View Full Version : WMD found?
Riptide
04-27-04, 04:50 PM
Discuss?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38213
DiscipleDOC
04-27-04, 04:56 PM
That's a good article...and no disrespect...but I wam waiting to hear this from some of the major news groups before I jump to any conclusions.....
that article contains nothing we don't already know...
"There is a long list of charges made by the U.S. that have been confirmed, but none of this seems to mean anything because the weapons that were unaccounted for by the United Nations remain unaccounted for."
the wmd's themselves have not been found... its a basic rehashing of "look... we found a uranium enriching centrifuge from 5000 b.c.e. that might have produced radioactive chickens"
there are various allegations and insinuations which have been raised before and probably in better context by many members on these forums... incl Udawg
the pesticide stockpiles that they claim to be "massive stockpiles" have been thoroughly searched and tested by various teams incl those from the US for traces of illegal components...
Stop it Rip. LMAO!!!!...
Why bring my name into this saz?
"There is a long list of charges made by the U.S. that have been confirmed, but none of this seems to mean anything because the weapons that were unaccounted for by the United Nations remain unaccounted for."
This is a good point. If it only shows material breach then it is not worthy to talk about by the left. The only thing the left wants is HUGE stock piles. It does not matter if we found equipment that was used for these banned weapons. It only matters that we find the matha load. Also never mind the fact they could export that technology anytime to terrorist or the highest bidder that hates the US. Oh and never mind Saddam totaly has always hated the US. Just as long as we make Bush look bad.
Riptide
04-27-04, 05:42 PM
I find these excerpt interesting:
"The Iraqis admitted they had made 3.9 tons of VX," a powerful nerve gas, but claimed they had never weaponized it. The U.N. inspectors "felt they had more. But where did it go?" The Iraqis never provided any explanation of what had happened to their VX stockpiles.
What does 3.9 tons of VX look like? "It could fit in one large garage," the official says. Assuming, of course, that Saddam would assemble every bit of VX gas his scientists had produced at a single site, that still amounts to one large garage in an area the size of the state of California.
This to:
Kay and Duelfer came to a similar conclusion, telling Congress under oath that Saddam had built new facilities and stockpiled the materials to relaunch production of chemical and biological weapons at a moment's notice. At Karbala, U.S. troops stumbled upon 55-gallon drums of pesticides at what appeared to be a very large "agricultural supply" area, Hanson says. Some of the drums were stored in a "camouflaged bunker complex" that was shown to reporters -- with unpleasant results.
You are right Rip. This whole WMD situation is not as simple as finding missles labled "WMD DON'T TOUCH". That was never gonna happen. The case is a Kay reported to congress and what the military has found and that is Saddam had every intention of putting back together his arsinal and labs once he was free to do so. He was just playing the waiting game.
The left rejects all of this and only wants missles labled WMD. Banned equipment and other items used to make these weapons do not count. All the while ignoring the fact that Saddam was a threat that was not going to go away. I say we did the right thing by eliminating this know terrorist supporter.
Why bring my name into this saz?
if you read what I wrote... I brought it in as saying you and others of a similar opinion have posted more compelling arguments than this editorial...
plus... saddam has not always hated the US... he was created and installed by the US and its actions and was allied to the US for a long time...
again... as I said in my first post in this thread... the elements that are discussed in the editorial have been covered before and have repeatedly been brought forward as evidence only for it to be dismissed on multiple occasions by personell on the US side as well as coalition scientists...
yes... pesticides contain chemicals but this site is hardly going to sway my opinion over that of a trusted news site...
I mean seriously..
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37088
please explain to me why this site is expected to make a compelling discussion when it is looking to further its own agenda through whatever editorial means possible? none of the news sites that are considered even remotely respectable have put forth anything wrt wmd's being found... not just fissle materials but also banned chemical and biological agents...
thus far the best that has been found has been nuclear centrifuge materials which are dated to over a decade ago...
Riptide
04-27-04, 07:06 PM
please explain to me why this site is expected to make a compelling discussion when it is looking to further its own agenda through whatever editorial means possible? none of the news sites that are considered even remotely respectable have put forth anything wrt wmd's being found... not just fissle materials but also banned chemical and biological agents...
thus far the best that has been found has been nuclear centrifuge materials which are dated to over a decade ago...You are missing the point IMO. They may not have found chemical weapons, but what the heck was he doing storing these chemicals in a "camouflaged bunker complex" for? Why not do it the usual way, with a warehouse?
Looks to me like he was definitely up to no good.
As to the site, I *personally* don't typically blow people's links off based on where they came from. I prefer to attack content.
Let me know when you find a news agency that reports just the facts and does not editorialize whatsoever. I would love to add it to my favorites. :)
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2004/tenet_testimony_03302004.html
if you read what I wrote... I brought it in as saying you and others of a similar opinion have posted more compelling arguments than this editorial...
plus... saddam has not always hated the US... he was created and installed by the US and its actions and was allied to the US for a long time...
Saddam was not created and istalled by the US. Either you don't know the history or you lied. You know full well that Iraq was a Soviet client state. We were trying to get Iraq to go against the Soviet Union. He was not a long standing ally. That is totally false and you know it.
Let me know when you find a news agency that reports just the facts and does not editorialize whatsoever. I would love to add it to my favorites. :)
He won't. He likes the BBC :rolleyes:
I gave up on this a long time ago Rip. This is why I don't post information anymore. The left always gives Saddam the bennifit of the doubt.
Oh and that famous tearing down of Saddam scene when we took baghdad. Well the lefties and their precious wacko web sites lied again about this.
The American flag that was put up by that Army soldier was put up there at the request of a Iraqi who was begging that soldier for an American flag. He finally got one from one of the other tank commanders. The American soldier said I will put it up for a little bit but then we will put up the old Iraqi flag. The media reported it as if this was a terrible thing and said that soldier was told to take it down. The fact is he was not told to take it down. They had already arrainged for it to but up just for a bit and then a Iraqi flag would go up.
Also the left says this whole scene was staged and fake. LOL ya like the moon landing. :rolleyes: The fact is it was real and the tanks around the area were there for protection. They also need the tank cran for that operation. Still the left will piss on our soldier who fight for them just because they hat Bush. Sad truely sad.
Don't bother posting any stupid web site links for your propaganda. My source is from the people who were there. Discovery channel did a great documentary about the war. Some here should watch it so they can dispell the crap they think about the war.
Saddam was not created and istalled by the US. Either you don't know the history or you lied. You know full well that Iraq was a Soviet client state. We were trying to get Iraq to go against the Soviet Union. He was not a long standing ally. That is totally false and you know it.
there are a quite a few stories around about saddam being trained by the CIA to assasinate Abd al-Karim Qasim, the prime minister @ the time... being part of a group back in 1959 in order to do the same...
Qasim was eventually overthrown and saddam came to power and subsequently had dealings with the US upto and including the war with iran...
given how this is the case I am unaware of how I know I am wrong wrt saddam and his dealings with the us over a coupla decades...
per the information... he was created by the US wrt training and what not... and he was indirectly installed by us when we took out Qasim... if you consider that to be wrong information so be it...
You are missing the point IMO. They may not have found chemical weapons, but what the heck was he doing storing these chemicals in a "camouflaged bunker complex" for? Why not do it the usual way, with a warehouse?
Looks to me like he was definitely up to no good.
the pesticides are certainly worrisome... there is no doubt about that... however they do not constitute a weapon... keep in mind that iraq was supposed to be armed and ready to delpoy various wmd munitions including chem and bio agents...
the problem I have is I have been searching on google for information wrt the camouflaged/6 foot deep area where the 55 gallon pesticide barrels were kept... every single link I have thus far read has been editorials or blogs and they pretty much all say the exact same thing... ie there is a single source for the information...
here is the same thing they have all written...
One of the reported incidents occurred near Karbala where there appeared to be a very large "agricultural supply" area of 55-gallon drums of pesticide. In addition, there was also a camouflaged bunker complex full of these drums that some people entered with unpleasant results. More than a dozen soldiers, a Knight-Ridder reporter, a CNN cameraman, and two Iraqi POWs came down with symptoms consistent with exposure to nerve agent. A full day of tests on the drums resulted in one positive for nerve agent, and then one resulted in a negative. Later, an Army Fox NBC [nuclear, biological, chemical] Recon Vehicle confirmed the existence of Sarin. An officer from the 63d Chemical Company thought there might well be chemical weapons at the site.
But later ISG tests resulted in a proclamation of negative, end of story, nothing to see here, etc., and the earlier findings and injuries dissolved into non-existence. Left unexplained is the small matter of the obvious pains taken to disguise the cache of ostensibly legitimate pesticides. One wonders about the advantage an agricultural commodities business gains by securing drums of pesticide in camouflaged bunkers six feet underground. The "agricultural site" was also co-located with a military ammunition dump, evidently nothing more than a coincidence in the eyes of the ISG.
if you can find another link which corroborates this I would be grateful... I have checked for .gov and the CNN archives for information on this and have come up empty thus far...
As to the site, I *personally* don't typically blow people's links off based on where they came from. I prefer to attack content.
Let me know when you find a news agency that reports just the facts and does not editorialize whatsoever. I would love to add it to my favorites.
no offense m8 but on a few occasions you haven't even bothered reading the links provided :)
I at least responded and explained why the information happens to be dodgy and I have proceeded to post the exact testimony of Duelfer from march 20th, 2004 as well as looking for information to corroborate the claims made in the article...
unfortunately other than the information we already know, the further claims made in the editorial don't seem to be common knowledge as one would expect something as explosive as that would be... keep in mind every previous occasion there have been calls of a smoking gun the media has taken it up
He won't. He likes the BBC :rolleyes:
I gave up on this a long time ago Rip. This is why I don't post information anymore. The left always gives Saddam the bennifit of the doubt.
Oh and that famous tearing down of Saddam scene when we took baghdad. Well the lefties and their precious wacko web sites lied again about this.
The American flag that was put up by that Army soldier was put up there at the request of a Iraqi who was begging that soldier for an American flag. He finally got one from one of the other tank commanders. The American soldier said I will put it up for a little bit but then we will put up the old Iraqi flag. The media reported it as if this was a terrible thing and said that soldier was told to take it down. The fact is he was not told to take it down. They had already arrainged for it to but up just for a bit and then a Iraqi flag would go up.
Also the left says this whole scene was staged and fake. LOL ya like the moon landing. :rolleyes: The fact is it was real and the tanks around the area were there for protection. They also need the tank cran for that operation. Still the left will piss on our soldier who fight for them just because they hat Bush. Sad truely sad.
Don't bother posting any stupid web site links for your propaganda. My source is from the people who were there. Discovery channel did a great documentary about the war. Some here should watch it so they can dispell the crap they think about the war.
the scene was not staged... there are some extreme left-wing sites that do claim it was as well as some hippie sites but thats not the case...
however there weren't the multitudes of people out there that many right-wing media centers claimed as was proven by shots of the area that were zoomed out... I dont ever hear anything from the upholders of the truth on these forums wrt that little fact :)
the flag going up was in bad taste given we were going in as liberators (according to what we were told) and not conquerors but it is understandable soldiers who have fought to get the city would do that...
holding up the soldiers as a sort of scapegoat to cover your anti-left wing rhetoric is definitely poor taste...
It wasn't right wing media. There is only one conservative news channel. All the media reported it the same way. They reported it as a big event. Left wing internet sites then proceeded to trash the event making childish attempts to undermine what really happened.
I just got done telling you that it was the Iraqis who wanted the American flag up then they would put up the Iraqi flag. The media got that whole scene wrong and you do to. It was an Iraqi who begged for a American flag to be put up there. Then left wing stoolies said the crowd was paid off and blah blah blah Rush Limbaugh sux and its all Haliburtons fault.
I am very much anti-left wing. I dispise the left wing ideas about how to givern and how to run a society. I only hold the soldier up as heroes and how much you wanna bet that most the military agrees with me with regards to politics and defense? So if I am holding them up at least they are on my side of the political isle and at least I support their mission and believe in them. Unlike the left who could givev a damn about them but only for a political body count to get rid of Bush. When is the left going to get behind the soldier and the mission? Oh they are not.
It wasn't right wing media. There is only one conservative news channel. All the media reported it the same way. They reported it as a big event. Left wing internet sites then proceeded to trash the event making childish attempts to undermine what really happened.
I just got done telling you that it was the Iraqis who wanted the American flag up then they would put up the Iraqi flag. The media got that whole scene wrong and you do to. It was an Iraqi who begged for a American flag to be put up there. Then left wing stoolies said the crowd was paid off and blah blah blah Rush Limbaugh sux and its all Haliburtons fault.
fair enough... an iraqi man wanted the flag up there... you saying this is the first I am hearing of it from any source...
now to answer some new elements you have introduced into this thread..
rush limbaugh does suck... you have said so yourself... he provides no proof and just puts forth rhetoric that has no basis... when somoene does ask him a valid question he feigns shock and disbelief and seems almost as though he will have a heart-attack... he never responds to the questions btw unless they are exactly what he wants them to be...
halliburton has serious issues wrt affairs in iraq... it has taken illegitimate advantage of the situation and profited @ the expense of US taxpayers...
I am very much anti-left wing. I dispise the left wing ideas about how to givern and how to run a society. I only hold the soldier up as heroes and how much you wanna bet that most the military agrees with me with regards to politics and defense? So if I am holding them up at least they are on my side of the political isle and at least I support their mission and believe in them. Unlike the left who could givev a damn about them but only for a political body count to get rid of Bush. When is the left going to get behind the soldier and the mission? Oh they are not.
politicizing the army is the single gravest mistake one can make... the army is not a political tool and its soldiers should not be treated as such either but it would appear to be a favorite passtime of the right :)
however as you have been inclined to do so for ages do continue to equate not-supporting bush's administrations retarded policies as somehow meaning people don't support the troops...
My brother is heading over to Iraq very, very soon. He's a Righty too. I guess he'll politicize the Army well enough for us. ;)
Oh, he picked up a Sprinfield .45 sidearm to take over there with him. Says he loves the hell out of it.
One of my clan members just got back from over there. He's a Righty too. Another of my clan members just went over there. He's a Righty too. Another of my clan members went to Afghanistan when that first went down. He's Canadian and a Righty (had to throw the Canadian part in there ;) ). Another clan member may have to go over there. He's a Righty too.
Don't think the Army is too politicized though.
Phyre
fair enough... an iraqi man wanted the flag up there... you saying this is the first I am hearing of it from any source...
now to answer some new elements you have introduced into this thread..
rush limbaugh does suck... you have said so yourself... he provides no proof and just puts forth rhetoric that has no basis... when somoene does ask him a valid question he feigns shock and disbelief and seems almost as though he will have a heart-attack... he never responds to the questions btw unless they are exactly what he wants them to be...
halliburton has serious issues wrt affairs in iraq... it has taken illegitimate advantage of the situation and profited @ the expense of US taxpayers...
politicizing the army is the single gravest mistake one can make... the army is not a political tool and its soldiers should not be treated as such either but it would appear to be a favorite passtime of the right :)
however as you have been inclined to do so for ages do continue to equate not-supporting bush's administrations retarded policies as somehow meaning people don't support the troops...
BAHAHAAHA!!! Man you fell too easily for that one. Come on bro we have been down this road. I just wanted to see if you would go.
Any way my source is the discovery channel. It was a awesome documentary. It was on Sunday or Saturday on the Pacific coast. I'll try and find out the name of it. It is a must watch. It was all from the point of view from the soldiers not the media. That is what I liked about it. The Discovery channel is not political IMO. Any way see if you can find it also.
I am not sure if this is it. (http://shopping.discovery.com/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10000&storeId=10000&langId=-1&productId=55862&partnumber=704379&gs=1)
This is it. Part I (http://dsc.discovery.com/schedule/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=30407&gid=403&channel=DSC)
Part II (http://dsc.discovery.com/schedule/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=30408&gid=403&channel=DSC)
I was totally captivated by this show. If you can watch it, do so.
Riptide
04-28-04, 08:45 AM
the pesticides are certainly worrisome... there is no doubt about that... however they do not constitute a weapon... keep in mind that iraq was supposed to be armed and ready to delpoy various wmd munitions including chem and bio agents...
I think we're just :bash: each other here. I think you keep missing the point here and I believe you probably feel the same about me. UDawg is right about you guys wanting to give him the benefit of the doubt IMO.
It was a mistake to post this link and I regret doing so. Other than a slight pad to my post count I don't see what we're going to accomplish here.
the problem I have is I have been searching on google for information wrt the camouflaged/6 foot deep area where the 55 gallon pesticide barrels were kept... every single link I have thus far read has been editorials or blogs and they pretty much all say the exact same thing... ie there is a single source for the information...
here is the same thing they have all written...
if you can find another link which corroborates this I would be grateful... I have checked for .gov and the CNN archives for information on this and have come up empty thus far...
FWIW, I remember this being reported on CNN. It was on while I was exercising one day @ the gym. Can't recall if I ever noticed the story on their website though, but I didn't check that day.
no offense m8 but on a few occasions you haven't even bothered reading the links provided :)
Only on one occasion am I aware of doing that and I apologized for it. And btw, it wasn't because of the source either that I didn't read it. It was laziness on my part.
I at least responded and explained why the information happens to be dodgy and I have proceeded to post the exact testimony of Duelfer from march 20th, 2004 as well as looking for information to corroborate the claims made in the article...
Thankyou for posting the link to the whole transcript, I will try and read it today if I get some more time @ my desk.
unfortunately other than the information we already know, the further claims made in the editorial don't seem to be common knowledge as one would expect something as explosive as that would be... keep in mind every previous occasion there have been calls of a smoking gun the media has taken it up
Every previous occasion that you are *aware* of maybe. I don't trust the media to always report all the facts, or even just the facts.
PsychoSy
04-28-04, 09:51 AM
The left rejects all of this and only wants missles labled WMD.
And the radical right -- since they can't find WMD at all -- wants to REDEFINE the definition of "WMD" to include damn everything under the sun in order to save their political asses.
General: "Any signs of WMD, thar soldier?!?"
Grunt: "Sir, no sir! All clear here! Only thing to see is a TV set tuned to Al-Jazeera!"
General: "Canvass it, boys! And tag that boob tube as WMD!!"
Grunt: "Why, sir?!? It's just a TV set ... "
General: "Yep, and it's showing proof of WMD right now!"
Grunt: "With all do respect sir ... that's not WMD!"
General: "Belay that, numbnuts! That TV is showing an 8-year old Arab holding an RPG!! That enough proof for you?!?"
Grunt: "Ummm ... regardless of age or nationality, sir ... Rocket Propelled Grenades are NOT classified as WMD!"
General: "Welp ... They are now, soldier!! And so is Al-Jazeera, too!!"
Grunt: "Why Al-Jazeera, sir?!? They're just a fundamental news organization ..."
General: " ... that isn't owned by Rupert Murdoch, doesn't show Jesus, and therefore can't be trusted!"
Grunt: "Sir, whose gave you that kind of criteria?!?"
General: "Our Commander-in-Chief, soldier. We both from Texas! Mr. Bush and I go to the same church in Dallas ev'ry Sunday ..."
Grunt: "OK, lemme get this straight -- The Al-Jazeera war coverage showing an 8-year old Arab with an RPG is proof of WMD ..."
General: : "Uh-huh ... "
Grunt: " ... and yet Al-Jazerra can't be trusted as a credible source because they're too fundamental?"
General: "Praise Jesus, you got it right on the money, boy!!"
Grunt: << *suddenly starts looking around suspiciously at his company* >>
General: "Wha?!? Where!?! Did you hear somethin' off the wall, boy?!?"
Grunt: "I sure did, sir!"
General: "I don't see anything! Don't hear nuthin' either! Whatcha lookin' for, kid?!?"
Grunt: : "Something more dangerous than WMD, Saddam Hussein, and Osama Bin Laden and it's coming from your direction ... Open you mouth, sir! Okay, not in there! Let's check your nose for a moment! DAMN! No disrespect sir, but those need trimmed. All clear there, now let me check your ears ..."
General: : "Dammit, boy! Why you giving me a once-over fer?!?"
Grunt: "Because I heard something off the wall coming from you just a moment ago, sir ..."
General: : "Alright, but pray tell what in tarnation do you expect to find in the orifices of my person, soldier?!?"
Grunt: : "Joseph Heller, sir."
General: : <<now irate as hell>> "That does it, private!! Tired of your insults!! Tired of your questions!! Once more peep out of you, boy, and there will be a Catch-22 conspiracy here! And it'll involve your miserable carcass catching 22 shells from my rifle!!! You understand me!?!?!?"
Grunt: "Yes, sir ... I understand ... I understand you've been watching too many movies with R. Lee Ermey ..."
RATATATATATATATATAT!!!!!!
Grunt #2: "Sorry, sir, but his mouth was becoming a weapon of mass destruction, and -- since you've got rank to lose and I don't -- I tagged it for you. I'm minus 22 bullets, by the way, sir."
General: "Quite alright, soldier. Thank ya and God bless ya!"
When is the left going to get behind the soldier and the mission?
When is the right gonna stop cutting VA benefits?!? ;)
So your answer for not supporting the soldier's mission is to play the political spin game? Nice dodge. What does a political fiscal decision that I don't agree with have to do with the general attitude on the left that they don't support the soldier's mission? Oh, NOTHING! It is just a mindless shot in the dark to dodge a losing issue.
BTW as is the Democrats never cut any bennifits to the military and the VA.
FWIW, I remember this being reported on CNN. It was on while I was exercising one day @ the gym. Can't recall if I ever noticed the story on their website though, but I didn't check that day.
I checked on google for any cnn links or anything to corroborate the story... I dont even know the original source but its out there and everyone is apparently quoting the same thing...
Every previous occasion that you are *aware* of maybe. I don't trust the media to always report all the facts, or even just the facts.
there are various media sources that I read... most of them slightly off-mainstream media (as they would be considered in america) and never sources that lean one way or the other... none of these places I go to get my news have thus far held up any smoking guns that have held up further scrutiny or even resemble the iron-clad proof we were shown and led to believe by the administration...
I do suggest that you have a read through the processes required to make bio and chem weapons and the conditions required and the time frame and the delivery mechanisms and what not... simply saying THIS COULD HAVE POSSIBLY IN SOME WAY BEEN USED does not constitute a definite YESSIR, WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE NOW scenario... if that was the case every pesticide and chemicals maker in the world should be under scrutiny...
So your answer for not supporting the soldier's mission is to play the political spin game? Nice dodge. What does a political fiscal decision that I don't agree with have to do with the general attitude on the left that they don't support the soldier's mission? Oh, NOTHING! It is just a mindless shot in the dark to dodge a losing issue.
BTW as is the Democrats never cut any bennifits to the military and the VA.
the general attitude of the right is to talk big and do little... your agreeing and not supporting something means jack squat since on the flip side you are quite adept at painting everything a lovely shade of Udawg for your own little sh!ts n giggles...
the overall number of personnel in our military on food stamps went from the many thousands under bush sr to the low hundreds under clinton...
just think about that... our soldiers on food stamps..
saudi arabia has increased pay by about 25% for personnel in the line of fire defending their nation... what have we done? a few benefits that expire after the elections... brilliant... yes the right-wing never dodges the issue.. they just declare themselves unilateral winners of discussions they bring up and walk away branding everyone else unpatriotic... excellent strategy..
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.