It's war time...

Status
Not open for further replies.
As am I.

The problem with govts is they are made of people. Govts by themselves are not corrupt...at least under democracies. PEOPLE are corrupt and that includes all of us only varying by degrees.

Somehow we have came to the conclusion that govt employees at the highest levels should be paid a pittance for the level of responsibility they assume...and then we wonder why they are crooked, incompetent, or both a large amount of the time.

As to complete democracy I don't think a public vote on EVERYTHING is feasible which is why the US and Canada are both hybrids. We are Republics in the sense that a ruling body makes rules for the masses as opposed to being made by a King, Prince, Potentate, Fuhrer, or whatever. We are also Democracies to the extent that we elect the governing bodies.

Our root problem IMHO is that we in the west are cursed by our own power and prosperity to the point that too many people believe whatever their preffered party tells them and never bothers to find the truth. Witness the Clinton folly. Most Americans believe that we truly ran surpluses ignorant to the fact that the national debt rose EVERY year of his term. Borrowed monies from SSI trust funds and govt employee pension funds were counted as "income". The sale of govt equipment as surplus was also counted as "income" while at the same time the expense to replace it was budgeted for the years after he left office. The Enron and other corporate scandals that HAPPENED during the Clinton terms was due to troubled companies using the govts accounting practices and betting the farm they could fix it before the bills came due. This is why the Clinton clan never pursued any of this. Then Dubya comes in and prosecutes the criminals and the Clintonista liberals yell...."look at that an oil co scandal under Bush what else would you expect?"

As to war being never the right choice...in principle I agree. In reality that requires a reasonable party on both sides. Saddam never was.

As to sticking to my guns I will say this, I do have a bit of an edge thru some people I know in our community who are involved heavily in Intelligence thru the USAF Foreign Technology Division and such which is based here locally. Now I don't want to leave the impression that someone has blabbed classified info because they haven't. OTOH I know these folks to be of unimpeachable character and when they tell me they have the proof and know exactly where to go to grab the stuff I believe them. When they say that to present the proof in full would require giving up informants inside Iraq and giving up highly classified intelligence gathering techniques I believe them as well. So far everything they have said would happen has happened. FWIW now that Iraq id essentially beaten down militarily and fewer and fewer people fear the old regime this stuff will be found in droves. The Tabun and such at the training bases is only the very tip of the iceberg.

I can say this also because it has been out in the media in bits and pieces here and there: Chem/Bio weapons were not used because Saddam cannot fire them himself. The order must go down a chain of command and we know that exact chain of command. We also are inside their E-mail and computer networks and the officers who would actually execute the orders have been made aware that if the order is followed they be tried as war criminals...if they survive the massive firepower which will be immediately brought down upon them. "Chemical Ali" was one of these who would have received the order from Baghdad and passed it to the front line and he is...explaining his actions to Allah as we speak, I wish him well. The Dogtags of PFC Lynch were found in a Baghdad home of a high Ba'ath party member. He would have been one to receive the order and pass it down also as well as the orders on treatment of POW's. Someone else received those orders and someone under them told their husband who dropped a dime. The Ba'ath party bigwig is...with Chemical Ali pleading his case to Allah as well.

I don't want to come across as a know it all on this but I do know a bit. I have studied this situation intently. Although 100% beyond ANY doubt proof is rarely possible on ANY issue when all circumstantial evidence and all provable evidence leads one to a particular conclusion the odds of it being completely wrong are verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry slim.

CAA I have never had that much disagreement with you as you have stuck to your ideals. You have I think accepted the anti war data a little to willingly. I leaned that way earklier in life myself. Sadly a certain amount of the human species is just EVIL. Law of averages would dictate that for every Mother Teresa there will be a Saddamite Hussinsein.

The side I have a problem with are the ones who accept the US as inherently EEEVILLL while making any excuse for the bad guys to be given the benefit of a doubt for the sole reason of political ideology. It is very apparent that Savant hates the President of the US and that is OK as this is a free country. When it crosses the line in my book is when that hatred ignores all else and spills over into giving aid and comfort, even if that was not the intent, to enemies of both our countries and humanity. The law of unintended consequences has never been repealed to my knowledge.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif :nono: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif :nono:

PEACE

 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80892,00.html

FWIW here is a condensed version of data from the State Department that has been out in the public domain. Whether one considers the US State Dept credible or not has no relevance as the overwhelming majority is from UNMOVIC and UNSCOM, being the 2 UN agencies tasked with inspections.

The following is the text of a State Department fact sheet summarizing findings of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) report on Unresolved Disarmament Issues relating to Iraq, presented to the U.N. Security Council on March 7, 2003: 

This fact sheet carefully reviews UNMOVIC's report (the "Cluster Document") delivered on March 7, 2003 before the U.N. Security Council concerning the Iraqi government and its refusal to carry out full and complete disarmament of its weapons of mass destruction.

 

The report demonstrates that Iraq and its leadership have pursued a consistent strategy of concealing its weapons of mass destruction and deceiving inspectors in direct violation of its international obligations. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction remain a direct and active threat to their neighbors and to the international community.

 

History Repeats Itself: Iraq's Strategy To Deny, Deceive and Conceal Continues

 

• UNMOVIC's document lays bare that Iraq's strategy today has not changed. Inspectors are faced with deception, concealment and changing stories.

 

• Inspectors discovered that Iraq failed to declare an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle that is based on a system that Iraq admitted to UNSCOM was intended to deliver chemical or biological agent.

 

• Inspectors discovered cluster bombs and sub munitions that appeared designed to deliver chemical or biological agents. Contrary to initial Iraqi statements, a number of bombs and over 100 sub munitions were found.

 

• Iraq has failed to provide inspectors with supplier information about foreign-procured items. These items include gyroscopes, chemicals and laboratory equipment — all apparent weapons of mass destruction-dual-use items.

 

• Iraq claims that a 50-ton trailer that it illegally imported for use as a missile launcher was "stolen." This is the same "stolen" story that Iraq has used in the past for weapons of mass destruction items such as biological growth media.

 

• UNMOVIC has concluded that documents Iraq provided regarding production of botulinum toxin and Iraq's capability to dry biological weapon agents provided no new information. Just the same, tired story Iraq told UNSCOM.

 

Iraq's History Of Denial, Deception And Concealment

 

• On nearly 30 occasions, Iraq refused — despite repeated requests from the international community — to provide credible evidence to substantiate its claims that they do not possess arms or have disarmed fully and completely.

 

• The document cites 17 instances when inspectors uncovered evidence directly contradicting Iraqi claims of innocence.

 

• Iraq has admitted numerous attempts to mislead inspectors by lying or planting false evidence during the inspection process.

 

• Time and again, Iraq successfully concealed its weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programs from the earlier inspection teams (UNSCOM) — only changing its story in order to fit the facts. For example:

 

• Only in 1995 did Iraq declare its offensive biological weapons program, after publicly denying its existence for four years.

 

• Only in 1997 did inspectors discover evidence of production completed on prohibited missiles in 1992.

 

• Only in 1997 did Iraq declare an additional 187 pieces of specialty equipment used to produce deadly chemical agents.

 

• Only in 2003 when confronted by inspectors, did Iraq turn over the "Iraqi Air Force" document that contradicts Iraq's chemical weapons declaration — by disclosing an additional 6,500 bombs with 1,000 tons of the blistering agent mustard gas.

 

• This document makes clear that Iraq has the inherent capability to manufacture chemical and biological weapons and literally tens of thousands of delivery systems (missiles, munitions, unmanned aerial vehicles).

 

Additional Examples of Iraq's Strategy of Deception and Concealment:

 

Anthrax

 

• After lying for four years, Iraq admitted in 1995 to producing nearly 8,500 liters of anthrax.

 

• Furthermore, the Iraqi's noted that only one facility was involved in the production of anthrax and that none of the biological agent was produced in 1991. Moreover, Iraq said it filled 50 R-400 bombs and five missile warheads with anthrax.

 

• UNMOVIC's report recollects UNSCOM's conclusions:

 

• Iraq's anthrax production potential could have been as much as 25,000 liters.

 

• Evidence that a second facility produced anthrax in 1991.

 

• Evidence that more than five warheads were filled with anthrax.

 

• That there is no reliable or final assessment of how many R-400 bombs were filled with anthrax.

 

• UNMOVIC concludes:

 

• About 10,000 additional liters of anthrax were not destroyed and may still exist.

 

• "Iraq currently possesses the technology and materials...to enable it to produce anthrax."

 

• By 1993, Iraq was successfully drying large quantities of a bacteria that "could be a model for anthrax."

 

• As the Secretary noted on February 5, Iraq has developed a mobile biological agent production capability. In only one month's time, these mobile units can produce the same, or more, dry anthrax equivalent to the 10,000 liters Iraq has hidden from inspectors.

 

VX

 

• Iraq's Chemical Weapons declarations in April 1991 and June 1992 did not disclose Iraq's VX program. Only in March 1995 did Iraq admit to having produced large-scale amounts of VX — one of the most dangerous chemical agents created.

 

• Iraq claims never to have successfully weaponized VX.

 

• UNMOVIC's document concludes:

 

• Iraq provided false and misleading declarations in order to retain production equipment specifically modified to produce VX.

 

• Direct physical evidence contradicts Iraq's claim that it never weaponized VX.

 

• Iraq failed to provide any credible evidence to support its claims of unilateral destruction of VX and VX precursors.

 

• UN inspectors reported to the UN Security Council that "UNMOVIC has information that conflicts with [iraq's] account. There are indications that Iraq had worked on the problems of purity and stabilization and that more had been achieved than has been declared."

 

R-400 Bombs

 

• Iraq first claimed it had 1,200 R-400 chemical bombs.

 

• After Iraq admitted its biological weapons program in 1995, Iraq altered its story and added 350 R-400 bombs.

 

• However, UNSCOM has never fully verified Iraq's ever-changing claims and concluded it did not know how many R-400 bombs Iraq produced for chemical/biological agents.

 

• Of these 1,550 bombs, Iraq says it filled 157 with biological agents. Nothing supports that number. UNSCOM concluded it did not know how many Iraq filled with biological weapons.

 

• Iraq claims today that newly-found bombs and bomb fragments add up close to 157 and that, therefore, the issue of R-400 biological bombs can be closed.

 

• Regrettably, the fact is that Iraq has refused to provide a complete and accurate count on how many R-400 bombs — filled or unfilled

 

• Iraq really has in its possession.

 

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Spray Devices

 

• We now know that inspectors discovered an undeclared Unmanned Aerial Vehicle with a 7.45 meter wingspan, based on a drop tank system that Iraq admitted was intended to disperse biological agent, has apparent autonomous flight capability and appears to have the capability to fly more than 150 kilometers.

 

• This type of discovery is only the latest chapter in Iraq's effort to hide the fact that it has worked for years to develop Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and spray devices to deliver chemical and biological agent.

 

• Only in 1996 did Iraq admit trying to convert the MiG-21 fighter aircraft into an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle to deliver a biological weapon agent. Then, Iraq changed its story and claimed that the MiG-21 would deliver a "munition."

 

• On spray tanks, UNMOVIC concludes, "there is a clear contradiction in Iraq's explanation of...spray tanks." Contrary to Iraq's declaration, Iraq has "a well-developed drop-tank for [a] chemical agent."

 

• UNMOVIC states, "The development of tanks for chemical weapons and biological weapons uses should...be considered...one continued project...Spraying devices modified for chemical/biological weapon purposes may still exist in Iraq."

 

• Iraq has pursued several other Unmanned Aerial Vehicles — the L-29 jet trainer and smaller aircraft — all capable of using spray devices to deliver a chemical/biological agent.

 

• UNMOVIC's basic conclusion: a "general question of Iraq's intentions with respect to remote-piloted vehicles as chemical/biological delivery systems..."

 

SCUD-Type Biological and Chemical Warheads

 

• UNMOVIC's document states: "A number of discrepancies and questions remain which raise doubts about accounting of special warheads, including:

 

• The total number produced [100 warheads, not 75] ...

 

• Iraq's numerous modifications to its declarations on these matters.

 

• Iraq's admitted action taken to mislead UNSCOM on the location and number of special warheads.

 

• And most importantly, the physical evidence which conflicts with Iraq's account of its destruction of biological warheads..."

 

• This issue is important because special warheads are "linked to the wider issue of whether Iraq had retained Scud-type missiles, propellant and a launching capability after the declared destruction."

 

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
PEACE

 
I heard on the radio news that our soldiers are no longer wearing chemical suits. WHy must the media tell us this. We don't need to know this. I personally feel like the media is trying to help SAdam kill our soldiers, which is pissing me off. Saying this statement gives the U.S. no advantages, so who is the media really trying to help. Let me at some of the directors of those news stations. I'd like to beat the crap out of them. Tell us this stuff once the war is over not before. Idiots!

 
Haven't you learned anything Josh? The Iraqis don't have any WMD's. Saddam said so. Hundreds of times he has said so.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif

According to the news right now all of those Iraqis who "never asked to be liberated" are taking on Saddamite Hussinsein's militia.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/mad.gif.c18f003ab0ef8a0d9c27ca78d77a6392.gif :mad:

Even though "it's all about the oil" we are putting Iraqis back in charge of the oil fields.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/banghead.gif.8606515f668c74f6de0281deb475b6fd.gif

Even though we've been told that there is a 10 yr occupation coming we are setting up an interim govt and planning for elections...possibly yet this year.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

Could it POSSIBLY be that we were told the wrong thing?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

PEACE

 
Originally posted by LWW Haven't you learned anything Josh? The Iraqis don't have any WMD's. Saddam said so. Hundreds of times he has said so.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/nono.gif.eca61d170185779e0921b0faa9704973.gif

 

According to the news right now all of those Iraqis who "never asked to be liberated" are taking on Saddamite Hussinsein's militia.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/mad.gif.c18f003ab0ef8a0d9c27ca78d77a6392.gif :mad:

 

Even though "it's all about the oil" we are putting Iraqis back in charge of the oil fields.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/banghead.gif.8606515f668c74f6de0281deb475b6fd.gif

 

Even though we've been told that there is a 10 yr occupation coming we are setting up an interim govt and planning for elections...possibly yet this year.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif

 

Could it POSSIBLY be that we were told the wrong thing?//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif

 

PEACE
One of these days it will click. I will finally realize that America is the modern day hitler.

 
Heard on the news today:

Barrels of what might be "mustard gas" were found a few days ago, still no conclusive tests.

This is only a guess as to they are, according to the media it is not known for sure.

Just figured you guys would want that info

 
Heard on the news today:
Barrels of what might be "mustard gas" were found a few days ago, still no conclusive tests.

This is only a guess as to they are, according to the media it is not known for sure.

Just figured you guys would want that info
Heard on the news today:

Barrels of what might be "mustard gas" were opened a few days ago, they raised blisters on soldiers present and exposed, they tested positive in the preliminary tests, it was loaded in artillery shells, there were chemical warfare manuals present, still no conclusive tests.

This is only a guess as to they are, according to the media it is not known for sure. Could just be leftovers from a bombed out Taco Bell who knows.

Just figured you guys would want that info.

PEACE

 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83449,00.html

My apologies as I forgot the rules of this game:

1-If you believe Dubya, the UN inspectors of UNMOVIC and UNSCOM, US and British intelligence agencies, and even Iraq's own admission to making TONS of this stuff with no explanation of where it went then you must post a link.

2-If you support the anti war theory that "Saddam says he ain't got it and you can't show me any because he won't let the inspectors go where they request or talk to the scientists and Dubya is a Texas oil man who only wants to plunder theIraqi nation then that's good enough for me" then all you have to have is a thought or a rumor to dispel all evidence.

PEACE

 
My source was CNBC news about 7:15 PM MST on Monday April, 8th 2003.

Thats what they claimed. while I have no doubt that Govt officials know exactly what it is. They probably just don't wat to scare anyone.

The New report said nothing about barrels being opened, said nothing about any effects on the troops. Just said barrels of what might be mustard gas were found, and no conclusive tests.

I don't try to play know-it-all, I speak what I know, and am willing to learn more. I learn by watching the news, and listening to others. Prove me wrong and I will gladly change my opinion.

You said they found chemical weapons in some locations, you provided a link, I read it, I believe you

 
Originally posted by CarAudioAddict My source was CNBC news about 7:15 PM MST on Monday April, 8th 2003.

 

Thats what they claimed. while I have no doubt that Govt officials know exactly what it is. They probably just don't wat to scare anyone.

 

The New report said nothing about barrels being opened, said nothing about any effects on the troops. Just said barrels of what might be mustard gas were found, and no conclusive tests.

 

I don't try to play know-it-all, I speak what I know, and am willing to learn more. I learn by watching the news, and listening to others. Prove me wrong and I will gladly change my opinion.

 

You said they found chemical weapons in some locations, you provided a link, I read it, I believe you

Don't believe everything you here on the news. Many stations are no longer credible as they are huge corporations that have their own agendas. Example: They may try to make Bush look horrible that way he loses next campaign. Then they give huge campaign money to Gore so that Gore will do favors. Some sites just crack me up. I saw a site for the International Socialist Organization and they were talking about how the war is unjust and Bush is there for oil. This is the same group that funding the Anti war protests around the country, ofcourse what they say is filled with heavy bias. SO BE CAREFUL. THE NEWS WILL LIE TO YOU JUST LIKE A SALESPERSON, BECAUSE THEY TO ARE USUALLY INTERESTED IN MONEY!!!!!

What a perfect world we live in.

 
Fair enough and my apology. I will admit that I sometimes have you and Savant linked too close together...and I basicly implied you following his standards which was a bit too far. I will admit that he attacked myself and others on a few different issues where I knew for a fact my info was correct and he of course spouted his nonsense as if he had actual knowledge of the issue.

Neither here nor there though as CAA you and I have not always agreed certainly but I think we have both learned a little from listening to an argument with which we didn't agree but the other side could at least back their opinion with something other than personal prejudice and political axes which needed grounding. At least I know I have anyway. Intellectual debate when arried on in an honest manner will often get heated but is IMHO the epitomy of what a professor of mine used to call "combat in the arena of ideas". I am pretty thick skinned and am offended by very little and meant no offense towards you.

I wish that everyone had your idealism as to avoiding personal and national violence, sadly though there are those which when confronted with less than brute force will see it as weakness and the opportunity for aggression. IMHO Saddamite Hussinsein falls perfectly into that camp along with Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, Amin, Pol Pot, Chairman Mao, and a rogue's gallery of others.

PEACE

 
Originally posted by LWW Fair enough and my apology. I will admit that I sometimes have you and Savant linked too close together...and I basicly implied you following his standards which was a bit too far. I will admit that he attacked myself and others on a few different issues where I knew for a fact my info was correct and he of course spouted his nonsense as if he had actual knowledge of the issue.
I don't even know why I bothered looking on this board again, but as soon as I do I notice your complete lack of credibility yet again.

The ONLY thing you were correct about, and could substantiate was the Clinton purgering himself (as pointed out many times, I never brought up anything about his being a felon, just that I was under the impression he never actually lied while in office.. you showed he did but wasn't prosecuted), something that was not widely publicized and I'm sure your hatred of Liberals had you obsessed about watching for any evidence to fan your flames.. Again, all of that was and is totally irrelivant to the conversation at hand.. Here is what you said

I make a hard effort to start researching every issue with no foregone conclusions and follow the facts to wherever they lead...and at the end of the trail truth will always be found.
Now, as an example of how you are so full of shit that you can't see your own falicies.. As you would like people to believe, you 'follow the path that ends in truth'.. yet, You have claimed 2 UNPROVEN things.. then offer support to SHOW you are falsly believing things..

Yet, you claim our government confirmed they found chem weapon chems (sarin and tabun) and you posted a link after saying this

FWIW NPR is reporting that a total of 20 missiles loaded with sarin or mustard gas
...
Only NEITHER link mentioned anything about 'loaded into' anything other than being in drums.. and NEITHER link 'confirmed' they were actually chem weapon chems.. On CNN they reported that they get false positives from pesticides all the time and that's why they were planning on doing more in depth testing (it was one of the military chem specialists ON SITE that said that on CNN).. In the light of your being perfectly willing to jump to conclusions and accept the phrase 'might be' as conclusive proof, I have to question your credibility and your ability to comprehend what you read and hear, let alone that you have any concept of what 'truth' or 'fact' is.

Neither here nor there though as CAA you and I have not always agreed certainly but I think we have both learned a little from listening to an argument with which we didn't agree but the other side could at least back their opinion with something other than personal prejudice and political axes which needed grounding.
Other than these few last posts from you, I've not seen any evidence that you agreed with CAA on anything, at all. You even went so far as to imply he thought Saddam was a good guy, in and amoungst your antics of trying to equate me to Saddam for your admirers..

At least I know I have anyway. Intellectual debate when [c]arried on in an honest manner will often get heated but is IMHO the epitomy of what a professor of mine used to call "combat in the arena of ideas". I am pretty thick skinned and am offended by very little and meant no offense towards you.
Only, it seems to me that the bulk of your refusing to even TRY to comprehend any of what I was saying was based on your being offended that I attacked people on this board (which I'm still a bit confused about since when you jumped in on page 2 I had only stated a few opinions and hadn't attacked anyone in a serious or overly agressive manner).. You kept trying to imply that by not agreeing with Bush that I supported Saddam.. Not even close to a reasonable correlation, and certianly not an example of caring about persuing truth.. simply being the bully you wanted to accuse me of.

I wish that everyone had your idealism as to avoiding personal and national violence
This is what amazes me.. That you can say this.. In the face of my saying that I don't think running off into this war when we did was a good idea, that we should have tried harder to push the issues and try to have a peaceful resolution (more so than sending in 100s of thousands of troops and have them blow shit up). There are MANY good reasons for having tried that.. Yet, that is an idealistic outlook that you felt the need to attack. I have even gone so far as to admit that we still most likely would have ended up in armed conflict.. But, the difference 'might' have been having a lot more global support and maybe getting more of his weapons destroyed (like those last 30 Al Samoud - II missles?). I don't like the idea of war at all, and I have even had several 'serious' conversations with people who feel like you do about all this, and we manage to have civil conversations and agree to disagree on some things, and we can accept the others point of view on other things (some things can't be proved either way, but have a logical basis despite being something believed or not.. meaning, some things 2 people can see differently and that doesn't make one right and the other wrong, but if you can't admit that it's a conceptual thing, you can't agree to disagree)..

Part of the problem, as I see it, is you are the one with a political axe to grind.. not me.. I don't like politicians period.. Liberals and Conservatives are both fundamentally flawed if you ask me.. but it's been my experience that Conservatives tend to follow a mantra that is more selfish than that of Liberals.. In general, I'm a compasionate and caring person.. that's not typically a Conservative ideal.. Normally, as has been my experience, Conservatives are almost solely concerned with money and profit, and tend to feel their ideals should be followed by everyone (seems Conservatives know better than an individual what might be good for them).. Liberals, despite their many flaws as well, at least tend to have an ideology of helping others.. *shrug*

Anyway.. I know I'm wasting my breath (energy in typing) with this. You claim to want to find 'truth' and claim to be openminded, yet I seem to be the only one that has admitted being misinformed about anything (the Clinton thing.. I even went so far as to admit I was wrong about the Saudi Arabia being #1 oil supplier, only I wasn't wrong about that.. go figger, I was just trying to give people the benifit of the doubt.. oh, wait.. That's a bad thing I guess //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif ) .. Then I ask for you to offer substantiation for your request for me to 'admit being wrong', yet they still have NOT confirmed chem/bio weaps or WMD.. Granted, it is really looking like they might have found some chem stuff (the potential sarin/tabun find).. I wouldn't be supprised if it is.. but, I'm willing to hold off judgment until I have all the 'facts', something you claim to do but obviously don't..

 
Originally posted by joshpoints I heard on the radio news that our soldiers are no longer wearing chemical suits. WHy must the media tell us this. We don't need to know this. I personally feel like the media is trying to help SAdam kill our soldiers, which is pissing me off. Saying this statement gives the U.S. no advantages, so who is the media really trying to help. Let me at some of the directors of those news stations. I'd like to beat the crap out of them. Tell us this stuff once the war is over not before. Idiots!
Actually, the point being made (if you can read between the lines) is even after opening the barrels and having 'decontaminated' a few soldiers, the chemicals were NOT serious enough to warrent chem suits..

In case you didn't know, Sarin gas is one of the nastiest nerve agents there are.. if those barrels contained pure sarin gas (liquid form, goes to gasious), all those in the building would have fallen over dead pretty fast.. The fact that they went back in without suits, to me, implies that even if it is something like sarin, it's so old that you would have to drink it to have it kill you.. *shrug*

They 'might' have chem weapons, but if they didn't use them once we encroached on Baghdad, they are most likely not going to use any EVER (during this war).. Perhaps Saddam was killed before the Baghdad raid and since 'Chemical Ali' died, no one left alive was willing to use chem weaps *shrug*.. In any event, I get the feeling that our troops are probably out of danger from chem/bio or WMD now.. now it's just a matter of rooting out the rest of the resistence, and hoping like hell that the US gets out before the civilians revolt (they don't want us 'there', they were happy for us to kill Saddam, but they don't want the US to 'occupy' Iraq.. if we stay too long there is strong supposition that the people will attack our troops.. then what?)

Anyway..

 
Originally posted by Savant Actually, the point being made (if you can read between the lines) is even after opening the barrels and having 'decontaminated' a few soldiers, the chemicals were NOT serious enough to warrent chem suits..

 

In case you didn't know, Sarin gas is one of the nastiest nerve agents there are.. if those barrels contained pure sarin gas (liquid form, goes to gasious), all those in the building would have fallen over dead pretty fast.. The fact that they went back in without suits, to me, implies that even if it is something like sarin, it's so old that you would have to drink it to have it kill you.. *shrug*

 

They 'might' have chem weapons, but if they didn't use them once we encroached on Baghdad, they are most likely not going to use any EVER (during this war).. Perhaps Saddam was killed before the Baghdad raid and since 'Chemical Ali' died, no one left alive was willing to use chem weaps *shrug*.. In any event, I get the feeling that our troops are probably out of danger from chem/bio or WMD now.. now it's just a matter of rooting out the rest of the resistence, and hoping like hell that the US gets out before the civilians revolt (they don't want us 'there', they were happy for us to kill Saddam, but they don't want the US to 'occupy' Iraq.. if we stay too long there is strong supposition that the people will attack our troops.. then what?)

 

Anyway..

WHat are you talking about Savant? What I heard on the radio had nothing to do with checking out those barrels. They said that our guys were no longer wearing chem suits, my point is why does this have to be mentioned. Must you always be so contrary. THis doesn't need to be known by the public or the leadership in Iraq.

You think you've proven some major point. LWW and I make our points to show problems with the liberals. THey said nothing when Clinton took part in plenty of illegal activities yet the liberals mentioned nothing of it. We should stay out of what he does even if it hurts the country? Liberals don't say what's wrong is wrong and what's right is right. WHat republicans do is wrong what liberals and democrats do is right. Maybe you should go read back through all the pages you missed because there are a lot of facts that have been posted. Maybe you'll learn something, or maybe not. I said why I now feel we had to go into Iraq. Sniping Sadam wouldn't not have worked, I stated a few pages back why.

C ya peace nick,

Go to San FRancisco and vomit and crap on the streets like all the other liberals up there, bunch of socialists.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

TheGrimReaperKD

10+ year member
Twiztid Mothaf*cka
Thread starter
TheGrimReaperKD
Joined
Location
Florida
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
737
Views
13,012
Last reply date
Last reply from
JimJ
IMG_20260513_214311575.jpg

ThxOne

    May 13, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260513_213956814.jpg

ThxOne

    May 13, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top