by Simon 865 Replies latest social current
dubla,
when and how?
sorry...i misread your post...i thought you were talking about WMD.
about powells report...i hope you don't expect me to remember exactly what you said a couple of weeks ago. (apparently you can't remember either since back than the word "considerable" was missing!)
realist-
no, i dont expect you to remember......thats why i refreshed your memory for you!
aa
SurRealist,
You said,
I can't speak for the Bush administration. Seems they have their hands full with trying to stabalize Iraq, deal with Iran, and find a solution for the Palestine/Israel issue.
aa
IP: glAUUiexpS+a3L4w
now with all due respect...the existence of a lab - even if able to produce bioweapons - does not mean bioweapons indeed existed! every university with a bio department has equipment that could be used to produce bio weapons. with all due respect, there is a colossal difference between universities having equipment that could be used for such purposes, and having a mobile laboratory that could have no other conceivable use than the production of bio weapons. but, only time will tell if thats the case or not. i just think your example is a bit suspect. also, if the finding would be substantial bush and co would have made a big fuss about it already. my guess is that theres a fear of "crying wolf" too many times....which is exactly what the administration has been accused of already. at this point, i would speculate that only confirmed evidence (which is no doubt why international inspectors are being called in, and this is a huge step im sure youd agree) will be ballyhooed. aa | ||
| IP: glAUUiexpS+a3L4w | ||
| Realist | Re: WoMD ... so where are they? | |
| Post 1565 of 1565 since 19-Apr-02 | dubla, since effective bioweapons are very hard to produce the whole thing is just very suspect in my opinon. Iraq (and specifically the Saddam Hussein Regime) possessing ANY type of Bio weapons, "effective" or not, aside from being in violation of the UN agreement, would be bad, very bad. How effective would "ineffective" Bio weapons have been in causing hysteria etc if released in NYC? Or even on our troops? | |
dubla,
i am not sure what your point is? of course if one of powell's claims is verified it lends some credit to what he said. is that worth a discussion?
yeru,
i can'T help but get the impression you are obsessed with my name
now with all due respect...the existence of a lab - even if able to produce bioweapons - does not mean bioweapons indeed existed! every university with a bio department has equipment that could be used to produce bio weapons.
THE POINT IS THEY WEREN"T SUPPOSSED TO HAVE THESE, and SAID THEY DIDN'T!
this was part of the discussion with dubla about whether iraq has WMD. also it would have to be proven that such facilities are indeed used to produce WMD. every fermenter can be used to produce toxic bacetria and every country that is not in the stoneage has fermenters.
Iraq (and specifically the Saddam Hussein Regime) possessing ANY type of Bio weapons, "effective" or not, aside from being in violation of the UN agreement, would be bad, very bad. How effective would "ineffective" Bio weapons have been in causing hysteria etc if released in NYC? Or even on our troops?
a) even in the hypothetical event that hussein had bioweapons i don't see why it would be that bad. if they were effective he couldn'T use them against his own people since that might kill himself. and to use them against the US would get him killed too....so what was the threat?
b) firstly, he didn't use them on US troops even when he was attacked and about to loose. why? secondly, why would hussein have released bioweapons in NYC? thirdly, they probably would have caused about as much panic as the letters with the anthrax dust that showed up at some post office in new jersey and florida.
Tell the surviving families of the thousands of dead Kurds that the weapons were ineffective.
For you, it's become obvious, no proof is proof enough, HATE AMERICA first, BLAME AMERICA first, give every two bit dictator a pass. Geesh!
yeru,
hussein has used bio weapons against the kurds? when?
<<<HATE AMERICA first, BLAME AMERICA first, give every two bit dictator a pass. Geesh!>>>
bla bla bla...
do you have anything of substance?
SurRealist,
Where have you been living, yes he used Bio Weapons on the Kurds, early 90's. Geesh, are you intentionally uninformed?
yeru,
you are telling me hussein killed thousands of kurds with bioweapons? i honestly missed that one.
by the way...did you know that it was the US who supplied hussein with bio weapons?
Yeru, what do you suggest I do productive? Do you know what I do? Complaining? Give me your best shot.
Guest 77
so lets see what rumsfeld has to say!
nytimes article from may 28th.
By ERIC SCHMITT
efense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld suggested publicly for the first time yesterday that Iraq might have destroyed chemical and biological weapons before the war there, a possibility that senior American officers in Iraq have raised in recent weeks.
Mr. Rumsfeld has repeatedly expressed optimism that it is just a matter of time, and of interviewing enough senior Iraqi scientists and former government officials, before military teams uncover the illicit arms that President Bush cited as a major reason for attacking Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein's rule.
 | Advertisement |
|
While Mr. Rumsfeld repeated that assertion yesterday, he added, "It is also possible that they decided that they would destroy them prior to a conflict." Maj. Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the Army's 101st Airborne Division, now in northern Iraq, mentioned the same possibility two weeks ago.
Senior defense aides insisted that Mr. Rumsfeld's response to a question after his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in Manhattan yesterday broke no new ground, and that it was consistent with his past explanations.
He said the speed of the campaign might have prevented Iraq from using unconventional weapons. He added that military investigators had been searching in earnest for only seven weeks, that Iraqi weapons might be buried in one of several hundred uninspected sites and that investigators' best leads might come from Iraqi officials who have only recently surrendered or been captured.
"I don't know the answer," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "I suspect we'll learn a lot more as we go along and keep interrogating people."
But the fact that Mr. Rumsfeld even raised the possibility that Iraq might have destroyed unconventional weapons before the war prompts new questions about the intelligence that President Bush and his senior advisers relied on to go to war, and about the credibility of the United States, defense analysts said yesterday.
"They don't have a good explanation, and therefore are trying to come up with as long a list as possible," said Joseph Cirincione, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. "But it's impossible to destroy or hide the quantities the administration said they had without our noticing it."
Mr. Bush, in an interview last month with NBC News, acknowledged, "there's going to be skepticism until people find out there was, in fact, a weapons of mass destruction program."
In his prepared remarks, Mr. Rumsfeld made no reference yesterday to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Instead, he sought to counter critics who have accused the administration of bungling the postwar phase of the military campaign in Iraq, and to appeal for patience for a reconstruction effort that will be difficult and bumpy at times.
"The transition to democracy will take time," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "Trial and error and experimentation will be a part of the process. The efforts will not be perfect. Course corrections will be needed. I'm sure they'll all be pointed to and viewed with alarm, but we'll survive that."
Mr. Rumsfeld's remarks seemed part of a public relations campaign of sorts. His speech echoed many of themes he outlined in an op-ed article published on Tuesday in The Wall Street Journal. Aides said he was to meet with The Journal's editorial board while in Manhattan.
The priorities Mr. Rumsfeld described coincide with recent steps by the administration's new civilian administrator for Iraq, L. Paul Bremer III.
These immediate goals include asserting the coalition's authority and providing security, steps Mr. Bremer has taken, along with increased military patrols in Baghdad to restore order and curb looting and lawlessness.
"The coalition is hiring and training Iraqi police, and will be prepared to use force to impose order, as required, because without order, little else is possible in any country," Mr. Rumsfeld said.
As fresh troops from the Army's First Armored Division take over for the war-weary Third Infantry Division in Baghdad, Mr. Rumsfeld said the coalition "will maintain as many security forces in Iraq as is necessary, and will keep them there for as long as is necessary."
Restoring basic services such as electricity and running water has proved more difficult that American engineers anticipated, but Mr. Rumsfeld said that "the power situation in Baghdad is improving, albeit slowly."
While Mr. Bremer has delayed establishing an interim civilian Iraqi authority, in part to provide better security and identify qualified representatives for the political body, Mr. Rumsfeld said the allies would move to install Iraqis who are not senior Baath Party members in ministry positions where possible.
The allies will promote a market economy for Iraq, he said, one that will be more diversified than the country's former economy that relied heavily on oil. That effort received a boost yesterday when the Treasury Department said it was lifting most of the remaining economic sanctions against Iraq.
"The Iraqi people have an historic opportunity to build a free and civil society," Mr. Rumsfeld said.
"If Iraqis, the Iraqi people, can take hold of their country, develop the institutions of self-government and claim their place as responsible members of the international community," he said, "then the world could well have a new model for a successful transition from tyranny to self-reliance, and indeed, a new ally in the global war on terror."
