BoobieCootie 0 #1 January 16, 2003 I think we are about to witness WW3 folks. It seems that the UN inspectors have found what Iraq's been hiding all along, and Bush is tired of this hide-n-seek. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #2 January 16, 2003 Gee, wait, no, you mean Bush was right? Oh, damn...I guess those liberals feel really funny right about now don't they.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jessd 0 #3 January 16, 2003 That's a scary thought WW3. I usually try not to post in these types of threads because I personally do not follow the politics behind this stuff too closely. But, I have some friends in the military and I always wonder what kind of impact this would have on them - some have already been affected. "Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blewaway5 0 #4 January 16, 2003 hehe, yeah, the ol' arms would have to be getting tired by now. Seriously, though, I can't decide if this is gonna be a big catalyst for war or not. I think if it does play into a war, it'll be just another straw on the camels, err, the centurions back. Truman Sparks for President Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #5 January 16, 2003 QuoteGee, wait, no, you mean Bush was right? Oh, damn...I guess those liberals feel really funny right about now don't they. Not really: A) They found empty war heads. Not that that's great, but that's like finding an unloaded gun. B) I don't know anyone who proclaimed that Bush was definitely wrong and that they don't have any WMD, just that we'd like to see proof of it before we start killing people and getting our troops killed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meathorse 0 #6 January 16, 2003 Quote11 empty 122 mm chemical warheads and one warhead that requires further evaluation Yeah, empty warheads + 1. Wonder what's up with the 12th. Maybe they're just using it as an ashtray. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #7 January 16, 2003 QuoteI think we are about to witness WW3 folks. It seems that the UN inspectors have found what Iraq's been hiding all along, and Bush is tired of this hide-n-seek. I hate to say it, but 12 empty shells is not news. We have always know that they had chemical weapons at one time. They used them on Iran. Most of their stockpiles were confirmed to be destroyed in 95 by the UN weapons inspectors. These really could be just leftovers. 12 is not exactly a stockpile. "Iraq made substantial use of chemical weapons (CW) during the Iran-Iraq War and, in 1988, Iraq mounted a massive chemical attack against the Kurdish town of Halabja, killing 5,000 civilians. Before Desert Storm, Iraq produced the blister agent mustard, as well as the nerve agents tabun, sarin, and VX. Iraq declared to UN inspectors that between 1982 and 1990 it produced 3,859 tons of CW agents and more than 125,000 filled and unfilled "special munitions," the latter mostly stored at the Muthana State Establishment, Iraq's major CW production, filling, and testing facility. By mid-1995, inspectors had largely completed verification and destruction of Baghdad's chemical stocks, munitions, and relevant production facilities and equipment. " NTI site Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #8 January 16, 2003 QuoteI think we are about to witness WW3 folks. Think of it this way. Assuming we find nothing in Iraq the US will attack, perhaps rightly so. But if we do find the weapons we can disarm Iraq peacefully and there will be no war at all. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #9 January 16, 2003 Hmm. I would think the word "empty" would be the operative word there. Will we go to war because there's an empty warehouse there that might someday store nukes, or because there are syringes with no bioweapons in them? Perhaps we could declare war because they have fighter planes with empty weapons pylons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jfields 0 #10 January 16, 2003 Quote Perhaps we could declare war because they have fighter planes with empty weapons pylons. Nope. We could declare war because they have a empty runway, that might oneday have a plane that might one day have a weapon that might oneday fly and drop a bomb that might one day actually hit something. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoobieCootie 0 #11 January 16, 2003 Quote the Muthana State Establishment, Iraq's major CW production, filling, and testing facility. Gee... I wouldn't the battle ground be the ideal place? You're gonna be killing a bunch people anywayRegardless of having just 1 shell or 100, the goal of WMD's is not just to kill off as much of the enemy at once. It is also to slow them down. Iraq can blow just one of these things but not kill even a cockroach, and I bet the war is going to last longer than the 2-3 weeks estimate. (Whoever the "expert" is that came up with this number best step away from the XBox) I read that on MSN.com 2 days ago. I would have posted the link, but I can't find it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #12 January 16, 2003 >Think of it this way. Assuming we find nothing in Iraq the US will > attack, perhaps rightly so. But if we do find the weapons we can > disarm Iraq peacefully and there will be no war at all. That makes sense. Perhaps even now they are scrambling to put together some crude nuclear weapons so they can avoid war. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #13 January 16, 2003 Ironically enough, that's why most countries have nukes. Not because they need them, but because they need to intimidiate those who do. Of course, those who do don't usually like it, but at least it's not open war. I once argued in class that nukes brought more peace than war. No conclusive evidence, but a plausible thought. -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoobieCootie 0 #14 January 16, 2003 Quote nukes brought more peace than war. I'll second that with the right to bear arms, and support gun ownership (and education of course). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #15 January 16, 2003 >Ironically enough, that's why most countries have nukes. I agree, and don't think there's much irony there. It is certainly part of the reason we are willing to deal diplomatically with, and make concessions to, North Korea. If anything, Hussein's error was not getting them quickly enough; if he did, it's likely we would be negoitating with him right now. And more importantly, the rest of the world sees that too. >I once argued in class that nukes brought more peace than war. Yep. It certainly prevented the cold war from getting too hot. Like most people, we don't care too much about what happens other places until _our_ lives or livelihoods are threatened; when they are, we suddenly get a lot more interested in peace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #16 January 16, 2003 In order for their to be a ww3 we would have to fight someone of equal power. That dosen't exist... Iraq will just be a short bombing campaign.. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoobieCootie 0 #17 January 16, 2003 Sorry, my bad. What I meant to say was... The world vs Iraq Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #18 January 16, 2003 The point is that they weren't declared, thus it proves Iraq is willing to lie and cheat when it comes to Bio-weapons/weapons of mass distruction.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #19 January 16, 2003 Yeagh baby!!!!!!! Let the games begin!!! Mighty Mouse is correct... Bush is FOAMING at the mouth now.. lol Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #20 January 17, 2003 >The point is that they weren't declared, thus it proves Iraq is willing > to lie and cheat when it comes to Bio-weapons/weapons of mass > distruction. Were empty canisters required to be declared? I didn't see that in the UN resolution, but I may have missed it. In any case, I worry more about N Korea cheating and building several nukes than Iraq cheating and having empty VX canisters. One's a bit more of a threat than the other. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #21 January 17, 2003 I don't believe they were even allowed to have weapons that could carry chemical weapons.. That is a delivery system according to the UN.. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lummy 4 #22 January 17, 2003 Quote... Bush is FOAMING at the mouth now.. lol Oh no.. does that mean he's rabid?I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ducky 0 #23 January 17, 2003 Quote Not really: A) They found empty war heads. Not that that's great, but that's like finding an unloaded gun. Umm.. not really. He said he had no "bullets or WMD, so why would he have the "unloded gun" or warheads??? Which came first the bullet or the gun??? kwakSometimes your the bug, sometimes your the windshield. Sometimes your the hammer sometimes your the nail. Question is Hun, Do you wanna get hammered or do you wanna get nailed????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,107 #24 January 17, 2003 >He said he had no "bullets or WMD, so why would he have the "unloded gun" or >warheads??? Because he used to have them. He admitted that; heck, he used them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoobieCootie 0 #25 January 17, 2003 Hypothetically if you were stopped by the police and they searched your car and found a holster but no gun. What do you think will happen? edit: Oops! Post was meant for PhilliKev Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
