At last! Have they finally found a 'weapon of mass destruction' in Iraq?

reply to post by December_Rain


Could be a silkworm too. Iraq had those during the Iran Iraq war as well, and used them on its H-6 Bombers

reply to post by watcher73


To defend Doc here a bit, from what I have noted in his posts is a highly intelligent member. Sure, sometimes he may be wrong. But from what I have seen, the rare times he has been wrong is not proof enough to discredit what he has to post on this subject.

Debate the post, not the poster.

To me in this case, I don't think that Doc is right, but using his tagline is hardly fair.

More than likely it is an Iranian launched silkworm that didn't detonate , and the Iraqi's removed the warhead and left the rest of it in the ground. If someone could identify that lettering as Farsi , that would be conclusive.

Why would they bother to dig a hole and hide away a wrecked silkworm when they have a structurally intact one on display at Umm Qasr ?

[edit on 6-2-2010 by Drexl]

Or it's one of our cruise missiles and we wrote arabic all over it and buried it and dug it out.

One of Obama's ideas?

Originally posted by princeofpeace
This doesnt matter anyway LOL. Many Iraqi officials have admitted to their WMD's as well as their shipment to Syria prior to the war. Iraq also used chemical weapons against the Kurds and the Iranians and that was a long time ago. They developed more weapons since then.

America knew about these chemical weapons years before they went to war, because America was the one that gave them to them.

reply to post by Now_Then


Fron the article:"It is not yet known whether the seven-metre rocket is armed with a warhead."

How could it be a WMD if they don't even know if it is armed? And even if it is armed, it would have to be armed with biological or chemical weapons to be a WMD.

Waste of time.

reply to post by ClintK


Ask the Daily Mail and not me

Posting in BAN is not me giving my opinion! Well it's me thinking this article is of note!... And then opinions will form...

I did not write the article - I mealy posted it here for discussion.

S.C.U.D. missile. Anyone ever heard of them? they were a type of weapon used by the Iraqi army against the US forces during the first war. In 1991. There were these weapons the US used called Patriot missiles that shot down scuds. Most of the kids here weren't old enough to remember the first gulf war. I was in it. When you heard about these scuds being launched, there was the constant fear that there would be a bio agent or chemical agent in the warhead. Until you have gone through chem warfare training and learned how these things kill, please don't even think about stepping onto your high horse. There were plenty of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq just as there are in most every country other there, and over here. To think that there were none, is so far beyond stupid it's not even remotely funny. Grow up, learn the way the real world works, then decide when to open up that pie hole.

Originally posted by Now_Then
reply to post by ClintK

 

Ask the Daily Mail and not me

Posting in BAN is not me giving my opinion! Well it's me thinking this article is of note!... And then opinions will form...

I did not write the article - I mealy posted it here for discussion.

Oh I understand. I just wonder why the Daily Mail even suggested it was a WMD when there was no info in the article whatsoever to support that claim.

Perhaps somebody who is British could clarify. Is the Daily Mail extremely pro-Blair?

Originally posted by ClintK
reply to post by Now_Then

 

Fron the article:"It is not yet known whether the seven-metre rocket is armed with a warhead."

How could it be a WMD if they don't even know if it is armed? And even if it is armed, it would have to be armed with biological or chemical weapons to be a WMD.

Waste of time.

They could do the tap it in the nose with a hammer test.

Whatever happened to all the Poison Gas reserves that Chemical Ali tapped to kill all those Kurds? I recall we only found old corroding warheads older that what was actually used to wipe out a few villages.

I think the only biological weapons found was Anthrax, and failed attempts at other biological weapons.

I recall a few threads that said the nuclear WMDs were moved to Bekka Valley in Syria. The Israelis bombed a nuclear bomb site in Syria and the world hushed it up.

Just like the buried Jets and bombs, Iraq hoped the attack would blow over and once the Coalition left, they could return or uncover their stockpiles.

After all these years people are still trying to justify the war. WMD's to Syria? Really, Why didn't we go after them at all? Too many people are just emotionally invested in the U.S./U.K. being right. The moment i spot "lefties" or "liberals" in someone's rant I know not to take them seriously.

What was pictured is not a WMD no matter how much you want it to be.


[edit on 6-2-2010 by antonia]

Originally posted by ClintK
[
Oh I understand. I just wonder why the Daily Mail even suggested it was a WMD when there was no info in the article whatsoever to support that claim.

Perhaps somebody who is British could clarify. Is the Daily Mail extremely pro-Blair?

What seems to be the case these days , is that british newspapers tend to get a lot of American traffic to view their online content. With the right wing newspapers , this means they'll gear their content more towards speculative , fear-mongering content to appease their new audience . Journalism and factual reporting goes out the window to retain these viewers and maintain their ads revenue.

Originally posted by antonia
After all these years people are still trying to justify the war. WMD's to Syria? Really, Why didn't we go after them at all? Too many people are just emotionally invested in the U.S./U.K. being right. The moment i spot "lefties" or "liberals" in someone's rant I know not to take them seriously.

What was pictured is not a WMD no matter how much you want it to be.


[edit on 6-2-2010 by antonia]

Agreed. And I think several people have stated something like "it is well documented Iraq shipped all their WMDs to Syria just before the war." It is? By who? Surely you can find these "documents."

In fact, it is NOT documented. Various people, in trying to explain why there were never any WMDs found in Iraq, have come up with the "Syria" theory. No proof, just a theory. One of several, trying to justify the idiocy of the Iraq War.

Is bogus propaganda.

But, because most people out there are as dumb as a sack of bricks and only slightly less heavy, unfortunately, there will be acceptance of this weak presentation that has been dragged out solely on behalf of Mr.Blair and because of the complaints recently launched against the Bush regime.

Nothing will come of any of it and Iraq occupation will continue til you me and everyone else on this board is forgotten and dust.

the generationstht come after us will be stupider and stupider.

your average person that graduated in 1980 doesn't have the depth of knowlegde that a 1960 graduate had. A graduate in 2000 is barely literate.

Most people don't go onto higher education.

It's a matter of only one or two more generations before the masses are literally functionally illiterate and that will be the standard.

So much easier to control large amounts of ignorant people than it is to control large amounts of educated and therefore smarter more intelligent people who have been equipped with the tools of understanding and rationality and logic.

I am glad I won't have to live in that world. I feel sorry for you guys that are in your 20's because it is you that is getting robbed and it is you that is being lied to the most and it is your generation that is accepting those lies and supporting those who tell the lies.

You do this through your own self interest and apathy.

sad, but there you have it.

What a joke !!! Please stop posting stupid dailymail news

Originally posted by djusdjus


It's a matter of only one or two more generations before the masses are literally functionally illiterate and that will be the standard.

So much easier to control large amounts of ignorant people than it is to control large amounts of educated and therefore smarter more intelligent people who have been equipped with the tools of understanding and rationality and logic.

Actually, when i was working with the Adult Literacy council as a tutor I was given statistics showing most Americans are functionally illiterate. It's pretty bad now.

"Education" doesn't save anyone from ignorance in truth. Many people who cling to the "Iraq had WMD's" story do so for emotional reasons not logical ones. There is no evidence any WMD's ever went to Syria, just rumors.

www.washingtonpost.com...

As you can see the U.S. did it's own investigation and found nothing.

Its a Chinese "Silkworm" anti-ship missile with 200 mile a range. It carries a 1000 lb shaped charge warhead.

Destructive.

Saddam was all over the map buying weapons but not co-ordinating a proper defense strategy. Iraq became a client state of Russia who supplied them with out-dated junk military equipment. The Chinese, Germans, French got in on the game. Junk equipment and promises of solidarity in exchange for under-the-table deep discounted oil.

Why they objected to the US going back in. Saddam owed them hundreds of millions they worried they'd never collect on.

A lot hidden by loyal Baathist members still in Iraq, much convoyed by Russia to Syria. Now probably resold to terrorist groups. Mostly outdated dysfunctional junk just as likely to blow up in your face as do any harm to enemies.

Why are the men in the picture holding guns, don't you think it's easier to dig with SHOVELS? I would think they would have the area secured by the time they have dug a 20 ft deep hole. Great photo op, get out guns. The soldier is looking at that missle the way you look at the sea the first time you see it. Mission Accomplished!

Originally posted by seattletruth
I don't think you understand the definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

WMD means nuclear, chemical, or biological weapon.

An ICBM is not a weapon of mass destruction unless it has a nuclear payload (even if that is an ICBM)

Go back to your drawing board.

Every rogue nation has missiles armed with warheads. We knew Iraq had tons of conventional missiles. Everybody knew that. The only problem is when they are NUCLEAR, which they obviously weren't.

[edit on 5-2-2010 by seattletruth]

lol WMD doesnt onlly mean nuclear, chemical, or biological, lol you get this wrong with alot of people it seems like WMD mean just that weapon of mass destruction, 9-11 can be considered wmd's noy the real wmd's are the ak-47 and the m-16those two MASS produced weapons have killed more people by far thany and nuke so far

You gotta be joking, like who has the time to dig up some scrap metal missile thats not even pointing in the right direction just to shoot it off at some ship in the sea, what a bunch of jokers...