ways. The more we dig, the more ways we'll find, too. Now if you want to argue the things we've found are no big deal, fine, but you at least have to concede they were all violations of sanctions, and nullify the ceasefire. Still, all you do is re-enforce the concept of the UN as a worthless entity. They share your opinions and are therefore rendered moot.

As long as SH was in power we were going back, and it didn't matter who was president. That should be abundantly clear after 12 years of friction between our countries.

[Kieran]

Try and be honest, if it is at all possible. No one has yet called it an imminent threat.

[Godzilla]

The UN failed and the US succeeded in making Iraq comply.
Which method do you guys think was more succsessful.... the US method or the UN's method?

To be fair, the UN only needed 2 more weeks though, so maybe the US jumped the gun too soon after 12 years of trying the UN's method.

The UN should be happy that the goal of Iraqi compliance has been realized . Rejoice UN, rejoice! Making Iraq comlply was the goal of the UN correct?

[Kieran]

Not

True.

Imminent threat was only one reason given. It was a stupid card to play, but it was NOT the only reason given, nor was it the only reason Congress went along with it. What you are seeing from Congress is political opponents trying to make hay in an election year, nothing new there.

The UN never went along with the war, so why even bring that up?

Besides that, what does that have to do with you dishonestly stating people here are calling the shells imminent threat?

[Kieran]

Ah, so you don't intend to be honest. Cool.

BTW, the question you refuse to answer is "Who here has said those shells constitute an imminent threat". Give me a name. Any member of this board. Or... you could again attempt to distract attention from that lie. Your choice.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Kieran
Try and be honest, if it is at all possible. No one has yet called it an imminent threat.

45 minutes away! That's what they said. What could be more imminent?