[heretic]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/16/sproject.irq.wrap/index.html

[Fineus]

Correct me if I'm wrong... but didn't America sell weapons to Iraq when they were figihting Iran?

And also... empty warheads? Hmm... what about full warheads?

[heretic]

it still violates the disclosure sent to the UN last month.

[Stryke 9]

...So?

Unless they found something in that "other" warhead, this means nothing. I have an empty gas lighter in my house. Now, am I an arsonist, or a smoker?

It's no news that he had MDWs. And, undoubetdly, Saddam's going to claim this was from back then. There's no real way to prove to the contrary, unless it's a new model or something.


At any rate, Bush is gonna invade anyway- there's absolutely no question of that. You're waving goodbye long after the cowboy has ridden into the sunset, gone on to marry, settle down, have kids, get a job as an investment banker, suffer a stroke, die, and decay into dust. The only question remaining in the Iraq deal is whether a revolution forms, and Bush helps it along, or whether he just has the Army go in and kill everybody in sight.


EDIT: And it doesn't necessarily violate the disclosure, if there's nothing in them. Spent bullet casings and evacuated shells do not qualify as munitions, no matter how crazy or gung-ho warmongering you are.

[an0n]

They found 10 empty, short-range warheads in a bunker that hasn't been used, and probably hasn't even been opened, since 1990.

If they'd known they were there, they'd have shipped them out ages ago.

[Fineus]

Originally posted by StrykeIX
At any rate, Bush is gonna invade anyway- there's absolutely no question of that. You're waving goodbye long after the cowboy has ridden into the sunset, gone on to marry, settle down, have kids, get a job as an investment banker, suffer a stroke, die, and decay into dust. The only question remaining in the Iraq deal is whether a revolution forms, and Bush helps it along, or whether he just has the Army go in and kill everybody in sight.

Right (sadly). I hate war but this is inevitable.

[Stryke 9]

Ah, well. I just hope Saddam does not go quietly. I'd be laughing my ass off at Bush if he started another Vietnam.

[an0n]

I'd love it if, knowing he's a dead man anyway, he smuggled himself into America or Britain and let himself be captured outside Parliament or the Whitehouse.

If I was a marked man, I know that's what I'd do.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by StrykeIX
...So?

Unless they found something in that "other" warhead, this means nothing. I have an empty gas lighter in my house. Now, am I an arsonist, or a smoker?

[color=66ff00]*looks to the guys in the suits* Step up surveiliance on this one guys, looks like we have a probable arsonist...

[/color]

Originally posted by StrykeIX
Ah, well. I just hope Saddam does not go quietly. I'd be laughing my ass off at Bush if he started another Vietnam.

[color=66ff00] I'm pretty sure all the americans in the crowd will not agree with you.

[/color]

[Black Wolf]

It doesn't matter whether they're full or not. This will be blown up, screwed around with and then eventually rereleased as "UN Weapons inspectors finally found something, let's attack". Even if it isn't, Strykes right - he'll attack anyway. This would just be one of many potential catalysts.

There are sooooo many things that piss me off about this whole Bush and Iraq thing.

For one thing, he's acting pretty much without evidence. What he has on Iraq is essentially a circumstantial case - murderers are let off when there is no solid evidence, but Bush is willing to go to war in a similar situation. He keeps saying how America will only attack if Iraq disarms, when, for all he knows, Iraq may well have nothing to disarm, nothing to get rid of.

Second of all - what right does he have to say "Weapons are bad" when the Americans probably have the biggest stockpile of active nukes on the entire planet.

I don't condone Saddam, or agree with his ideologies or whatever, but I still think Bush is a moron for pushing this stupid war.

Heh, as for humour, I'd personally like to see Saddam just say - OK, I give up. and had over 50 nukes and a couple of dozen biological weapons, and throw open all the construction plants and ****. That'd F$#@ Bush right up.

[heretic]

Originally posted by Black Wolf
For one thing, he's acting pretty much without evidence. What he has on Iraq is essentially a circumstantial case - murderers are let off when there is no solid evidence, but Bush is willing to go to war in a similar situation.

Undeclared chemical warheads is, say it with me now, A VIOLATION OF UN RESOLUTIONS. It doesn't matter if they're filled with anything or not (although they're examining a 12th more thorougly). It's not like these are rusted out casings. They're in excellent condition and undeclared which is indicative of an ongoing banned chemical weapons program in Iraq.

[an0n]

If we're going to start enforcing UN Resolutions, isn't there an outstanding one regarding Israel?

[kode]

sometimes I'm ashamed that Hans Blix is a swede.

oh, and UN is a pile of crap.

I meant Hans, not Erik. I messed him up with some reporter guy...

[an0n]

Here we go. 3 UN resolutions telling Israel and Palestine to withdraw and stop being little *****es:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/indepth/featureitems/s516961.htm

[Black Wolf]

Originally posted by heretic


Undeclared chemical warheads is, say it with me now, A VIOLATION OF UN RESOLUTIONS. It doesn't matter if they're filled with anything or not (although they're examining a 12th more thorougly). It's not like these are rusted out casings. They're in excellent condition and undeclared which is indicative of an ongoing banned chemical weapons program in Iraq.

True, but the primary thrust of Bush's pro-war arguments up until now has been that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, not that they have undeclared warheads. While this does break UN resolutions, empty warheads do not constitute weapons of mass destruction. Plus these don;t represent a 'weapons program' at all, the represent purely what they are - old casings that have probably been in Iraq for 20 years. Keep in mind that A - Any sort of valuable stuff is kept in secure conditions (where it will not rust away or break down from wear) and B - the countries pretty damn dry as it is.

Essentially there's zero evidence that these are new, zero evidnce that they were intended for mass destruction, and zero evidence that they were ever full of anything. They are not a justification for War.

[an0n]

The UN and the weapons inspectors now have to declare Saddam in violation and let America whoop his ass, because no matter what the UN say America is going in.

America is ****ing certain to attack and if the UN say Saddam shouldn't be attacked and order them to stop or try and force them to stop, they'll completely ignore the UN exposing it as no better than the failed League Of Nations and end up collapsing it. And this, kids, will bring about yet another sign of the apocalypse as prophecide in the Bible.

[kode]

so what's so wrong to live at the end of the world? now, there's something to tell your grandchildren about...

and yeah. US is prolly going in anyway. methinks they should either  a) stop meddling with stuff they have nothing to do with
or b) solve the issue between israel and palestina and the korea thing, instead of warmongering.

[Stryke 9]

Originally posted by Maeglamor


[color=66ff00]*[color=66ff00] I'm pretty sure all the americans in the crowd will not agree with you.

[/color]

Well, I'm one, and I know there are several others that would like to see Bush thoroughly ****ed, so that's at least four, by my count... and three of those are of that small percentage who get on the news a lot. Not bad, by my reckoning.

Yes, I suppose there is some of that pacifist pussyfooting that has soiled the name of the Left out here. "Oh, we don't mind war, but if PEOPLE GET KILLED... *gasp*". Or, better yet: " We don't mind war, but if AMERICANS get killed..."

The way I see it, any American deaths in Iraq would be deaths for the Revolution. It's really too bad that many of the soldiers there likely aren't willing to die, or even fight, but that's what's known as collateral damage, and it's inevitable in a war environment. And no, this isn't just some abstract pontificating done without taking into account the unpleasantness death will be to people. If my death could aid to any noticeable degree the coming of the Revolution, and its glorious victory, I wouldn't hesitate a second, and I've thought that through.

[kode]

*yawns*

what Revolution are you talking about?

[Stryke 9]

Just because the USSR is down doesn't mean we are- they were really just fascists in disguise, anyway. Except for Kruzchev. Gotta respect a guy who bangs his shoe on a table in a public tantrum in front of the leaders of the world.