10Bears Does Iraq have Chem/Bio Weapons?

[Toad]

C'mon 10 Bears...

Are you confident in what you've been saying or not?

Time to throw it down... what's $45 anyway if you're SURE you're right?

C'mon, lets do it!

The Wager:

When the war does happen, Iraq (most likely Republican Guard Units) will use either chemical or biological weapons currently prohibited by the UN against the US forces. If not, it will be clearly shown on worldwide media AFTER the war that Iraq had stockpiles of these weapons that WERE NOT known to the UN inspectors prior to the war. In other words, that they're lying through their teeth about not having this stuff. I'll wager you $45 this also happens. If I win, you pay $45 to HTC to cover another 3 months subscription of the one TAS member that is in the Special Forces of the USA and is currently "in theater". If you win, I send another $45 to Ronald McDonald house and provide you either with a receipt or have them notify you it has been received in you name.

If, for some reason, the TAS member does not make it through in good enough condition to play AH, you donate the money directly to his family.

Well?


Surely Zebb or Zepp or whoever has convinced you this is a totally easy way for you to make $45?

Whadda ya say?

[GRUNHERZ]

Are you 100% sure this TAS member is legit?

[Nash]

Toad.... er not to step in between yours and 10b's little dance... because I might get hurt ... but what of the nuke program? I can't remember if you said there'd also be evidence of this, but if so... I'm curious. What do you reckon the Iraq nuke program (if/when it's unearthed) amounts to? In September Bush said Iraq was 6 months away from developing a nuclear weapon (at the time it seemed to be *the* motivating factor for an attack). To what degree do you think we'll see evidence of this?

[Toad]

Well, Grun, in a word, yes.

His last deployment he gave us an APO address that included his SF unit. I sent some stuff to that APO and he didn't know what I sent. He e-mailed back that he had got it and particulary enjoyed say... the Kudo bars.

This, in addition to one or two other things I'm not going to mention here. You ask WpnX when he gets back, OK?

[Toad]

Nash, 10Bears used a "nuke issue" diversion last time I asked him if he was sure enough that Iraq didn't have WMD to bet a small amount of his pocket change on his opinion. So, this time I left it out, trying to get the wager down.

*********

As far as my opinion on their nuke program? I personally think they're pretty dang close. At the end of the 1st Gulf War, general estimates were that they were between 3 years to as little as 6 months from their first test. That was 12 years ago.

Anyone who thinks they haven't been clandestinely trying to get weapons and parts in for any number of different weapons systems hasn't been paying attention. I'm sure the nuke program was one of them.  

Have they kept up their nuke program? I'd wager the ranch that the answer is yes. Have they been able to cover the remaining ground in the last 12 years? Intuition says they're undoubtedly much, much closer. So is 6 months a reasonable estimate from September? I'd say it's probably close enough to draw serious attention.

Ya know, Governments don't always tell everything they know. Mainly, cause it scares the crap outta folks and/or if the enemy then changes plans the government would look unreliable. One of the reasons Bush might be in a real hurry is that we have solid intel that they are REALLY close.

Not to go into the black helo/tinfoil hat syndrome, but it sort of would explain why the US and GB are willing to fall on their collective swords at the SC to get this thing going, wouldn't it?

Because personally, I think they could back the SC into a corner on this by Fall and go then if Iraq is not in compliance. You get Blix to make up a detailed "no sh*tter" list of stuff that has to be done in order of importance and put a "no later than" date on each item. Then you say "if ANY of this stuff isn't done by the respective date, we go."

Obviously, they don't want to wait that long. So, could nukes be a reason? Yeah, or it could be something else.

Like any other civilian, I don't know for sure. Folks I trust, folks I worked with still in the biz tell me "it's time to go... no sh*t" and that's good enough for me.

Is that an answer?

[10Bears]

Now Toad,

You said it would take up to a year to find the stuff that’s how long the bet would be right?
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/bush-m08.shtml

Bush declared in his opening statement: "Iraqi operatives continue to hide biological and chemical agents to
avoid detection by inspectors. In some cases, these materials have been moved to different locations every 12
to 24 hours or placed in vehicles that are in residential neighborhoods."

This claim, which simply repeats allegations made by Secretary of State Colin Powell in his disastrous
presentation to the United Nations last month, was again refuted by Blix in his Friday report to the Security
Council.

"As I noted on 14 February," Blix stated, "intelligence authorities have claimed that weapons of mass
destruction are moved around Iraq by trucks and, in particular, that there are mobile production units for
biological weapons. The Iraqi side states that such activities do not exist. Several inspections have taken
place at declared and undeclared sites in relation to mobile production facilities. Food and mobile workshops
have been seen, as well as large containers with seed processing equipment.  No evidence of proscribed
activities has so far been found" (emphasis added).

Bush also declared, "We know from multiple intelligence sources that Iraqi weapons scientists continue to be
threatened with harm should they cooperate with UN inspectors." This claim was also challenged by Blix the
following morning. "In the last month," he stated, "Iraq has provided us with the names of many persons who may
be relevant sources of information, in particular, persons who took part in various phases of the unilateral
destruction of biological and chemical weapons and proscribed missiles in 1991."

While acknowledging that the interview process was not free of problems, Blix noted: "the Iraq side seems to
have encouraged interviewees not to request the presence of Iraqi officials, so called minders, or the taping
of the interviews." Blix explained that the inspectors intended to request that some interviews be held outside
Iraq.

So go ahead argue with Blitz.. er Blix

[10Bears]

More reading for ya..

http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/50401.html
phillyBurbs.com

Fallacies and War: Misleading a nervous America to the wrong conclusion.

By Dave Koehler
 
I love America. I feel extremely lucky to have been born in this country into a middle-class family. I get very angry when my America gets abused and my way of
life challenged by the actions of the politicians running the government. For this week’s column, I’m turning serious to discuss some of the empty arguments
given by the current administration as a pretext for war.

When facts are not available or convenient, there are many tricks one can use to present an argument. Here are a few examples of tactics the current administration is using to convince you and the world that invading Iraq is necessary.

One of the favorite methods of the current administration is a false dilemma. This is when only two choices are given when, in reality, there are more options. Right after 9/11 you heard, “You are either with us or against us,” in the fight against terrorism. Actually, countries can be both against terrorism
and not an ally of the U.S. More recently, many countries are showing that they are both against a pre-emptive war and against the current Iraqi regime.

We are also hearing we must attack Iraq or Saddam will develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and threaten the world if we do nothing. Other options of
monitoring with inspectors and containment are just flatly discounted. Are we to believe that Saddam could develop nuclear weapons while the world has him under a microscope?

Just recently, the President suggested the U.N. should vote for war or face irrelevance.
The U.N. will not disappear just because most of its member countries disagree with George W. Bush. If debate and disagreement spelled the end of deliberative bodies, the U.S. Congress would have vanished long ago.

Another arguing device is the argument from ignorance. This involves claiming that what hasn’t been disproven must be true. We hear Iraq hasn’t shown that they do not have WMD, therefore they do. The real burden of proof is on the
party making the claim. The U.S. and/or U.N. must prove that Iraq has WMD. It is impossible for Iraq to prove that they don’t.

An argument portraying a series of increasingly bad events is called a slippery slope. This is used effectively by gun-control opponents who suggest handgun registration will eventually lead to government confiscation of all guns. On Iraq, we hear how Saddam will develop WMDs and give them to terrorists who will
then use them on America. While this is one possible chain ofevents, it hardly justifies a pre-emptive attack on a sovereign nation.

The response to this has been that the proof or smoking gun can’t be in the form of a mushroom cloud over an American city. This is more slippery slope with a false dilemma and a whole lot of fear- mongering. There are effective ways to find proof of WMD and destroy them before it comes to such a dramatic
conclusion.

Criticizing a person or group instead of an issue is called an ad hominem attack. Thecurrent talk about France by many Americans is a perfect example. It is not only childish, it distracts from the real issues. France is not obligated to go along with every American idea because we saved them from Nazi Germany 60 years ago.

President Bush also often calls Saddam Hussein a murderous, evil man who can’t be trusted. While true, this name-calling does not prove that Saddam has any ability to threaten the world.

Another common device we are seeing is a fallacy of exclusion. Colin Powell and President Bush have both talked about aluminum tubes being used for uranium
enrichment for use in nuclear weapons. They always fail to mention that according to U.N. nuclear inspectors the tubes were actually conventional rocket artillery casings. They also mention Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iran in the 1980’s. They again leave out that we supported Iraq at that time in their war against Iran, and basically ignored the use of WMDs at that
time.

Colin Powell also claimed the most recent audio tape from Osama bin Laden showed a link between al Qaeda and Iraq. They have been suggesting this since 9/11, but still haven’t provided any real evidence. Osama said that he stands with the Iraqi people while referring to Hussein as an “infidel.” Also, as most
people know, the majority of the perpetrators of 9/11 were from our “ally” Saudi Arabia.

Arguing a claim is true based on someone being an expert on the subject is known as an appeal to authority. In our case, the experts are defectors from Iraq. Powell claimed defectors reported there were 18 mobile biological weapons
labs cruising around Iraq. First, these defector’s stories are suspect due to their obvious dislike of Iraq. I’m sure they would be happy to tell the U.S. what they wanted to hear if it hastened the destruction of the Iraqi regime and they could return to their homeland. More to the point, chief weapons inspector
Hans Blix said his men had examined some of the trucks and found them to be food-testing labs.

So, with out any real evidence, what’s left? Saddam is bad?

Is that all? I realize war has become relatively easy for the US, especially when we arefacing such a remarkably weak adversary and few American lives are at risk. But why war, and why now when there are still peaceful means for disarming Saddam
Hussein?

Why is the Bush Administration using these deceptive techniques to rush us into a war withIraq?

Is there any solid evidence that Iraq still processes weapons of mass destruction and has ties with terrorist groups? A few audio tapes and fuzzy satellite photos are not proof. All we hear is the same anecdotal evidence repeated over and over again.

President Bush has said that if Saddam and his generals “take innocent life, if they destroy infrastructure, they will be held accountable as war criminals.” Isn’t the United States about to take innocent life and destroy infrastructure?

There was immense goodwill for America after 9/11, with even a French newspaper proclaiming “We are all Americans!” Now America is viewed with suspicion, fear and anger. When millions of the world’s citizens protest American aggression,
why does our president just shrug?

Despite what you have been told by this administration, the ends do not justify the means. While the goals of disarming Saddam and helping Iraq become free and
democratic are certainly good, war is not the right way to make that happen. There is no imminent threat and no need to throw away international law and diplomacy. We should not risk the lives of our troops and kill thousands and thousands of Iraqi men, women and children because of one man.

Sometimes war is a horrible necessity.

This is not one of those times.

[10Bears]

See this lil' hippy gal?...

You want her don't you..

Well.....

We're gonna havta work on your pro rah! rah! WAR attitudes there Mr Toad..

[Creamo]

The $30 Bistro bounty was much funner, this is getting almost compulsive weird.

[Toad]

So your're convinced there are no chem/bio weapons, right 10Bears? I mean that's the point of yer posts right?

And I think you'll be paying off about the time the allies get to Baghdad, so probably not a year. But it could be.

So, you throwing down? Gonna put up or just keep blowing smoke?

I'm in... you taking the bet? Or not?

[Toad]

As fer the hippy chicks, had all of them I could ummm.. eat back in the '69- '72 time frame when I was in AFROTC and they were trying to convince me to "make love, not war".

And I told you.. I'm against going in w/o UN sanction.

But it's going to happen, no matter what I think, and I bet you're wrong about the chem/bio. After all, Blix has assured you. Wanna bet?

[Puke]

A list of what is unaccounted for in Iraq:

48 Scud missiles and launchers
3.9 tons VX nerve gas
790 Tons of Sarin
5,300 gallons of Botulinum Toxin
2,200 gallons of Anthrax
31,658 filled and unfilled chemical munitions
550 artillery shells loaded with Mustard Gas
Design plans for nuclear weapons
600 tons of mustard gas and nerve agents

Remember, Iraq had to catalog all of its weapons and then provide proof of their destruction.

This list comes from a History Channel program "Saddam's Arsenal."

[Gyro/T69]

^^^^^^
 I watched it again tonight. But I'm quite sure the girl in 10bears picture has the complete low down on what is and isn't in Iraq. So there's nothing to worry about, is there?

[Toad]

Ya know, looking at that girl, I think I ........ knew.......... her momma.

So, anyway, you going to believe Blix and take an easy $45 off me?

Come on, throw down. Your sure to win, right?

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Toad
Well, Grun, in a word, yes.

His last deployment he gave us an APO address that included his SF unit. I sent some stuff to that APO and he didn't know what I sent. He e-mailed back that he had got it and particulary enjoyed say... the Kudo bars.

This, in addition to one or two other things I'm not going to mention here. You ask WpnX when he gets back, OK?

Great, just making sure nobody is getting tricked again after I found out the full extent of the other story.