Saddam's hold had been getting weaker and weaker. Your statement assumes there was no other way he could have been removed from power.
[not you giant] on the airstike thing, it was almost a daily occurance for the coalition planes to bomb stuff.
giant, the whole thing stunk to high heaven, Syria getting back door oil, SH egging on sucide bombers, pretty much an outlaw regiem that [probably] was a breeding ground for anti-west activity, and a root of bitterness for the other mideast countries. The whole WMD thing/canard/whatever.
Basically the west, oops UN, was in an abusive and profitable relationship with Iraq. It needed to come to a resolution. 9/11 and the paradigm shift that surrounded that probably dicatated a clearing of the air in the Mideast/mass Arabic culture crash course so that we could infiltrate that culture and powerbase. Brilliant startegy with dodgey reasons, although I would imagine that SH probably thought he had WMD until the end. Although, if he did, he had plenty of time to get rid of it.
[not you giant] on the airstike thing, it was almost a daily occurance for the coalition planes to bomb stuff.
giant, the whole thing stunk to high heaven, Syria getting back door oil, SH egging on sucide bombers, pretty much an outlaw regiem that [probably] was a breeding ground for anti-west activity, and a root of bitterness for the other mideast countries. The whole WMD thing/canard/whatever.
Basically the west, oops UN, was in an abusive and profitable relationship with Iraq. It needed to come to a resolution. 9/11 and the paradigm shift that surrounded that probably dicatated a clearing of the air in the Mideast/mass Arabic culture crash course so that we could infiltrate that culture and powerbase. Brilliant startegy with dodgey reasons, although I would imagine that SH probably thought he had WMD until the end. Although, if he did, he had plenty of time to get rid of it.
Again, sources? I don't know but I was in the military at the time, and I don't recall daily bombing raids into Iraq. I do recall bombings in 96 and 98, but that doesn't constatute "daily".
Also there's a lot of speculation in your statement. Do you think its good foreign policy to start wars based on "probablies" because that's what we did and whoop's it turns out the "probablies" were "most likely nots".
Additionally, the only way to resolve sanctions was war? Come'on...
Also, David Kay spoke to SH's scientists (the people who would have made the weapons) and concluded Sh didn't have them. This "hide them" argument is weak because somebody would have to know where they were hidden. The people in the know said "Ain't none here, thankyou good bye".
Question whats the shelf life of the chemical agents used to make Serin and VX gases?
How many gas centrifuges are required to seperate U-235 from U-238?
How many kg of raw U are required to make a cirtical load of U-235 (about 15kg in well designed bombs)?
This contention that the weapons were spirited off during the night isn't grounded in reality.
The no-fly zone was patrolled by aircraft---every day. I might have to completely back off the "everyday" thing but I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the frequency of radar locks/provacative behavior by the Iraqi forces, and the response---i.e. a missile---were nearly constant (everyday stuff for the pilots to deal with.) Somebody check me out on this.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
Also, David Kay spoke to SH's scientists (the people who would have made the weapons) and concluded Sh didn't have them. This "hide them" argument is weak because somebody would have to know where they were hidden. The people in the know said "Ain't none here, thankyou good bye".
Question whats the shelf life of the chemical agents used to make Serin and VX gases?
How many gas centrifuges are required to seperate U-235 from U-238?
How many kg of raw U are required to make a cirtical load of U-235 (about 15kg in well designed bombs)?
This contention that the weapons were spirited off during the night isn't grounded in reality.
You are hiding in obscure details, It sounds as if you already have an answer----tell us, why it is impossible for Iraq to give away, over several months, the equipment/materials/scientists needed to make WMD?
The no-fly zone was patrolled by aircraft---every day. I might have to completely back off the "everyday" thing but I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the frequency of radar locks/provacative behavior by the Iraqi forces, and the response---i.e. a missile---were nearly constant (everyday stuff for the pilots to deal with.) Somebody check me out on this.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
So do you believe that war was the only answer to this problem? No red herring arguments about the UN's culpability. Was war the only answer or could we have found a better solution? Next, how do address the idea that this war was preordained by the administration? 911 or not these guys had their fingers on the trigger from the get go. Not just a plan to support revolt from within but an honest to god plan involvioing 130,000 US troops.
You are hiding in obscure details, It sounds as if you already have an answer----tell us, why it is impossible for Iraq to give away, over several months, the equipment/materials/scientists needed to make WMD?
You just don't give away tons of yellow cake and be found out. Yellow Cake is highly controlled. The countries making or researching Nukes are doing so with preexisting technology (N.Korea had/has a breader reactor, N.Korea and Iran had/have fully operational nuclear power plants). To purify Uranium you need quite a few high speed gas centrafuges (in the upper hundreds at a minimum to thousands for a full production line). We caught SH trying to import a little over 200 aluminum tubes which we attributed to gas centrifuges but it was later determined these tubes were to make a missle similar to an Italian design. The only damning evidence to date where 12 or so parts an an old drawing for 1 centrafuge found burried in a garden.
We knew how SH's scientists were already. We spoke to all of them. Hans spoke to most of them. The scientists didn't sneak off never to be seen again.
Our assertions about weapons programs as presented by Mr. Powell before the UN have been all but proven false. Rember those two mobile gas mixxing trucks Powell shoed the UN. Well you should also remember we found them a few weeks after the regime fell. Yup they where weather ballon trucks built by a company from the UK as many had speculated before the war.
SH postured for self preservation. It's coming out from vaqrious source that we knew SH's was bereft of WMD.
So do you believe that war was the only answer to this problem? No red herring arguments about the UN's culpability. Was war the only answer or could we have found a better solution? Next, how do address the idea that this war was preordained by the administration? 911 or not these guys had their fingers on the trigger from the get go. Not just a plane to support revolt from within but an honest to god plan involvioing 130,000 US troops.
I would imagine not only this administration, but the previous one too, had plans to go in. Either way I believe that the sanctions program was a inhumane, sadistic way of dealing with Iraq. It was completely uncivilized. It was like the police, instead of arresting a perp, pistol whipping him in the basement for ten years---very bizzarre.
War? I don't know---probably, for Amercian interests. There seems to be something out there that had some in the EU and elsewhere keen on keeping up the sanctions, inspections, no-fly zone indefinitly. This part of the equation hasn't been looked at. Also, don't forget that the EU is in it's ascendancy (at least Deutschland and France think so) and there are fients and powerplays going on over this---this has to be thrown into the mix as well.
I think these kinds of threads get wrapped up in crucifying the Chief executive of one branch of American government, and forget that there are many other forces in play, which are dismissed out of hand as having anything to do with what is being discussed.
You just don't give away tons of yellow cake and be found out. Yellow Cake is highly controlled. The countries making or researching Nukes are doing so with preexisting technology (N.Korea had/has a breader reactor, N.Korea and Iran had/have fully operational nuclear power plants). To purify Uranium you need quite a few high speed gas centrafuges (in the upper hundreds at a minimum to thousands for a full production line). We caught SH trying to import a little over 200 aluminum tubes which we attributed to gas centrifuges but it was later determined these tubes were to make a missle similar to an Italian design. The only damning evidence to date where 12 or so parts an an old drawing for 1 centrafuge found burried in a garden.
We knew how SH's scientists were already. We spoke to all of them. Hans spoke to most of them. The scientists didn't sneak off never to be seen again.
Our assertions about weapons programs as presented by Mr. Powell before the UN have been all but proven false. Rember those two mobile gas mixxing trucks Powell shoed the UN. Well you should also remember we found them a few weeks after the regime fell. Yup they where weather ballon trucks built by a company from the UK as many had speculated before the war.
SH postured for self preservation. It's coming out from vaqrious source that we knew SH's was bereft of WMD.
good point---keep them coming!
Question: what would it take, using 1940s technology, to produce a fission bomb? (fat man/little boy types)
I would imagine not only this administration, but the previous one too, had plans to go in. Either way I believe that the sanctions program was a inhumane, sadistic way of dealing with Iraq. It was completely uncivilized. It was like the police, instead of arresting a perp, pistol whipping him in the basement for ten years---very bizarre.
War? I don't know---probably, for American interests. There seems to be something out there that had some in the EU and elsewhere keen on keeping up the sanctions, inspections, no-fly zone indefinitely. This part of the equation hasn't been looked at. Also, don't forget that the EU is in it's ascendancy (at least Deutschland and France think so) and there are fients and power-plays going on over this---this has to be thrown into the mix as well.
I think these kinds of threads get wrapped up in crucifying the Chief executive of one branch of American government, and forget that there are many other forces in play, which are dismissed out of hand as having anything to do with what is being discussed.
Yes, there was a lot going on; however, threads like this and discussion like this are to show that we were not as informed as we should have been. The administration cowed the media and descenter's. The administration had a plan involving war. The administration acted on that plan. No diplomacy was used. Hans Blix was not given all of the information available to the US and his conclusions, when even slightly favorable to the cause, when yelled from the top of the white house. When Hans spread information unfavorable to the preordained cause, he was berated and discredited.
Question: what would it take, using 1940s technology, to produce a fission bomb? (fat man/little boy types)
A couple of kg's a plutonium. Plutonium is not naturally occuring and requires a breader reactor to produce. The plutonium used to bomb Nagasaki was a glass ball about 3 and a quarted inches in diameter with about 2.2 kg of plutonium mixed in.
Plutonium isn't easy to come by. U-238 is much easier...
The no-fly zone was patrolled by aircraft---every day. I might have to completely back off the "everyday" thing but I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the frequency of radar locks/provacative behavior by the Iraqi forces, and the response---i.e. a missile---were nearly constant (everyday stuff for the pilots to deal with.) Somebody check me out on this.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
Check you out? How about you provide something to back up your claims?
Countries WERE making money off Iraq "during/because of the sanctions". You sure you want to go there? It may burst your bubble.
Quote:
According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, however, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Dallas-based company.
Yes, there was a lot going on; however, threads like this and discussion like this are to show that we were not as informed as we should have been. The administration cowed the media and descenters. The administration had a plan involving war. The administration acted on that plan. No diplomacy was used. Hans Blix was not given all of the information available to the US and his concludings when even slightly favorable when yelled from the top of the white house. When Hans desciminated information unfavorable to the preordained cause, he was berated and discredited.
Okay, devil's advocate then: Bush got into office with the intention of using a war get SH out. So he goes to the intelligence community and sexes up/hard-sells what American intelligence has. So now we have SH dragging his feet on inspections, and the sexed up intel. Then America (and several other countries) invade and install, let's face it, a VERY favorable governing body. Oil starts flowing (is this new contry a member of OPEC? hmmmmm....).
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
A couple of kg's a plutonium. Plutonium is not naturally occuring and requires a breader reactor to produce. The plutonium used to bomb Nagasaki was a glass ball about 3 and a quarted inches in diameter with about 2.2 kg of plutonium mixed in.
Plutonium isn't easy to come by. U-238 is much easier...
Wasn't one the first two bombs U-238 based? [potentially dumb question] can't you harvest U-238 from seawater?
Check you out? How about you provide something to back up your claims?
Countries WERE making money off Iraq "during/because of the sanctions". You sure you want to go there? It may burst your bubble.Oh no, Not Cheney!!
There is some truth to the claim. I remember reading about bombing gun emplacements almost every other day.
the thing was is that it was suicide for the gunners to fire at the American planes . .. because inevitably they would get the sheitzea blown out of them . . it was pathetic and was also incomprehensible
also, it was in no way a reason to invade the country
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
Anyone?
You're joking right? Yeah, controlling the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world is no major payoff. Privatizing Iraq's business structure is no major payoff. I guess billions of $ in contracts are minor payoffs.
Seriously, you have to want to educate yourself first. The information is out there. It's not that difficult. Unless you want it to be.
There is some truth to the claim. I remember reading about bombing gun emplacements almost every other day.
the thing was is that it was suicide for the gunners to fire at the American planes . .. because inevitably they would get the sheitzea blown out of them . . it was pathetic and was also incomprehensible
also, it was in no way a reason to invade the country
I'm not saying there wasn't. This guy is asking for sources...he should look for and provide some himself.
Okay, devil's advocate then: Bush got into office with the intention of using a war get SH out. So he goes to the intelligence community and sexes up/hard-sells what American intelligence has. So now we have SH dragging his feet on inspections, and the sexed up intel. Then America (and several other countries) invade and install, let's face it, a VERY favorable governing body. Oil starts flowing (is this new contry a member of OPEC? hmmmmm....).
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
Anyone?
Its a question of ideology. Richard Perle and company have been hot to trot for this since Bush I. They felt it would domino the entire middle east into some form utopia where cats and dogs play together. The post war planning indicates that these guys truely believed we, the coalition, would be welcomed with open arms by all. Its apparent the powers that be thought once SH was toppled life would instantly improve. Most middle east analysts disagreed with these ideas and said "hey your gonna need move than 100,00 trops there for at least 5 years". In fact an administration official was canned for saying as much (I can't recall his name and I'm too lazy to look it up. It was White I believe), but the administration was blinded by ideology and visions of grandeur. BushCo firmly believed, IMO, that this conflict would takes days, and the cleanup would take a couple of months. They were wrong.
The domino theory was applied to Afganastan also. Its been two years there and there isn't much governmental control outside Kandahar.
Joseph Cirincione at the Carnagie Institute for International peace said "You can't bring democracy at the tip of a bayonette." I don't know if he originated that but He's said it quite a few times and its true. Democracy only comes when the people being ruled decide they want a change. Or in the case of Post WWII Japan democracy come when 40% of the male population is killed, two atomic bombs are dropped and the US amintans a 15 year controlling presence.
Now the question becomes do the ends justify the means? In 99.99% of the case no. We learned a lot from the Jewish internments and the experiments performed by German doctors at that time. Was it worth it? NO. We destabilized a country in order to extract oil. We're breeding more and more terrorists instead of addressing the fundamental issues. We've diverted our attention from disrupting terrorist organizations to toppling two bit dictators. Was it worth it? Time will tell, but my hunch is no. Who knows, maybe after 20 years of sanctions SH might have changed his tune and decided to reenter the world society as a "good leader" ala Libya. We'll never find out now.
We squandered world positive opinion for an ideological turnaround in the middle east instead of using diplomacy to change minds. We could have given Sauid Arabia an ultamatium but we didn't. We could have said "All you dictators out there look out because here we come!" We didn't. We didn't. We relied on force which the only thing force ever beget was force.
Comments
Originally posted by giant
Saddam's hold had been getting weaker and weaker. Your statement assumes there was no other way he could have been removed from power.
[not you giant] on the airstike thing, it was almost a daily occurance for the coalition planes to bomb stuff.
giant, the whole thing stunk to high heaven, Syria getting back door oil, SH egging on sucide bombers, pretty much an outlaw regiem that [probably] was a breeding ground for anti-west activity, and a root of bitterness for the other mideast countries. The whole WMD thing/canard/whatever.
Basically the west, oops UN, was in an abusive and profitable relationship with Iraq. It needed to come to a resolution. 9/11 and the paradigm shift that surrounded that probably dicatated a clearing of the air in the Mideast/mass Arabic culture crash course so that we could infiltrate that culture and powerbase. Brilliant startegy with dodgey reasons, although I would imagine that SH probably thought he had WMD until the end. Although, if he did, he had plenty of time to get rid of it.
Originally posted by dmz
[not you giant] on the airstike thing, it was almost a daily occurance for the coalition planes to bomb stuff.
giant, the whole thing stunk to high heaven, Syria getting back door oil, SH egging on sucide bombers, pretty much an outlaw regiem that [probably] was a breeding ground for anti-west activity, and a root of bitterness for the other mideast countries. The whole WMD thing/canard/whatever.
Basically the west, oops UN, was in an abusive and profitable relationship with Iraq. It needed to come to a resolution. 9/11 and the paradigm shift that surrounded that probably dicatated a clearing of the air in the Mideast/mass Arabic culture crash course so that we could infiltrate that culture and powerbase. Brilliant startegy with dodgey reasons, although I would imagine that SH probably thought he had WMD until the end. Although, if he did, he had plenty of time to get rid of it.
Again, sources? I don't know but I was in the military at the time, and I don't recall daily bombing raids into Iraq. I do recall bombings in 96 and 98, but that doesn't constatute "daily".
Also there's a lot of speculation in your statement. Do you think its good foreign policy to start wars based on "probablies" because that's what we did and whoop's it turns out the "probablies" were "most likely nots".
Additionally, the only way to resolve sanctions was war? Come'on...
Question whats the shelf life of the chemical agents used to make Serin and VX gases?
How many gas centrifuges are required to seperate U-235 from U-238?
How many kg of raw U are required to make a cirtical load of U-235 (about 15kg in well designed bombs)?
This contention that the weapons were spirited off during the night isn't grounded in reality.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
Originally posted by faust9
Also, David Kay spoke to SH's scientists (the people who would have made the weapons) and concluded Sh didn't have them. This "hide them" argument is weak because somebody would have to know where they were hidden. The people in the know said "Ain't none here, thankyou good bye".
Question whats the shelf life of the chemical agents used to make Serin and VX gases?
How many gas centrifuges are required to seperate U-235 from U-238?
How many kg of raw U are required to make a cirtical load of U-235 (about 15kg in well designed bombs)?
This contention that the weapons were spirited off during the night isn't grounded in reality.
You are hiding in obscure details, It sounds as if you already have an answer----tell us, why it is impossible for Iraq to give away, over several months, the equipment/materials/scientists needed to make WMD?
Originally posted by dmz
The no-fly zone was patrolled by aircraft---every day. I might have to completely back off the "everyday" thing but I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the frequency of radar locks/provacative behavior by the Iraqi forces, and the response---i.e. a missile---were nearly constant (everyday stuff for the pilots to deal with.) Somebody check me out on this.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
So do you believe that war was the only answer to this problem? No red herring arguments about the UN's culpability. Was war the only answer or could we have found a better solution? Next, how do address the idea that this war was preordained by the administration? 911 or not these guys had their fingers on the trigger from the get go. Not just a plan to support revolt from within but an honest to god plan involvioing 130,000 US troops.
Originally posted by dmz
You are hiding in obscure details, It sounds as if you already have an answer----tell us, why it is impossible for Iraq to give away, over several months, the equipment/materials/scientists needed to make WMD?
You just don't give away tons of yellow cake and be found out. Yellow Cake is highly controlled. The countries making or researching Nukes are doing so with preexisting technology (N.Korea had/has a breader reactor, N.Korea and Iran had/have fully operational nuclear power plants). To purify Uranium you need quite a few high speed gas centrafuges (in the upper hundreds at a minimum to thousands for a full production line). We caught SH trying to import a little over 200 aluminum tubes which we attributed to gas centrifuges but it was later determined these tubes were to make a missle similar to an Italian design. The only damning evidence to date where 12 or so parts an an old drawing for 1 centrafuge found burried in a garden.
We knew how SH's scientists were already. We spoke to all of them. Hans spoke to most of them. The scientists didn't sneak off never to be seen again.
Our assertions about weapons programs as presented by Mr. Powell before the UN have been all but proven false. Rember those two mobile gas mixxing trucks Powell shoed the UN. Well you should also remember we found them a few weeks after the regime fell. Yup they where weather ballon trucks built by a company from the UK as many had speculated before the war.
SH postured for self preservation. It's coming out from vaqrious source that we knew SH's was bereft of WMD.
Originally posted by faust9
So do you believe that war was the only answer to this problem? No red herring arguments about the UN's culpability. Was war the only answer or could we have found a better solution? Next, how do address the idea that this war was preordained by the administration? 911 or not these guys had their fingers on the trigger from the get go. Not just a plane to support revolt from within but an honest to god plan involvioing 130,000 US troops.
I would imagine not only this administration, but the previous one too, had plans to go in. Either way I believe that the sanctions program was a inhumane, sadistic way of dealing with Iraq. It was completely uncivilized. It was like the police, instead of arresting a perp, pistol whipping him in the basement for ten years---very bizzarre.
War? I don't know---probably, for Amercian interests. There seems to be something out there that had some in the EU and elsewhere keen on keeping up the sanctions, inspections, no-fly zone indefinitly. This part of the equation hasn't been looked at. Also, don't forget that the EU is in it's ascendancy (at least Deutschland and France think so) and there are fients and powerplays going on over this---this has to be thrown into the mix as well.
I think these kinds of threads get wrapped up in crucifying the Chief executive of one branch of American government, and forget that there are many other forces in play, which are dismissed out of hand as having anything to do with what is being discussed.
Originally posted by faust9
You just don't give away tons of yellow cake and be found out. Yellow Cake is highly controlled. The countries making or researching Nukes are doing so with preexisting technology (N.Korea had/has a breader reactor, N.Korea and Iran had/have fully operational nuclear power plants). To purify Uranium you need quite a few high speed gas centrafuges (in the upper hundreds at a minimum to thousands for a full production line). We caught SH trying to import a little over 200 aluminum tubes which we attributed to gas centrifuges but it was later determined these tubes were to make a missle similar to an Italian design. The only damning evidence to date where 12 or so parts an an old drawing for 1 centrafuge found burried in a garden.
We knew how SH's scientists were already. We spoke to all of them. Hans spoke to most of them. The scientists didn't sneak off never to be seen again.
Our assertions about weapons programs as presented by Mr. Powell before the UN have been all but proven false. Rember those two mobile gas mixxing trucks Powell shoed the UN. Well you should also remember we found them a few weeks after the regime fell. Yup they where weather ballon trucks built by a company from the UK as many had speculated before the war.
SH postured for self preservation. It's coming out from vaqrious source that we knew SH's was bereft of WMD.
good point---keep them coming!
Question: what would it take, using 1940s technology, to produce a fission bomb? (fat man/little boy types)
Originally posted by dmz
I would imagine not only this administration, but the previous one too, had plans to go in. Either way I believe that the sanctions program was a inhumane, sadistic way of dealing with Iraq. It was completely uncivilized. It was like the police, instead of arresting a perp, pistol whipping him in the basement for ten years---very bizarre.
War? I don't know---probably, for American interests. There seems to be something out there that had some in the EU and elsewhere keen on keeping up the sanctions, inspections, no-fly zone indefinitely. This part of the equation hasn't been looked at. Also, don't forget that the EU is in it's ascendancy (at least Deutschland and France think so) and there are fients and power-plays going on over this---this has to be thrown into the mix as well.
I think these kinds of threads get wrapped up in crucifying the Chief executive of one branch of American government, and forget that there are many other forces in play, which are dismissed out of hand as having anything to do with what is being discussed.
Yes, there was a lot going on; however, threads like this and discussion like this are to show that we were not as informed as we should have been. The administration cowed the media and descenter's. The administration had a plan involving war. The administration acted on that plan. No diplomacy was used. Hans Blix was not given all of the information available to the US and his conclusions, when even slightly favorable to the cause, when yelled from the top of the white house. When Hans spread information unfavorable to the preordained cause, he was berated and discredited.
Originally posted by dmz
good point---keep them coming!
Question: what would it take, using 1940s technology, to produce a fission bomb? (fat man/little boy types)
A couple of kg's a plutonium. Plutonium is not naturally occuring and requires a breader reactor to produce. The plutonium used to bomb Nagasaki was a glass ball about 3 and a quarted inches in diameter with about 2.2 kg of plutonium mixed in.
Plutonium isn't easy to come by. U-238 is much easier...
Originally posted by dmz
The no-fly zone was patrolled by aircraft---every day. I might have to completely back off the "everyday" thing but I remember reading/hearing somewhere that the frequency of radar locks/provacative behavior by the Iraqi forces, and the response---i.e. a missile---were nearly constant (everyday stuff for the pilots to deal with.) Somebody check me out on this.
As for endning sanctions, hell, the UN didn't even want to do that after the war.
Also, countries were making money off Iraq during/because of the sanctions, why is this not discussed?
Check you out? How about you provide something to back up your claims?
Countries WERE making money off Iraq "during/because of the sanctions". You sure you want to go there? It may burst your bubble.
According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, however, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Dallas-based company.
Oh no, Not Cheney!!
Originally posted by faust9
Yes, there was a lot going on; however, threads like this and discussion like this are to show that we were not as informed as we should have been. The administration cowed the media and descenters. The administration had a plan involving war. The administration acted on that plan. No diplomacy was used. Hans Blix was not given all of the information available to the US and his concludings when even slightly favorable when yelled from the top of the white house. When Hans desciminated information unfavorable to the preordained cause, he was berated and discredited.
Okay, devil's advocate then: Bush got into office with the intention of using a war get SH out. So he goes to the intelligence community and sexes up/hard-sells what American intelligence has. So now we have SH dragging his feet on inspections, and the sexed up intel. Then America (and several other countries) invade and install, let's face it, a VERY favorable governing body. Oil starts flowing (is this new contry a member of OPEC? hmmmmm....).
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
Anyone?
Originally posted by Gilsch
Check you out? How about you provide something to back up your claims?
Countries WERE making money off Iraq "during/because of the sanctions". You sure you want to go there? It may burst your bubble.Oh no, Not Cheney!!
When in doubt, whip it out! Speak to me! I'm all for it.
Originally posted by faust9
A couple of kg's a plutonium. Plutonium is not naturally occuring and requires a breader reactor to produce. The plutonium used to bomb Nagasaki was a glass ball about 3 and a quarted inches in diameter with about 2.2 kg of plutonium mixed in.
Plutonium isn't easy to come by. U-238 is much easier...
Wasn't one the first two bombs U-238 based? [potentially dumb question] can't you harvest U-238 from seawater?
Originally posted by Gilsch
Check you out? How about you provide something to back up your claims?
Countries WERE making money off Iraq "during/because of the sanctions". You sure you want to go there? It may burst your bubble.Oh no, Not Cheney!!
There is some truth to the claim. I remember reading about bombing gun emplacements almost every other day.
the thing was is that it was suicide for the gunners to fire at the American planes . .. because inevitably they would get the sheitzea blown out of them . . it was pathetic and was also incomprehensible
also, it was in no way a reason to invade the country
Originally posted by dmz
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
Anyone?
You're joking right? Yeah, controlling the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world is no major payoff. Privatizing Iraq's business structure is no major payoff. I guess billions of $ in contracts are minor payoffs.
Seriously, you have to want to educate yourself first. The information is out there. It's not that difficult. Unless you want it to be.
Originally posted by pfflam
There is some truth to the claim. I remember reading about bombing gun emplacements almost every other day.
the thing was is that it was suicide for the gunners to fire at the American planes . .. because inevitably they would get the sheitzea blown out of them . . it was pathetic and was also incomprehensible
also, it was in no way a reason to invade the country
I'm not saying there wasn't. This guy is asking for sources...he should look for and provide some himself.
Originally posted by dmz
Okay, devil's advocate then: Bush got into office with the intention of using a war get SH out. So he goes to the intelligence community and sexes up/hard-sells what American intelligence has. So now we have SH dragging his feet on inspections, and the sexed up intel. Then America (and several other countries) invade and install, let's face it, a VERY favorable governing body. Oil starts flowing (is this new contry a member of OPEC? hmmmmm....).
So both Blair, Bush and the late great ruling party of Spain, among others, have gone out on a huge limb on presumably (for the sake of argument) false intelligence.
What is the payoff here? Why expose yourself politically without a major payoff that is either strategic or monetary?
Anyone?
Its a question of ideology. Richard Perle and company have been hot to trot for this since Bush I. They felt it would domino the entire middle east into some form utopia where cats and dogs play together. The post war planning indicates that these guys truely believed we, the coalition, would be welcomed with open arms by all. Its apparent the powers that be thought once SH was toppled life would instantly improve. Most middle east analysts disagreed with these ideas and said "hey your gonna need move than 100,00 trops there for at least 5 years". In fact an administration official was canned for saying as much (I can't recall his name and I'm too lazy to look it up. It was White I believe), but the administration was blinded by ideology and visions of grandeur. BushCo firmly believed, IMO, that this conflict would takes days, and the cleanup would take a couple of months. They were wrong.
The domino theory was applied to Afganastan also. Its been two years there and there isn't much governmental control outside Kandahar.
Joseph Cirincione at the Carnagie Institute for International peace said "You can't bring democracy at the tip of a bayonette." I don't know if he originated that but He's said it quite a few times and its true. Democracy only comes when the people being ruled decide they want a change. Or in the case of Post WWII Japan democracy come when 40% of the male population is killed, two atomic bombs are dropped and the US amintans a 15 year controlling presence.
Now the question becomes do the ends justify the means? In 99.99% of the case no. We learned a lot from the Jewish internments and the experiments performed by German doctors at that time. Was it worth it? NO. We destabilized a country in order to extract oil. We're breeding more and more terrorists instead of addressing the fundamental issues. We've diverted our attention from disrupting terrorist organizations to toppling two bit dictators. Was it worth it? Time will tell, but my hunch is no. Who knows, maybe after 20 years of sanctions SH might have changed his tune and decided to reenter the world society as a "good leader" ala Libya. We'll never find out now.
We squandered world positive opinion for an ideological turnaround in the middle east instead of using diplomacy to change minds. We could have given Sauid Arabia an ultamatium but we didn't. We could have said "All you dictators out there look out because here we come!" We didn't. We didn't. We relied on force which the only thing force ever beget was force.