SkyDekker 1,465 #51 August 28, 2003 QuoteI don't think I heard that, but if I had to guess, it was in reference to SCUDs with chemical agents, not a nuclear capability. It was a huge fear last time, too. They were used in the Iran-Iraq war as well. 45 minutes would assume a SCUD already filled, fueled and in the field, which wasn't likely, but a risk too great for the troops to ignore and not be prepared now those were the scuds in the field that were never found with the WMD that were never found. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #52 August 28, 2003 Quoteif I had to guess, it was in reference to SCUDs with chemical agents, And when did we find them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #53 August 28, 2003 QuoteAnd when did we find them? God... you and the Justinses are in SUCH a hurry...Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TitaniumLegs 8 #54 August 28, 2003 QuoteAnd when did we find them? I was talking about troop preparedness. You go in ready for the worst, hoping for the best, not the other way around. (>o|-< If you don't believe me, ask me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #55 August 28, 2003 QuoteAnd when did we find them? we did find massive amounts of NBC suits for the Iraqi military. Do you know what NBC suits are for? Seems to indicate they felt the need to have them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
littledebbie000 0 #56 August 28, 2003 What are NBC suits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #57 August 28, 2003 QuoteWhat are NBC suits? Network executives Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #58 August 28, 2003 protective suits for Nuke, bio and chemical warfare. http://www.saferamerica.com/saProducts.asp?categoryID=14 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #59 August 28, 2003 >we did find massive amounts of NBC suits for the Iraqi military. Do >you know what NBC suits are for? Seems to indicate they felt the > need to have them. Yep. And of course that could have nothing to do with the fact that we told them we were about to invade them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
littledebbie000 0 #60 August 28, 2003 Network executives Quote I guess I left that one wide open.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #61 August 28, 2003 QuoteDo you know what NBC suits are for? Seems to indicate they felt the need to have them. Hmmm, are they used as a weapon of mass destruction? I've got air bags in my car. Does that mean I intend to intentionally crash it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kiltboy 0 #62 August 28, 2003 I believe Iran and Iraq both used chemical weapons during the Iran Iraq war. I also thought that the suits were found near the Iran border so it makes sense to have protective suits near the border of a country that has exchanged chemical munitions with you in the past. David Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #63 August 28, 2003 QuoteYep. And of course that could have nothing to do with the fact that we told them we were about to invade them. Or it could mean they were intending to use them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #64 August 28, 2003 >Or it could mean they were intending to use them. Our troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #65 August 28, 2003 QuoteOr it could mean they were intending to use them. Sure, could mean that. But, again, the point is... A) They aren't WMD B) They aren't proof of WMD According to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #66 August 28, 2003 QuoteOur troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? I hear we have nukes, too. When do we invade us? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #67 August 28, 2003 QuoteOur troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? we had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD. they had them so they could launch the wmd. This thread has been hijacked (as normal) all I wanted to discuss is Iran and nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #68 August 28, 2003 >we had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD . . . But . . . but . . . you said they had them so they could _launch_ WMD's! Surely that's the only reason to have them! Unless you're using a double standard, which I'd find hard to believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #69 August 28, 2003 Quotewe had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD. they had them so they could launch the wmd. And where's your source on this "fact"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #70 August 28, 2003 QuoteAccording to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? The directions were in french. Lets get back to the thread about IRAN and Nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #71 August 28, 2003 QuoteThe directions were in french. Ok...that was a good one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #72 August 28, 2003 >The directions were in french. Dow Chemical prints their directions in French? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #73 August 28, 2003 QuoteI hear we have nukes, too. When do we invade us? because we are not training Bin's troops at salmon pac, SH was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,118 #74 August 28, 2003 >because we are not training Bin's troops at salmon pac, SH was. We control Iraq now. There are Al Qaeda terrorist training camps there. I guess by your logic we're training Bin Laden's troops. (Which wouldn't be anything new - we did that for years in the 80's.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,149 #75 August 28, 2003 QuoteQuoteAccording to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? The directions were in french. Lets get back to the thread about IRAN and Nukes. Sorry, that won't work. All you need do is go back to last January through March and re-read all your "Iraq has WMD, we'll find them soon..." posts back then, and ask yourself if, in retrospect, you have any credibility at all on these issues. Or did you think we'd forgotten the rubbish you wrote back then?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 3 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
PhillyKev 0 #61 August 28, 2003 QuoteDo you know what NBC suits are for? Seems to indicate they felt the need to have them. Hmmm, are they used as a weapon of mass destruction? I've got air bags in my car. Does that mean I intend to intentionally crash it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kiltboy 0 #62 August 28, 2003 I believe Iran and Iraq both used chemical weapons during the Iran Iraq war. I also thought that the suits were found near the Iran border so it makes sense to have protective suits near the border of a country that has exchanged chemical munitions with you in the past. David Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #63 August 28, 2003 QuoteYep. And of course that could have nothing to do with the fact that we told them we were about to invade them. Or it could mean they were intending to use them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #64 August 28, 2003 >Or it could mean they were intending to use them. Our troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #65 August 28, 2003 QuoteOr it could mean they were intending to use them. Sure, could mean that. But, again, the point is... A) They aren't WMD B) They aren't proof of WMD According to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #66 August 28, 2003 QuoteOur troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? I hear we have nukes, too. When do we invade us? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #67 August 28, 2003 QuoteOur troops went into Iraq with NBC suits. How come it's OK for the US to plan to use chemical weapons but not OK for Iraq to plan to do the same? we had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD. they had them so they could launch the wmd. This thread has been hijacked (as normal) all I wanted to discuss is Iran and nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #68 August 28, 2003 >we had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD . . . But . . . but . . . you said they had them so they could _launch_ WMD's! Surely that's the only reason to have them! Unless you're using a double standard, which I'd find hard to believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #69 August 28, 2003 Quotewe had them to protect our troops from Iraq's WMD. they had them so they could launch the wmd. And where's your source on this "fact"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #70 August 28, 2003 QuoteAccording to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? The directions were in french. Lets get back to the thread about IRAN and Nukes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #71 August 28, 2003 QuoteThe directions were in french. Ok...that was a good one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #72 August 28, 2003 >The directions were in french. Dow Chemical prints their directions in French? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #73 August 28, 2003 QuoteI hear we have nukes, too. When do we invade us? because we are not training Bin's troops at salmon pac, SH was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #74 August 28, 2003 >because we are not training Bin's troops at salmon pac, SH was. We control Iraq now. There are Al Qaeda terrorist training camps there. I guess by your logic we're training Bin Laden's troops. (Which wouldn't be anything new - we did that for years in the 80's.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,149 #75 August 28, 2003 QuoteQuoteAccording to you they had chemicals and planned to use them? Why didn't they? The directions were in french. Lets get back to the thread about IRAN and Nukes. Sorry, that won't work. All you need do is go back to last January through March and re-read all your "Iraq has WMD, we'll find them soon..." posts back then, and ask yourself if, in retrospect, you have any credibility at all on these issues. Or did you think we'd forgotten the rubbish you wrote back then?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
