View Full Version : WMD
Hm
They don't have them and Bush is wrong?
Look at this! #U.S. Army Says Finds Shell with Sarin Agent in Iraq (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=1&u=/nm/20040517/ts_nm/iraq_sarin_dc)
Sarin Gas Released by Iraq Roadside Bomb (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html)
Don't give "it's only one" routine -- shells are like ants -- where there's one, there usually are alot more!
Have we taken the gloves off yet?
K8ERV
05-17-2004, 03:25 PM
I think WMD's are right here. They are called Politicians--
TOM K8ERV
Actually it is the taxes and increases they propose and pass that are the WMDs. Who was it who said that "The Power To Tax Is The Power To Destroy?"
73
George
K3UD
From Today's Seattle Times
Powell says his assertions were wrong
WASHINGTON Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday that what he had called "the most dramatic" element of his Feb. 5, 2003, speech to the United Nations was "inaccurate and discredited."
The presentation, considered a key in convincing allies and the American people that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, claimed the existence of mobile biological-weapons laboratories.
"When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me," Powell said yesterday on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"It turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and, in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed, and I regret it," he said.
A CIA spokesman declined comment.
(If the intelligence of which Mr. Powell speaks was "deliberately misleading," then WHO is responsible for this wanton and purposeful deception taking us to war?
Cheney and the Office of Special Plans? Neoconservative ideologues??
WHO engineered this misinformation?? Why?
The American people deserve answers.
TP
Did I miss something
The extremists are being to use some of the missing chemical weapons as part of road side bombs.
Is this a good thing?
Check out the news links
A "small amount" of sarin in a shell does nothing to confirm the Bush Administration's justification of the Iraqi War based on WMD.
It is no secret that after Hussein's governemt was toppled, military ordinance did fall into the hands of private individuals who could have gotten sarin or any number of substances from any number of sources.
Please see the article I have posted. In it, Powell even admits that the WMD intelligence regarding Iraq was "deliberately misleading."
I'd like to know WHO is responsible for this misinformation.
TP
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 04:22 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8LXR @ May 17 2004,08:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A "small amount" of sarin in a shell does nothing to confirm the Bush Administration's justification of the Iraqi War based on WMD.
It is no secret that after Hussein's governemt was toppled, military ordinance did fall into the hands of private individuals who could have gotten sarin or any number of substances from any number of sources.
Please see the article I have posted. #In it, Powell even admits that the WMD intelligence regarding Iraq was "deliberately misleading."
I'd like to know WHO is responsible for this misinformation.
TP[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
So tell me where the mortor round came from?
First it was poison gas and chem's found on Al-Qaeda operatives by Jordanian authorities
Now Sarin gas was attempted to be used against US troops.
See I knew this was going to be spun by some of you critics saying that this doesn't prove anything.
As much as you're not willing to admit it, it's a matter of time before we find this stuff and what will you critics say then?
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 04:24 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC0LNU @ May 17 2004,08:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Did I miss something
The extremists are being to use some of the missing chemical weapons as part of road side bombs.
Is this a good thing?
Check out the news links[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
The next thing you'll know this will be used in our communities.
So no... It can't be a good thing.
KI4DYA
05-17-2004, 04:26 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As much as you're not willing to admit it, it's a matter of time before we find this stuff and what will you critics say then?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Please stop encouraging them. We'll all have our fill of their tripe soon enough.
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 04:31 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KI4DYA @ May 17 2004,09:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As much as you're not willing to admit it, it's a matter of time before we find this stuff and what will you critics say then?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Please stop encouraging them. #We'll all have our fill of their tripe soon enough.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
But it's fun to hear how silly some of them sound.
LNU:
Latest reports identify this shell as one left over from the FIRST Iraq war... Saddam admittd to having these a decade ago and most of them were destroyed... We know a few still remain...No big deal... This still shoms no real threat to the United States...
And it is the second one found in the last 10 days... The first was mustard gas...
Remind me again... WHY are we there...
--- Saddam connections to Bin Laden? None shown to date.
--- Existance of WMD? Even Powell admits it was "deliberately misleading." and all we are finding is stuff 15 years old...
--- Because Saddam was a tyrant? So what? That is not a threat to the United States! Let folks in other countries take care of their own problems! It is not our job to tell other folks how to live... If they want to stand up, as we did in 1776, and declare their freedom then THEY have to do it... We can not 'give' it to them... It has no value if it is not earned...
This war is not justified...
And it is only the beginning of worse things to come if we do not get rid of the present administration and get someone more moderate in the White House...
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 04:45 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ May 17 2004,09:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LNU:
Latest reports identify this shell as one left over from the FIRST Iraq war... Saddam admittd to having these a decade ago and most of them were destroyed... We know a few still remain...No big deal... This still shoms no real threat to the United States...
And it is the second one found in the last 10 days... The first was mustard gas...
Remind me again... WHY are we there...
--- Saddam connections to Bin Laden? None shown to date.
--- Existance of WMD? Even Powell admits it was "deliberately misleading." and all we are finding is stuff 15 years old...
--- Because Saddam was a tyrant? So what? That is not a threat to the United States! Let folks in other countries take care of their own problems! It is not our job to tell other folks how to live... If they want to stand up, as we did in 1776, and declare their freedom then THEY have to do it... We can not 'give' it to them... It has no value if it is not earned...
This war is not justified...
And it is only the beginning of worse things to come if we do not get rid of the present administration and get someone more moderate in the White House...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Correct me if I am wrong, but they were left over from the last war, but they're there.
Am I missing something? They were left over from the first war, but yet now they're being found and you claim this means nothing. Although they're BEING USED NOW against the troops.
That logic seems flawed to me.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8LXR @ May 17 2004,08:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A "small amount" of sarin in a shell does nothing to confirm the Bush Administration's justification of the Iraqi War based on WMD.
It is no secret that after Hussein's governemt was toppled, military ordinance did fall into the hands of private individuals who could have gotten sarin or any number of substances from any number of sources.
TP[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Proves nothing.
HMMM it sure proves a lot to me.
It was in an artillery shell, in binary form, in an IRAQI shell no less.
This is not somthing made in some cladestine AQ lab.
This was there before we invaded. And nobody sets up production to make one shell......
So it proves:
Iraq had specificly banned, under the UN resolution. WMD. In weaponized form.
Saddam lied when he said they did not.
Thats a whole lot proven, when you look at the critics saying Bush lied and there were no WMD in Iraq. We now know there were.
W4TEY
05-17-2004, 05:23 PM
I just wonder what would have to happen to justify war for some of you? I believe in turning the other cheek but geeeez! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
OK guys:
1. #How do you know WHERE this shell came form?
2. #How do you know from WHOM the sarin came?
# #(The place is crawling with terrorists thanks in no
# # small measure to our little military field trip.)
3. #Why isn't the Bush Administration trumpeting
# # this as proof positive for their case?
# #(Our forces found a similar shell with mustard
# # gas days ago - with no glorious fanfare from
# # the Neoconservative Hawks heralding proof
# # postive of their case.)
4. #Even IF this shell is/was Hussein's, is there
# #any proof that he was threatening the US
# #with the damn thing?
5. #Even IF Hussein had WMD generally, again, did
# # such WMD pose a threat to our homeland? #It's
# # a little hard to lob an artillery shell over a path
# # of some 6000 miles.
# #(And don't use the "He would give them to terrorists!!!
# # canard - that notion has even been discredited by our
# # own intelligence service.)
6. #How many more straws will you grasp at?
It's going to take one hell of a lot more than this to sell me the notion that the "Flying Drones, Mushroom Clouds,
Sadaam is close to getting a nuclear weapon" song and dance used to justify this war is true.
TP
Hm
Is anyone besides me just grateful these folks didn't lose their live disarming these things.
Is anyone besides me understand Sadam had these things at the end of 1991, were ordered to destroy them, stated they were gone at the same time (prior to the 2nd gulf war) said he would use these very weapons against us.
Common, I feel like I'm back in the 60's.
Peace, Love, and .....................
LEI:
The reason we are there in the first place is because the present administration lied to us and told us that Saddam and company were PRESENTLY making WMD... so soon you forget... Fact is they weren't... they were contained...
A few shells slipping through the screening process does not a WMD manufacturing plant make!
You appear to be buying into the lies presented by the Bush administration to justify this war... I recommend rethinking your position...
Dealing with a few of these old shells is going to come up now and again because we are there... but do not try to justify our being there BECAUSE of these old shells... Doesn't fly my friend...
The manufacturing of WMD did not exist, does not exist... and even the CIA was caught trying to IMPORT WMD into the country and it was mistakenly blown up by our own troops...
You have bought into a lie... and sayiong 'What the difference?' as Bush did to Dianne Sawyer, does not make what we are doing correct...
My solution... I don't know.... we have made such a mess of this that now we have to clean it up before we can leave... and that really sucks... We have made it possible for AQ and other radicals to infiltrate Iraq, when in fact Saddam was keeping them at arms length... It appears from my reading that he was sorta molifying them by not interfering with them so they would leave HIM alone... but as far as actual support, there is no evidence of that... So now we have AQ and other there, and what do we do... turn around and say 'see, AQ is here!' and try to reverse justify our presence when we caused the presence in the first place...
If we had cleaned out the taliban and Bin Laden's snake pits in Afghanistan, then come home, I would support this action wholeheartedly... but this crap in Iraq is just plain ignorant...
Look, if the CIA and US foreign policy had not messed in these folks politics for so many years, then there would not have been a reason for Bin Laden and AQ to develop in the first place... Think about the history of the whole region hgoing back to the '20s and working forward... Western influence in dividing those countries up as they now stand withour regard to their tribal customs and their own likes and dislikes was the beginning of all this stuff... then the CIA, in the '50s, started messing with the governments and we actually overthrew several fledgling democracies in order to install dictators that we could control... When you study the real history of what has happened, we have in fact brought all of this on ourselves...
If we would simply pull out and let them settle their own problems and establish FAIR trade relations with them, it all might still work out... but that will never happen because then they would be able to establish their own prices for their products [oil being #1] and our oil companies would not be in the good position they are in today... Many, many of these 'wars' are being fought for the wrong reason... and a lot of it has to do with commercial interests, but disguised as us having a interest in the 'people' ... It is a lot of hooey... It doesn't fly in the face of the facts after you wash away all the propoganda put out by our own leaders...
Look, I'm as pro-American as anyone, and a whole lot more patriotic than some... but I do not believe it is healthy for this country to blindly follow such ill-concieved notions as 'converting' governments or nation building... different folks have different values and no one has the right to force their values on anyone else...
We preach about rights and fair play in this country, but we ignore other's rights by tampering with their countries governments for our own selfish self-center wants...
I use WANTS and not NEEDS in the previous statement and some folks don't understand the difference... You NEED to eat... you WANT to have television available... You NEED to have a place to sleep but you WANT it to be warm and dry... When folks start getting their want and need mixed up, then they start doing strange things... This country thinks it NEEDs oil for our daily living... but that is not a NEED... it is a WANT...it is for our convienience... If the oil was not available then we would find another way to provide the energy we WANT to provide for our other WANTS... but we continue to stick our stinky CIA fingers into everybody's business to satisfy this WANT... What we really NEED is to start developing other energy sources and let the Arabs sit on their oil...
Enough ranting for one post... All I'm trying to get across is that there are far more reasons for what is going on from the 9/11 attacks to the war in Iraq than most people feel like dealing with in an honest and open way... and a good potion of it has to do with our stinky foreign policy...
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 05:36 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8LXR @ May 17 2004,10:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">OK guys:
1. #How do you know WHERE this shell came form?
2. #How do you know from WHOM the sarin came?
# #(The place is crawling with terrorists thanks in no
# # small measure to our little military field trip.)
3. #Why isn't the Bush Administration trumpeting
# # this as proof positive for their case?
# #(Our forces found a similar shell with mustard
# # gas days ago - with no glorious fanfare from
# # the Neoconservative Hawks heralding proof
# # postive of their case.)
4. #Even IF this shell is/was Hussein's, is there
# #any proof that he was threatening the US
# #with the damn thing?
5. #Even IF Hussein had WMD generally, again, did
# # such WMD pose a threat to our homeland? #It's
# # a little hard to lob an artillery shell over a path
# # of some 6000 miles.
# #(And don't use the "He would give them to terrorists!!!
# # canard - that notion has even been discredited by our
# # own intelligence service.)
6. #How many more straws will you grasp at?
The Neocon/Bush Cry for the Day #"OH my...oh PLEASE...if we only had some WMDS!"
Get real.
TP[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
LXR... You think the terrorists just came right on in when we started our invasion? Please, they were there before we got there. Salman Pak ring a bell?
Let's see... The terrorists used this IED with Sarin against the troops. But Iraq was never a threat because there is no link between ALl-Qaeda and Saddam. But again the Sarin went off against a US convoy.
Maybe they're not saying anything because the news is speaking for itself.
"4. Even IF this shell is/was Hussein's, is there
any proof that he was threatening the US
with the damn thing?"
Go back to my second paragraph and read again If they used it against the US troops and Al-Qaeda attempted to use it in Jordan (to include a US embassy there). Then what's to say the wouldn't try and do it here. Thusly Iraq was a threat via terrorist operatives. But again liberal naysayers state there is no link between Iraq and terrorists.
It was attempted in Jordan to be used, but what's to say it wouldn't happen here. Then of some had gone off here, the blame would have gone on Bush for not doing something about it before.
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 05:43 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ May 17 2004,10:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LEI:
The reason we are there in the first place is because the present administration lied to us and told us that Saddam and company were PRESENTLY making WMD... so soon you forget... Fact is they weren't... they were contained...
A few shells slipping through the screening process does not a WMD manufacturing plant make!
You appear to be buying into the lies presented by the Bush administration to justify this war... I recommend rethinking your position...
Dealing with a few of these old shells is going to come up now and again because we are there... but do not try to justify our being there BECAUSE of these old shells... Doesn't fly my friend...
The manufacturing of WMD did not exist, does not exist... and even the CIA was caught trying to IMPORT WMD into the country and it was mistakenly blown up by our own troops...
You have bought into a lie... and sayiong 'What the difference?' as Bush did to Dianne Sawyer, does not make what we are doing correct...
My solution... I don't know.... we have made such a mess of this that now we have to clean it up before we can leave... and that really sucks... We have made it possible for AQ and other radicals to infiltrate Iraq, when in fact Saddam was keeping them at arms length... It appears from my reading that he was sorta molifying them by not interfering with them so they would leave HIM alone... but as far as actual support, there is no evidence of that... So now we have AQ and other there, and what do we do... turn around and say 'see, AQ is here!' and try to reverse justify our presence when we caused the presence in the first place...
If we had cleaned out the taliban and Bin Laden's snake pits in Afghanistan, then come home, I would support this action wholeheartedly... but this crap in Iraq is just plain ignorant...
Look, if the CIA and US foreign policy had not messed in these folks politics for so many years, then there would not have been no reason for Bin Laden and AQ to develop in the first place... Think about the history of the whole region hgoing back to the '20s and working forward... Western influence in dividing those countries up as they now stand withour regard to their tribal customs and their own likes and dislikes was the beginning of all this stuff... then the CIA, in the '50s, started messing with the governments and we actually overthrew several fledgling democracies in order to install dictators that we could control... When you study the real history of what has happened, we have in fact brought all of this on ourselves... #
If we would simply pull out and let them settle their own problems and establish FAIR trade relations with them, it all might still work out... but that will never happen because then they would be able to establish their own prices for their products [oil being #1] and our oil companies would not be in the good position they are in today... Many, many of these 'wars' are being fought for the wrong reason... and a lot of it has to do with commercial interests, but disguised as us having a interest in the 'people' ... It is a lot of hooey... It doesn't fly in the face of the facts after you wash away all the propoganda put out by our own leaders...
Look, I'm as pro-American as anyone, and a whole lot more patriotic than some... but I do not believe it is healthy for this country to blindly follow such ill-concieved notions as 'converting' governments or nation building... different folks have different values and no one has the right to force their values on anyone else...
We preach about rights and fair play in this country, but we ignore other's rights by tampering with their countries governments for our own selfish self-center wants...
I use WANTS and not NEEDS in the previous statement and some folks don't understand the difference... You NEED to eat... you WANT to have television available... You NEED to have a place to sleep but you WANT it to be warm and dry... #When folks start getting their want and need mixed up, then they start doing strange things... This country thinks it NEEDs oil for our daily living... but that is not a NEED... it is a WANT...it is for our convienience... If the oil was not available then we would find another way to provide the energy we WANT to provide for our other WANTS... but we continue to stick our stinky CIA fingers into everybody's business to satisfy this WANT... What we really NEED is to start developing other energy sources and let the Arabs sit on their oil...
Enough ranting for one post... All I'm trying to get across is that there are far more reasons for what is going on from the 9/11 attacks to the war in Iraq than most people feel like dealing with in an honest and open way... and a good potion of it has to do with our stinky foreign policy...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Who's more reliable a source to believe. Bush or A.N.S.W.E.R.?
Bush or Not In Our Name?
I think I will take my chances with Bush than some of these off the wall groups that state what you exactly state.
You state I have bought into the lie of my boss, but you sound strangely like some of these groups and the mainstream press.
Guys this is NOT the 60's and this is not Vietnam as some want to try and compare it to.
Saddam never had WMD, the Kurds commited mass suicide....
Wanna buy a bridge?
Rice/Rumsfeld 2008
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 05:48 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,10:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam never had WMD, the Kurds commited mass suicide....
Wanna buy a bridge?
Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
YS... They admit he had them then, but not now. Which is why they claim this war is not justified because we can't find them... But the key missing word is YET.
There is just too many things starting to surface now that bring questions on the fact they were never there. No matter how much the detractors want to start spinning it.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ May 16 2004,11:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,10:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam never had WMD, the Kurds commited mass suicide....
Wanna buy a bridge?
Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
YS... #They admit he had them then, but not now. #Which is why they claim this war is not justified because we can't find them... #But the key missing word is YET.
There is just too many things starting to surface now that bring questions on the fact they were never there. #No matter how much the detractors want to start spinning it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
the desert is a BIG area... Saddam hid planes in bunkers under sand, saddam tried to hide underground in a hole, I am convinced that his WMD's are hidden under the sand. It is just going to take time for the CIA to break one of the henchmen and get the location.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,11:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam never had WMD, the Kurds commited mass suicide....
Wanna buy a bridge?
Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I never said he NEVER had WMD... I'm saying that he was contained at the beginning of THIS conflict... The Kuwait thing and the weapons inspections actually did set him back and stopped a lot of what he was trying to do... and I think that our being there and not finding NEW [post 1995] WMD is proof of that...
Saddam absolutely used WMD on the Kurds, FIFTEEN years ago... but he doesn't have it anymore and hasn't had it for a good many years... when are you folks gonna see that...
We were and still are being fed a lot of propoganda to justify this war... a war that Rumsfeld & Cheney and their PNAC buddies developed as far back as the mid '90s... and they state in their own papers that the best thing for this nation is a continious war...
Personally I don't think that is a good idea, and I cannot, nor will I ever support such a notion... Peace could be had if and when we quit sticking our pompous noses into other folks' business...
As far as the bridge goes, I can't trust your description of it due to your, IMHO, inability to investigate things and come out with an accurate conclusion... [smile its a joke ... just firing back at your joke!]
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 05:58 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,10:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ May 16 2004,11:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,10:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Saddam never had WMD, the Kurds commited mass suicide....
Wanna buy a bridge?
Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
YS... #They admit he had them then, but not now. #Which is why they claim this war is not justified because we can't find them... #But the key missing word is YET.
There is just too many things starting to surface now that bring questions on the fact they were never there. #No matter how much the detractors want to start spinning it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
the desert is a BIG area... Saddam hid planes in bunkers under sand, saddam tried to hide underground in a hole, I am convinced that his WMD's are hidden under the sand. It is just going to take time for the CIA to break one of the henchmen and get the location.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Iraq is roughly the size of California and it makes it hard to find WMD's when we're getting shot at and blown up by IED's. It will take time to find them... I can't wait to see the spin placed on this one when we do.
What? This wasn't done fast enough?
W3MIV
05-17-2004, 06:00 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,13:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I'm with you. Either way 'round.
W3MIV
05-17-2004, 06:02 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ May 17 2004,13:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraq is roughly the size of California...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
There are other similarities...
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 06:05 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ May 17 2004,10:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If we would simply pull out and let them settle their own problems and establish FAIR trade relations with them, it all might still work out... but that will never happen because then they would be able to establish their own prices for their products [oil being #1] and our oil companies would not be in the good position they are in today... Many, many of these 'wars' are being fought for the wrong reason... and a lot of it has to do with commercial interests, but disguised as us having a interest in the 'people' ... It is a lot of hooey... It doesn't fly in the face of the facts after you wash away all the propoganda put out by our own leaders...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Hey, that's the smartest thing I have heard all day. Let's leave and show once again how Bin Ladin was right (after Somalia) that this is how the US military fights/operates.
Cutting and running will just ruin our credibility (and don't tell me the prison photos are doing that already) to the point of making us looking like fools.
Oh just heard via Fox News that another Sarin laced shell has just been found.
KD4LEI
05-17-2004, 06:07 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W3MIV @ May 17 2004,11:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ May 17 2004,13:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraq is roughly the size of California...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
There are other similarities...
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
HA HA HA HA!!!!
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Rice/Rumsfeld?
How about Guiliani/Rice?
Looks like a second one has popped up.
I wonder if the terrorists who planted it even knew it had sarin in it. Its been pretty standard for them to use arty shells in these bombs, and if the markings had been removed or changed by saddam to try to fool inspectors or others it may very well have been so. It would explain why they used it in such an inefficient manner.
As for asking how do we know where it came from, our EOD guys are trained well enough to determine the country of origin of any explosive produced in a factory on this earth, and the ones over there know by now all to well what the Iraqi ordnance looks like.
LXR... You think the terrorists just came right on in when we started our invasion? Please, they were there before we got there. Salman Pak ring a bell?
LXR responds:
Salam Pak was yet another fabrication that has been discredited. It was presented by none other that the Iraqi National Congress whose leader, Ahmed Chalabi, expected the US to install him as the next prime minister of Iraq.
That man is nothing more than an opportunist (who is currently under indictment for fraud in Jordan) who fed us all kinds of dubious intelligence using his hand picked defectors to bolster his claims.
I would be quite careful believing anything he says. Even the CIA loathes the man for all the bad intelligence he has presented our government.
LEI:
Let's see... The terrorists used this IED with Sarin against the troops. But Iraq was never a threat because there is no link between ALl-Qaeda and Saddam. But again the Sarin went off against a US convoy.
LXR:
(It's an IMPROVISED explosive device. After and before the Hussein government fell, Bath military leaders would have had access to conventional artillery shells, perhaps quite easily.
Sarin is not difficult to make as any chemist will attest and the shell could have been retrofitted after Hussein was diposed. That it was planted near the Baghdad Airport rather like a mine nearly shows almost conclusively that it was put there by the insurgency or a terrorist group intent on harming US troops.
The sarin could have come from anywhere in the last 12 months since Hussein was toppled.
LEI:
Maybe they're not saying anything because the news is speaking for itself
LXR:
NO way! No chance. If our intelligence services believed that the mustard gas shell was (and this one as well) proof positive that the WMD claims of the Administration were true and correct, you can be sure that in an election year and especially when GWB is falling like a rock in the polls, they surely would not pass up this opportunity to herald this development that the WMD claims were true after all..
Look, my position all along was simply that IF Hussein had WMD, the US would have to show conclusively that his regime was posing a credible threat to our national security WITH those WMD.
Weapons, in and of themselves, are NOT proof positive of a threat to use them.
In any event, I think you guys are jumping to conclusions.
TP
ki4bgo
05-17-2004, 06:52 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N0PU @ May 17 2004,11:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Remind me again... WHY are we there...
--- Because Saddam was a tyrant? So what? That is not a threat to the United States! Let folks in other countries take care of their own problems! It is not our job to tell other folks how to live... If they want to stand up, as we did in 1776, and declare their freedom then THEY have to do it... We can not 'give' it to them... It has no value if it is not earned...
This war is not justified...
And it is only the beginning of worse things to come if we do not get rid of the present administration and get someone more moderate in the White House...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
EXACTLY! Why does the U.S. have to be the world's babysitter? What about OUR homeless? OUR jobless? OUR lack of reasonable healthcare costs? NO ...finishing up daddy bush's fiasco is WAY more important! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif Throw him out on election day! We need a President that'll take care of THIS country, not somebody elses! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8LXR @ May 17 2004,11:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(It's an IMPROVISED explosive device. #After and before the Hussein government fell, Bath military leaders would have had access to conventional artillery shells, perhaps quite easily. #
Sarin is not difficult to make as any chemist will attest and the shell could have been #retrofitted after Hussein was diposed. #That it was planted near the Baghdad Airport rather like a mine nearly shows almost conclusively that it was put there by the insurgency or a terrorist group intent on harming US troops.
The sarin could have come from anywhere in the last 12 months since Hussein was toppled.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
You don't retrofit a convetional shell into a binary nerve gas shell. For one the shells are cast differently. For two, it requires a pretty complicated facility. And third... its stupid. If you have the capability to produce it, and the intelligence, then your smart enough to use it right.
This was an Iraqi produced shell, made under the Saddam regime, that was used quite poorly. The terrorists probably were not smart enough to realize what they had and had just grabbed the next shell on the pile.
The shell wasn't improvised. Its when they took a shell, then attached some explosive to the sides and a remote detonating capability that it became an "Improvised Explosive Device"
ki4bgo
05-17-2004, 06:56 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K8YS @ May 17 2004,12:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Rice/Rumsfeld 2008[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I'm on the FLOOR!!! ...that IS a JOKE isn't it? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif ...I hope... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
KC2HJN
05-17-2004, 07:14 PM
From FOX:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">....Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time.
"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," Kimmitt said.
The incident occurred "a couple of days ago," he added. The discovery reportedly occurred near Baghdad International Airport.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Old stuff, that's why no big announcement. It was from years ago, stored improperly and virtually unuseable as a chemical weapon. Probably found in some warehouse covered in cobwebs and thought to be a regular shell.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC2HJN @ May 17 2004,12:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From FOX:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">....Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time.
"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," Kimmitt said.
The incident occurred "a couple of days ago," he added. The discovery reportedly occurred near Baghdad International Airport.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Old stuff, that's why no big announcement. It was from years ago, stored improperly and virtually unuseable as a chemical weapon. Probably found in some warehouse covered in cobwebs and thought to be a regular shell.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Virtually unusable? I'd like to see you back that up with something more than your own conjecture and imagination.
Sarin in its binary state does not degrade. This shell was every bit as usable now as it was the day it was made. The contents were as well were they to be removed and used otherwise. It was set up and used wrongly so there wasn't much damge.
But had it been used properly there would have been.
It shows that there was deception and lies coming from the Saddam regime when they kept saying they had no WMD. It shows WMD existed in Iraq. The fact that it was not marked as a chemical shell but as a convetional shell shows an intenet to deceive any inspectors or others who may see it.
No, we haven't found facilities used to pursue the manufacture of other weapons, but how easily can one hide an RV with a small lab in the desert, or destroy it if need be? We may never, we may today. But the fact that the regime held onto these weapons, while swearing they didn't exist, and had them marked in such a way as to decieve any who saw it, shows the mindset, intent, and existance of a WMD capability.
CBS News...
Poland believes they were 'mislead' on WMD at start of war... go figure...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/17/iraq/main617857.shtml
KF4PEP, et al,
You OBVIOUSLY have a good, solid, accurate source of informatoin on various topics relating to such items as binary shells, depleted uranium and the like and I (along with others) THANK YOU for posting accurate information.
I won't inquire as to WHERE or HOW you have such knowledge.. but you do andthat's fine.
Now.. HOW do Iknow he's right? SIMPLE! I have looked it up in textbooks that COVER (in great detail) various militarized Chem-Bio-Nuclear weaponry.
Sarin, like mustard gas.. does NOT degrade. Sarin, until COMBINED together retains ALL it's component (individual) properties UNTIL COMBINED! Mustard retains its capacity to blister as well. Mustard shells from WW2 are STILL quite 'hot' and are handled just as if they were as fresh as the day they were loaded.
A BIOLOGICAL weapon, like anthrax, botulimum toxin, Ebola, etc. WILL and DOES degrade over time SIMPLY because it is based on LIVING organisms which ALL have a 'shelf-life'. THESE can (and do) degrade BUT CHEM/NUCLEAR?? UH UH. once they are produced.. they (like the Everready Bunny) keep on 'going .. and going.. and going!'
THAT solves THAT little argument. Please... those on the 'left', STOP working the 'they're OLD so they don't mean anuything' venue. It's not working.
NOW.. as to the 'These shells were around back in 1991....' argument..
SO WHAT? The facts are that these shells were 'supposed to have been destroyed and accounted for' by Saddam. THEY WEREN'T!
So thye may have been 'absconded with' my some insurgents back in 1991. Means NOTHING!
The FACT IS CLEARLY THIS.
THEY WERE USED *NOW*. THIS MEANS THEY WERE *IN IRAQ NOW*.. this means *IRAQ HAS WMD* (then) and NOW.
Shells don't linger as singles. If there is ONE.. there are others.
BUT one solid fact stands clear.
Folks on this thread who CONTINUE to try and avoid, evade, or deny THE OBVIOUS will NOT be happy UNTIL.
A chem/bio/nuclear attack occurs in Iraq and our folks (or others get killed.
The agent that killeed them is POSTIVELY proven (By a NON-USA < most likely French/German/Russian/Arab> source to BE chemical in nature.
They have PICTURES which show the terrorists loading the shells and also speaking that these are chemical shells from Iraq.
An Arab or French or German or Russian scientist comes forward to confirm that these shells ARE from IRAQ.
THEN.. thye will believe.. UNTIL THEN.. we beat our fingers against keyboards tyring to show those who choose NOT to see what others know is obvious.
Sigh..
K3FT
There are NONE so blind as those who will NOT see!
kc7jty
05-17-2004, 08:30 PM
Seems to me if they really had the bad stuff they would have strapped some on the back of a suicide bomber by now.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc7jty @ May 17 2004,13:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Seems to me if they really had the bad stuff they would have strapped some on the back of a suicide bomber by now.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ground level burst is a very ineffficent way to deliver chemical munitions.
kc7jty
05-17-2004, 08:39 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ki4bgo @ May 17 2004,11:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why does the U.S. have to be the world's babysitter?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Baby sitter hell. If that was the case we would be all over Africa saving the people there from themselves.
These neocon/neoimperialists in our gvt. want the mideast oil (which is now vital to our national security) they also want to set up a permanent military base in Iraq. Not to mention topple all perceived threats to our precious ally ISRAEL. Thats the REAL reason why we hit them.
kc7jty
05-17-2004, 08:40 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KF4PEP @ May 17 2004,13:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ground level burst is a very ineffficent way to deliver chemical munitions.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
He can climb a minaret.
KC2HJN
05-17-2004, 08:54 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KF4PEP @ May 17 2004,15:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC2HJN @ May 17 2004,12:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">From FOX:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">....Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas weapons date back to that time.
"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," Kimmitt said.
The incident occurred "a couple of days ago," he added. The discovery reportedly occurred near Baghdad International Airport.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Old stuff, that's why no big announcement. It was from years ago, stored improperly and virtually unuseable as a chemical weapon. Probably found in some warehouse covered in cobwebs and thought to be a regular shell.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Virtually unusable? I'd like to see you back that up with something more than your own conjecture and imagination.
Sarin in its binary state does not degrade. This shell was every bit as usable now as it was the day it was made. The contents were as well were they to be removed and used otherwise. It was set up and used wrongly so there wasn't much damge.
But had it been used properly there would have been.
It shows that there was deception and lies coming from the Saddam regime when they kept saying they had no WMD. It shows WMD existed in Iraq. The fact that it was not marked as a chemical shell but as a convetional shell shows an intenet to deceive any inspectors or others who may see it.
No, we haven't found facilities used to pursue the manufacture of other weapons, but how easily can one hide an RV with a #small lab in the desert, or destroy it if need be? We may never, we may today. But the fact that the regime held onto these weapons, while swearing they didn't exist, and had them marked in such a way as to decieve any who saw it, shows the mindset, intent, and existance of a WMD capability.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ugh....did you read the article? I didn't think so.
It was about the sarin shell discoverd and a mustard gas shell discovered 2 weeks ago.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group (search) a U.S. organization searching for weapons of mass destruction and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective." [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ok, mustard gas ineffective.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Two people were treated for "minor exposure" after the sarin incident but no serious injuries were reported. Soldiers transporting the shell for inspection suffered symptoms consistent with low-level chemical exposure, which is what led to the discovery, a U.S. official told Fox News.
"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy."
The round detonated before it would be rendered inoperable, Kimmitt said, which caused a "very small dispersal of agent."
However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
"minor exposure"....."no serious injuries"....."symptoms consistent with".....
This amounts to nothing.
From the BBC:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.
He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained.
Sarin is a toxic nerve gas 20 times as deadly as cyanide.
A drop the size of a pin-head can kill a person by effectively crippling their nervous system.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Soldiers were transporting a chemical shell, which they didn't know was a chemical weapon, it exploded and basically nothing happened.
"However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed."
Remember the remote drones?
Remember the mobile chemical labs?
Remember the anthrax attacks? (in which the anthrax was traced back to a US military lab)
Remember the other chemical shells found a year or so ago?
Blah blah blah blah..........
How many times are we going to hear this type of crap?
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC2HJN @ May 17 2004,14:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">How many times are we going to hear this type of crap?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Until some folks take their blinders off and look at the facts...
ahhhh well....
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC2HJN @ May 17 2004,13:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ugh....did you read the article? I didn't think so.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That article, and more hours in classes on these types of weapons than I care to remember.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
It was about the sarin shell discoverd and a mustard gas shell discovered 2 weeks ago.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group (search) a U.S. organization searching for weapons of mass destruction and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective." [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Ok, mustard gas ineffective.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Two people were treated for "minor exposure" after the sarin incident but no serious injuries were reported. Soldiers transporting the shell for inspection suffered symptoms consistent with low-level chemical exposure, which is what led to the discovery, a U.S. official told Fox News.
"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy."
The round detonated before it would be rendered inoperable, Kimmitt said, which caused a "very small dispersal of agent."
However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
"minor exposure"....."no serious injuries"....."symptoms consistent with".....
This amounts to nothing.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
So Sarin, one of the most effective nerve agents, is found when the left is screaming that Saddam never had WMD before we invaded, but in your eyes it amounts to nothing.
There were no casulties only because it was used ineffectivley. The fact that it existed, when so many claim it didn't, is the big deal.
I guess you would be happier had it killed a handfull of our soldiers.....</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
From the BBC:
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.
He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained.
Sarin is a toxic nerve gas 20 times as deadly as cyanide.
A drop the size of a pin-head can kill a person by effectively crippling their nervous system.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Soldiers were transporting a chemical shell, which they didn't know was a chemical weapon, it exploded and basically nothing happened.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
When you detonate a binary shell before the componets mix, it is basicly ineffective. Thats a safety feature built into binary shells in case of accidental detonation. Try educating yourself on how they work, there is some suprisingly detailed information available on the web if you hunt for it.
This weapon was very deadly is the right sequence of events had activated it, or had the contents been removed and used otherwise.
The reason they didn't know what it contained is that it was marked like a conventional shell. There is only one reason you mark a chemical shell as a regular shell... because your trying to hide it.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
"However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed."[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Having used these field tests myself, and knowing the battery of tests available in the field, I will go ahead and remain confident the results from the lab will confirm it.
See, I know the subject at hand, I don't just make things up as I go or dismiss things I can't disprove as some here do.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Bush to the UN 2002:
"U. N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
"United Nations' inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons."
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Dec 2003 interview:
DIANE SAWYER: But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still -
PRESIDENT BUSH: So what's the difference?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
He's obviously gave it up 5 month ago... Why can't ya'll... He know's he lied... Why can't ya'll see it...
[I know...I posted this on another thread...but it fits here better!]
K6UEY
05-17-2004, 09:36 PM
Let's see, the President said that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, it turns out (as I always believed) that there are Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, maybe the Media would call it "A LIE" by their standards, although I really am suspicious of the Media more than the President.
Hey ORV:
Glad to see ya back in here...
It's hot in the ole town tonight!
Try reading the quote from Bush's speech to the UN again... in particular the bolded part...
We ALL knew there was gonna be some left over crap from the early 90s... My understanding is that they really didn't keep track of that stuff like they should have... the paper trails were lousy...
Where are these "expanding and improving facilities" we kept hearing about... THAT is why the American Public agreed to this war in the first place... It was a lie ORV... You know it and I know it and Bush knows it and that is why they aren't screaming "WE FOUND IT!"
W8EFA
05-17-2004, 10:37 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ May 17 2004,14:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let's see, the President said that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, it turns out (as I always believed) that there are Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, maybe the Media would call it "A LIE" by their standards, although I really am suspicious of the Media more than the President.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Someone answer me this.
If Saddam Had WMD like Bush said :
Why did they not use them on us when we invaded? #
Pretty dangerous military when it took us 2 weeks to take the whole country and they were fighting our tanks with Toyota Pick-up trucks.
Would take longer than 2 weeks to take Cincinnati
KC2HJN
05-17-2004, 11:15 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So Sarin, one of the most effective nerve agents, is found when the left is screaming that Saddam never had WMD before we invaded, but in your eyes it amounts to nothing.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Nobody said he NEVER had them. The Bush adm. said he was ACTIVELY PERSUING THEM. Currently. Big difference.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I guess you would be happier had it killed a handfull of our soldiers.....[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Never said that, don't put words in my mouth...I could just as easily say GW is PRAYING for another attack on us to save his political career.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This was one of the factors that lead the Iraqis to investigate binary weapons, for which sarin is particularly well suited. While they had not mastered the art of manufacturing binary munitions in which the mixing of the precursors occured on firing at the time of the invasion of Kuwait, they had developed a simple process for generating the agent immediately before use: a warhead or shell would be given a partial fill of isopropanal (and often cyclohexanol, a precursor for the related nerve agent GF, sometimes known as cyclosarin) and stored along with plastic containers of methylphosphonic difluoride (DF). Shortly before the munition was to be used an Iraqi soldier would be provided with a gas mask and would pour an appropriate amount of the DF into the munition. This eliminated storage issues.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Soooo, like I said.....the shell they found was basically useless as a chemical weapon. If they had the other ingredients, don't you think they would have used them?
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Having used these field tests myself, and knowing the battery of tests available in the field, I will go ahead and remain confident the results from the lab will confirm it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Then why the immediate 'words of caution' from Rumsfield? Like I said, we've been through this over and over....WE FOUND 'EM.....oh no, we were mistaken....WE FOUND 'EM....oh no, we were mistaken........etc etc etc....
If Americans weren't being killed over there (and it was someone elses gov't) it would be comical.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">See, I know the subject at hand, I don't just make things up as I go or dismiss things I can't disprove as some here do. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Don't be condescending, I have some news for you....you could be wrong. See, not too long ago I had the same beliefs and attitude as you do. Two days after 9-11, I was curious as to why the middle east wasn't a flat piece of green glass yet. Then I started reading and learning about the history behind what's happening now. Not the crap propaganda we are spoon fed. I tried to find out the real deal. It's not easy. Lots of disinformation on both sides, but things have a way of revealing themselves after so many years. This didn't start a year or two ago. Not on 9-11, not even from the first Gulf War. It goes way back to the height of the cold war, maybe further. I learned a lot, and guess what.... I found out I was wrong about many of the things I thought were true.
Now, don't get me wrong, I strongly believe that we should defend ourselves if attacked. I believe we should use any means necessary to win. If that means killing every single last one of our enemies, so be it. Problem is, if your going to go on a killing spree, you better be damn sure your right.
After a year of talking, and a year of fighting, our government HAS YET to show ONE justification for attacking Iraq. Saddam killed his own people? So what. Every scene of Iraq showed everyone with AK-47's. I think that a few hundred thousand armed and pissed Iraqis should have been able to take care of themselves. If not, too bad. They have been fighting in the middle east for thousands of years, we will not stop it. WMD? A big if. Yes he might have them. Oh, but wait. We attacked him twice and he didn't use them. Why not. I thought the purpose of weapons is to use them on your enemies. I know, he didn't use them because he didn't want anyone to know he had them right? What about the first Gulf War? WMD wasn't a big issue then, but this is the time he was stockpiling them.
This whole scenario is so rediculous. I suppose you think the Arabs hate us because of our freedoms too.
KI4BDW
05-18-2004, 12:25 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Pretty dangerous military when it took us 2 weeks to take the whole country and they were fighting our tanks with Toyota Pick-up trucks.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Really? We took the country in two weeks and our soldiers haven't come back and they are still getting killed?
Capital != Country
Thanks for all the information regarding chemical weapons.
In my estimation, finding a small number of chemical weapons, (2) which is all we have at this point, does not justify the statements of the Administration that (paraphrasing) "Iraq has and continues to develop some of the most lethal weapons ever devised by mankind"
and related assertions made prior to the war.
Sorry boys...but a few pre-1991 artillery shells with extremely small quantities of chemical agents do not a world menace make, much less a significant threat to US national security, such as would justify an all out invasion and occupation of another nation.
The Bush Administration made it sound like there were huge stockpiles of WMD. They also claimed that Hussein had restarted a nuclear weapons program (I believe that their position was something to the effect that Iraq was only months away from having nuclear attack capability).
The entire rhetoric used to justify this war led one to believe that there were huge quantities of menacing WMD that was laced with references to "mushroom clouds," flying drones," and "uranium from Niger."
Frankly, I believed that there was a high probability that we would in fact find significant quantities of WMD once Hussein's government was deposed but I was still opposed to the war, as I could find no compelling argument making the case that Iraq was threatening the US, no matter its weapons capability.
This, coupled with the fact that not even the Administration claimed that Iraq had an ICBM capable of attacking the US convinced me that Hussein's regime, notwithstanding his domestic treachery, posed no credible threat to US national security.
Since I believe that war is only justified as a measure of self-defense, the case was closed for me, WMD or no, short of a UN resolution making the case that Iraq was a danger to world peace generally.
If the justification for the attack and occupation were to made based on a UN sanction violation, I was and still am resolute that such a measure would require a majority vote of the UN Security Council as I can find nothing supporting that claim that the US or any other nation may unilaterally enforce UN mandates.
Now..these recently found shells. No one denies that Iraq had very significant quantities of chemical weapons prior to the First Gulf War. I would imagine that out of the thousands of chemically weaponized shells existent then, that a few might remain even if Hussein was in compliance overall.
This is why the UN requires that to establish a true violation of its sanctions, evidence amounting to a "material breach" and not simply a "technical breach" has to be shown.
I really don't think that the 2 shells found recently would qualify as a "material breach" in any event.
In any event, the WMD issue has been a moot point for me anyway, and all I hope is that this war is over soon, no matter who was right about the WMD issue.
Bring the troops home.
73
TP
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W8EFA @ May 17 2004,15:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K6UEY @ May 17 2004,14:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let's see, the President said that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, it turns out (as I always believed) that there are Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, maybe the Media would call it "A LIE" by their standards, although I really am suspicious of the Media more than the President.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Someone answer me this.
If Saddam Had WMD like Bush said :
Why did they not use them on us when we invaded? #
Pretty dangerous military when it took us 2 weeks to take the whole country and they were fighting our tanks with Toyota Pick-up trucks.
Would take longer than 2 weeks to take Cincinnati[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Good question. Saddam didn't do a lot of things that would have hurt us and slowed us down. He failed to blow any of the bridges we needed to cross before we took them, He failed to use most all his forces effectivley. Even the firing of just the two shells we know now existed would have slowed us down a whole lot, as once such were used it would have forced our entire operation into a higher level of protective posture, making every task more difficult and time consuming.
Why he didn't do these things is still a question. Was it because he was stupid? Was it that he ordered them but his generals saw the writing on the wall and refused to carry out his orders? Was it that our air campaign effectivly destroyed is command, communications, and control system to the point where he was unable to issue commands? We don't know... but we know he didn't do a whole lot of things that and decent tactician would have.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC2HJN @ May 17 2004,16:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So Sarin, one of the most effective nerve agents, is found when the left is screaming that Saddam never had WMD before we invaded, but in your eyes it amounts to nothing.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Nobody said he NEVER had them. The Bush adm. said he was ACTIVELY PERSUING THEM. Currently. Big difference.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>We still don't have proof he wasn't..just haven't proved he was. if i hid labs in 2 RV's, then told you "They are somewhere in Californina how quickly would you locate them? Hell we keep finind MIg's and helocopter buried in the sand.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This was one of the factors that lead the Iraqis to investigate binary weapons, for which sarin is particularly well suited. While they had not mastered the art of manufacturing binary munitions in which the mixing of the precursors occured on firing at the time of the invasion of Kuwait, they had developed a simple process for generating the agent immediately before use: a warhead or shell would be given a partial fill of isopropanal (and often cyclohexanol, a precursor for the related nerve agent GF, sometimes known as cyclosarin) and stored along with plastic containers of methylphosphonic difluoride (DF). Shortly before the munition was to be used an Iraqi soldier would be provided with a gas mask and would pour an appropriate amount of the DF into the munition. This eliminated storage issues.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Soooo, like I said.....the shell they found was basically useless as a chemical weapon. If they had the other ingredients, don't you think they would have used them?
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>They had advanced beyond what you have listed there to true mix-on-firing binary rounds, thats what this was. It had both componets, otherwise it wouldnt read psoitive for Sarin.
See my post just above this about why he didn't use them. He didn't do a whole lot of things that one would have expected him to during this war, like blowing bridges. Why? see above.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Having used these field tests myself, and knowing the battery of tests available in the field, I will go ahead and remain confident the results from the lab will confirm it.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Then why the immediate 'words of caution' from Rumsfield? Like I said, we've been through this over and over....WE FOUND 'EM.....oh no, we were mistaken....WE FOUND 'EM....oh no, we were mistaken........etc etc etc....
If Americans weren't being killed over there (and it was someone elses gov't) it would be comical.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">See, I know the subject at hand, I don't just make things up as I go or dismiss things I can't disprove as some here do. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Don't be condescending, I have some news for you....you could be wrong. See, not too long ago I had the same beliefs and attitude as you do. Two days after 9-11, I was curious as to why the middle east wasn't a flat piece of green glass yet. Then I started reading and learning about the history behind what's happening now. Not the crap propaganda we are spoon fed. I tried to find out the real deal. It's not easy. Lots of disinformation on both sides, but things have a way of revealing themselves after so many years. This didn't start a year or two ago. Not on 9-11, not even from the first Gulf War. It goes way back to the height of the cold war, maybe further. I learned a lot, and guess what.... I found out I was wrong about many of the things I thought were true.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
If the website below that you like enough to link is any of what you consider to be "the real informantion" I can see why your so mislead. Its so badly bent and skewed to the left, the ultra-hypersocialist left, its not even funny. I get my news from a variety of sources. network news, NPR, talk radio, international shortwave (love the BBC), online.... but a source as twisted and openly biased as that just makes me laugh.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
Now, don't get me wrong, I strongly believe that we should defend ourselves if attacked. I believe we should use any means necessary to win. If that means killing every single last one of our enemies, so be it. Problem is, if your going to go on a killing spree, you better be damn sure your right.
After a year of talking, and a year of fighting, our government HAS YET to show ONE justification for attacking Iraq. Saddam killed his own people? So what. Every scene of Iraq showed everyone with AK-47's. I think that a few hundred thousand armed and pissed Iraqis should have been able to take care of themselves. If not, too bad. They have been fighting in the middle east for thousands of years, we will not stop it. WMD? A big if. Yes he might have them. Oh, but wait. We attacked him twice and he didn't use them. Why not. I thought the purpose of weapons is to use them on your enemies. I know, he didn't use them because he didn't want anyone to know he had them right? What about the first Gulf War? WMD wasn't a big issue then, but this is the time he was stockpiling them.
[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Like I said, see above as to why he didn't use them. BTW the first GW, if your old enough to remember, Bush pretty much told Saddam that chemical weapons use would result in an even bigger more devestating retalliation.... and you know what that means.</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
This whole scenario is so rediculous. I suppose you think the Arabs hate us because of our freedoms too.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Let me guess... its all Isaels fault..is that what your going to say? Sorry, but thats just another good excuse for them. Radical Islam, the ones who we need to eliminate, seeks to either convert or enslave all non-muslims, and seeks to establish a univerasl Islamic state to rule the entire world, the Khilafah.
In thier own words:[U] The Republican system is not an Islamic system and Islam does not approve of it whether it is Presidential in nature as in the US or it is Parliamentary, as found in Germany, because the Republican system in both these forms is based on the democratic system which gives the sovereignty to the people, whilst the system of Khilafah is based on the system of Islam that gives sovereignty to the Shara [I]
Findthe rest here:
http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=2714&TagID=2 (http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=2714&TagID=2)
http://www.khilafah.com/
KC2HJN
05-18-2004, 03:10 PM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If the website below that you like enough to link is any of what you consider to be "the real informantion" I can see why your so mislead. Its so badly bent and skewed to the left, the ultra-hypersocialist left, its not even funny. I get my news from a variety of sources. network news, NPR, talk radio, international shortwave (love the BBC), online.... but a source as twisted and openly biased as that just makes me laugh.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
PEP, The reason I link to that site is bacause many of the stories there will never been seen on the "mainstream" news services. I can admit, some of the articles are a little over the top, but it is still a good idea to get the "other side" of the story. You are better prepared to make a decision when you have heard both sides. I don't rely on only that site, I also read from a variety of sources...some mainstream (cnn, fox, bbc, abc), some others like newsmax, npr and a variety of other foreign sites.
When I debate with someone here on this site, it's not to try to 'make' them see things my way, but to make them think for themselves and maybe do a little reading. I admit I may be wrong at times, but I at least try to be objective.
My whole problem with the whole situation is the secrecy and deceit in our government. Since 9-11, the administration has thrown up many roadblocks to investigations, bush has sealed presidential papers that were to be released, Cheney would not disclose his energy papers..etc.......
Why the secrecy?
I would actually be more supportive if they just came out and said....Hey were going to take Iraq because we WANT to and we CAN.
I f'n hate liars, more than thieves, more than most things..
What makes me laugh is when I hear some people saying the same old stupid slogans and repeating the same old information that has long since been proven wrong. They sound like a bunch of brainwashed sheep. I think some people secretely WANT our troops to be hit with some WMD just so they can say they were right.
Anyway, I'm not refering to you here so don't take it personal. Even though I don't agree with everything you say, at least you make some kind of sense when you say it.
By the way.....
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let me guess... its all Israels fault..is that what your going to say?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I wasn't going to say that, but at the same time I don't think Israel dreserves the unwavering, political, military, and financial support we give them. They have become a welfare state dependant on the US and do their fair share of causing trouble in the Middle East.
KC2HJN, I can see that, but you choose only one site to link, one with a radical left wing slant. Why not the BBC or other great alternative sources.
As for the secrecy, you find it in any administration. Go back and look at the previous ones. See any similarities bewteen Cheneys energey meetings and Hillaries health care meetings.... they refused to release those too.
Heck Clinton, in response to a lawsuit, actually refused to answer any questions on the grounds that he was protected from a lawsuit by the Soldiers and Sailors Relief act of 1940... a law designed to keep soldiers deployed overseas from being sued during deployment!
And here is another thing to consider. (Credit goes to a friend of mine but I'm stealing his quote here because he puts it better than I could) Saddam was also getting up there in years with his sons left to take power behind him. Both were full blown flipping lunatics with alot more energy for evil than their father and alot more greed. They could not be allowed to enter the world stage as rulers of a nation state that possessed the capacity to field an army with WMD, where Saddam showed some restraint in using his arsenal internationally, I think these two would have done it, either for money, or just for sh*ts and giggles.
The time was right, the war was right, and the world is a better place for it having happened.
BTW reports now show it held 3-4 liters of Sarin, about right for a 155 shell. 3-4 liters of Sarin, if they found thier way over here, would be a disaster. Just choose your large gathering place..... Times Square at New Years eve, Superbowl, World Series, Dayton, downtown Vegas..................
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8LXR @ May 16 2004,20:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thanks for all the information regarding chemical weapons.
In my estimation, finding a small number of chemical weapons, (2) which is all we have at this point, does not justify the statements of the Administration that (paraphrasing) "Iraq has and continues to develop some of the most lethal weapons ever devised by mankind"
and related assertions made prior to the war.
Sorry boys...but a few pre-1991 artillery shells with extremely small quantities of chemical agents do not a world menace make, much less a significant threat to US national security, such as would justify an all out invasion and occupation of another nation.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
How many chemical munitions must go off to have the desired effect?
If this was a dirty bomb, would you still say it was only one.
Logic is not working here -- fact is they exist.
W4TEY
05-19-2004, 02:59 AM
Just did a check of Fox, CNN, and MSNBC news websites. Fox has the sarin gas confirmed as a lead story. Couldn't find anything at all on CNN and had to dig deep on MSNBC. The latter had nothing on confirmation. CNN was all about Abu Ghraib and the "terrible" scandal. No mention of Nick Berg there either. MSNBC is all Kerry and how bad he is going to kick Bushs ass. Our tv news media is worse than the paper tabloids you find in the grocery line. I expect CNN and MSNBC will accuse Bush of being an alien or the antichrist at some point.
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W4TEY @ May 18 2004,20:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I expect CNN and MSNBC will accuse Bush of being an alien or the antichrist at some point.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Now THERE is a rumor just beggin' to be started...hehehehe
kc0ebm
05-19-2004, 07:19 PM
Saddam's WMDs?
Where are they?
Why, they're in Syria and Lebanon, and burried in the Iraqi desert, that's where!
EBM
You forgot. A few of them are also in Jorden -- thankfully in control of the authorities.
Seems like a few folks understand what can be done with this evil stuff, other than make road side bombs.
kc0ebm
05-21-2004, 01:51 AM
Hey Guys!
I caught the tail end of an interview on Fox News today of a man who said that satellite intel revealed early on the heavy truck traffic into Syria before the war.
He claims that imagery also details the offloading and the exact location in Syria where the WMDs are burried.
He also claims that the Bush Administration has known all along the precise location of this buried WMDs in Syria.
Now I know why Bush levied sanctions on Syria.
This ain't over by a long shot. You can damn well expect more in the way of confrontation between the US and Syria.
This crap ain't gunna fly. Bush ain't gunna turn his back and give a pass on Syria. Look for more on this in the near future. If this man knows what he's talking about and is telling it straight, some big sh*t will be goin down in Damascus. It may not happen before the election, but if Bush wins, we may see the fulfillment of Bible prophesy.
Here it is: Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.
Damascus Syria is the oldest continuously inhabited City in world history. But the Bible foretells its destruction. Looks like it may be in the works.
Whether or not this will be the result of the WMDs being buried there, the Bush Administration will not sit still for it. Damascus has got some 'splainin' to do.
They gotta kick out the terrorists and cough up the WMDs. That's all there is to it.
You heard it here first.
EBM
KD4LEI
05-21-2004, 04:47 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ May 20 2004,18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">This ain't over by a long shot. You can damn well expect more in the way of confrontation between the US and Syria.
This crap ain't gunna fly. Bush ain't gunna turn his back and give a pass on Syria. Look for more on this in the near future. If this man knows what he's talking about and is telling it straight, some big sh*t will be goin down in Damascus. It may not happen before the election, but if Bush wins, we may see the fulfillment of Bible prophesy.
Here it is: Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.
Damascus Syria is the oldest continuously inhabited City in world history. But the Bible foretells its destruction. Looks like it may be in the works.
Whether or not this will be the result of the WMDs being buried there, the Bush Administration will not sit still for it. Damascus has got some 'splainin' to do.
They gotta kick out the terrorists and cough up the WMDs. That's all there is to it.
You heard it here first.
EBM[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Or as Bush has promised... Any nation or group that uses WMD's on the US or it's interests will face their end with a nuke attack. If anything happens to this nation with WMD's involved and it's traced back to Syria, then that prophecy may be fulfilled.
I think though that this isn't going to come to pass until the Tribulation period.
Here's your WMD...
http://www.voanews.com/article....5A9BC4F (http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=51F7713B-0472-4E5A-95ADFFDA95A9BC4F)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1113603.htm
http://slate.msn.com/id/2083736/
There is plenty more where those came from...
The WMD claim is falling on its face faster than a toddler in new shoes...
Let's see...
No WMD... [two shells are hardly new plants for manufacture, fellas!]
No connection to AQ...
No Threat to US...
No need for this dumb war!
And No need to continue with Bush, PNAC and the Neocon Hawks!
KA8NCR
05-23-2004, 02:46 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ May 20 2004,21:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Or as Bush has promised... Any nation or group that uses WMD's on the US or it's interests will face their end with a nuke attack. If anything happens to this nation with WMD's involved and it's traced back to Syria, then that prophecy may be fulfilled.
I think though that this isn't going to come to pass until the Tribulation period.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
So Al Queda manages to not only find nuclear material, but makes a bomb and gets it over here and detonates it.
Who is the US going to retaliate against? Just indescriminately nuke other countries?
This is why Bush has failed. He's gone off half cocked over Iraq and the war against Al Queda is far from over. We're sure as hell not going to get much help from Arab countries now.
News flash.
No one in their right mind will use nukes -- which is making them less and less useful as a tool to prevent war.
Extremests and crazies (like North Korea) are another story -- they don't care who they hurt or how many as long as they get the power and the cause gets the publicity.
Any one seen this? North Korea Provided Libyan Uranium -- NY Times (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=8&u=/nm/20040523/ts_nm/korea_libya_report_dc)
Now if this can happen under our supervision, anyone really seriously think Sadam didn't have the capability to produce and hide WMD for use when we least expect it?
N1XHF
05-23-2004, 06:11 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC0LNU @ May 17 2004,07:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hm
They don't have them and Bush is wrong?
Look at this! U.S. Army Says Finds Shell with Sarin Agent in Iraq (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=1&u=/nm/20040517/ts_nm/iraq_sarin_dc)
Sarin Gas Released by Iraq Roadside Bomb (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html)
Don't give "it's only one" routine -- shells are like ants -- where there's one, there usually are alot more!
Have we taken the gloves off yet?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Iraq's WMD's are hidden with their closest allies .....The AARA and K1MAN, hidden deep in the lakes of belgrade. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
KI4FDW
05-23-2004, 01:47 PM
The WMD are located in Syria. At the outbreak of the war a Syrian division what mobilized into the desert. A convoy of trucks were spotted on Satellite heading for the Syrian border from Iraq. Now at that very spot a Brigade of Syrian soldiers are still positioned.
I say they are gaurding something?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
They are probably sitting on them.
This was a blip in the news a couple of weeks ago... not that you would hear it on CNN but it has not been on there since.
Kevin
KD4LEI
05-24-2004, 04:06 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ka8ncr @ May 22 2004,19:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Who is the US going to retaliate against? Just indescriminately nuke other countries?
This is why Bush has failed. He's gone off half cocked over Iraq and the war against Al Queda is far from over. We're sure as hell not going to get much help from Arab countries now.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Oh yes...
More liberal talking points:
"Bush has failed" yada yada yada...
You sound like Kerry and Kennedy NCR, so what else is new?
In case you forgot... Back after 9-11 happened, Bush stated that any nation or group who attacks US or it's interests with WMD's will face a Nuke strike.
Nobody in their right mind would use Nuke's? Willing to bet if Al-Qaeda had one that they wouldn't use it? You willing to trust a loonatic fringe, or trust them first before you trust Bush?
ki4bgo
05-24-2004, 04:22 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ May 20 2004,20:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hey Guys!
I caught the tail end of an interview on Fox News today of a man who said that satellite intel revealed early on the heavy truck traffic into Syria before the war. #
He claims that imagery also details the offloading and the exact location in Syria where the WMDs are burried.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
And of course, you believe, what spews forth from Fox News.....there's your first mistake! And all this WMD stuff, well it's like this: the neo-con regime has BRAINWASHED you into believing this ridiculous dribble! Seek professional help and for Gods'sake quit watchin' that Fox crap! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
KD4LEI
05-24-2004, 04:29 AM
</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (ki4bgo @ May 23 2004,21:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0ebm @ May 20 2004,20:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hey Guys!
I caught the tail end of an interview on Fox News today of a man who said that satellite intel revealed early on the heavy truck traffic into Syria before the war.
He claims that imagery also details the offloading and the exact location in Syria where the WMDs are burried.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
And of course, you believe, what spews forth from Fox News.....there's your first mistake! And all this WMD stuff, well it's like this: the neo-con regime has BRAINWASHED you into believing this ridiculous dribble! Seek professional help and for Gods'sake quit watchin' that Fox crap! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
and I guess CNN or the alphabet news channels are so much more reliable?
How about the Washington Post? Oh wait, they want to feed some people's fetish for more prisoner abuse photos.
Brainwashed? Why is Fox News' ratings better than CNN's?
"and for Gods'sake quit watchin' that Fox crap!"
Of course that is what CNN would hope people do.
KI4FDW
05-24-2004, 07:20 AM
AMEN!!! LEI. I guess the next thing that CNN and the others are going to report is that we are not at war at all. This is all a "wag the dog" movie made in the Calif. Desert.
I guess the only reason they got 911 right, is because they could not deny that one and get away with it. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
Kevin