Saddam has it up his pants....cuz he said so.
"Mez have WMD up mez pants. Deez Americans findz me and shootz me, mez go boom!"
Gawd, I hope so!
Yiz
WoMD ... so where are they?
by Simon 865 Replies latest social current
-
-
George W Bush
The first United Nations inspection unit, Unscom, operated in Iraq from 1991 to 1998. Its mission was to destroy weapons that, it was assumed, would be handed over by a defeated and co-operative regime. The reality was rather different.
With an area twice that of Britain, Iraq could easily withhold information from a few hundred inspectors. Through infiltration, bugging and physical threats, it systematically obstructed the UN's efforts. . . .
The nuclear weapons Iraq was aiming to produce depend on highly enriched uranium, which may still be available on the black market. Given the documentation from previous work, and the know-how in scientists' heads, the time required to assemble a crude bomb would then be a matter of months.
If the US had yielded to UN pressure to give Unmovic more time, it is unlikely the inspectors would have found significant WMD. The troop concentrations around Iraq would have been dispersed and the pressure on Mr Hussein to co-operate would have diminished accordingly. Ultimately economic sanctions would have been lifted - and a rehabilitated Mr Hussein could have resumed his quest for WMD.
That would have been disastrous for global security. The possibility of links to terrorist groups was one of the weightiest motives for war. Regimes in possession of clandestine WMD must be tempted to use them by proxy, since countermeasures cannot easily be directed against anonymous assailants.
What matters is not whether Iraq's WMD can be tracked down but whether the production of such weapons has been inhibited for the foreseeable future. That required the overthrow of the regime.
-
Satanus
GWB
Many of the wtc suicide flyers were from saudi arabia. A large check to the terrorists was sent from a high official in pakistan. The taliban came from pakistan. These terrorist links are much more substantial than the tenuous links to iraq. It would seem that for the us govt, the iraq attack has nothing to do w the wtc attack. As an excuse, it works well on the people, though.
SS
-
Yizuman
Many of the wtc suicide flyers were from saudi arabia. A large check to the terrorists was sent from a high official in pakistan. The taliban came from pakistan. These terrorist links are much more substantial than the tenuous links to iraq. It would seem that for the us govt, the iraq attack has nothing to do w the wtc attack. As an excuse, it works well on the people, though.
What about the fact that Saddam murdered over 200,000 Kurdish Villagers as well as his own people in Iraq by killing anyone who opposed him or thinks they are a threat to his power base?
Seems that people are avoiding that issue.
So what you think we should do? Put Saddam back in power and apologize for invading his country?
Yiz
-
patio34
When did SHussein gas the Kurds? If the US was so outraged at that (they weren't) why did they wait so long to retaliate?
-
Simon
... and why supply the gas and go on supplying arms afterwards?
-
jelly
I have to admit as an American everytime I see the Iraq army I would have a tringe of guilt. All the T-72 tanks that are made in ohio. Those mirage jet fighters made right here in california. AK-47's which are of coursed produced in florida. And all thoughs wonderfull extras like, night vision gear, GPS jammers. Yes, America just made a bundle selling Saddam all that stuff.
Also, just FYI stuff to make gas is dual use, the equipment used to make pesticide (purchased from europe) can also be sued to make posion gas. Honestly, pesticide was developed from military research on gas and is just dilluted nerve agent.
Reality:
- During the Iran Iraq war we did give Saddam some sattelite inteligence. Primarly because we did not want to see him over run by Iran. In the messy reality of that part of the world not a bad decision.
- France and Russia were by far the biggest supplies of millitary equipment to Iran. That should be obvious by simply looking at its composition.
- We did give Iraq some samples of anthrax (was that what he used on the kurds? no?). stupid idea but remember anthrax occurs naturally and this was not weapons grade anthrax. A world of difference between the two.
Terry
-
dubla
simon-
... and why supply the gas
this is the second time ive seen this statement in this thread. the other time i asked the poster for some proof of this claim (and i got, of course, no reply), and ill do the same this time. do you have any backing for this statement, or is it just another fabrication? more specifically: please supply links showing that the mustard gas saddam used on the kurds was supplied by the u.s.
aa
-
William Penwell
I have posted this before but here it is again:
Officially, most Western nations participated in a total arms embargo against Iraq during the 1980s, but as we shall see in this broadcast, Western companies, primarily in Germany and Great Britain, but also in the United States, sold Iraq the key technology for its chemical, missile, and nuclear programs. As we shall also see, many Western governments seemed remarkably indifferent, if not enthusiastic, about those deals. And here in Washington, the government consistently followed a policy which allowed and perhaps encouraged the extraordinary growth of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and his power.
But Germany was not alone in supplying chemicals to Iraq. In April 1988, a U.S. Customs sting in Baltimore uncovered an Iraqi chemical-buying network shipping hundreds of tons of thiodyglycol to Iraq. The chemical has several commercial uses, but officials believe the Iraqis were interested in just one. It is a chief ingredient of mustard gas.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/arming.html
-
dubla
william-
are you serious? really, that is your proof? the fact that you believe those statements even back up your stance is laughable, and im almost embarrassed for you.
youve given a statement saying that a small number of companies in the u.s. sold technology to iraq.......the statement has no strong backing as far as i can tell from your link, and even if its true, this supports the u.s. government supplying mustard gas to iraq how?
and your second statement, about the sting operation......again, how does this support the notion that the u.s. government supplied mustard gas to iraq? in fact, if it was a u.s. customs sting, doesnt this support the exact opposite, that the u.s. was actively trying to stop the components from getting into saddams hands? interesting logic youre using there.
aa