It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Killuminati
Originally posted by astrocreep
Originally posted by Killuminati
Originally posted by astrocreep
"Chief inspector Hans Blix reported to Security Council members that Iraq had failed to account for 1,000 tons of chemical agent, 6,500 chemical bombs, 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard gas and VX nerve agent and 380 rocket engines useful in the delivery of biological and chemical agents."
It is not justified to jump to the conclusion that something exists just because it is unaccounted for, espically on the basis of war and peace
It was the responsibility of Iraq to account for all these. We know they existed before and there was no proof of destruction and no account for where they are so if we assume one way or another in this, do we assume they didn't exist even though we saw them stockpiled and we saw them used and we were witness to their power merely on the word of the Iraqi information minister? I remind you of their truthfulness during the war. I say your reaching, really reaching for no more a justified reason than politics.
Iraq was going to show a report on destroyed anthrax....its a shame that we attacked before they could show this proof to us
Its not like it would of changed Bushes mind
HE WAS GOING TO ATTACK REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING
Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Originally posted by Byrd
My sarcastic, unkind, before-the-first-cuppa-coffee response is "because he's 'doing' the American public... not White House interns."
Actually, I did hear that same question raised on NPR this morning.
You'd better go ahead and have your cup of coffee and think back to the days when Bubba did more than just interns. You democrats are so fixated on sex that you think that's all it was about.
Originally posted by Gazrok
Clinton certainly was no angel...and no, I'm not talking sex. The Clintons are connected with more mysterious deaths, and dirty deeds than I care to count (I'd run out of digits).
But, as republican as I usually tend to be...I still think GW is a boob....
Originally posted by astrocreep
Originally posted by Peace
Originally posted by astrocreep
Originally posted by Peace
they have even seen the mobile biological weapons labs used to concoct deadly virus' (which turn out to be harmless weather baloon labs).
Now I have to wonder what the hell weather baloon labs were doing buried in the desert? I don't think we're getting the full story about whats been found and I can't figure out why. Bush and Blair are both taking a hell of alot of heat over this. I reserve judgement until I see the entire picture. Saddam might have been closer than anyone thinks and we might have goofed and let those weapons get out of there. In our blind rage to get Bush out of there, I'd hate to think we'd ignore the painfully obvious...or the guy in the mall with a ticking backpack.
You don't understand, the weapons inspectors ridded Iraq of WMD, some of the inspection team even came out and said so (Scott Ritter). Iraq was stripped of all necessary components for developing weapons of mass destruction, that is why all the focus was on the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and these were clearly non existant or they would have been found, anyone who thinks Saddam Hussein is driving around the middle east with 300, 000 litres of anthrax in the back of his jeep needs a reality check. The weapons were destroyed years ago.
"Chief inspector Hans Blix reported to Security Council members that Iraq had failed to account for 1,000 tons of chemical agent, 6,500 chemical bombs, 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 500 tons of sarin, mustard gas and VX nerve agent and 380 rocket engines useful in the delivery of biological and chemical agents."
www.worldnetdaily.com...
Oh its checked...make no mistake about that. Reality is my game, baby.
edit to add this little tidbit for those who have better things to do than chasing my links....
"While blasting Iraq today for not "genuinely" accepting disarmament and hinting that undeclared chemical warheads recently found in a bunker southwest of Baghdad may be the "tip of the submerged iceberg," the duo in charge of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq asked for more time to do their work.
Reporting on the progress of the inspection process over the past 60 days, U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix told members of the U.N. Security Council today that he was encouraged by Iraq's cooperation in providing access to inspectors.
But his praise was muted by a blistering summation of Iraq's overall cooperation.
"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it," Blix declared.
[Edited on 17-6-2003 by astrocreep]
Originally posted by astrocreep
yeah, Saddam really was an angel to deal with wasn't he. Sorry you all got shafted on the baloons and thanks for finding the info. I really wondered about what he really wanted baloons for anyway. I'm shocked beyond belief that it was a military program.
Still, this guy who can't be trusted to pay his depts and is guilty of so many atrocities, is the guy of whom you believe when he says he wasn't making WMDs. I know you really are just wnating a political tool against the US and thats fine. My point is, we can't all look the other way and really believe there are no WMDs and never were. Fine, drag Bush through the mud over it but we can't justify this dangerous premise for political gains. We've all been witness to Saddam's actions. Do you really believe he had no weapons? Aren't you the least bit concerned that the UK might be a target as well as the US?
Originally posted by onlyinmydreams
I try to avoid the political stuff here...
...But a bigger question is "Why isn't the European Media reporting all the mass graves US forces have been finding?"
WMDs were just part of the reason for the Iraq invasion... there were a couble of dozen UN mandates that went with that...
Personally, I think the WMD issue is just being drummed up by a lot of people who realize that they... lost. They're missing the larger point, which is that a brutal dictator, who has killed, and was killing, hundreds of thousands of people has been toppled, that a rogue state, potentially a home to various types of terrorists, has been defeated, and that there will be a new democratic state in the middle east.
An objective observer would see life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as having been won by the war....
..whereas most democrats will just march on towards their destruction in 2004 with their sour-grapes, on the rope naysaying loser-isms.
Jim
PS Someone HAD to say that around here. For all the Dems out there, you need someone to goad you on this site from time to time
But I shouldn't have to mention Saddam's regime BECAUSE EVERYONE f-ing KNOWS ALREADY!
EVERYONE KNOWS that Saddam was an evil dictator and no one is challenging that, no one is saying he was not, EVERYONE knows what he did, EVERYONE! GET IT!?
Originally posted by Peace
Originally posted by astrocreep
yeah, Saddam really was an angel to deal with wasn't he. Sorry you all got shafted on the baloons and thanks for finding the info. I really wondered about what he really wanted baloons for anyway. I'm shocked beyond belief that it was a military program.
Still, this guy who can't be trusted to pay his depts and is guilty of so many atrocities, is the guy of whom you believe when he says he wasn't making WMDs. I know you really are just wnating a political tool against the US and thats fine. My point is, we can't all look the other way and really believe there are no WMDs and never were. Fine, drag Bush through the mud over it but we can't justify this dangerous premise for political gains. We've all been witness to Saddam's actions. Do you really believe he had no weapons? Aren't you the least bit concerned that the UK might be a target as well as the US?
Sorry matey but those trucks are all the evidence your boys have uncovered so far, and it turns out to be bullsh*t, may seem trivial, but in serious matters like these evidence needs to be accurate.
Saddam Hussein was a creation of the CIA, the CIA has made a mess of almost every part of the world that they have stuck their dirty little noses. I would have welcomed getting rid of Saddam, perhaps the time to get rid of him would have been 1991, thats what i think, if you wanted to take him out, 1991 was the best time, it would have saved 100,000's of lives, Madeline Albright admitted that she thought the price of 500,000 deaths was a worthy price.
Instead of taking Baghdad in 1991, the International community decided to starve the state into submission, that didn't work completely, but it made Saddam weak enough to remove easily.
I know Saddam wasn't a threat to this country, to the best of my knowledge, his weapons of mass destruction are ficticious, the weapons inspectors destroyed his arsenal. Of course i worry that we will be attacked, but i don't think Saddam Hussein was a threat, he wishes he was.
My point is, you don't start a war on the basis of lies, if the case had been made solely on the basis of facts i would have probably supported the war. I don't like being lied to, and i believe our government and the US government will try and trick us into war again and i don't intend to allow myself to be fooled.
Originally posted by Toltec
Its not just about Saddam Hussein's Regime which something you can't seem to get through your thick scull.
If it had been, then there would have been no way he could have gotten away with it. How did he get away with it is the issue.
He had to have help from some aspect of the world community that was actually responsible for making sure he could not.
And to be certain it had nothing to do with the US as for the last 10 years we were not in Iraq.
My advice is that you wake up
[Edited on 18-6-2003 by Toltec]