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.

 

Demolishing the WMD Myth

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by HiddenReality
Why would the world attack Iran for defending itself from invasion with weapons similar if not the same...


The US will invade Iran only in response to an attack by them; or a significant threat by them to use WMD. Iran has announced its desire to destroy Israel. Given that Israel is our ally, we are responsible to aid in their defense. The "world's" opinion/response is irrelevent in terms an Iranian attack. Only the superpowers matter (Eurpoe, US, Russia).




as the US has in its arsenal. Bush told an all out lie, got caught out so blamed his intel. Any movement like this would have been picked up by satalite images or the many agents in Iraq before the invasion.




posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
Iran has announced its desire to destroy Israel.


- No "Iran" hasn't.

Their new President got carried away with himself at a rally for the Palestinians and spouted some of the old rhetoric.
(Just like has happened in Iran countless times since the 1979 revolution; it was no cause to think they were on the verge of attacking Israel then just as it isn't now)

It was not an announcement of Iranian government policy.


The "world's" opinion/response is irrelevent in terms an Iranian attack. Only the superpowers matter (Eurpoe, US, Russia).


- In which case you'll be all on your lonesome then.
Cos if you think Europe or Russia are all for another murderous ME war you are kidding yourself.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by HiddenReality
Why would the world attack Iran for defending itself from invasion with weapons similar if not the same as the US has in its arsenal. Bush told an all out lie, got caught out so blamed his intel. Any movement like this would have been picked up by satalite images or the many agents in Iraq before the invasion.


I was talking about Iraq, not Iran... And seriously, think of the logic in what I said. If he doesn't use them he looks like a golden child and makes the US loo like idiots. If he used them he would have A LOT of people pissed off at him.

As for satellite images picking it up? Not necessarily. Any moron can figure out when and where a satellite will be in the sky, including spy satellites. All they have to do is move the stuff when no birds are overhead. And agents in Iraq? Well, a couple thoughts on that one... A.) The US admittingly doesn't have many agents in that area of the world (or any other, for that matter) and 2.) The US has one of the worst intelligence agencies in the world.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid

I was talking about Iraq, not Iran... And seriously, think of the logic in what I said. If he doesn't use them he looks like a golden child and makes the US loo like idiots. If he used them he would have A LOT of people pissed off at him.

As for satellite images picking it up? Not necessarily. Any moron can figure out when and where a satellite will be in the sky, including spy satellites. All they have to do is move the stuff when no birds are overhead. And agents in Iraq? Well, a couple thoughts on that one... A.) The US admittingly doesn't have many agents in that area of the world (or any other, for that matter) and 2.) The US has one of the worst intelligence agencies in the world.


I did see you was talking about Iraq, Iran was a mistype, anyhow its not so easy to track all the satellite and high flying sply planes over the sky even with the best hardware in the world, also this kind of movement would have to be off road, which would leave great tracks visable from those satellites and planes easily. (look on google earth for examples, and these satellite images are inferior compared to military ones) There are also many agents in the ME, its not exactly like the US is going to list its number and location of agents is it? If you dont believe me on this you could google for the list of US agents names which was leaked onto the internet, it listed lots of people in Iraq and other ME countries.

If the US was right all along they would have also picked up the WMDs being moved, they didnt because none existed. Do you think the world is treating Saddam like the golden child you describe? The world media is being hard on him as are the judges and majority of Iraqi people... You seem to contradict yourself, saying he is restrained enough to not attack your troops invading, but unstable enough to fire WMDs at europe or the US? You cant have it both ways...



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   

I did see you was talking about Iraq, Iran was a mistype, anyhow its not so easy to track all the satellite and high flying sply planes over the sky even with the best hardware in the world, also this kind of movement would have to be off road, which would leave great tracks visable from those satellites and planes easily. (look on google earth for examples, and these satellite images are inferior compared to military ones)


It's fairly simple if you know the equations. I won't go into technical details since that's a whole other topic, but really, it's not hard. Getting the orbital information of a bird is about as easy as figuring out the orbital information of a comet, and people do that every day.

As for the tracks? Last time I checked it was mainly desert there, which is quite sandy. Sounds like some shifting of the sands could make any tracks disappear. And what if they get caught in the open? Just throw over a sand camoflauge tarp and make it all blend in. Also, the US doesn't rely on spy planes any more. Yes, we do have a few UAVs that are capable of long duration flights now, but not during the phases of gathering intel before the war. The US primarily gets everything from satellites.

Also, the tracks wouldn't be that "great." Sure, a convoy of 100 semitrucks bearing heavy weapons would leave some evidence. But wouldn't a convoy of about 100 cars full of refugees? The amount of pressure left would be similar, that's why semis and larger vehicles have so many wheels. So how could you tell the difference. Width of the tracks? Well, maybe all the cars didn't follow in an exact line. Sounds a bit more plausible that they wouldn't have been seen being moved now, doesn't it?

Plus, what if there were tunnels or catacombs that have been undiscovered by US troops or the UN inspectors. Isn't that totally plausible? Why yes, it just may be!



If the US was right all along they would have also picked up the WMDs being moved, they didnt because none existed. Do you think the world is treating Saddam like the golden child you describe? The world media is being hard on him as are the judges and majority of Iraqi people... You seem to contradict yourself, saying he is restrained enough to not attack your troops invading, but unstable enough to fire WMDs at europe or the US? You cant have it both ways...


Do think that if Saddam used any form of WMDs on the invading troops there would still be an ongoing trial? No. He would have been dead many months ago.

I did say that he restrained from using WMDs on our invading coalition, but where did I say that he would be unstable to fire WMDs and Europe or the US? I never said such a thing... Maybe you have a post of mine confused with someone elses.

[edit on 2/1/2006 by cmdrkeenkid]



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   
saddam wasn't an idiot

he knew that he'd have no use for WMDs, because he'd have no way to deploy them.

his longest range missle has a range of only 96 miles, so he'd have no way to strike with the WMDs.

he had a crippled military, so he was cautious to be good and focus on other matters, lest he be invaded.

the little evidence there are for WMDs, all involve them being smuggled to syria, and all claims have been made by people who have been out of iraq for years. they also have their own agenda in the new iraq and wish to justify the war as much as possible.

this is one article, with an obvious anti liberal tone. if there were other, purely informational articles, i'd be tempted to do more research. HOWEVER, this seems like straight up propaganda.



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   


I did say that he restrained from using WMDs on our invading coalition, but where did I say that he would be unstable to fire WMDs and Europe or the US? I never said such a thing... Maybe you have a post of mine confused with someone elses.

[cmdrkeenkid]

I thought since that was one of the main lies told to incite the war on Iraq, you would also believe this. Europe was told that Saddam could hit most of there cities in a matter of hours, and that he was insane enough to do this. Maybe he does have some hidden underground like you said, but i still believe any movement so big as it would be would be tracked by the US or reported to them before they could be hidden again.



new topics




 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join