kelpdiver 2 #126 May 18, 2004 QuoteHas anyone brought this up yet? It just doesn’t make sense to me that insurgents would bring WMD into the country. Their leadership is smart. Politically and in the realm of public opinion, I think it would hurt their cause. WMD found in Iraq will further justify our cause. First off, I don't think you have unified leadership on the other side. Some may be smart, some may just be thinking with their balls and looking for a fight. (They might argue the same of Bush) Given the need to stay hidden from US forces, a good number of them are likely acting on their own. In any event, Saddam is gone and the new players don't really need to worry about justifying the US invasion. The US forces are there so they'll use any methods they can to prevail. That could include the use of chemical weapons. But even if there still are hidden stores in Iraq, the insurgents may not know where they are either. If things weren't hard enough for the US troops already... I'd expect most hope there really aren't any/many more of these shells. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #127 May 18, 2004 QuoteFirst off, I don't think you have unified leadership on the other side. Some may be smart, some may just be thinking with their balls and looking for a fight. (They might argue the same of Bush) Given the need to stay hidden from US forces, a good number of them are likely acting on their own. I obviously give the terrorists/insurgents more credit for intelligence and organization than you do. Some may be acting by themselves tactically due to reasons you mentioned but I’m pretty sure they are ultimately answering to someone who has a long-term strategic plan. I would think that transporting chemical weapons into Iraq and the consequences of using them would be controlled from way up the terrorist food-chain. QuoteIn any event, Saddam is gone and the new players don't really need to worry about justifying the US invasion. The US forces are there so they'll use any methods they can to prevail. That could include the use of chemical weapons. But even if there still are hidden stores in Iraq, the insurgents may not know where they are either. The war isn’t always fought on the battlefield. I still say that keeping the US looking bad in front of the world community is a good tool for Al-Qaeda. It’s probably worth as much as killing a bunch of people to them. The US producing WMD can’t be good for their cause if it then completely justifies the invasion of Iraq. Even in the eyes of all the critics who only see WMD as the only justifiable reason to invade. I don’t believe the guys that planted this IED knew what they had. I don’t think it was brought in from somewhere else and I don’t believe it was planted. QuoteIf things weren't hard enough for the US troops already... I'd expect most hope there really aren't any/many more of these shells. I’d expect most to hope that they find and destroy as much as they can. The troops are there to fight the fight. The mission comes first. They won’t be the ones to back down when it gets tougher. The no-backbone liberal US population might but the soldiers on the ground won’t. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #128 May 18, 2004 QuotePersonally, I'm just glad that no one was killed. From what I read, Sarin is not a "kind killer". Iraqi scientist, Gazi George says we will begin finding more. 2/3rds down this page (Fox article). He also says the Survey Group needs more time, as one year isn't enough. So.....let me get this straight. We wouldn't give the UN more time to find WMD while there was a stable gov't in place controlling the popluation. A gov't which, if they did have WMD, chose NOT to use them even to protect themselves from being overthrown by invading forces. Now that we've gone in and fixed that problem. Chemical weapons are being used in a country occupied and controlled by us. And they say they need more time? Jesus Christ, does no one see the freakin' irony? Or are the righties to busy patting themselves on the back because we finally "found" WMD in Iraq. Here's a clue....we didn't find DICK. Someone used them against us. Something that SH wasn't even willing to do. Good thing we got rid of that barrier so that we could "find" them. SANGIRO.....I NEED A FREAKIN' ROLLING EYES SMILEY, DAMNIT!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,170 #129 May 18, 2004 >I obviously give the terrorists/insurgents more credit for intelligence > and organization than you do. Some may be acting by themselves > tactically due to reasons you mentioned but I’m pretty sure they are > ultimately answering to someone who has a long-term strategic > plan. I would think that transporting chemical weapons into Iraq and > the consequences of using them would be controlled from way up > the terrorist food-chain. So we invaded, occupied the country - and in the process created a foe stronger, smarter and better equipped to plot against us than Saddam Hussein's army? And that's progress? We keep screwing up. We may not be able to recover from the prisoner abuse scandal; we have to do everything right from here on in. But when I look at the endless posturing from both sides - how they turn everything into a political issue - I am not hopeful. >I still say that keeping the US looking bad in front of the world >community is a good tool for Al-Qaeda. I agree. We should stop doing things that make us look bad for that reason. >They won’t be the ones to back down when it gets tougher. Oh, I suspect they will do what they are ordered to do. They backed down on Fallujah, per their orders. Which makes them good soldiers, not cowards. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #130 May 18, 2004 QuoteSANGIRO.....I NEED A FREAKIN' ROLLING EYES SMILEY, DAMNIT!!!! Whenever I'm in that mood, I just use this one: ... ... I understand your point to a degree, but understand we were affecting their command/control before we were even within a couple hundred miles of any major city. Saddam could have wanted to give the order but was unable to communicate it. That "stable" government you are referring to was doing nothing to facilitate UN objectives.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,170 #131 May 18, 2004 >And they say they need more time? Well, sure. It took us a whole year to find solid, concrete proof that Iraqi prisoners were being tortured, raped and killed in Saddam's prisons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #132 May 18, 2004 Did anyone read the origional article??????? It also mentions they found mustard gas 10 days ago.... That was conveniently 9/10 of the way down the article and no one is mentioning that. Bill, you keep saying "we sold it to him ...we sold it to him" Who gives a SHIT!!! That is completely irrelevant. If I sold you a pile of shit, and the UN said that pile of shit is illegal it must be destroyed, and you don't. Instead for 12 years you hide it and lie about it, does it matter where it came from????? NO... You hid it and YOU lied!!!!!!!!!!!! GOD DAMN IT !!!!!!! Iraq has WMD . PERIOD. It has had it for a long time. SH lied for a long time! Maybe the amounts were off, maybe he wasn't producing asa much as we thought, maybe he did destroy more than we thought, BUT HE HAS/HAD (since it is not his anymore) SOME, AND THERE IS MORE OUT THERE TO BE DISCOVERED. If it looks like shit and it smells like shit chances are it is probably shit. Step in it and find out. Chris ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #133 May 18, 2004 BTW- If you want to start talking about who sold what to who, maybe we should discuss how France was secretly selling jet parts to IRAQ (illegally) for their air force up untill two years ago. Does it matter? Maybe, but it doesn't change anything right now does it? ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #134 May 19, 2004 QuoteSo we invaded, occupied the country - and in the process created a foe stronger, smarter and better equipped to plot against us than Saddam Hussein's army? And that's progress? Unforeseen events happen in war. They do in all wars. We improvise, adapt, and overcome (I assume you’re referring to Al-Sadr and his followers). Progress is being made. Why insist on being the eternal pessimist? In reference to our biggest “foe”, however, we didn’t “create” Al-Qaeda by invading Iraq. My point in saying what I said was that you should never underestimate your enemy and this one has proven to be quite formidable. We will defeat them, however. QuoteWe keep screwing up. We may not be able to recover from the prisoner abuse scandal; we have to do everything right from here on in. But when I look at the endless posturing from both sides - how they turn everything into a political issue - I am not hopeful. We will recover from the prisoner abuse scandal because of the kind of people we are. It will be demonstrated to the world that we will not tolerate that kind of action and justice will be served to those that did it. I wasn’t aware that I was making my argument political. QuoteOh, I suspect they will do what they are ordered to do. They backed down on Fallujah, per their orders. Which makes them good soldiers, not cowards. I agree that it does not make them cowards. Who are we to second guess the commanders on the ground making those decisions? You almost make it sound like we “backed down” from the enemy as in “submitted to” or failed. They pulled out, per orders, and there was a cease fire. That’s different from “backed down on Fallujah.” Maybe I’m just misinterpreting what you’re trying to say. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #135 May 19, 2004 *** France was secretly selling jet parts to IRAQ (illegally) for their air force up untill two years ago. [/.quote] Or how about talking about the nuclear program, and who funded/trained that one? Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #136 May 19, 2004 QuoteOr how about talking about the nuclear program, and who funded/trained that one? Thankfully, Israel took a chunk out Iraq's nuclear program about 23-24 years ago. Soon after that, Saddam invaded Iran and his program slowed down considerably, but he did progress up until the first Gulf War.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #137 May 19, 2004 QuoteSoon after that, Saddam invaded Iran and his program slowed down considerably, but he did progress up until the first Gulf War. Dunno if I can agree or disagree... What I was getting at is France's fingerprints on Iraq's nuke program. For example: Opinion Journal's article (WSJ.com) "First, the U.N. weapons inspectors will not find anything Saddam does not want them to find. Second, France, Germany, and to a degree, Russia, are opposed to U.S. military action in Iraq mainly because they maintain lucrative trade deals with Baghdad, many of which are arms-related." A more general overview From CNN... From NRO "Saddam showed his appreciation by approving a deal under which Iraq committed to granting French oil companies a number of privileges plus a 23 percent share of Iraqi oil. Chirac repaid the favor by approving the construction of Iraq's first nuclear-power center, Tammuz, near Baghdad. The project, which subsequently emerged as the core of Iraq's efforts to develop nuclear weapons, was destroyed in an Israeli air raid in September 1980." And so on... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #138 May 19, 2004 Gives new meaning to "No war for oil" doesn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #139 May 19, 2004 QuoteThankfully, Israel took a chunk out Iraq's nuclear program about 23-24 years ago and as always it was received with world wide condemnation... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #140 May 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteThankfully, Israel took a chunk out Iraq's nuclear program about 23-24 years ago and as always it was received with world wide condemnation... O Given that the reactor type was not conducive to weapons development, that may have been appropriate. But it was definitely a form of diplomacy that make Reagan's heart go warm. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #141 May 19, 2004 QuoteGiven that the reactor type was not conducive to weapons development do you have facts backing this statement? if you have any doubts about iraq's nuclear plans, take a look at an interview (published 1998) given by Khidhir Abdul Abas Hamza, an Iraqi senior scientist who's defected to the US in 1994. QuoteHe said Iraq's nuclear weapons program was personally directed by Saddam Hussein, Iraq's leader, since its inception 27 years ago (1971). It was abetted, he said, by a host of Western companies, which sold Iraq sophisticated equipment as they "winked and laughed" at patently false cover stories. QuoteIraq's peaceful nuclear power program, begun 30 years ago, was quickly turned into a cover for the secret bomb program, which went ahead even as Baghdad opened up its research reactors to Western inspection. QuoteHe said they had asked him to help start a secret nuclear weapons program under the cover of an expanded civilian atomic energy program QuoteThe inspectors, Hamza said, never asked even basic questions, "like why an oil-rich country like ours wanted nuclear power?" QuoteAfter Israel bombed Iraq's reactor in 1981, the Iraqi leader created the first completely independent, clandestine weapons program, most of which remained hidden from Western inspectors for nearly a decade and if you need more... An Iraqi Defector Warns of Iraq's Nuclear Weapons Research even the "optimistic" predictions said that in 1981 they were only 5-10 years away from having a bomb. this airstrike and the war with Iran is what delayed them until 1991, and even then (according to this interview) most of the nuclear facilities were unharmed... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckbrown 0 #142 May 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteThankfully, Israel took a chunk out Iraq's nuclear program about 23-24 years ago and as always it was received with world wide condemnation... O Given that the reactor type was not conducive to weapons development, that may have been appropriate. But it was definitely a form of diplomacy that make Reagan's heart go warm. At the time Israel was widely condemned for the bombing of this reactor, but, like many things, history has put a different view on this incident. It's now pretty much accepted that Israel did the world a great service by putting this reactor out of commission and effectively destroying Hussein's nuclear weapons program. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #143 May 19, 2004 Isn't that interesting.. That should shut up the people that doubted we needed to go into Iraq... If one doesn't want to believe intelligence thay HAVE to believe tha man himself that ran the program... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #144 May 19, 2004 Quotethey HAVE to believe no they don't. the believe what matches their views. and not often it is so easy to prove wrong... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #145 May 19, 2004 QuoteWe keep screwing up. We may not be able to recover from the prisoner abuse scandal; we have to do everything right from here on in. But when I look at the endless posturing from both sides - how they turn everything into a political issue - I am not hopeful. I still think that whole thing was faked... I don't believe a damned bit of it... The Arab world hates us right... So we cook up this prisoner scam.. Then we PROSECUTE the living hell out of these people ALL ON TV.. For the first time MILITARY court marshals are being opened to the press. DOESN'T ANYONE SEE THIS? Prosecute these people and the Arab world will hate THEM not the US. They won't see us as heartless occupiers. For God's sake... This whole thing is a fucking joke... Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StevePhelps 0 #146 May 19, 2004 Quote I still think that whole thing was faked... I don't believe a damned bit of it... You've seen one too many conspiracy theory movies! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #147 May 19, 2004 QuoteSo we invaded, occupied the country - and in the process created a foe stronger, smarter and better equipped to plot against us than Saddam Hussein's army? And that's progress? Or... we could have had the UN "discuss" things with SH for another 12 years and another... That would accomplish? Zip. Sometimes, things have to be done. Diplomacy clearly was not working. It has been shown that SH was secretly selling oil and hiding the money. It was business as usual. SH was playing a stalling game on the UN and making fools out of the UN and whoever believed him. QuoteWe keep screwing up. We may not be able to recover from the prisoner abuse scandal; we have to do everything right from here on in. But when I look at the endless posturing from both sides - how they turn everything into a political issue - I am not hopeful. Let's see. We put 60,000 troops in a country. Four of them are boneheads. So everybody screwed up? Everyone is evil? That is painting everyone with a very broad brush. Mistakes will be made. The only way to stop all mistakes is to do nothing. Doing nothing would have been a larger mistake. Quote I agree. We should stop doing things that make us look bad for that reason. I can't stop making errors in my own life. I doubt that an entire country is going to do that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #148 May 19, 2004 QuoteOr... we could have had the UN "discuss" things with SH for another 12 years and another... That would accomplish? Zip. How many chemical weapons were used against us in the 90s? How much of a threat was SH during the 90s? Zip. Maybe something had to be done, but not an invasion, destabilization and half assed aftermath. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #149 May 19, 2004 QuoteHow many chemical weapons were used against us in the 90s? How much of a threat was SH during the 90s? Zip. For SH, it was business as usual. He accomplished everything. Once the UN sanctions were lifted, he would have immediately been a bigger problem. He spent $2 billion on his palaces and pocketed an estimate $7 billion. What would he do with that? He was playing a successful waiting game. QuoteMaybe something had to be done, but not an invasion, destabilization and half assed aftermath. What about the successes? The destabilization was of the original regime. That was a goal. Now that SH is jailed, the country can transition to a new power structure. Is it going peachy-keen easy? No. This is the middle east, I can't imagine that anything ever does. The aftermath is going slowly because of the political restraints being placed on the military. It would be far easier if all the opposition voices were just shot today. Allowing free speech for the opposition is tough if you don't agree with the content. That is the point though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #150 May 19, 2004 QuoteThe aftermath is going slowly because of the political restraints being placed on the military. For instant Rumsfeld comitting 1/3 the troops that the Joint Chiefs said would be needed? QuoteFor SH, it was business as usual. He accomplished everything. Who cares what he was accomplishing in Iraq? He was not a threat to us. And I don't recall anyone suggesting that the UN sanctions be lifted. QuoteWhat about the successes? And those would be? Baath party out of power. That's about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
