10-03-2003 10:36									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yes, your right Ur. You know more then the Powell, the CIA, and British intelligence. Everyone who doesn't agree with you if telling lies; everyone except Saddam that is who always tells the truth. BTW read the article in the first post and learn how foolish you've been or if you like go to the BBC or to CNN for they have similar articles.

I'm sure you'll get up and dismiss them all as an imperialist plot or claim none of the experts know nearly as much about the issue as you do though.

	10-03-2003 10:39									#32
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: If we destroy an enemy, we have the right to dictate whatever terms we wish.

i disagree with this in principle, i'm saying might doesn't make right. if nazi germany had of won WWII it wouldn't have had the right to gas anyone it would have, although it would have had the ability to do that...however this is the way the world works, and i'm not trying to argue that it doesn't, i'm arguing it shouldn't which is different

	10-03-2003 10:42									#33
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by korn469 i disagree with this in principle, i'm saying might doesn't make right. if nazi germany had of won WWII it wouldn't have had the right to gas anyone it would have, although it would have had the ability to do that...however this is the way the world works, and i'm not trying to argue that it doesn't, i'm arguing it shouldn't which is different

touchee
however, i dont think it is a bad thing for disallowing a man like Saddam from having the power of WoMD. I guess this just opinion, however

	10-03-2003 10:43									#34
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Felch X Besides, these drones are quite capable of delivering biological or chemical weapons, and spreading them over a large target area.

No, they're not, not without extensive redesign and uprating of controls, etc. Also, the payload is the payload, whether it's fuel, a Hellfire missile on a Predator, or BCW ordnance and dispersal systems.

Assuming you mount such stuff on your UAV, you have a huge increase in aerodynamic drag which affects flight stability and duration, coupled with a huge decrease in fuel load, and an increase in static weight, all of which add up to cripple the effective range of any such craft.

There are two primary purposes to UAV's - passive electronic surveillance and active visual/IR surveillance. So far, the US is the only country which has successfully made the operational conversion to a weapons delivery platform, with the Hellfire equipped Predator - and that is still a definite step short of being able to make an effective dispersal system for BCW agents.

	10-03-2003 10:43									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Whether or not Saddam has WMD's is irrelevent.

	10-03-2003 10:46									#36
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: however, i dont think it is a bad thing for disallowing a man like Saddam from having the power of WoMD. I guess this just opinion, however

no actually i agree with you on that, and i think that there are a number of valid reasons to support this

however it is my opinion that simply because we kicked his ass before and forced him to sign an agreement under the threat of more force that it isn't a just reason for war, although it is certainly a legal reason

100 years for now, if this war happens they won't say it occured because saddam was in material breech, they will say saddam was a petty little despot who was a thorn in the US's side one too many times or whatever

	10-03-2003 10:47									#37
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

On the contrary it is at the heart of the matter.

	10-03-2003 10:49									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I hate to differ with MtG, but...

quote: Iraqi adds to weapons arsenal By JOBY WARRICK, The Washington Post In the waning hours of Operation Desert Fox in 1998, a British missile sheared off the top of a military hangar in southern Iraq and exposed a closely guarded secret. Plainly visible in the rubble was a new breed of Iraqi drone aircraft -- one that defense analysts now believe was specially modified to spread deadly chemicals and germs. Up to a dozen of the unmanned airplanes were spotted inside the hangar, each fitted with spray nozzles and wing-mounted tanks that could carry up to 80 gallons of liquid anthrax. If flown at low altitudes under the right conditions, a single drone could unleash a toxic cloud engulfing several city blocks, a top British defense official concluded. He dubbed them "drones of death." Today, Iraq's drones loom even larger as the Bush administration weighs a possible new strike against Saddam Hussein. The United States and Britain have charged that the Iraqi president is working to obtain chemical, biological and possibly nuclear weapons. A key unanswered question is whether Iraq has the means to deliver such weapons. According to U.S. and allied intelligence officials and U.N. documents, Iraq has worked with apparently mixed success to diversify a patchwork collection of delivery vehicles that now includes not only Scud missiles, which it launched during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, but also a variety of novel machines for spraying pathogens and poisons from aircraft. Iraq deployed but never used chemical and biological weapons in the 1991 war.

http://www.s-t.com/daily/09-02/09-05-02/a01wn009.htm

	10-03-2003 10:49									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: On the contrary it is at the heart of the matter.

that he is in material breech?

i disagree, that is simple a causa belli, if Saddam was somehow useful to US policy we would care less if he was in material breech or not, i mean we were giving him aid when he was gassing the kurds, so if it didn't matter then it shouldn't matter now

	10-03-2003 10:51									#40
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

They're quite capable in the long term. What the Iraqis effectively have are basically V1s. They can fly them in the direction they want to fly them in, attach tanks fulls of whatever agent they wish, some appropriate valves, and voila, a buzz bomb crop duster. No one is saying this will be a war winning weapon, but it is something they can hold over the Israelis heads.

And it certainly should have been brought up in the oral report.

	10-03-2003 10:54									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Drake: How dare you use responsible reporting to deny their baseless accusations. you ought to be ashamed of yourself; don't you know 'poly debates are supposed to be about opinions and not fact?

	10-03-2003 10:58									#42
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Gladly.

How does any information you quoted refute the IAEA's report?

	10-03-2003 10:59									#43
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I am in a quoting mood tonight, aren't I?

	10-03-2003 10:59									#44
	Support Apolyton

Wow..Iraq is so technologically advanced: they must have this secret death ray to zap down american planes... and they developed the special catepillar system for their nuclear subs too. Then they have those satelites armed with nukes, and the mooonbase, lets not forget the moonbase.

	10-03-2003 11:02									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Slumber party!!!

	10-03-2003 11:02									#47
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It takes about the same technology level as your average 1920's crop duster to create a spray noozel to deliver chemical weapons.

	10-03-2003 11:02									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: On the contrary it is at the heart of the matter.

Saddam would never be stupid enough to use WMD's unless there's international sanction (or if US troops are about to march down the streets of Baghdad). Using such weapons would currently insure a quick death, and he gains little from such actions. When he gassed Kurds and Iranians, he was our boy and they were our enemies. During the Gulf War, he didn't dare use the chemical weapons he had on coalition forces because that would've meant the end of his regime.

	10-03-2003 11:02									#49
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Yes, your right Ur. You know more then the Powell, the CIA, and British intelligence. Everyone who doesn't agree with you if telling lies; everyone except Saddam that is who always tells the truth. BTW read the article in the first post and learn how foolish you've been or if you like go to the BBC or to CNN for they have similar articles. I'm sure you'll get up and dismiss them all as an imperialist plot or claim none of the experts know nearly as much about the issue as you do though.

Oh my sides

British Intelligence - found to have plagarised from a decade old report

CIA - used outdated maps

Powell - unable to provide any solid information to the UNSC last month, and he used the fake British intelligence report.

You still have not been able to substantiate the US/UK assertion. Neither has Jack Straw or Colin Powell.

Where is your point?

	10-03-2003 11:02									#50
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: How does any information you quoted refute the IAEA's report?

It demonstrates the IAEA's past record of being completely oblivious to secret Iraqi nuclear programs. I thought that was pretty obvious, but I'm not a dullard...

	10-03-2003 11:03									#51
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

He'll us them the second his back is to the wall.

	10-03-2003 11:03									#52
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Isn't that a reason not to attack?

	10-03-2003 11:05									#53
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Kramerman anybody know any alternative purpose for these drones other than for delivering chemical agents? What else could there purpose be in other words, my imagination is at a loss and i havent really read much on this discovery.

Uh, the US/UK assertion is that these drones can go more than 150km, thus violating the UNSC resolution. It was not about whether they can be used to carry chemical agents.

	10-03-2003 11:06									#54
	Remove this text

I'd say it is proof he's lieing to the U.N. and that many of the Lefties here at 'poly are willing proticipants in this fantasy.

Saddam isn't hording these WoMD to help little children. he's hording them to use them so it is imparative we disarm him before he has a chance to use them on his own terms against targets of his choosing.

	10-03-2003 11:09									#55
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Uh, the US/UK assertion is that these drones can go more than 150km, thus violating the UNSC resolution.

Where'd you get this false idea? You didn't even read the article I posted, did you?

	10-03-2003 11:09									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin It takes about the same technology level as your average 1920's crop duster to create a spray noozel to deliver chemical weapons.

So Iraq is not allowed crop dusters?


Saddam Hussein is really the twin of Ming the Merciless, about to unleash his diabolical AnthroVXmustardiobolical ray..and only Bush and the Chickenhwak brigade can stop him! Go go chickenhawks ho!!

I always find it funny when a group of ideologically equally minded people spend half a thread patting themselves in the back.."good job billy", "yeah, great work timmy".

quote: It demonstrates the IAEA's past record of being completely oblivious to secret Iraqi nuclear programs. I thought that was pretty obvious, but I'm not a dullard...

One bit of that sentence is wrong......

Yeah, we all know only the IAEA has issues over the past..you know, its not like the admin. ever sold us an idea that turned out to be utterly wrong, you know, like the Atta-Iraq meeting in Prague....

As they say, proof of past mistakes is not proof of present ones...otherwise we would still be calling our president a drunken coke-hoar.

	10-03-2003 11:11									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: He'll us them the second his back is to the wall.

quote: Isn't that a reason not to attack?

I'll say!

quote: If Saddam doesn't have chemical weapons then why is he busy building delivery systems? I am afraid many of you leftist appologists take your hatred of America to far. You ignore the obvious truth because it is politically expedient to do so. I suspect that deep down (even if your political sensabilties will not let you admite it) you know Saddam is hording illegal WoMD but you choose to ignore that fact and play fanciful games in which the U.S & U.K. are equated to Saddam's war crimes because it makes you feel good to imagine it is so.

Hatred of America? Why does this always come out? I am anti-war, but pro-America. Is that okay?

Also, the reasoning in your first sentence is suspect. He has the means to deliver chemical weapons, therefore he must have chemical weapons. The drone COULD be altered to carry chem weapons. Therefore he must have MILLIONS of vials of anthrax. It is possible to have guns without bullets... and chem weapons are a lot harder to come by than bullets.

So no, I certainly don't hate America. I just don't think a spy plane is grounds for war. Thank heavens the Chinese are with me on that.

	10-03-2003 11:12									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Are you going to make any real arguments, GePap, or are you just going to continue flapping your lips and making smilies? Deal with the thread topic or get out...

	10-03-2003 11:13									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten quote: How does any information you quoted refute the IAEA's report? It demonstrates the IAEA's past record of being completely oblivious to secret Iraqi nuclear programs. I thought that was pretty obvious, but I'm not a dullard...

First of all, there is zero corroboration with the information you quoted from other sources. Even if I ignore the bias (which is obvious) of the site you quoted, how is the mere words of a defector more trustworthy than that of IAEA or the weapons inspectors? Secondly, the IAEA report has conclusively refuted these bald assertions.

Where are your facts?

	10-03-2003 11:14									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Also, the reasoning in your first sentence is suspect. He has the means to deliver chemical weapons, therefore he must have chemical weapons. The drone COULD be altered to carry chem weapons. Therefore he must have MILLIONS of vials of anthrax. It is possible to have guns without bullets... and chem weapons are a lot harder to come by than bullets.

Only grossly misinformed people seriously argue that Saddam doesn't have chemical and biological weapons. Welcome to the club...