I really don't want to point out that I suggested many times that this kind of discovery would happen eventually. Actually, yes I do.
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead?
Quote:
If you think that the "just one" argument now excuses the attacks that many of you have made on this government, you are wrong IMO.
So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on.
Quote:
You will see more and more discoveries like this as TIME goes on.
Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
Well they say something is funny if it's half true.
I thought it was funny because what you were implying with your little comedy bit is so off the wall. For you to imply the manufacturing and storing/hiding of WMDs can be a one or two man operation is ridiculous. You can't be serious about that. At least I hope you aren't.
Quote:
I personally think that, in the face of certian defeat in conventional warfare, SH had the brains to stockpile guns ammuntion, RPGs, etc., and basiclly do what the Swiss will do to anyone whoever invades Switzerland. (no cheese or chocolate jokes---I mean it!!)
Of course anyone with a brain would stockpile munitions facing a war, just like anyone would stockpile water and food facing a natural disaster. That's common sense. However, when you stockpile weapons facing an invation, and facing the end, you stockpile them because you're going to use them to defend yourself. And if there are so many of them, as we were told time and time again, I'm sure our
allies spies, or our satellites would've picked them up.
Why would SH stockpile WMDs he was not going to use? Did he think he'd get a second chance with us? Come on.
Quote:
But all war is based on deception
Hehehe. First thing you've said that makes sense. Irony.
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead? So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on. Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
I think the fact that we have now found "just one" small find, just goes to prove how well hidden the WMDs are. First mustard and now sarin, what is next?
If another one of these accidental finds happen, I think that I would be totally convinced, but hey that's me. These chemicals had to come from somewhere and SH did not spend billions on just one shell.
I personally think that Syria or elsewhere is where we will find the rest of the SH fabled WMDs. Once again, IMO.
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead? So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on. Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
I don't remember if you posted in the thread that I started:
but I think that it proves overwhelmingly that many of you will NEVER admit any good done by this president or this country during his presidency.
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
I think the fact that we have now found "just one" small find, just goes to prove how well hidden the WMDs are. First mustard and now sarin, what is next?
Wishful thinking. And to call that a "small find", in the context of thousands of artillery shells(I believe we were told there were 26 THOUSAND of them by Bush)is kind of silly. Our local skin heads or anarchists have more than that I'm sure.
Quote:
If another one of these accidental finds happen, I think that I would be totally convinced, but hey that's me.
I think you have always been convinced from the sounds of it.
Quote:
These chemicals had to come from somewhere and SH did not spend billions on just one shell.
Producing chemical and biological weapons in industrial quantities(as we were told ad nauseum by the Bush admin)is not a mom and pop operation. It involves many people, many scientists, many labs, and many warehouses. With hundreds of inspectors on the ground, with the technology we have, including hundreds of satellites, "sniffers", and MILLIONS of dollars available to pay informants....celebrating ONE artillery shell, or one bomb as proof that there were WMDs sounds like wishful thinking to put it mildly.
Quote:
I personally think that Syria or elsewhere is where we will find the rest of the SH fabled WMDs. Once again, IMO.
So Saddam is gone. We've "controlled" Iraq for over a year, we have most if not all Iraqi scientists in custody(haven't read anything to the contrary), and no information that those weapons, in the threatening quantities we were told existed, were moved out of the country? Sorry man, you've got to do MUCH better than that. That is one conspiracy theory that wouldn't even make those annonymous whacko Geocities websites. lol
[B]I don't remember if you posted in the thread that I started:but I think that it proves overwhelmingly that many of you will NEVER admit any good done by this president or this country during his presidency.
No, I didn't post there, and who cares what whether one likes Bush and his admin. or not. We're talking about the WMDs we went to WAR for. We were under an imminent threat remember?
Quote:
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
Bull. Yes it does. We were told there were hundreds of tons of chem and bio agents. We were told there were thousands of shells ready to deliver those agents. The threat was imminent, we couldn't wait. If this "find" is enough for you to justify the over 700 dead US troops and the thousands of US casualties, and the billions of dollars spent in this war...well, I'll stop here.
Wishful thinking. And to call that a "small find", in the context of thousands of artillery shells(I believe we were told there were 26 THOUSAND of them by Bush)is kind of silly. Our local skin heads or anarchists have more than that I'm sure. I think you have always been convinced from the sounds of it. Producing chemical and biological weapons in industrial quantities(as we were told ad nauseum by the Bush admin)is not a mom and pop operation. It involves many people, many scientists, many labs, and many warehouses. With hundreds of inspectors on the ground, with the technology we have, including hundreds of satellites, "sniffers", and MILLIONS of dollars available to pay informants....celebrating ONE artillery shell, or one bomb as proof that there were WMDs sounds like wishful thinking to put it mildly.
So Saddam is gone. We've "controlled" Iraq for over a year, we have most if not all Iraqi scientists in custody(haven't read anything to the contrary), and no information that those weapons, in the threatening quantities we were told existed, were moved out of the country? Sorry man, you've got to do MUCH better than that. That is one conspiracy theory that wouldn't even make those annonymous whacko Geocities websites. lol
"Absence of proof does not equal proof of absence."
You guys condemn Bush/US for going to war on little evidence. But I will contend that he/we had far more evidence that SH had the WMDs then the other way, even now. Or should I say, especially after this chance warhead and the other with mustard. Like I said, the more they find the more it proves the US right.
Just like the old rusty warheads they found a while back, many made every excuse for SH and his military. But they totally lost sight of the fact that those very weapons buried in the sand proved that was the way things are done there and opened up the future to more chance discoveries. Oh yeah, what about those jets, read it again JETS buried in the middle of the desert? Oh and all of the hundreds, yes hundreds of stashes of weapons found and who knows how many are still there. You all act as if, "hey, yeah that's exactly what you do with expensive equipment and war making munitions. Just ignore that. Move along. Bush lied... Runsfeld is a monster... Bla, bla bla"
I expect the Bush admin to release some hard hitting information over the next months. Yeah, and it's release will be delayed for political gain, but the "loyal" (ha) opposition has proven that it will use any and everything against him politically. That is what I expect, it \\should be interesting.
No, I didn't post there, and who cares what whether one likes Bush and his admin. or not. We're talking about the WMDs we went to WAR for. We were under an imminent threat remember? Bull. Yes it does. We were told there were hundreds of tons of chem and bio agents. We were told there were thousands of shells ready to deliver those agents. The threat was imminent, we couldn't wait. If this "find" is enough for you to justify the over 700 dead US troops and the thousands of US casualties, and the billions of dollars spent in this war...well, I'll stop here.
So, if you lived next to a known murderer or child molester, you wouldn't make moves to protect your family unless it was an imminent threat?
I think you would agree that SH was a threat of one kind or another. So you are basing your position on a matter of degrees, IMO. And you as President Gilsch would have gambled the security of your nation on a bunch of maybes and "Yeah he's a bad guy but not that bad" kind of logic?
That logic did not pan out with AQ and the other terrorists, did it?
I have no proof that NaplesX is not a terrorist, a rapist and a murderer.
That may be true, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?
All three of those descriptions apply to SH and his two co-dictators/sons, yet it seems that many here would still, if it were up to you, have him left alone to continue that lifestyle. It almost comes across as lament that he is out of power, or is it just the fact that the US did the honors?
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
For me this isn't a game of legalistic technicalities where Bush suddenly becomes praise-worthy simply because in some very limited sense one might claim that any WMD, regardless of actual effective capability, is the same as any quantity of WMD at all.
You also seem to be ascribing to the unsupported logic that any find whatsoever can only, no two ways about it, be viewed as the tip of an iceberg, that anything seen must imply vast unseen quantities behind it. While such a relationship is possible, is imaginable, it's far from inescapable.
When you consider the cost of the war in Iraq, in human lives, in dollars, in strain on our international relationships, only the true size and scope of the purported pre-invasion Iraqi threat matters, not technicalities.
If we'd poured the hundreds of billions of dollars that we've wasted on Iraq into Afghanistan instead, if we'd truly made an effort to make that country safer and more prosperous, we'd have done much, much more to reduce the threat of terrorism, improve our standing among the world's nations, and show the Arab world our good intentions.
Even freeing Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny -- a very good thing, but not our stated reason for going to war -- might only be a temporary respite for the Iraqis because of terrible post-war planning. The country is very likely to collapse into anarchy and civil war, probably eventually leading to a Shia theocracy, simply changing which group of Iraqis is causing the most oppression and which other groups are most oppressed.
If this mess in Iraq can be solved, and it's looking bleaker all the time, I certainly don't trust Bush and company to be the ones to do it, nor will much of the rest of the world be very willing to help out for as long as Bush stays in charge.
Focussing our money and our manpower to do one job, Afghanistan, and do it right, would have stood a much better chance of not only serving America's interest, but in improving the lives of many poor and oppressed non-Americans.
You would be wrong in that assumption. Look at Ghaddafi. Saddam could have been the next Ghaddafi. There was no evidence that he wasn't going to be.
Of course you all think Bush's recent ramping up the sanctions against Cuba are in some way sane. It's like you get this idea in your brain about who your enemy is and nothing can stop you from wishing death on that person and presuming guilt before innocence.
You (incorrectly, according to all evidence) presumed Saddam had WMDs. I did not.
So this discovery of Sarin gas in a warhead that the insurgents used on a regular basis, Widely accepted as weapons from SH's many stashes. says nothing to you?
If over the next weeks, these warheads are used, will that say anything to you?
"Absence of proof does not equal proof of absence."
You guys condemn Bush/US for going to war on little evidence. But I will contend that he/we had far more evidence that SH had the WMDs then the other way, even now. Or should I say, especially after this chance warhead and the other with mustard. Like I said, the more they find the more it proves the US right.
For you to turn this into a Bush hating thread just proves how ridiculously poor your "arguments" are. You're more of a Bush fanatic than I thought you were.
From one of the many articles on this. Read carefully:
Quote:
Reuters
Soldiers who removed the bomb experienced symptoms consistent with low-level nerve agent exposure, U.S. officials said. No one was wounded in the partial blast Saturday, and the dispersal of sarin from the bomb was very limited, the military said.
If confirmed in subsequent testing, the discovery would be the first evidence of a banned weapon in Iraq (news - web sites) since the war began. The Bush administration based its case for the war on the existence of such weapons.
Earlier this month, some trace residue of mustard agent, an older type of chemical weapon, was detected in an artillery shell found in a Baghdad street, a U.S. official said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity. The shell was believed to be from one of Saddam's old stockpiles and was not regarded as evidence of recent weapons of mass destruction production in Iraq.
In Washington, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld cautioned that the sarin results were from a field test, which can be imperfect and more analysis needed to be done.
"We have to be careful," he told an audience in Washington Monday afternoon. Rumsfeld said it many take some time to determine precisely what the chemical was, what its presence means in terms of risks to U.S. forces and other implications.
U.S. troops have announced the discovery of other chemical weapons before, only to see them disproved by later tests. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said "the jury is still out" on whether chemical or other weapons of mass destruction remained in Iraq.
The former top U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, David Kay, said it was possible the shell was an old relic overlooked when Saddam said he had destroyed such weapons in the mid-1990s.
Kay, in a telephone interview with The Associated Press, said he doubted the shell or the nerve agent came from a hidden stockpile, although he didn't rule out that possibility.
Former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, speaking to the AP in Sweden, agreed the shell was likely a stray weapon scavenged from a dump and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles.
Numerous arsenals and weapons depots were looted in the turmoil following the collapse of the regime last April. Some depots are still only lightly guarded. Many of the materials used for roadside bombs were believed to have been looted.
Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive did not know it contained the nerve agent. The 155-mm shell did not have markings to indicate it contained a chemical agent, a U.S. official said.
It looks like this is an old shell. A there were no markings on the shell, most likely nobody knew what it was. Also take note that this has happened on numerous occasions since the war started:
Big announcement, blazing headlines in the media:
WMDs FOUND IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!. Fox did it again today, and its still up. On each past occasion, analysis has proved the claims to be 100% false. BUT...never a retraction in the media, at best a little 4 liner footnote on page 71, under a Sears three-quarter page ad;, and *never* a mention on the network news. People just remember the original headline, and "history" is written.
So, if you lived next to a known murderer or child molester, you wouldn't make moves to protect your family unless it was an imminent threat?
I think you would agree that SH was a threat of one kind or another. So you are basing your position on a matter of degrees, IMO. And you as President Gilsch would have gambled the security of your nation on a bunch of maybes and "Yeah he's a bad guy but not that bad" kind of logic?
That logic did not pan out with AQ and the other terrorists, did it?
Too bad SH was a dictator not a terrorist. How long did it take us to find SH? How long did it take to find the guy that attacked us? I'll argue degrees with you because in terms of US body bags the bade guy is galavanting between Pakistan and Afghinastan. The real bad guy has had enough time to diversify his terror network even more. The real bad guy has been able to use the war with Iraq to cull more recruits. The real bad guy has had time to launder his money even more. The real bad guy is from Yemen BTW.
So if you want to talk about degrees of evil and degrees of threat to the US then go ahead because the real threat (not the pseudo threat SH) has a beard and the initials UBL (or OBL).
One shell. You're preaching the praises of Bush and the glorious conquest based on one shell. One old shell. One old shell filled with sarin (maybe recall the other chemical finds to date). One shell filled with a neuro-toxin which most troops carry, or carried at one time, the antidote for. Yeah that's right, when there is a threat of chemical warefare the troops are issued pam-triple-K and atripine shots. One shell so old that the affected troops didn't even need on the spot treatment. One old shell and you're going to justify the war. Issues man issues.
Too bad SH was a dictator not a terrorist. How long did it take us to find SH? How long did it take to find the guy that attacked us? I'll argue degrees with you because in terms of US body bags the bade guy is galavanting between Pakistan and Afghinastan. The real bad guy has had enough time to diversify his terror network even more. The real bad guy has been able to use the war with Iraq to cull more recruits. The real bad guy has had time to launder his money even more. The real bad guy is from Yemen BTW.
So if you want to talk about degrees of evil and degrees of threat to the US then go ahead because the real threat (not the pseudo threat SH) has a beard and the initials UBL (or OBL).
One shell. You're preaching the praises of Bush and the glorious conquest based on one shell. One old shell. One old shell filled with sarin (maybe recall the other chemical finds to date). One shell filled with a neuro-toxin which most troops carry, or carried at one time, the antidote for. Yeah that's right, when there is a threat of chemical warefare the troops are issued pam-triple-K and atripine shots. One shell so old that the affected troops didn't even need on the spot treatment. One old shell and you're going to justify the war. Issues man issues.
No actually it is two. One with mustard that the army says it found and one now with sarin. Apparently sarin can last a long time in the binary form.
The soldiers were reported to be treated for sarin exposure, so I am not sure that I would say they did not require anything.
First, many of you said that the shelf life was too short for SH to store WMDs and now this find and it's "one old shell" Funny how the story changes.
I do not justify anything about his war based on this shell, I have repeatedly espoused the legitimacy of this war on just the humanitarian reasons. This is just added proof for the pudding. I also have said that everyone should wait before jumping over the edge for or against. Right now I am saying proof is proof.
WMDs FOUND IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!. Fox did it again today, and its still up. On each past occasion, analysis has proved the claims to be 100% false. BUT...never a retraction in the media, at best a little 4 liner footnote on page 71, under a Sears three-quarter page ad;, and *never* a mention on the network news. People just remember the original headline, and "history" is written.
Actually a representative from the US military did it. But don't let the facts get in your way.
Edit: Fox ran a story about the buried warheads I meantioned earlier. And I specifically remember the headline being more like " WMDs FOUND?" And I also remember specifically them following the story all that day and updating the story as info came in and as soon as it was found to be a negative reading, they reported it. I also remember them saying repeatedly that it was a possible WMD find. Nice try, but not true, if that really matters here in AO.
No actually it is two. One with mustard that the army says it found and one now with sarin. Apparently sarin can last a long time in the binary form.
The soldiers were reported to be treated for sarin exposure, so I am not sure that I would say they did not require anything.
First, many of you said that the shelf life was too short for SH to store WMDs and now this find and it's "one old shell" Funny how the story changes.
I do not justify anything about his war based on this shell, I have repeatedly espoused the legitimacy of this war on just the humanitarian reasons. This is just added proof for the pudding. I also have said that everyone should wait before jumping over the edge for or against. Right now I am saying proof is proof.
If you take the time to read the post you'll see that I said (and sourced) that Mustard Gas has a long shelf life in solid form. Finding residue of Mustard Gas doesn't constitute a WMD find as members of the Bush war party have already said. Sarin does have a short shelf life as evidenced by:
Quote:
According to Ritter, the chemical weapons which Iraq has been known to possess -- nerve agents like sarin and tabun -- have a shelf life of five years, VX just a bit longer. Saddam's major bio weapons are hardly any better; botulinum toxin is potent for about three years, and liquid anthrax about the same (under the right conditions). And he adds that since all chemical weapons were made in Iraq's only chemical weapons complex ? the Muthanna State establishment, which was blown up during the first Gulf War in 1991 -- and all biological weapons plants and research papers were clearly destroyed by 1998, any remaining bio/chemical weapons stores are now ?harmless, useless goo.?
David Kay, who last year led the post-invasion hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before stepping down, said the sarin was probably left over from the 1980s, produced either during the Iraq-Iran war or before the 1991 Gulf War.
"It was probably just scavenged from one of the 125-plus ammunition storage points that still remain," Kay said. More forensic testing should determine with some confidence when it was produced, he said.
and
Quote:
In Baghdad, Kimmitt told a news conference that two members of a U.S. explosives team had been treated for exposure to the substance.
The tone of the last statement would have been "Two US soldiers are in critical condition following exposure to Sarin gas released from an IED" had the chemicals not been passed their shelf life. As it stands, these poor boots probably got a lung full resulting in some jitters.
Comments
Originally posted by NaplesX
I really don't want to point out that I suggested many times that this kind of discovery would happen eventually. Actually, yes I do.
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead?
If you think that the "just one" argument now excuses the attacks that many of you have made on this government, you are wrong IMO.
So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on.
You will see more and more discoveries like this as TIME goes on.
Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
Originally posted by dmz
Well they say something is funny if it's half true.
I thought it was funny because what you were implying with your little comedy bit is so off the wall. For you to imply the manufacturing and storing/hiding of WMDs can be a one or two man operation is ridiculous. You can't be serious about that. At least I hope you aren't.
I personally think that, in the face of certian defeat in conventional warfare, SH had the brains to stockpile guns ammuntion, RPGs, etc., and basiclly do what the Swiss will do to anyone whoever invades Switzerland. (no cheese or chocolate jokes---I mean it!!)
Of course anyone with a brain would stockpile munitions facing a war, just like anyone would stockpile water and food facing a natural disaster. That's common sense. However, when you stockpile weapons facing an invation, and facing the end, you stockpile them because you're going to use them to defend yourself. And if there are so many of them, as we were told time and time again, I'm sure our
allies spies, or our satellites would've picked them up.
Why would SH stockpile WMDs he was not going to use? Did he think he'd get a second chance with us? Come on.
But all war is based on deception
Hehehe. First thing you've said that makes sense. Irony.
Originally posted by Gilsch
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead? So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on. Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
I think the fact that we have now found "just one" small find, just goes to prove how well hidden the WMDs are. First mustard and now sarin, what is next?
If another one of these accidental finds happen, I think that I would be totally convinced, but hey that's me. These chemicals had to come from somewhere and SH did not spend billions on just one shell.
I personally think that Syria or elsewhere is where we will find the rest of the SH fabled WMDs. Once again, IMO.
Originally posted by Gilsch
What was that "discovery" again? Hundreds of missiles? Tons of stored deadly chemicals? The sophisticated labs necessary to make biological and/or chemical weapons? A nukulear warhead? So are you saying there aren't any weapons experts, diplomats, etc criticizing the government because no stockpiles of WMDs have been found over a year, thousands of casualties and billions and billions of $ later? Come on. Yeah, I don't doubt the odd artillery shell or two will be found in the future. Of course, that'll probably be enough to satisfy the Bush At Any Cost supporters who'll point to those as proof of the "imminent threat" we were under.
I don't remember if you posted in the thread that I started:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=42003
but I think that it proves overwhelmingly that many of you will NEVER admit any good done by this president or this country during his presidency.
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
Originally posted by NaplesX
I think the fact that we have now found "just one" small find, just goes to prove how well hidden the WMDs are. First mustard and now sarin, what is next?
Wishful thinking. And to call that a "small find", in the context of thousands of artillery shells(I believe we were told there were 26 THOUSAND of them by Bush)is kind of silly. Our local skin heads or anarchists have more than that I'm sure.
If another one of these accidental finds happen, I think that I would be totally convinced, but hey that's me.
I think you have always been convinced from the sounds of it.
These chemicals had to come from somewhere and SH did not spend billions on just one shell.
Producing chemical and biological weapons in industrial quantities(as we were told ad nauseum by the Bush admin)is not a mom and pop operation. It involves many people, many scientists, many labs, and many warehouses. With hundreds of inspectors on the ground, with the technology we have, including hundreds of satellites, "sniffers", and MILLIONS of dollars available to pay informants....celebrating ONE artillery shell, or one bomb as proof that there were WMDs sounds like wishful thinking to put it mildly.
I personally think that Syria or elsewhere is where we will find the rest of the SH fabled WMDs. Once again, IMO.
So Saddam is gone. We've "controlled" Iraq for over a year, we have most if not all Iraqi scientists in custody(haven't read anything to the contrary), and no information that those weapons, in the threatening quantities we were told existed, were moved out of the country? Sorry man, you've got to do MUCH better than that. That is one conspiracy theory that wouldn't even make those annonymous whacko Geocities websites. lol
Originally posted by NaplesX
[B]I don't remember if you posted in the thread that I started:but I think that it proves overwhelmingly that many of you will NEVER admit any good done by this president or this country during his presidency.
No, I didn't post there, and who cares what whether one likes Bush and his admin. or not. We're talking about the WMDs we went to WAR for. We were under an imminent threat remember?
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
Bull. Yes it does. We were told there were hundreds of tons of chem and bio agents. We were told there were thousands of shells ready to deliver those agents. The threat was imminent, we couldn't wait. If this "find" is enough for you to justify the over 700 dead US troops and the thousands of US casualties, and the billions of dollars spent in this war...well, I'll stop here.
probably an icecube.
Originally posted by Gilsch
Wishful thinking. And to call that a "small find", in the context of thousands of artillery shells(I believe we were told there were 26 THOUSAND of them by Bush)is kind of silly. Our local skin heads or anarchists have more than that I'm sure. I think you have always been convinced from the sounds of it. Producing chemical and biological weapons in industrial quantities(as we were told ad nauseum by the Bush admin)is not a mom and pop operation. It involves many people, many scientists, many labs, and many warehouses. With hundreds of inspectors on the ground, with the technology we have, including hundreds of satellites, "sniffers", and MILLIONS of dollars available to pay informants....celebrating ONE artillery shell, or one bomb as proof that there were WMDs sounds like wishful thinking to put it mildly.
So Saddam is gone. We've "controlled" Iraq for over a year, we have most if not all Iraqi scientists in custody(haven't read anything to the contrary), and no information that those weapons, in the threatening quantities we were told existed, were moved out of the country? Sorry man, you've got to do MUCH better than that. That is one conspiracy theory that wouldn't even make those annonymous whacko Geocities websites. lol
"Absence of proof does not equal proof of absence."
You guys condemn Bush/US for going to war on little evidence. But I will contend that he/we had far more evidence that SH had the WMDs then the other way, even now. Or should I say, especially after this chance warhead and the other with mustard. Like I said, the more they find the more it proves the US right.
Just like the old rusty warheads they found a while back, many made every excuse for SH and his military. But they totally lost sight of the fact that those very weapons buried in the sand proved that was the way things are done there and opened up the future to more chance discoveries. Oh yeah, what about those jets, read it again JETS buried in the middle of the desert? Oh and all of the hundreds, yes hundreds of stashes of weapons found and who knows how many are still there. You all act as if, "hey, yeah that's exactly what you do with expensive equipment and war making munitions. Just ignore that. Move along. Bush lied... Runsfeld is a monster... Bla, bla bla"
I expect the Bush admin to release some hard hitting information over the next months. Yeah, and it's release will be delayed for political gain, but the "loyal" (ha) opposition has proven that it will use any and everything against him politically. That is what I expect, it \\should be interesting.
Originally posted by NaplesX
I don't think that you are correct on this one.
Ricin, anthrax, mustard and VX are all considered WMDs, along with bio and nukes, because of their potential to kill masses of people.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/50/2302.html
Originally posted by Gilsch
No, I didn't post there, and who cares what whether one likes Bush and his admin. or not. We're talking about the WMDs we went to WAR for. We were under an imminent threat remember? Bull. Yes it does. We were told there were hundreds of tons of chem and bio agents. We were told there were thousands of shells ready to deliver those agents. The threat was imminent, we couldn't wait. If this "find" is enough for you to justify the over 700 dead US troops and the thousands of US casualties, and the billions of dollars spent in this war...well, I'll stop here.
So, if you lived next to a known murderer or child molester, you wouldn't make moves to protect your family unless it was an imminent threat?
I think you would agree that SH was a threat of one kind or another. So you are basing your position on a matter of degrees, IMO. And you as President Gilsch would have gambled the security of your nation on a bunch of maybes and "Yeah he's a bad guy but not that bad" kind of logic?
That logic did not pan out with AQ and the other terrorists, did it?
Originally posted by tonton
I have no proof that NaplesX is not a terrorist, a rapist and a murderer.
That may be true, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?
All three of those descriptions apply to SH and his two co-dictators/sons, yet it seems that many here would still, if it were up to you, have him left alone to continue that lifestyle. It almost comes across as lament that he is out of power, or is it just the fact that the US did the honors?
Originally posted by NaplesX
Evidence does not have to be a Huge stockpile of WMDs, this find is still evidence, like it or not. Sarin is a WMD and has been found in Iraq. That is a true statement.
For me this isn't a game of legalistic technicalities where Bush suddenly becomes praise-worthy simply because in some very limited sense one might claim that any WMD, regardless of actual effective capability, is the same as any quantity of WMD at all.
You also seem to be ascribing to the unsupported logic that any find whatsoever can only, no two ways about it, be viewed as the tip of an iceberg, that anything seen must imply vast unseen quantities behind it. While such a relationship is possible, is imaginable, it's far from inescapable.
When you consider the cost of the war in Iraq, in human lives, in dollars, in strain on our international relationships, only the true size and scope of the purported pre-invasion Iraqi threat matters, not technicalities.
If we'd poured the hundreds of billions of dollars that we've wasted on Iraq into Afghanistan instead, if we'd truly made an effort to make that country safer and more prosperous, we'd have done much, much more to reduce the threat of terrorism, improve our standing among the world's nations, and show the Arab world our good intentions.
Even freeing Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny -- a very good thing, but not our stated reason for going to war -- might only be a temporary respite for the Iraqis because of terrible post-war planning. The country is very likely to collapse into anarchy and civil war, probably eventually leading to a Shia theocracy, simply changing which group of Iraqis is causing the most oppression and which other groups are most oppressed.
If this mess in Iraq can be solved, and it's looking bleaker all the time, I certainly don't trust Bush and company to be the ones to do it, nor will much of the rest of the world be very willing to help out for as long as Bush stays in charge.
Focussing our money and our manpower to do one job, Afghanistan, and do it right, would have stood a much better chance of not only serving America's interest, but in improving the lives of many poor and oppressed non-Americans.
Originally posted by tonton
You would be wrong in that assumption. Look at Ghaddafi. Saddam could have been the next Ghaddafi. There was no evidence that he wasn't going to be.
Of course you all think Bush's recent ramping up the sanctions against Cuba are in some way sane. It's like you get this idea in your brain about who your enemy is and nothing can stop you from wishing death on that person and presuming guilt before innocence.
You (incorrectly, according to all evidence) presumed Saddam had WMDs. I did not.
So this discovery of Sarin gas in a warhead that the insurgents used on a regular basis, Widely accepted as weapons from SH's many stashes. says nothing to you?
If over the next weeks, these warheads are used, will that say anything to you?
Originally posted by NaplesX
"Absence of proof does not equal proof of absence."
You guys condemn Bush/US for going to war on little evidence. But I will contend that he/we had far more evidence that SH had the WMDs then the other way, even now. Or should I say, especially after this chance warhead and the other with mustard. Like I said, the more they find the more it proves the US right.
For you to turn this into a Bush hating thread just proves how ridiculously poor your "arguments" are. You're more of a Bush fanatic than I thought you were.
You're either with us or against us!
Reuters
Soldiers who removed the bomb experienced symptoms consistent with low-level nerve agent exposure, U.S. officials said. No one was wounded in the partial blast Saturday, and the dispersal of sarin from the bomb was very limited, the military said.
If confirmed in subsequent testing, the discovery would be the first evidence of a banned weapon in Iraq (news - web sites) since the war began. The Bush administration based its case for the war on the existence of such weapons.
Earlier this month, some trace residue of mustard agent, an older type of chemical weapon, was detected in an artillery shell found in a Baghdad street, a U.S. official said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity. The shell was believed to be from one of Saddam's old stockpiles and was not regarded as evidence of recent weapons of mass destruction production in Iraq.
In Washington, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld cautioned that the sarin results were from a field test, which can be imperfect and more analysis needed to be done.
"We have to be careful," he told an audience in Washington Monday afternoon. Rumsfeld said it many take some time to determine precisely what the chemical was, what its presence means in terms of risks to U.S. forces and other implications.
U.S. troops have announced the discovery of other chemical weapons before, only to see them disproved by later tests. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said "the jury is still out" on whether chemical or other weapons of mass destruction remained in Iraq.
The former top U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, David Kay, said it was possible the shell was an old relic overlooked when Saddam said he had destroyed such weapons in the mid-1990s.
Kay, in a telephone interview with The Associated Press, said he doubted the shell or the nerve agent came from a hidden stockpile, although he didn't rule out that possibility.
Former U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, speaking to the AP in Sweden, agreed the shell was likely a stray weapon scavenged from a dump and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles.
Numerous arsenals and weapons depots were looted in the turmoil following the collapse of the regime last April. Some depots are still only lightly guarded. Many of the materials used for roadside bombs were believed to have been looted.
Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive did not know it contained the nerve agent. The 155-mm shell did not have markings to indicate it contained a chemical agent, a U.S. official said.
It looks like this is an old shell. A there were no markings on the shell, most likely nobody knew what it was. Also take note that this has happened on numerous occasions since the war started:
Big announcement, blazing headlines in the media:
WMDs FOUND IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!. Fox did it again today, and its still up. On each past occasion, analysis has proved the claims to be 100% false. BUT...never a retraction in the media, at best a little 4 liner footnote on page 71, under a Sears three-quarter page ad;, and *never* a mention on the network news. People just remember the original headline, and "history" is written.
Originally posted by NaplesX
So, if you lived next to a known murderer or child molester, you wouldn't make moves to protect your family unless it was an imminent threat?
I think you would agree that SH was a threat of one kind or another. So you are basing your position on a matter of degrees, IMO. And you as President Gilsch would have gambled the security of your nation on a bunch of maybes and "Yeah he's a bad guy but not that bad" kind of logic?
That logic did not pan out with AQ and the other terrorists, did it?
Too bad SH was a dictator not a terrorist. How long did it take us to find SH? How long did it take to find the guy that attacked us? I'll argue degrees with you because in terms of US body bags the bade guy is galavanting between Pakistan and Afghinastan. The real bad guy has had enough time to diversify his terror network even more. The real bad guy has been able to use the war with Iraq to cull more recruits. The real bad guy has had time to launder his money even more. The real bad guy is from Yemen BTW.
So if you want to talk about degrees of evil and degrees of threat to the US then go ahead because the real threat (not the pseudo threat SH) has a beard and the initials UBL (or OBL).
One shell. You're preaching the praises of Bush and the glorious conquest based on one shell. One old shell. One old shell filled with sarin (maybe recall the other chemical finds to date). One shell filled with a neuro-toxin which most troops carry, or carried at one time, the antidote for. Yeah that's right, when there is a threat of chemical warefare the troops are issued pam-triple-K and atripine shots. One shell so old that the affected troops didn't even need on the spot treatment. One old shell and you're going to justify the war. Issues man issues.
Originally posted by faust9
Too bad SH was a dictator not a terrorist. How long did it take us to find SH? How long did it take to find the guy that attacked us? I'll argue degrees with you because in terms of US body bags the bade guy is galavanting between Pakistan and Afghinastan. The real bad guy has had enough time to diversify his terror network even more. The real bad guy has been able to use the war with Iraq to cull more recruits. The real bad guy has had time to launder his money even more. The real bad guy is from Yemen BTW.
So if you want to talk about degrees of evil and degrees of threat to the US then go ahead because the real threat (not the pseudo threat SH) has a beard and the initials UBL (or OBL).
One shell. You're preaching the praises of Bush and the glorious conquest based on one shell. One old shell. One old shell filled with sarin (maybe recall the other chemical finds to date). One shell filled with a neuro-toxin which most troops carry, or carried at one time, the antidote for. Yeah that's right, when there is a threat of chemical warefare the troops are issued pam-triple-K and atripine shots. One shell so old that the affected troops didn't even need on the spot treatment. One old shell and you're going to justify the war. Issues man issues.
No actually it is two. One with mustard that the army says it found and one now with sarin. Apparently sarin can last a long time in the binary form.
The soldiers were reported to be treated for sarin exposure, so I am not sure that I would say they did not require anything.
First, many of you said that the shelf life was too short for SH to store WMDs and now this find and it's "one old shell" Funny how the story changes.
I do not justify anything about his war based on this shell, I have repeatedly espoused the legitimacy of this war on just the humanitarian reasons. This is just added proof for the pudding. I also have said that everyone should wait before jumping over the edge for or against. Right now I am saying proof is proof.
Originally posted by Gilsch
Of course anyone with a brain would stockpile munitions facing a war....
Actually I meant weapons caches, etc., a deliberate setup for assymetrical warfare. (Like the Swiss.)
Originally posted by sammi jo
WMDs FOUND IN IRAQ!!!!!!!!. Fox did it again today, and its still up. On each past occasion, analysis has proved the claims to be 100% false. BUT...never a retraction in the media, at best a little 4 liner footnote on page 71, under a Sears three-quarter page ad;, and *never* a mention on the network news. People just remember the original headline, and "history" is written.
Actually a representative from the US military did it. But don't let the facts get in your way.
Edit: Fox ran a story about the buried warheads I meantioned earlier. And I specifically remember the headline being more like " WMDs FOUND?" And I also remember specifically them following the story all that day and updating the story as info came in and as soon as it was found to be a negative reading, they reported it. I also remember them saying repeatedly that it was a possible WMD find. Nice try, but not true, if that really matters here in AO.
Originally posted by NaplesX
No actually it is two. One with mustard that the army says it found and one now with sarin. Apparently sarin can last a long time in the binary form.
The soldiers were reported to be treated for sarin exposure, so I am not sure that I would say they did not require anything.
First, many of you said that the shelf life was too short for SH to store WMDs and now this find and it's "one old shell" Funny how the story changes.
I do not justify anything about his war based on this shell, I have repeatedly espoused the legitimacy of this war on just the humanitarian reasons. This is just added proof for the pudding. I also have said that everyone should wait before jumping over the edge for or against. Right now I am saying proof is proof.
If you take the time to read the post you'll see that I said (and sourced) that Mustard Gas has a long shelf life in solid form. Finding residue of Mustard Gas doesn't constitute a WMD find as members of the Bush war party have already said. Sarin does have a short shelf life as evidenced by:
According to Ritter, the chemical weapons which Iraq has been known to possess -- nerve agents like sarin and tabun -- have a shelf life of five years, VX just a bit longer. Saddam's major bio weapons are hardly any better; botulinum toxin is potent for about three years, and liquid anthrax about the same (under the right conditions). And he adds that since all chemical weapons were made in Iraq's only chemical weapons complex ? the Muthanna State establishment, which was blown up during the first Gulf War in 1991 -- and all biological weapons plants and research papers were clearly destroyed by 1998, any remaining bio/chemical weapons stores are now ?harmless, useless goo.?
source
Don't believe what Ritter sys though see what the federation of american scientists says about the same thing:
http://www.fas.org/irp/gulf/cia/960715/72569.htm
Updated article btw http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=5170978 . The more up to date article features such quotes as"
David Kay, who last year led the post-invasion hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before stepping down, said the sarin was probably left over from the 1980s, produced either during the Iraq-Iran war or before the 1991 Gulf War.
"It was probably just scavenged from one of the 125-plus ammunition storage points that still remain," Kay said. More forensic testing should determine with some confidence when it was produced, he said.
and
In Baghdad, Kimmitt told a news conference that two members of a U.S. explosives team had been treated for exposure to the substance.
The tone of the last statement would have been "Two US soldiers are in critical condition following exposure to Sarin gas released from an IED" had the chemicals not been passed their shelf life. As it stands, these poor boots probably got a lung full resulting in some jitters.