Pentagon officials say U-S pilots attacking Iraq have started using a special kind of bomb that is highly accurate - but does not blow up. The weapons are filled with concrete instead of explosive.
Over left-leaning "journalists", anti-Bush mouthpieces and the worldwide "we-know-everything-even-though-we're-constantly-proven-wrong" brigade? Sure, I would.
Don't forget "self-admitted conspirators" when you talk about journalists.
I'm sorry. If I could go back to school and get as smart as you and othersI'd apply for membership to the highly-regarded AppleInsider Brain Trust & Supper Club (I hear its really swell and that the yearly cruises and formal dances are something to behold...I've even got a tux). Obviously I just don't get it, uneducated and all as I be. Those "dichotomies" have kept me healthy, prosperous, safe, employed, loved, grounded, surrounded by great friends and family, etc. I'll take my "ignorant little rules of life" over the nonsensical crap I see represented and believed in by many here.
Sounds like you're doing ok for yourself. Illegitimi non carborundum, dude.
As for the Brain Trust, I bet a swell club, but I'm sure the scenery just isn't there. Besides, as Groucho said, would you want to be a member of a club that would have you as a member?
The fact that FUX ran this story sometime last night, coupled with the fact that during the intervening hours, not ONE reputable news source I can find has even *mentioned* "plutonium" (not the NYT, not CNN, not the Trib) leads me to believe that either:
A. Fox took reports of some unknown substance that was found, and fabricated the whole thing because hey, it gets good ratings.
B. Fox received an out-of-context quote from someone and tried to do some math: we found an underground bunker with some canisters in it + someone (not in Iraq) said "it could be plutonium" = "we have unconfirmed reports that we've found plutonium in Iraq."
C. Fox really believes they are reporting something accurately and their on site sources just suck really bad.
I tend to err on the side of B, possibly with a hint of C. Fox is notorious for taking half-assed information and trying to turn it into something it isn't. No matter what side of the debate it implicates. They're shameless, period.
Two initial "improved chemical agent monitor" (ICAM) tests showed trace amounts of a nerve agent on the baseball bat-length warhead -- at the rear and in the middle where there is a screwed-down circular area about the size of a quarter.
ICAM is a miniature chemical agent detector that allows for simultaneous detection of nerve and blister vapors and aerosol agents.
The warhead tested at one bar on a six-bar scale, which would be consistent with leakage from a chemically armed weapon, military sources said.
But two subsequent ICAM tests showed zero on the scale, contradicting the earlier tests.
A soldier who performed the second pair of tests told CNN that little should be gathered from the findings, because no definitive answers would emerge until chemical experts arrive at the base and break into the warhead itself.
What does it matter if they have found the plutonium?? I personally think we have proven already our reasons for being in Iraq.
As someone who was there once already in Desert Storm, and having followed the events to now. For 12 years, we have played this game with Saddam. He says he has no weapons that will surpass the edicts in the UN resolution, and yet we find he is lying. We move into Iraq, he fires missles that exceed the given range of that same UN resolution. We find links to him supporting/training Al Quieda (sp).
Granted we put Hussein in power, but he was controllable before he became a religious zealot. In '91, he was left in power because he was still somewhat controllable. Rather than put someone less controllable, we stuck with Hussein. Now he has been evicted, and quite efficiently as well.
I dont think we have anything to prove to anyone. The Iraqi people "seem" thrilled we are there to liberate them, which would indicated they may have been opressed.
As for the UN, they are just a figure-head to facilitate aid to 3rd world countries. In fact, this has been the biggest part of their function for years. Who cares if they support this war??
Still haven't heard boo about "plutonium" from other news sources. If there were even a hint of truth to it, it would be all over the news by now. An uncovered plutonium stash is sure as hell a better smoking gun to show the world than a warhead that is color-coded like chemical warheads, but gee we're still not sure.
Fox is an f-ing joke. I don't like left-wing media tool outlets , but Fox seems to be to be a right-wing media tool outlet more and more. Balanced coverage ... the world's most precious commodity.
If I were paranoid conspiracy dude, I could offer the explanation that there is some thread of truth in all of these initial reports, but in the interests of not incriminating Coalition allies or further incriminating other supposed "allies", further follow-up reports are "silenced" from the media. The political worldscape is in serious flux at the moment, so indiscriminant exposure of incriminations could have ramifications with very unpredictable consequences (on the order similar to the propect of "the discovery of free energy" or that "God is proven to not exist"). Potentially, it is best to keep it under tight wraps for the time being until a fuller picture can be developed (as to how all of these separate elements tie together), and an assessment can be made if it is even truly safe to reveal the big picture at all in the end (probably not immediately, but maybe declassifiable after a 100 years or so). You can't stop the "initial discoveries" that the media gets a hold of and reports, but CENTCOM can certainly come back around and tell them to "hush up" about xyz (or else) due to "impending security concerns". The profile of these discoveries seem to be awfully similar in the way they pop-up and then suddenly go silent.
............The profile of these discoveries seem to be awfully similar in the way they pop-up and then suddenly go silent.
This is something I've noticed as well, everything from underground nuclear facilities, to buried freight containers of this and that, to rooms found under schools......all seem to pop up and then vanish.
What the heck is that all about? Is CENTCOM saving it all up? Bad reporting? Maybe the armed forces are trying to sneak up on the problem?
Could be politics, could be military strategy, could be just bad reporting. Ultimately, it just means that nobody should draw any big conclusions by what is presented to us (or not presented). Just hope that the the powers that be are doing what they do to effect the most "agreeable" outcome for the world at large.
The profile of these discoveries seem to be awfully similar in the way they pop-up and then suddenly go silent.
i wonder if it won't change after the fighting is over and Tikrit is in hand. the war in Iraq hasn't ended. there could be excellent reasons not to show the world just yet solid evidence of illegal weapons. (if they've found them)
as for political reasons, i'm sure it was awkward when they found those torpedeos (illegal) that British firms had sold. not really a good idea to go forward with that type of information until you know the background on how things got there.
Now that IS a good point (the torpedos), if the arms are form other countries that could be used as leverage---or that they don't want to spook the links in the chain that lead elsewhere......hmmm
So you apparently forgot to ask the most glaring of glaring questions: why did they initially believe it was plutonium specifically? Did you ever think there was more to the story than is reported in mainstream press?
from strafor
So there is an actual reason why it was thought to be specifically plutonium. Just because you didn't get the info from Fox News doesn't mean it was just an idea some journalist had.
And this point is here because why exactly? I never said it was or was not Plutonium. What has this got to do with anything I argued?
Quote:
Note also that any removal of seals, if shown to be true, demonstrates a real lack of maturity and professionalism in these particular guys, who are most likely ~19 or 20, though they might be among the few that are older.
You are not over there. you do not know who removed the seals, or how they were removed. You do not kmnow what they were wearing. You know none of it. You lack of information is only serving to shove your feet right into your obviously big mouth.
Quote:
Last, if you don't see a WMD claim in ""How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?" you have some real issues you need to work through.
Lastly, if you don't see the world the way I see it then you boviously have some issues to work through. Nice.
Like I said, why do I bother? Giant, you have no class, no social graces, and nothing that I consider to be of value to add to the conversation. Proceed in your outbursts and talking to yourself. By all means. I think I hear Bunge coming with yet another "Yeah, me too!"
That you are blaming journalists for calling it plutonium when it wasn't journalists. The info and plutonium claim obviously came from someone in the US military. I'm sorry for not spelling it out more clearly so you could understand.
as for your other bit:
Quote:
Capt. John Seegar, a combat engineer commander from Houston, is currently running the operation in Al Tuwaitha. "I've never seen anything like it, ever," he told the Tribune-Review. "How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?"
"This is significant," Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Richard Gonzales, head of the team, told the Army Times. "We would not be here if it was inconsequential."
Let's see...what are the possible things that would be a) considered a big deal to the world by the US military b) radioactive and c) found in Iraq? I think the list of possible answers is pretty short and only includes things that fit squarely under the WMD heading.
But hey, maybe they thought it was a new radioactive bubble gum that's able to keep it's flavor all day, right, NoahJ?
That you are blaming journalists for calling it plutonium when it wasn't journalists. The info and plutonium claim obviously came from someone in the US military. I'm sorry for not spelling it out more clearly so you could understand.[
I never did so. Reread, then feel stupid. I said that Journalists have a tendancy to call all the finds WMD before any news is truly identified as true or false. The troops themselves speculate that it could be this or that. You are really reaching Giant. You have now gone so far as to insert words in my mouth that were not there. Deperate...
Quote:
Let's see...what are the possible things that would be a) considered a big deal to the world by the US military b) radioactive and c) found in Iraq? I think the list of possible answers is pretty short and only includes things that fit squarely under the WMD heading.
But hey, maybe they thought it was a new radioactive bubble gum that's able to keep it's flavor all day, right, NoahJ?
Nad now you are putting words in the soldiers mouth. Just because it justifies your position does not mean that it means what you think it does. I simply stated that they never said they found a smoking gun, nor did they say they found WMD. And they did not. You are inferring it but it was never said.
reach for the rim all you want, but your hole is too deep.
Here are the quotes again, and then you can say what is so amazing about radioactive material in Iraq that doesn't have anything to do with a nuclear weapons program.
Quote:
Capt. John Seegar, a combat engineer commander from Houston, is currently running the operation in Al Tuwaitha. "I've never seen anything like it, ever," he told the Tribune-Review. "How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?"
"This is significant," Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Richard Gonzales, head of the team, told the Army Times. "We would not be here if it was inconsequential."
What did Seegar think was happening there that the world should be aware of? What did we miss? a polo match? a printer jam? Seriously. What are they referring to? Go on. Say it. It won't hurt.
As for the journalist bit, you just did it again. Journalists didn't make the conclusion that it was plutonium. What do you think they do? Get a report of the data collected by the instruments and come to a conclusion? Get real. That info was supplied by the US military, as have all the other claims, such as the chem factory. The journalists just go with the info they are given by the military. Look, they even say it in the Fox article:
Quote:
U.S. defense officials on Friday confirmed that preliminary field tests did in fact indicate the material could be plutonium.
All the journalists are doing is going with the story. Granted, they should be more skeptical, but then again, there is freedom of the press and they can do what they want.
So, no, it is not the journalists, it is the military.
How many times are you going to argue points that are flatly and clearly wrong?
Comments
an excerpt
Pentagon officials say U-S pilots attacking Iraq have started using a special kind of bomb that is highly accurate - but does not blow up. The weapons are filled with concrete instead of explosive.
Originally posted by pscates
Over left-leaning "journalists", anti-Bush mouthpieces and the worldwide "we-know-everything-even-though-we're-constantly-proven-wrong" brigade? Sure, I would.
Don't forget "self-admitted conspirators" when you talk about journalists.
Originally posted by pscates
I'm sorry. If I could go back to school and get as smart as you and othersI'd apply for membership to the highly-regarded AppleInsider Brain Trust & Supper Club (I hear its really swell and that the yearly cruises and formal dances are something to behold...I've even got a tux). Obviously I just don't get it, uneducated and all as I be. Those "dichotomies" have kept me healthy, prosperous, safe, employed, loved, grounded, surrounded by great friends and family, etc. I'll take my "ignorant little rules of life" over the nonsensical crap I see represented and believed in by many here.
Sounds like you're doing ok for yourself. Illegitimi non carborundum, dude.
As for the Brain Trust, I bet a swell club, but I'm sure the scenery just isn't there. Besides, as Groucho said, would you want to be a member of a club that would have you as a member?
A. Fox took reports of some unknown substance that was found, and fabricated the whole thing because hey, it gets good ratings.
B. Fox received an out-of-context quote from someone and tried to do some math: we found an underground bunker with some canisters in it + someone (not in Iraq) said "it could be plutonium" = "we have unconfirmed reports that we've found plutonium in Iraq."
C. Fox really believes they are reporting something accurately and their on site sources just suck really bad.
I tend to err on the side of B, possibly with a hint of C. Fox is notorious for taking half-assed information and trying to turn it into something it isn't. No matter what side of the debate it implicates. They're shameless, period.
would this count?
Well done indeed.
This suspected chemical warhead discovered at an air base near Kirkuk is marked with a green band, which sources said is the symbol for chemical weaponry.
Originally posted by Scott
This suspected chemical warhead discovered at an air base near Kirkuk is marked with a green band, which sources said is the symbol for chemical weaponry.
From the article linked by Scott :
Two initial "improved chemical agent monitor" (ICAM) tests showed trace amounts of a nerve agent on the baseball bat-length warhead -- at the rear and in the middle where there is a screwed-down circular area about the size of a quarter.
ICAM is a miniature chemical agent detector that allows for simultaneous detection of nerve and blister vapors and aerosol agents.
The warhead tested at one bar on a six-bar scale, which would be consistent with leakage from a chemically armed weapon, military sources said.
But two subsequent ICAM tests showed zero on the scale, contradicting the earlier tests.
A soldier who performed the second pair of tests told CNN that little should be gathered from the findings, because no definitive answers would emerge until chemical experts arrive at the base and break into the warhead itself.
As someone who was there once already in Desert Storm, and having followed the events to now. For 12 years, we have played this game with Saddam. He says he has no weapons that will surpass the edicts in the UN resolution, and yet we find he is lying. We move into Iraq, he fires missles that exceed the given range of that same UN resolution. We find links to him supporting/training Al Quieda (sp).
Granted we put Hussein in power, but he was controllable before he became a religious zealot. In '91, he was left in power because he was still somewhat controllable. Rather than put someone less controllable, we stuck with Hussein. Now he has been evicted, and quite efficiently as well.
I dont think we have anything to prove to anyone. The Iraqi people "seem" thrilled we are there to liberate them, which would indicated they may have been opressed.
As for the UN, they are just a figure-head to facilitate aid to 3rd world countries. In fact, this has been the biggest part of their function for years. Who cares if they support this war??
Still haven't heard boo about "plutonium" from other news sources. If there were even a hint of truth to it, it would be all over the news by now. An uncovered plutonium stash is sure as hell a better smoking gun to show the world than a warhead that is color-coded like chemical warheads, but gee we're still not sure.
Fox is an f-ing joke. I don't like left-wing media tool outlets , but Fox seems to be to be a right-wing media tool outlet more and more. Balanced coverage ... the world's most precious commodity.
Originally posted by Randycat99
............The profile of these discoveries seem to be awfully similar in the way they pop-up and then suddenly go silent.
This is something I've noticed as well, everything from underground nuclear facilities, to buried freight containers of this and that, to rooms found under schools......all seem to pop up and then vanish.
What the heck is that all about? Is CENTCOM saving it all up? Bad reporting? Maybe the armed forces are trying to sneak up on the problem?
The profile of these discoveries seem to be awfully similar in the way they pop-up and then suddenly go silent.
i wonder if it won't change after the fighting is over and Tikrit is in hand. the war in Iraq hasn't ended. there could be excellent reasons not to show the world just yet solid evidence of illegal weapons. (if they've found them)
as for political reasons, i'm sure it was awkward when they found those torpedeos (illegal) that British firms had sold. not really a good idea to go forward with that type of information until you know the background on how things got there.
Originally posted by Scott
This suspected chemical warhead discovered at an air base near Kirkuk is marked with a green band, which sources said is the symbol for chemical weaponry.
Give up dude.
Originally posted by giant
I was trying to figure that out myself.
So you apparently forgot to ask the most glaring of glaring questions: why did they initially believe it was plutonium specifically? Did you ever think there was more to the story than is reported in mainstream press?
from strafor
So there is an actual reason why it was thought to be specifically plutonium. Just because you didn't get the info from Fox News doesn't mean it was just an idea some journalist had.
And this point is here because why exactly? I never said it was or was not Plutonium. What has this got to do with anything I argued?
Note also that any removal of seals, if shown to be true, demonstrates a real lack of maturity and professionalism in these particular guys, who are most likely ~19 or 20, though they might be among the few that are older.
You are not over there. you do not know who removed the seals, or how they were removed. You do not kmnow what they were wearing. You know none of it. You lack of information is only serving to shove your feet right into your obviously big mouth.
Last, if you don't see a WMD claim in ""How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?" you have some real issues you need to work through.
Lastly, if you don't see the world the way I see it then you boviously have some issues to work through. Nice.
Like I said, why do I bother? Giant, you have no class, no social graces, and nothing that I consider to be of value to add to the conversation. Proceed in your outbursts and talking to yourself. By all means. I think I hear Bunge coming with yet another "Yeah, me too!"
Originally posted by NoahJ
And this point is here because why exactly?
That you are blaming journalists for calling it plutonium when it wasn't journalists. The info and plutonium claim obviously came from someone in the US military. I'm sorry for not spelling it out more clearly so you could understand.
as for your other bit:
Capt. John Seegar, a combat engineer commander from Houston, is currently running the operation in Al Tuwaitha. "I've never seen anything like it, ever," he told the Tribune-Review. "How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?"
"This is significant," Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Richard Gonzales, head of the team, told the Army Times. "We would not be here if it was inconsequential."
Let's see...what are the possible things that would be a) considered a big deal to the world by the US military b) radioactive and c) found in Iraq? I think the list of possible answers is pretty short and only includes things that fit squarely under the WMD heading.
But hey, maybe they thought it was a new radioactive bubble gum that's able to keep it's flavor all day, right, NoahJ?
Like I said, why do I bother?
Like I said, I was wondering the same thing.
Originally posted by giant
That you are blaming journalists for calling it plutonium when it wasn't journalists. The info and plutonium claim obviously came from someone in the US military. I'm sorry for not spelling it out more clearly so you could understand.[
I never did so. Reread, then feel stupid. I said that Journalists have a tendancy to call all the finds WMD before any news is truly identified as true or false. The troops themselves speculate that it could be this or that. You are really reaching Giant. You have now gone so far as to insert words in my mouth that were not there. Deperate...
Let's see...what are the possible things that would be a) considered a big deal to the world by the US military b) radioactive and c) found in Iraq? I think the list of possible answers is pretty short and only includes things that fit squarely under the WMD heading.
But hey, maybe they thought it was a new radioactive bubble gum that's able to keep it's flavor all day, right, NoahJ?
Nad now you are putting words in the soldiers mouth. Just because it justifies your position does not mean that it means what you think it does. I simply stated that they never said they found a smoking gun, nor did they say they found WMD. And they did not. You are inferring it but it was never said.
Like I said, I was wondering the same thing.
Original too...
Here are the quotes again, and then you can say what is so amazing about radioactive material in Iraq that doesn't have anything to do with a nuclear weapons program.
Capt. John Seegar, a combat engineer commander from Houston, is currently running the operation in Al Tuwaitha. "I've never seen anything like it, ever," he told the Tribune-Review. "How did the world miss all of this? Why couldn't they see what was happening here?"
"This is significant," Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 Richard Gonzales, head of the team, told the Army Times. "We would not be here if it was inconsequential."
What did Seegar think was happening there that the world should be aware of? What did we miss? a polo match? a printer jam? Seriously. What are they referring to? Go on. Say it. It won't hurt.
As for the journalist bit, you just did it again. Journalists didn't make the conclusion that it was plutonium. What do you think they do? Get a report of the data collected by the instruments and come to a conclusion? Get real. That info was supplied by the US military, as have all the other claims, such as the chem factory. The journalists just go with the info they are given by the military. Look, they even say it in the Fox article:
U.S. defense officials on Friday confirmed that preliminary field tests did in fact indicate the material could be plutonium.
All the journalists are doing is going with the story. Granted, they should be more skeptical, but then again, there is freedom of the press and they can do what they want.
So, no, it is not the journalists, it is the military.
How many times are you going to argue points that are flatly and clearly wrong?