Oops, is that WMD we just Found in Iraq????????

by Leolaia 72 Replies latest social current

• 

  hawkaw

  wasasister. Far from "jumping" on anything I simply reported the facts as presented in the news releases and also echoed the analysis that I have heard from every news source - that this is NO proof of WoMD and is just a left-over shell.

  Lets keep moving the "goal posts". Fact is that sarin, especially the 155 mm binary shell, is defined as a WMD by the UN. The liquids in binary shell, when fired, will mix to form deadly sarin gas - 3 to 4 litres. Its nasty stuff in the right environment. Whether or not the shell was before or after GW1 is a mute point. Under UN resolutions Sadam was prescribed to account for all of his WMDs. Sadam said to the world (including Dan Rather) that he had accounted for all of his WMDs. But the facts are that the coalition has found this binary Sarin shell, a mustard gas shell and others. Sadam was in violation of the UN resolution on WMDs. hawk
• 

  dubla

  Whether or not the shell was before or after GW1 is a mute point. Under UN resolutions Sadam was prescribed to account for all of his WMDs. Sadam said to the world (including Dan Rather) that he had accounted for all of his WMDs.

  exactly....i cant understand why this is such a hard concept for some to grasp. ONE shell is ONE more than he claimed to have unaccounted for. i just dont get this mentality that says: if its an old shell, it doesnt count....if its an old shell, its not a WMD.....if saddam didnt know where it was, he wasnt in violation.....etc, etc. i swear if there was a nuclear warhead found buried in iraq, there would be people on here declaring it a meaningless find because "saddam forgot where he put it".

  aa
• 

  hawkaw

  exactly....i cant understand why this is such a hard concept for some to grasp. ONE shell is ONE more than he claimed to have unaccounted for. i just dont get this mentality that says:

  You have to remember the many in the press have told us that NO WMDs have been found or will be found in Iraq. To report what the UN resolutions stated with the quantifiable evidence is a bit to much for the mainstream press. Then, add that with what some in the anti-war crowd have been wrongly spouting (which are some of the most stupidest things I have ever heard) as well as an election year in the USA and of course all you will see is this insane attempt to move the "goal posts". I tella, I still have Neil MacDonald (Washington corespondent for CBC) up here in Canada spewing this stupid line of reasoning that no WMDs have been found even after the May 26, 2004 confirmation of the 155 mm shell. And of course CBC or any other mainstream media in Canada has yet to actually report the occurence of the 155 mm shell. Also remember Hans Blix and other UN inspectors have staked their reputations on this fact that there are NO WMDs as well. So that also adds to this mentality. At least David Kaye wasn't as stupid as Blix.
  

  People, whether they are for or against this "past" war (which is now a reconstruction effort similar to Gernany after WW2), need to realize that there is now quanitifiable evidence of the existence of these WMDs and there is a very serious danger that these weapons will get into the wrong hands.

  hawk
• 

  SixofNine

  The question is not whether or not Saddam was in violation of UN rules. The question is whether or not you take the extraordinary measure of invading and occupying and killing alot of Iraqis and Americans and thereby weakening our defenses and taking your eye off the ball on terrorism and diluting greatly our mission to bring Osama bin Laden to justice and giving life to a whole new crop of enraged muslims, just because Saddam was being "defiant" and stepping over the line of UN rules.

  And the answer is obvious. No, you don't.
• 

  dubla

  six-

  The question is not whether or not Saddam was in violation of UN rules.

  this may be your stance....but that is INDEED the issue that so many on here violently defend.....the supposed fact that saddam wasnt in violation, that he did in fact declare all his wmds, and whatever he couldnt account for had been completely destroyed. if youd like me to post a list of comments from the anti-war crowd to back this up, let me know.....itll be a long list.

  im glad to see that you dont buy into that nonsense.......whether or not you agree with following through on the consequenses spelled out in resolution 1441 is obviously a much more reasonable debate than whether or not saddam was in violaton of it.

  aa
• 

  hawkaw

  The question is not whether or not Saddam was in violation of UN rules. The question is whether or not you take the extraordinary measure of invading and occupying and killing alot of Iraqis and Americans and thereby weakening our defenses and taking your eye off the ball on terrorism and diluting greatly our mission to bring Osama bin Laden to justice and giving life to a whole new crop of enraged muslims, just because Saddam was being "defiant" and stepping over the line of UN rules.
  

  And the answer is obvious. No, you don't.

  Respectfully, I completely disagree with your response. Why? As just one example, Pakistan/coalition attacks on Taliban and al Q forces over the last few years in the southwestern province of Pakistan and Eastern Afganistan. I note in the back pages of today's press reports that another terrorist main figure ... a tribal leader in the region ... was killed by Pakistan troops. I also note that yesterday Yemon put on trial those who were responsible for the Cole attack except for the main dude who is in USA custody. Let's be real, its not the governments that have taken their eye off Afganistan or the W on T. No No. Its the press who has taken their eye off the 15,000 - 20,000 American troops in Eastern Afganistan and the other 4,500 coalition troops patrolling Kabol (including the 2,000 or so Canadian troops that I might point out to you). Just like the press has taken their eye off the thousands of people butchered by Sadam and who are in mass graves in Iraq that makes the GW2 and its aftermath look like a walk in the park. Just like the press who doesn't want to report what the Carter doctrine is all about and its importance to US foreign policy. And why? Well ... its boring news with the American occupation of Iraq stuff going on. I can go on and on. And no doubt you will go on and on. But my point is that people need to get their collective heads out of the sand. The war is over and the clean up and handover back to the people of Iraq (including their oil I might point out) is proceeding. The 12 shells found so far plus the 2 (of the 16) found by the Polish troops and confirmed by the coalition are a serious indicator of a problem. And this problem is that there is a good likelihood that a number of WMD shells exist in many caches that are not in the control of the coalition. These WMDs could make it into the wrong hands and then (as was almost the case of Jordan just a few short months ago) we could have a city under attack with these weapons. hawk
• 

  SixofNine

  :Let's be real, its not the governments that have taken their eye off Afganistan or the W on T.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  To say that doing Iraq did not cause American military and intelligence and governance to take their collective eye off of the W on T and Osama bin Laden, is preposterous.
• 

  hawkaw

  And while we are on this topic ... here is another issue that drive me nuts that I now found out was true:

  A British inquiry, led by Lord Butler, into pre-war intelligence is about to conclude that the MI6 were justified in claiming Saddam was trying to buy uranium from Niger.

  http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373567507

  http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=68

  I still remember the press harping about this last year and even going so far as telling me the American and British administrations were misleading people.
• 

  hawkaw

  To say that doing Iraq did not cause American military and intelligence and governance to take their collective eye off of the W on T and Osama bin Laden, is preposterous.

  Yep. That's what I am saying. Oh I bet you can find the odd satilite etc. that moved for a while and of course some of the "upper" parts of the Administrations may have been more focused etc. but the American, British, etc governments are quite large. Hell even the Canadian federal and provincial governments are quite large. But not everybody gets assigned to the same file.

  Facts are that the Fort Drum 10th mountain men and women (which are close to where I live) were in Afganistan doing the nasty with A-10 and other fighter support while the 1 Calvry, the 3rd Armor and the Marines were rolling through the desert with USAF support in Iraq.
• 

  SixofNine

  As I said, it's preposterous. Hand waving it away with a "oh, gubments are really big" is equally preposterous.