 |
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:27
|
|
quote: This combined with his track record made him a "grave threat". |
Past action is not proof of future action, specially when you have actions in the middle that serve as counter-proof.
He sued chemical weapons against Iran and the Kurds, He did not used chemical weapons against the Coolition, Israel, or the Shia in 1991 (never heard any reports, as opposed to what they said in "Three Kings"). Why would his post 1998 actions resemeble his pre-1990 actions and not his 1991-98 actions?
"grave threat", unless it is imminent, is not a causus belli- the important thing for me is, what was the legal justification given for this war? violations of Un sanctions, sanctions delaign with disarmemment. If Iraq was disarmed (I give the US one more month, but as of now, it seems their intelligence was wrong on many things), then out legal justification was, well, not real.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:27
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Japher
I guess I will never hear you saying "less we study our history, we are doomed to repeat it."
Past action is not proof, but motive and proof of intent. It is the only tool we have at this time to predict the future... so it will have to suffice. And, if you don't want the US marching through your front door it might be wise not to be an evil dictator murdering your citizens... oh well, better luck in the next life bucko |
One has to study ALL of history, not study it selectively. Again, Saddam did not use WMD against the US, ever. Why would he? you can say, hey, if he gets into another war with Uran, he might use WMD's. But for you to say :hey, he will use WMD's against the US, you have to get by the fact that he didn;t use WMD's against the US in our previous war (or this one, for that matter).
As for your second part. You better not be an ANTI-US dictator killing your own people. As long as you remain pro-US, you are fine, or if you are a dictator in Africa.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:27
|
|
PLATO: and there were reports that Atta had mert with Iraqi intelligence in Prague beofre 9/11. Where are those reports now? And the link between Ansar Al_Islam and Baghdad? They took all of Ansars documents a month ago, and in a month the didn;t come up with one tie, one connection yet, between Ansar and Baghdad? (which was supposed to be the great active Al Qaeda-Iraq link)
Do I think If Saddam though he could get away with it, would he do it. Perhaps, probalby, BUt that is the rub of your argument PLATO: he could have never gotten away wth it, and he knew it. IN all the documents from Al qaeda we took from Afghanistan: not a single document given to show any funding, weapons, support, from Iraq to Al Qaeda. Why not? Did they burn all the files? We have now most of the highest members of Saddam's scientific elite in our custody. One would think if they had, and we have, and we have always said they did have, valuable info, why has the coolition not acted on it?
I don't link Saddam to 9/11 cause he had nothing to do with 9/11, or the Cole attack, or the Embassy bombings. 9/11 is not a reason to attack Saddam, never was, never will. Why hasn't Bush said Osama's name since July of 2002 after all his "dead or alive" sthick? As a New Yorker, that gets me much more.
I never found any of the doomsday scenerios credible. As I said before the War, I did not think even if Saddam had WMD's. that that wasa credible caussu belli, and I have seen nothign to change that opinion. There was only one valid excuse fopr war, the "liberation excuse". The thing being, that most people in these forums and the US were not using the "liberation" excuse, butt he "Oh my God, Osama and Saddam will get together, kill us all, and rule the world with their hellspawn!" excuse. And as of right now, no proof that that was a valid excuse at all has come up.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PLATO

|
 |
Of the occupied South
Dec 2002 time: 23:27
|
|
Hellspawn.
quote: Do I think If Saddam though he could get away with it, would he do it. Perhaps, probalby |
Okay, we agree here.
quote: he could have never gotten away wth it, and he knew it. |
If he had acted directly...no question that your correct. The problem was that their was growing ties to terrorist networks. Osama...maybe. Hamas, Hezbollah...definately. He was paying homicide bomber's families in Israel. Obviously there was an established conduit for the cash to move. Before 9/11, Hezbollah was responsible for more American deaths than any other terror organization. WMD could have moved through a variety of channels and countries and never have left Hezbollah's hands. In this scenario, I maintain he could have gotten away with it.
quote: One would think if they had, and we have, and we have always said they did have, valuable info, why has the coolition not acted on it? |
They are. Over 1000 specialist are eithier on the way or preparing to go. The US has identified 100's of sites that need to be looked at. I don't think we want the 19 year old Marine trying to do this.
quote: Why hasn't Bush said Osama's name since July of 2002 after all his "dead or alive" sthick? |
1.) Embarrasment, 2.) As the picture of world wide terror organizations unfolds, Osama becomes less relevant to the overall war.
quote: There was only one valid excuse fopr war, the "liberation excuse". |
As I am sure you are aware, this was one of my major points for going to war. WMD and enforcement of UNSC resolutions were also there.
quote: And as of right now, no proof that that was a valid excuse at all has come up. |
patience my friend, patience.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:27
|
|
I myself, as I have said, want a full accounting of all the claims made by Blari and BUsh: for example, evidence that Mobile Bio-weapons labs ever existed (or not) and if they did, what happened to them: acouning for all the claimed Anthrax, Sarin, VX, Mustard Gas, every claimed SCUD or better, all of it. Them finding 2 or 3 shells with nerve gas residiue will not be enough.
quote: WMD could have moved through a variety of channels and countries and never have left Hezbollah's hands. |
Hezbollah hasn't attacked a single American outside of Lebanon, and hasn't done that since the 1980's. I don;t fear Hezbolah cause I know I am not on thier target list, and the folks in Hezbollah know they would not get away with suing WMD's against Israel. Besides, they have a much closer realtion with Syria and have still gotten zip as far as WMD's are concerned.
I do not view the "State giving WMD to uncontrolled non-state actor" scenerio to be credible. If it was plausible, it would have already happened. Chem weapons are not new people, they are older than automatic rifles.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
raghar
|
|
I wish somewhere else.
Oct 2002 time: 05:27
|
|
quote: Originally posted by SpencerH
If the Iraqis had provided ANY proof to the UN that they had in fact destroyed their chemical and biological weapons, the sanctions would have been lifted years ago, Saddam Hussein would still be in power, and we'd have Iraqi oil in our gas tanks right now. The alternative is that the Iraqis destroyed those weapons but didnt want the sanctions lifted or were too stupid to be able to show the UN inspectors the evidence. Neither of those answers makes sense. |
Did they have any usable and nonused weapons?
They could screw or simply didn't think they'll need the evidence. If you don't have evidence then what? Fabricate it? Or wait if they'll get common sense? Both ways could end with diseaster. And as you can see it did end with problems for Iraq. >
Well we could ask on explanation on alt.gov.conspiracy It could be more reasonable than attempts to get some info from goverment now.
Did US provided evidence that they destroyed their own chemical and biological weapons? I never seen one.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
PLATO

|
 |
Of the occupied South
Dec 2002 time: 23:27
|
|
quote: Originally posted by GePap
I myself, as I have said, want a full accounting of all the claims made by Blari and BUsh: for example, evidence that Mobile Bio-weapons labs ever existed (or not) and if they did, what happened to them: acouning for all the claimed Anthrax, Sarin, VX, Mustard Gas, every claimed SCUD or better, all of it. Them finding 2 or 3 shells with nerve gas residiue will not be enough.
quote: WMD could have moved through a variety of channels and countries and never have left Hezbollah's hands. |
Hezbollah hasn't attacked a single American outside of Lebanon, and hasn't done that since the 1980's. I don;t fear Hezbolah cause I know I am not on thier target list, and the folks in Hezbollah know they would not get away with suing WMD's against Israel. Besides, they have a much closer realtion with Syria and have still gotten zip as far as WMD's are concerned.
I do not view the "State giving WMD to uncontrolled non-state actor" scenerio to be credible. If it was plausible, it would have already happened. Chem weapons are not new people, they are older than automatic rifles. |
GePap, I think we all want to know what happened to his WMD. That question may be far more important than even you are giving it credit.
WRT Hezbollah, you ARE on their target list. They announced that approx 8-12 weeks ago. Americans anywhere are now fair game.
The "State giving WMD to uncontrolled non-state actor" statement is last century thinking. The world has changed and most countries even regard this as a grave threat now.
quote: Besides, they have a much closer realtion with Syria and have still gotten zip as far as WMD's are concerned. |
Are you implying that Syria has WMD?
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27. Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|