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.

 

Iraq Dossier

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 03:13 AM
link   
oooooooookay
so the reason America persuaded Columbia to hand over the Dossier to them early so they could reproduce it and hand it out to selected countrys is because they have

"better Photo copiers"

one wonders if the Dossier is now a little thicker than when it first arrived from Iraq




posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 07:45 AM
link   
Both the Unmovic team and the International Atomic Energy Agency have original copies. Do not worry too much. However, I do find it disturbing that the Americans, staged a UN "coup" and took the document to distribute on their own. They knew, when signing the original resolution, what the document would entail, and now refuses to give it to all Security Council members.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Its just massively frustrating to watch any credibility for the case against Iraq get slowly washed away by an increasing tide of beurocratic and political manoeuvring.

Its actually got to the point where 99% of the people know there is going to be a war with Iraq no matter what happens.

How utterly insane is that?

I'm starting to think that maybe the only way to get the US to acknowledge another political agenda is to fly a plane into one of their buildings...



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 08:29 AM
link   
I almost wish you would Lupe. It would nearly be worth it to be rid of such an asshole.
Too bad you don't have the balls.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 08:49 AM
link   
mmmmmm very insisive *nod*

you don't think theres anything slightly worrying about the fact that one country is about to attack another country for crimes against humanity it seems to not be able to provide evidence for?

nor do you find it worrying that said country has pretty much illegaly bi passed its regulatory body and is now distributing documents to countrys it selects which it has been responsible for reproducing?

This war is loosing credibility by the second.

if none of the first two points worry you maybe this third point will.

If America goes ahead with this war with no evidence against Saddam and, as is predicted, it costs around 2 trillion dollars and lasts ten years, what exactly are you going to tell the parents of the american kids who are going to go out there and get shot, their kids are dying for.

Its certainly not to protect america.....according to the evidence thus far it doesn't seem to be to protect the world in general....

hmmmm?



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Ethics aside, is not the preservation of a significant percentage the world's oil supply from lunatic control a valid option in this era of transition from oil to alternatives?

Could it be that simple?

Should it be?



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Ethics aside, is not the preservation of a significant percentage the world's oil supply from lunatic control a valid option in this era of transition from oil to alternatives?
preservation for who? and please demonstrate that Bush is less of a lunatic than Saddam

Could it be that simple?
no.

Should it be?
no.

next.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Your inane rhetoric grows tiring. As usual, you misdirect and out and out lie to try to make a point for which you have no proof or precedent.

*Loopy sniveled, one wonders if the Dossier is now a little thicker than when it first arrived from Iraq.


Yes, Loopy, the American Government is going to add a million pages to Iraqs document. Never mind that the UN has the ORIGINAL copy, and any attempt to alter it would be painfully obvious. The US did not take the document so they could distribute it themselves, as Dakmarid states, and as for refusing to give it to all the security council members, please, tell me, where do you guys come up with this trash? Wake up and smell the garbanzo beans, boys! Every member of the US Security council will get a copy of the documents, and it wont come from the US. The US has bypassed no one. You are just stupid enough to make # like that up to prove a point that you have no proof for. As far as proof of Sadams brutality and use of weapons on mass destruction, I guess the bodies of dead Kurdish children he gassed in the 80s in northern Iraq mean nothing to you. Of course notit proves you wrong!

And Loopy, sounds like you are threatening to commit an act of terrorism. You know, we have a hotline here to report boneheads like you who threaten such acts. What was your phone number? I need it for the report

Forget it...I'll just use your IP address......



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:26 AM
link   
The US photocopied the doccuments and that only permanent security council members were given complete copies of the dossier was because the dossier contained details of where Iraq got it's Biological and Chemical equipment and ingredients.
I will look for links to prove this(It has already been stated in the British media)but the declaration imformed the world that the US,UK,France,and Russia all supplied Iraq with equipment and ingredients which helped it's weapons program.
This was felt to be embarrassing(nay hypocritical)and so this imformation was cut before it goes to the other ten members of the security council.

So much for full disclosure!



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:33 AM
link   
John There are links on the BBC web site.
quite a bit is coming out at present if you check out BBC 24 we just had a report on possible surpression of aspects of the report by the US for reasons of national security.

AR, you really seem to get a little hot under the collar over this sort of thing.

can I suggest a more placid web site, or laying of the tartrazine for a while?



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:43 AM
link   
HA HA HA! Oh, Loopy, you make me laugh so hard! You love to ridicule those who prove you wrong and point out the holes in your story. Smoke and mirrors, an attempt to discredit others whom you disagree with. Just like terrorists do. Ignore the meat of the post, then spread propaganda about them. Sorry, fella, no dice. We all see you for what you are. Nope, not "hot under the collar" at all. Just pointing out the fallacy of your drivel. And by the way, your little remarks just prove that YOU are the one getting hot under the collar.

Go buy another pint with your welfare check and calm down a bit...



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:51 AM
link   
uhuh.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lupe_101
preservation for who?


Does it matter?

At this stage, society needs oil. Certainly, if one entity engages in military efforts to secure a supply of vital resources, it is not unexpected.

It just might be that simple. Why must it be complex?



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:00 AM
link   
AR - Dude, take it down a notch, ok? Cutting someone's argument to shreds with facts/links/logical argument scores soooooo much higher with the judges than !Flame On! everytime a certain poster puts something out there.

Mi dos centavos.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Sure it matters. Oil is still being proffered as the only viable solution to society's energy needs because there is a very well worn path to the coffers of the same families in place during the British Empire. That the monetary infrastructure is concrete is the primary factor as to why innovation has not been adopted more wide scale....the tech is there in theory and with much, already in application.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I agree with you, it should be that simple. I also agree that oil is part of the equation. However, ridding the world of a ruthless dictator that would think nothing of using WMD's in an instant is also in the mix. He has proven his willingness to do so on his own people!

I believe the governments of the UK and US both have intellegence information that will truthfully refute Iraq's claim that they have no such weapons. They are just waiting for the report supplied by Iraq to be deciphered, and will then release to the UN some of what they have. They will probably not release all they have, as this would jeopardize the HUMINT resources the information was gathered by. Unfortunatly, many do not realize the importance of protecting our valuable intelligence gathering system. Bill Clinton surely didn't. He cut the resources that quite possibly could have avoided this mess all together.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Does it matter?

At this stage, society needs oil. Certainly, if one entity engages in military efforts to secure a supply of vital resources, it is not unexpected.

Not unexpected but can it be considered moral, right, "civilised"

In the west we make a lot out of the fact that we are "better" than certain people.
Saddam may have nukes.
we have nukes but thats ok because were better and more moral than him

Saddam funds terrorists.
we've certainly funded and armed people considered to be terrorists but thats ok because we are better and more moral about it.

In order for us to maintain the moral high ground we must explicitly demonstrate that whilst our methods may be the same as somone like Saddam our ultimate goal, our reasoning behind certain actions is for the greater good.

otherwise we loose the moral high ground and our argument for continuing what is, to a certain extent, a hypocritical moral crusade disintegrates.

as such, with the world watching us, we cannot simply state "we want his oil, we're going to take it because we can" even if that is our actual motive, and, however obvious that motive becomes we simply cannot afford to explicitly say it. We would loose to much good will and, however powerfull the US thinks it is, it simply couldn't survive without a certain amount of good will from the rest of the world.

Thats why Bush hasn't just said "lets get the oil" thats why Bush has neetly tied Saddam to his war against terror, a moral crusade the people will back which, if its what he wants, allows him to take the oil without saying thats why he's doing it.

It just might be that simple. Why must it be complex?
The reasons behind this war may be that simple, they may even be as simple as say, a son wanting to please his father, the explicit political motivation however cannot be seen to be that simple, our political stability requires that the reasons be complex and many fold.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Lupe, you have got to be a classic case of selective hearing. It's obvious that you have a major problem with the US, maybe you were deported ?
The point I'm making is that you twist benign points into unreasonable anti US rhetoric.
Widen your view and you may ( if you're lucky ) realise it is wrong.
You might even get to start a thread : How ATS and it's members changed my views and life for the better.



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:44 AM
link   
I flame where flaming is called for. the "certain individual" you speak of is the king of smoke and mirrors, and all I am doing is pointing out that fact. I may have lowered myself towards his level a little, but that's my shame, not yours. I'll live with it. I post many cohearant remarks here, and Loopy usually takes the first shot at me. Even when someone posts a resonable argument that disagrees with his, he resorst to name calling and personal attacks. Debunking him has become sort of a hobby. At least Mad Scientist has the guts to flame him as well. Thanks, MS, I was beginning to fell left out in the cold there...



posted on Dec, 10 2002 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I AM one of those parents Lupe (yes, I have a 17 year old son). I will tell myself the same thing my Great grandfather told himself when my grandfather went over to bomb Germany to defend *some country*.
It's to make the world a better/safer place for EVERYONE.

But, then of course, by your logic Hitler was innocent since he never stood trial right?

[Edited on 10-12-2002 by Fry2]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join