 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
VJ, preliminary tests indicate Sarin.
quote:
Originally posted by CyberShy
Something must have happened with sadam's WMD.
Everybody knows he once got them, and there hasn't been found any evidence that it has been destroyed.
Either these weapons are brought to other countries, or he has hid them deeply into the desert, or he did indeed destroy his weapons, which leaves open the question why he didn't documentate it very accurate so he could show it to the UN. |
First, the United States has at least two hundred tons of chemical weapons unaccounted for. They may have have been destroyed without being documented, misplaced, lost, or stolen. We don't know. They're just missing. We have much better acountablity than some Third-world shithole like Iraq.
Second, it is generally believed the Hussain wanted the Iranians and Kurds to think he still had weapons, so that the former wouldn't try and attack and the latter wouldn't try and rebel.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Japher
|
 |
Ook! Ook! Ack! Ack! Ack!
Jun 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
We know they destroyed a lot of weapons without documenting it. |
We do? Prove that they are destroyed... oh, you can't. You don't even have some documents to question.
quote:
If the United States, which has vastly superior accounting methods and a much stricter hierarchy and oversight for handling these weapons cannot account for all of its own weapons, is it reasonable to assume that a Third-World nationa with very poor accountability and oversight would be able to achieve 100% knowledge of all weapons it may have had?
|
This isn't about the US' accounting methods... It's about the US' claim that Iraq had WMD. What was found may or may not be from Sadam, it may just be a small portion of what he had, or it may of been all he had. The point is, a WMD was found in Iraq, why is that so hard to believe? And, why are you defending him, Che?
Hell, I bet we could find a whole cache of weapons over there that they weren't suppose to have and you would somehow find a way to dismiss the findings.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Japher
|
|
Ook! Ook! Ack! Ack! Ack!
Jun 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
If A and B are true, then why didn't he use them on the American forces?
|
Cause he's a coward who thought it would be so much easier to become a martyr. Also, he was an aggressor not a defender.
quote:
If either one is not true, then why the war? |
Both are true, or at least one, this is part of a war on terror... or did you miss that part?
quote:
The real question is, though : Since we're SURE than N.Korea has WMD and is "evil", why does the Bush administration do nothing against them?
|
Because they aren't blowing up our buildings.
quote:
They are clearly not dumb enough to attack a mad dictator
with access to WMD. Therefore they KNEW that Saddam was "clean", and they waited for the report proving his WMDs were gone, so they'd know it was safe to attack.
Proven by logic!
|
I fart better logic than that!
The ME is and has been a hot bed for terrorist activity. Saddam was and is a known supporter of such terrorist activity not only amongst his own people but those of neighboring countries (see Kuwait). He had the desire and ability to continue to threaten this country through acts of terror or acts of war, either directly or non-directly. Our actions in Iraq have shown that we will not go gently and other would be threats have since voiced their support in our efforts (see Libya).
Most ppls problem is that thinks this attack was an attack on Iraq, and only Iraq, and have already forgotten Afghanistan and the fighting that continues there. These battles are not individual wars but are a part of a bigger war, a war against terrorist hot bed communities, supporters, and those who harbor them… Just as Bush said he would do in 2001.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-05-2004 19:48
Except that the Iraqi goverment... did? 
I really hate having to hold people's hands. Okay, real simple. If the United States, which has vastly superior accounting methods and a much stricter hierarchy and oversight for handling these weapons cannot account for all of its own weapons, is it reasonable to assume that a Third-World nationa with very poor accountability and oversight would be able to achieve 100% knowledge of all weapons it may have had?
|