So you didn't my answer my question: what would be left that hasn't degraded to the point of being useless.
Now your link contains serious ommisions, which is not surprising considering the analysis was done by neo-conservative frontline.
Just as one example, frontline claims 1.5 tons of unaccounted for VX (referring to VX produced through 'route , yet UNMOVIC points out that this VX would be useless at this point:
"VX produced through route B must be used relatively quickly after production (about 1 to 8 weeks), which would probably be satisfactory for wartime requirements."
"Unresolved Disarmament Issues" (6 March 2003), p.82
Secondly, UNSCOM verified that VX was in fact discarded at the location specified by Iraq as the dump site for the VX in question.
So really, you are going to have to do a much, much, much better job if you want to be remotely correct. It might also help you not to cite neo-conservative sources. It will consistently bite you in the butt.
We did NOT go to war to end SH's abuses of his own people, although that would have been a great motive in concert with the UN and with Arab support.
We did NOT go to war to end his abuses of his own people, god.
We went to war because he was a 'grave and imminent threat' but he WASN'T.
A slightly belated 'precisely!' to that. If we had really gone to war for humanitarian reasons, to free the Iraqi people from a brutal oppressor etc etc, then Bushblair would have said so. But they didn't
Scott, this juxtaposition pains The Blue Meanie. Are you seriously suggesting that human rights is an "anti-American" concept? That's a scary thought...
Also the web site linked to is lying when they say "This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA." That FALSE! The statement was based on information that the Brits could not show because they had agreed to keep it under wraps.
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there, Scott. Hasn't the White House acknowledged that the infamous phrase in the SotU address was based on "forged documents?
There is also plenty of evidence to suggest that the White House was well aware of the dubiousness of the Niger claims some time before - see " target="_blank">here, " target="_blank">here, and here.
The British government has made almost no reference to the mysterious other source in recent months - and the claims sounded pretty feeble to start with. Sounds like ass-covering to The Blue Meanie.
Yeeeeeeah, Scott, could you come in on Saturday? And Sunday too. That would be grrreat
Comments
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Just going by what the UN said.
Did you not read my post?
Originally posted by giant
let's look at the UN reports:
http://middleeastreference.org.uk/iraqweapons.html
So you didn't my answer my question: what would be left that hasn't degraded to the point of being useless.
Now your link contains serious ommisions, which is not surprising considering the analysis was done by neo-conservative frontline.
Just as one example, frontline claims 1.5 tons of unaccounted for VX (referring to VX produced through 'route
"VX produced through route B must be used relatively quickly after production (about 1 to 8 weeks), which would probably be satisfactory for wartime requirements."
"Unresolved Disarmament Issues" (6 March 2003), p.82
Secondly, UNSCOM verified that VX was in fact discarded at the location specified by Iraq as the dump site for the VX in question.
So really, you are going to have to do a much, much, much better job if you want to be remotely correct. It might also help you not to cite neo-conservative sources. It will consistently bite you in the butt.
You want to keep going?
Originally posted by BuonRotto
As a matter of fact, no. I guess you mention something in that quote too?
So that's why you believe the WMD mumbo-jumbo.
At least you admit you don't know what you are talking about.
Originally posted by Harald
We did NOT go to war to end SH's abuses of his own people, although that would have been a great motive in concert with the UN and with Arab support.
We did NOT go to war to end his abuses of his own people, god.
We went to war because he was a 'grave and imminent threat' but he WASN'T.
A slightly belated 'precisely!' to that. If we had really gone to war for humanitarian reasons, to free the Iraqi people from a brutal oppressor etc etc, then Bushblair would have said so. But they didn't
Originally posted by Scott
Anti-american "human rights" groups?
Scott, this juxtaposition pains The Blue Meanie. Are you seriously suggesting that human rights is an "anti-American" concept? That's a scary thought...
Originally posted by Scott
Also the web site linked to is lying when they say "This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA." That FALSE! The statement was based on information that the Brits could not show because they had agreed to keep it under wraps.
Yeeeeeeeeeeah, I'm going to have to go ahead and disagree with you there, Scott. Hasn't the White House acknowledged that the infamous phrase in the SotU address was based on "forged documents?
There is also plenty of evidence to suggest that the White House was well aware of the dubiousness of the Niger claims some time before - see " target="_blank">here, " target="_blank">here, and here.
The British government has made almost no reference to the mysterious other source in recent months - and the claims sounded pretty feeble to start with. Sounds like ass-covering to The Blue Meanie.
Yeeeeeeah, Scott, could you come in on Saturday? And Sunday too. That would be grrreat
Originally posted by The Blue Meanie
Anyway, it's not lying of course. It's 'perception management'
bump
gotta keep these issues from fading with the next 'news event du-jour' - - I think they deserve to bring up real considerations for impeachment
check out: this
Originally posted by pfflam
bump
gotta keep these issues from fading with the next 'news event du-jour' - - I think they deserve to bring up real considerations for impeachment
check out: this
We can but dream 8)