[SkunkApe]

When I took a class concerning the lawful use of deadly force, the instructor taught me that I could only use deadly force against an attacker that intended inflict death or serious bodily harm upon me, and when these three conditions were met:

1) Immediacy - the assailant will attack me now, not an hour later or tomorrow.

2) Ability - the assailent has the means to inflict serious bodily injury or death upon me.

3) Intent - the assailant's intent is to do me harm; if he's about to accidently drop a piano on me, I can't shoot him.

This legal principle is consistent with my own moral beliefs regarding the use of deadly force.

I was wondering how you all think this moral/legal principle applies to foreign policy, and if the difference between your views and mine could help to explain the general unpopularity of my opinions regarding he Iraqi war.

This is how I see it if we apply these three requirements to Iraq at the point in time prior to our initiation of deadly force:

1) Immediacy - No. We were in no immediate danger of attack.

2) Ability - No. None of Iraq's weapons or military forces posed a significant threat to the United States. (Except, perhaps, their ability to disrupt our oil supply.)

3) Intent - Maybe, but thats my gut feeling and not based on evidence. Having a hunch probably wouldn't hold up in court.

What do you think? Or is the beer getting to me?

[grampster]

It is the beer, Skunky.:D

IMHO the rules that apply to individuals do not necessarily, for good reason, apply to the dealings of national welfare. Rather than go on a long explaination of my comment, just mull it over for awhile.

grampster

[Ian]

See, SkunkApe, if a LOT of people get together and want something, they don't need to bother with rules and principles and such. This is called "democracy." You can see the principle in action with war, as you have pointed out, and also in such matters as gun control, the War on Some Drugs, and welfare. Note that if needed, corrupt politicians with ulterior motives can be substituted for masses of people.

[David Park]

SkunkApe, if your assailant notices your gun and decides to halt his attack and walk away, you can (and probably should) let him go. However, if you were a police officer, allowing a violent criminal to escape instead of apprehending him would get you into serious trouble. That's because there are different rules for police officers who have the job and responsibility "to serve and protect." The police are, in effect, our chosen representatives for dealing with criminals. Similarly, our representative government and military is charged with the defense of the nation.

It's not a perfect analogy, and I'm not sure if it's the way our country should operate (I'd like to see a return to the citizen militia), but it's the way our country does operate.

Anyway, analogies aside, here are my answers to your questions about Iraq:

1) Immediacy - They had violated the Gulf War cease-fire agreement repeatedly, and intelligence suggested they were (once again) close to developing WMDs. We gave them 12 years, and didn't want to risk waiting any longer, especially after 9/11.

2) Ability - Republican Guard weren't going to come marching up on our beaches, but Saddam's regime did have the ability to wage an asymmetrical war while getting rich on UN Oil for Palaces, I mean Food, dollars. They funded terrorism, tried to assassinate G.H.W. Bush, provided a safe haven for guys like Abu Nidal, and could have supplied WMDs to terrorists.

3) Intent - Wolfowitz recently said that he believed Saddam was a backer of the first World Trade Center bombing, the Oklahoma City bombing, and 9/11(link (http://www.newsmax.com/showinside.shtml?a=2003/6/1/161354)), something others in gov't have been saying for a long time. There's plenty of evidence out there showing connections if the gov't would only run with it. Assisting in three attacks on American soil, to me, indicate Saddam's intent.
(But I guess I'm just a tinfoil-hat-wearing far-right kook.)

[jmbg29]

Another vote for beer.

[Jim March]

It's faster to phrase it as a single question?

Am I now in danger of losing my life or suffering great bodily injury from criminal assault?

See? By putting it as a single question, you get the same result quicker. And speed *matters*.

Two other points:

If it's animal attack, the risk need be less but still at least somewhat present. Put another way, you can draw a gun against a human when you're *sure* there's a threat, but against an animal when there "might be, but intent isn't 100% sorted out yet". If you're being watched by a large dog 20 feet away, but he's not moving or growling, putting your hand on the grip would be less legally risky than against a human in the same circumstances.

Sometimes your life is in danger but it's not about "attack" - you're in a burning building, you could die, and the door you're trying to get through is deadbolted. Is blowing the lock out with a 357 round reasonable? Depends on how many people you suspect are on the other side, and/or if you can angle the round into the main door frame to slow it down some. But such "emergency tool use" is at least possible. (Hunting for food if you're stranded and hungry and ain't got a deer tag falls along the same lines.)

[TarpleyG]

Somebody say beer?

[Esky]

I'm pretty much in agreement with the comments of Jim March and David Park.

Another point worth mentioning is that Saddam was well known to reward terrorists' families for suicide bomb murders. It isn't much of a stretch for me to think that he'd have been happy to encourage & reward terrorists to attack any part of the Great Satan.

That he had terrorist training camps has been proven.

I'm agreeing that defense of country is not the same thing as personal self defense. Even so, it seems to me that all three conditions are met:

1. immediacy- Saddam would attack as soon as he thought he could get away with it (which we wouldn't know until he did it.)

2. ability- he had that too, if small portable WMDs count (and there is LOTS of evidence that he had them, and was trying to get more)- besides the WMDs, all you need is some loonytunes who's willing to blow himself up or kill himself in the delivery (dime-a-dozen all over the Middle East.)

3. intent- the USA may or may not be the highest priority on his little black list but I'm sure the Great Satan wouldn't be far from the top (again, we wouldn't know his intent until too late.)

There's also the factor of "amount of risk"-- I'd run away from an attacker, if I could do so without increasing my risk of getting hurt or killed. But I'd certainly fight if I were cornered, or if the risk of running away was unacceptably high. We found on 9/11 that we as a country can't run, and we can't hide, and our attacker(s) will stoop to nothing to do us harm.

But I gather from your post, SkunkApe, that you are looking at this question from more of a Iraq-as-a-country attacking (in more conventional ways) the USA-as-a-country. I never saw it like this at all. For me Iraq as a country has been a helpless pawn, used to promote a murderous dictator's agenda.

Esky
who'd much rather face a gangsta than a megalomaniac dictator, but who doesn't want to face either one

[Drjones]

Frankly Skunk, neither you, I, nor anyone else here is capable of answering your question.

Nobody here has all the information as to the immediacy, ability, and intent of Iraq to harm the US, and we probably won't see it for a while. That stuff is going to remain classified for pretty far into the forseeable future, and that's just the way it is.



Politely waiting to get called a blind, Republican Bush worshipper,
Drjones

[Gordon Fink]

You’re right, SkunkApe, but don’t waste your breath. The war is over. Thankfully, it went relatively easy on our troops. Hopefully, the same will be true of the occupation.

Even I thought Iraq had biochemical weapons, but now that “fact” is starting to look like a sham, too. So stop wasting your energy debating what is already done and start concentrating on voting the warmongering sons of bitches out of office!

~G. Fink

[DRC]

Gordon,

WMD were in Iraq. What's being reported is that they didn't exist. What isn't being reported is a concern for where they went. Believe what you will as will I
http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000454.php http://wcco.com/topstories/topstories_story_019183037.html

During the campaign ground troops located 20 warheads tipped with Sarin gas on a transport. I saw this on Fox News but saw little else ever reported about it. I've been trying to find a link to the story but have only found a page with a lead in to an article but can't find the archive date April 7, 2003.

Dr Jones,

You are the quintasential blind, Republican Bush worshipper but I mean that in a nice way and do hope I've not offended you by saying so. :) Was that what you were waitng for? I too fall into the catagory of Republican and Bush supporter so I too will politely wait to be called what you said as well I just hope they also include "Staunch Conservative" in their name calling as well :)

DRC

[Standing Wolf]

Beer.

[grampster]

Geez, gordon fink,

With a philosphy that mirrors your comment on "hope", I guess one can see why you are so shortsighted and bitter. (My comment meant in the spirit of amused puzzlement not criticism.)

grampster

[jmbg29]

Somebody say beer?LMAO :D :p :D

[Drjones]

The silence is positively deafening.




I stand your blind, line-towing Republican, Bush-worshipper,
Drjones

[DonQatU]

and intelligence suggested they were (once again) close to developing WMDs.

Intelligence? Who's intelligence?

Still waiting for all those nasty WMDs that could have been deployed in 45 minutes to pop out of the desert sand! :D

And what's the story on those mobile "bio-weapons labs" now?

Seems those were sold to Iraq by Marconi (now AMS).

"Bio-weapons labs"? Well, Bush said so! :rolleyes:

Hope they keep international inspectors away from those "bio-weapons labs" ..... like they're keeping them away from the Tuwaitha nuclear facility! The administration might get some news it doesn't want to hear! :D

Don

[DonQatU]

During the campaign ground troops located 20 warheads tipped with Sarin gas on a transport.

Well, that WOULD be newsworthy, DRC! Wonder why there was no follow-up on that incident? Maybe ........ because it NEVER HAPPENED????!!

Got to love FOX! They put out false "speculative" reports. Never a retraction when they're proven to be false.

But how about US security at the Tuwaitha nuclear facility (or lack thereof)? Anybody know if they're missing any Cesium-137 (ideal material for a dirty bomb) from the storage site?

That stuff was REAL! Not FOX hype! The UN inspectors were brought back in to determine if any is missing.

I guess the "Inspector Clouseaus" are smarter than Rush Limbaugh made them out to be!

Don

[DRC]

I don't believe we've spoken...and I can see now why ;)

Anyway I did find a link for this short blurb on NPR (which would seem to be what you might consider a reliable source for all of your news edification) http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1223246

I, personally, do not consider npr reliable however they have a story on it, Reuters has one (but my page wouldn't load) and if I could find the archive I'm sure Fox would as well. So quite a hodge podge of folks reporting on this. Evidently there is even an audio report on NPR. Feel free to take a look if you wish. I haven't found any retractions of this story thus far but at least I've proven I'm not crazy in any event :)

As to Fox News being what you claim, they just might be but CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC and all their ilk could be lumped into the same descriptives that you've given for Fox. You trust your sources and I'll read all and discern the BS from the truth. So in short MAYBE IT DID HAPPEN????!! :)

You take care and keep doing whatever it is you do.

DRC

[jmbg29]

Don, it is things like thisSeems those were sold to Iraq by Marconi (now AMS).that just drive me crazy about your posts. What is that quote supposed to mean exactly? Instead of all of the exclamation points, and the cryptic BS, why not just state the facts plainly?

I can't think of a single thread where you haven't resorted to the "we shall see" s******ing - as if you know something that the rest of the world doesn't - that is more becoming of 12 year olds, and fruitcake leftists.I guess the "Inspector Clouseaus" are smarter than Rush Limbaugh made them out to be!If they were so smart, then why did they never succeed in their work?

[Erik]

It is best to not juxtapose some things.

[DonQatU]

I haven't found any retractions of this story thus far but at least I've proven I'm not crazy in any event

DCR, there were a series of "smoking gun reports" fed to the embedded reporters. When they turned out to be false, there were never any retractions! This is one of those "false positives" that later proved to be false...... never retracted.

I know you want to believe what you think you heard.......... but I'd recommend you listen to that report again....... carefully!

Who fed this journalist this "information"? Is it first hand? Or second or third hand unconfirmed info? You find it surprising that those second and third hand sources never make any retractions?

I DO agree with you that this NPR journalist put out a lot of crap. But notice how he distanced himself from the sources who were feeding him this crap?

"If true......this would be very important....... etc. Well it turned out to be untrue so not that important!

In a nutshell, if this report were true, George Bush would be in hog heaven! Because he would have something more than the two "mobile bio-weapons" labs he keeps talking about, to support his weak claims of WMD developement and current employment.

Don

PS - Do BM-21s really have a range of about 300 miles like the NPR journalist reported? :D

[Zander]

Or second or third hand unconfirmed info? -- DonCongratulations...you've broken the bounds of philosophy and are assured that you've proven a negative. Thus, by your standard of proof, Saddam Hussein never existed.

One question:

If further proof that WMDs were, and likely still are, present...or are proven to have been shipped out of Iraq...are you willing to admit publicly that you have made a false accusation?

Before you snap off one of your pithy replies, do a little homework on the last UN resolution re: Iraq.

Resolution 1441 [8 Nov 2002] begins:

"Recalling all its previous resolutions...

You assert that darn near every source, from our intelligence services to the anti-American fools who "run" the UN, lied repeatedly about the presence of WMDs in Iraq.

The complete and utter failure of Hussein's regime to prove [as required by multiple resolutions] that such weapons had been destroyed is a matter of fact, not speculation.

For once, let the process of logic drive your responses instead of your blind hatred of the current administration.

[DonQatU]

Zander, those WMDs got to be there somewhere! Just BELIEVE! :D

These good folks wouldn't lie!

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003

"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes."
Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003

"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them."
Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003

"I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction."
Defense Policy Board member Kenneth Adelman
Washington Post, p. A27
March 23, 2003

"One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites."
Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark
Press Briefing
March 22, 2003

I especially love this one! :D
"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

"Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find -- and there will be plenty."
Neocon scholar Robert Kagan
Washington Post op-ed
April 9, 2003

But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.
Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
April 10, 2003

"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them."
George W. Bush
NBC Interview
April 24, 2003

"There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country."
Donald Rumsfeld
Press Briefing
April 25, 2003

"I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now."
Colin Powell
Remarks to Reporters
May 4, 2003

"We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country."
Donald Rumsfeld
Fox News Interview
May 4, 2003

"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program."
George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 6, 2003

"U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction."
Condoleeza Rice
Reuters Interview
May 12, 2003

This is another great one! :D
"I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago -- I mean, there's no question that there were chemical weapons years ago -- whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they're still hidden."
Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
May 13, 2003

"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found."
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003

"Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction."
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003

Another great one from Rumsfeld! :D
"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer."
Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003

Wolfowitz let's it out of the bag! :D
"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."
Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003

This guy has seen his last star! :D
"It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
May 30, 2003

A classic! :D
"Do I think we're going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I think there's a lot of information out there."
Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency
Press Conference
May 30, 2003

Don :D

[Destructo6]

And what's the story on those mobile "bio-weapons labs" now?

Seems those were sold to Iraq by Marconi (now AMS).
Uh, AMS makes/sells electronics for air defense and air traffic control. I don't see that they make fermentors, much less mobile fermentation systems.

Besides, what was the point of this non-sequitor?

[DRC]

Don,

What was the point of your last post? That people said things? None of these things have been proven true or false and your post doesn't prove any falsities either. I'm assuming that by the loosest form of syllogism you've singlehandedly proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that all these things are false and that all these people are liars? You are a god in my book :rolleyes:

I will also assume that you're suggesting I "read between the lines" regarding the report of the missiles tipped with chemical gas? Perhaps you might try not looking for a conspiracy theory. The missile story wasn't true but no one retracted the report? Here's my thinking; the report was short lived because it was an expected find as were many others that have not turned up yet (emphasis on "yet") Did you hear the report about the two mobile missile launchers found in two garages outside of Bagdad I believe it was? The military would still be looking for them now if they had not been told by a local where they were simply because of the shear number of places they have to cover and look into.

Keep in mind too that Iraq is roughly the same square mileage as California and the military has been there...three months? They have to secure the facilities and cities first (so they don't get shot while trying to do the rest of their job) which takes time AND THEN they have to scour the countryside.

I'm sure you're an expert on any and everything based on your postings thus far but I'll deffer to the information of those that are actually in the "loop" and not speculate around facts for my own amusement.

Thanks for your input regardless of how baseless it may be. Always nice to see opinions and ideas from others.

DRC

[DonQatU]

Uh, AMS makes/sells electronics for air defense and air traffic control.
They also made the AMETS under Marconi. Sold those to the Iraqis in 1987! Don't believe me? Do a Google search "Marconi AMETS".

I don't see that they make fermentors, much less mobile fermentation systems.
They don't and never did! And they also never made the centrifuges and and drying ovens necessary to produce bio-weapons!

Besides, what was the point of this non-sequitor?
The point of this "non sequitur" is that those two mobile "bio-weapons labs"....... were more than likely mobile hydrogen gas generators for artillery balloons used with the AMETS that the Iraqis bought from Marconi! :D

Don

[Destructo6]

Uh, how much Hydrogen are they producing for balloons? The generators I've found were very small, 18"x18" and could supply 75lpm @ 35psi. The others were gigantic.

Of course, when you generate hydrogen from H2O, you also get...Oxygen, which would be necessary for a fermentation run.

Now, in your Guardian report, it claims that three teams of international experts examined the "mobile labs" and the third was "sharply split." It doesn't mention the conclusions of the other two.

Also, their list of suspicious incapabilities within the "labs" is itself suspicious.
The lack of any trace of pathogens found in the fermentation tanks. According to experts, when weapons inspectors checked tanks in the mid-Nineties that had been scoured to disguise their real use, traces of pathogens were still detectable.
That's usually called, "cleaning." At our ferm hall, we could run one product one day (actually a 48 hour run, but you get the picture) and run another the next with no danger of cross contamination.
The lack of an autoclave for steam sterilisation, normally a prerequisite for any kind of biological production. Its lack of availability between production runs would threaten to let in germ contaminants, resulting in failed weapons.
Our fermentors, whether they were 15liter or 500+liter, steam-sterilized themselves. It would be kinda silly to disassemble 1000lbs of equipment, stuff it in an autoclave, pull it out, and reassemble it, all the while trying to keep it sterile.
A shortage of pumps required to create vacuum conditions required for working with germ cultures and other processes usually associated with making biological weapons.
Why would you need a vacuum? This thing was designed for handling suspected biological agents and it needs no vacuum.
http://www.captair.com/IMAGES/pyramid_p-4.jpg

Here's some more, and from a source, Federation of American Scientists, that the Guardian quoted.
In summary, Iraq declared the production of at least 19,000 litres of concentrated botulinum toxin (nearly 10,000 litres were filled into munitions), 8,500 litres of concentrated anthrax (some 6,500 litres were filled into munitions) and 2,200 litres of concentrated aflatoxin (1,580 litres were filled into munitions);

Iraq declared that it had decided to destroy biological munitions and the remaining biological warfare bulk agent after the Gulf war. An order for destruction was claimed to have been given orally, and no Iraqi representative seems to be able to recall an exact date for the order or the dates of destruction operations. The order was said to have been given some time in May or June 1991. All filled biological bombs were relocated to one airfield and deactivation chemicals added to agent fill. The bombs were then explosively destroyed and burnt, and the remains buried. A similar disposal technique was used for the missile warheads at a separate site. In late August 1995, Iraq showed to an UNSCOM team a location which it claimed to be a warhead destruction site. However, later on, Iraq changed its story and was unable to identify with any degree of certainty the exact location of warheads destruction operations.

Of the bacterial bulk agent stored at Al Hakam, Iraq stated that a similar deactivation procedure had been adopted. The detoxified liquid was emptied into the facility's septic tank and eventually dumped at the site. About 8,000 litres of concentrated botulinum toxin, over 2,000 litres of concentrated anthrax, 340 litres of concentrated perfringens and an unspecified quantity of aflatoxin, according to Iraq's declaration, were destroyed at Al Hakam.

Current Capabilities
Iraq has medical, veterinary, and university facilities where biotechnical research and development can be carried out. Some of these facilities likely are staffed by former members of Iraq's biological warfare program. Much of the laboratory equipment is dual-use and could be used for biological agent development. Iraq has the equipment, raw materials, and know-how for bulk production of biological agents for weaponization and the means of delivering the agents. With the equipment Iraq is known to possess, 350 liters of weapons-grade anthrax could be produced each week, according to Iraq's own production figures.
The capability to perform BW R&D exists at the University of Baghdad and other universities and at various pharmaceutical facilities. A BW agent production capability could be re-established in a matter of weeks to months utilizing equipment at pharmaceutical facilities such as Samarra Drug Industries. Production, however, would be at a much reduced and limited capacity and unsafe compare to dedicated BW plants. In order to reproduce the entire BW system as it existed on 15 January 1991, including the facilities at Salman Pak, Abu Ghurayb, Taji, Latifiyah and all the destroyed bunkers, Iraq would need to spend 100-200 million dollars and 5-8 years. However, the complete BW system was a multi-facility R&D and production system with redundancy and back-up capabilities. Additionally, not all the bunkers would be required to store a militarily significant amount of BW agent. Iraq could re-establish a significant BW capability with dedicated labs, containment facilities, storage and filling capacity without duplicating the prewar system. Such a BW system without the prewar redundancy and back-up could be built within 3-4 years for less than 100 million dollars
Read the whole thing...
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/bw/program.htm
and the Guardian version:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4686547,00.html

[DRC]

Destructo,

I'm glad you posted this information. I now have a better understanding of what these units are and do.

The sad part about this whole ordeal is that there are people that just don't understand the "immediacy, ability and intent" posed by Saddams regime.

We know that Iraq had and has the "ability" to create WMD and cannot account for all that were "destroyed" or even the exact location of where some were destroyed.

We know that Iraq wants occupation in other territories (Kuwait comes to mind) as well as the total anihilation of Isreal and has very anti-Amreican sentiments (although to what degree is anyones guess) Iraq also had no quams with selling what they produced to those that truly hate everything about the US so there's the "intent" to do us harm wether direct or indirect.

The immediacy? Well that's anyones guess as well. When will the next hurricane hit Florida? We don't know but if we did and we could prevent it shouldn't we do so? When will the next tornado hit? No one knows but it could happen later this afternoon or even the next five minutes, but it's going to happen at some point in time. How much risk is one willing to ignore or take?

Here's a scenario that might hit home for some while others remain hopeless ;)

Hypothetical:

There's a guy that wants to kill someone and that someone knows it, but he can't do it without a weapon.

The killer comes to me and says "I'll pay you whatever you want if you will build me a weapon to kill this guy with."

I know the intended victim of the killer and don't much like them either so I agree and begin building the weapon.

The intended victim finds out what's going on and comes to me and tries to make me stop building the weapon, so I tell them I will just to make them go away (but of course I keep building I just do it when they're not looking or when they're asleep)

The intended victim finds out I haven't stopped building the weapon so they call the cops on me and the cops come over, but I know they're coming and I move all the components to my neighbors basement in the dead of night so they won't be able to tell what I had or where (plus I have a good friend that knows about cleaning up messes, if you know what I mean? ;) The cops get there, don't find anything, so I throw them out because they got nothing on me and it's my house darnit!

When alls going on elsewhere I finish building the weapon and sell it to the killer. The killer has the intent as well as the ability, but he's patient and will wait until the oportunity is better to make sure his goal is met. The victim will be dead and the killer will be long gone in whatever capacity is necessary.

I got paid to arm the killer even though I was found out, told to stop building the weapon and investigated when I didn't.

Would Iraq push a button and launch a missile attack against us? I doubt it because that poses a clear and present danger not to mention a declaration of war AND we would know where it came from. No, it's much more effective to send some radical to this country and get them a nuclear device to wear under clothing. Talk about a mobile assault unit, what could be more mobile or precise than a guy or gal walking around with a device strapped to their person? The best part; who would know where it orginated from or who was responsible? That's why terror is what it is. Immediacy doesn't enter into it; it's done when it's convenient and effective not to mention at random.

Take care and thanks again for the information. Maybe one day people will use some common sense and understand the realities of all of this. Hey, I can dream can't I? :)

DRC

[buzz_knox]

I guess the "Inspector Clouseaus" are smarter than Rush Limbaugh made them out to be!

The actual inspectors (not the higher ups you see on TV) were hired by the UN based on their diversity, not their prowess. They are given a short course on how to swab things and hand the samples in. They aren't trained in what to look for or how to conduct inspections.

[DonQatU]

Destructo6, before, I go into the other inaccuracies in your previous post, I urge you to go back and check the information {with picture} you posted on the Captair "Pyramid". You intimated that vacuum pumps would not be needed in a "mobile bio-weapons lab".

[QUOTE]Why would you need a vacuum? This thing was designed for handling suspected biological agents and it needs no vacuum. [QUOTE]

By this "thing" ....you were referring to the Captair Pyramid. But ......the following is from the Captair site:

The captair pyramid enclosure is designed with an internal nozzle (fig.1), itself connected to an external connection valve (fig.2) that will be hooked up by the analytical laboratory to a vacuum pump equipped with a microporous filter membrane. The suspicious powders discovered inside the enclosure will now be found on the membrane in order to be analysed. This entire operation is performed under negative pressure, which insures the protection of the environment.

Needs no Vacuum, eh? :D

More after I watch the evening news. Don

[Destructo6]

You didn't read that very closely, did you? The pump is only required when you're doing an analysis (phase 3), in order to pump the "suspicious material" through a trapping membrane. Then, you'd analyze what is caught on that membrane. I would hope the Iraqi lab techs would already know what they put inside the pyramid.

To innoculate a shaker flask inside the pyramid a vacuum is not necessary.

[DonQatU]

I would hope the Iraqi lab techs would already know what they put inside the pyramid.

And I'd hope the Iraqi techs would also know how to safely move the "contents" of the "fermentation tank" to the centrifuges and drier ovens........ without vacuum pumps! :D

But, ........ OOPS! The centrifuges and drier ovens are also missing from these "bio-weapons labs! :D

Well, at least there wouldn't be a lot of wind and dust blowing through those "labs"! They have those roll-up canvas sides that really take care of that problem! :D

Don

PS - If the Iraqis took so much care to "hide" their other WMDs, why didn't they just put some Semtex on these "fermentation tanks" and blow them into unrecognizable scrap metal?

Nah! Let's just abandon these trailers (after they've hid everything else) and let the Kurds turn them over to the US! :rolleyes:

Yup! That's the ticket!

[Destructo6]

You've never used a fermentation vessel, either, have you? You don't need a vacuum pump to remove the sup. The vessel is pressurized...open the valve at the bottom and the sup comes squirting on out. Attach a hose to the spigot and it goes wherever the hose leads it.

I don't think anybody ever said that these "possible mobile labs" were capable of manufacturing the dried type of product needed for long-term storage. If they were planning to use the the wet stuff, they'd probably need to use it rather quickly and it would make sense to have production mobile.

and you're all wet...again.

[DonQatU]

I don't think anybody ever said that these "possible mobile labs" were capable of manufacturing the dried type of product needed for long-term storage. If they were planning to use the the wet stuff, they'd probably need to use it rather quickly and it would make sense to have production mobile.

Excuse me if, I laugh! Now they are "possible mobile labs" !

Anyone who reads this, and knows a bit about the subject, must know who's talking crap! :D

Don

[gunsmith]

for five Iraqi Republican/Feyadeem to slip over Mexican
border with N.B.C weapons.
But if I had my way,I would declare war on every country
that the 9/11/01 perps were from,also the Palestinians
for dancing with joy in the streets at the news of thousands
of Americans dead.
Then I would put every anti gun politician on trial for threatening
the National Security,and hang the bureaucrats who introduced
the laws prohibiting Americans from bringing their guns on board planes......:fire:

[DRC]

Don???

"Excuse me if, I laugh! Now they are "possible mobile labs" !"

Usually people put things in quotes when it is being quoted by them but was said by another sos not to plagerize. I could be wrong but I'm not. I'm not sure who originally said "possible mobile labs" but the quotes would imply to me that it wasn't Destructo. Just FYI

"Anyone who reads this, and knows a bit about the subject, must know who's talking crap!"

So let me get this straight, Destructo obviously has a vast knowledge of these units and has evidently operated such (I would assume it is part of his job to handle this equipment or was at one time) You seem to have a veried knowledge of said equipment, moreso the knowledge of pieced together tidbits of information that you "think" you have an understanding of without any practicle application but perhaps with some deductive reasoning. So with that in mind you believe that anyone reading this thread will think that you know what you're talking about and that Destructo is "talking crap"??? Truly amazing. I don't know what to say to that type of logic. Seriously, I haven't the mental faculties to comprehend how you came to that conclusion.

I must be an idiot because I'm gonna have to go with Destructo seeing as he seems to know what he's talking about. I will also answer your rhetorical question by saying as I see it the one "talking crap" is the one who wrote the line, not the other way around.

Take care and remember "ignorance is bliss"

DRC

[DonQatU]

So let me get this straight, Destructo obviously has a vast knowledge of these units and has evidently operated such (I would assume it is part of his job to handle this equipment or was at one time)

Good question DRC! So let me ask Destructo a few questions right now for the record!

Hey, Destructo! Were you ever involved in the production of Anthrax (or other bio-warfare "stuff"? When? Where? In what capacity?

You "OK" with that, DRC?

Don :D

[DonQatU]

Thank-you, Destructo!

I don't think anybody ever said that these "possible mobile labs" were capable of manufacturing the dried type of product needed for long-term storage.

Oh..... so I guess that means they would have to use the product almost immediately! That would also make it pretty hard for dispersal.....doesn't it?!!! :D

Those of you who believe this might want to look at the evidence from the Hatfill case!

Destructo, please forgive me. But you obviously don't know what you're talking about! Glad DRC and others like him do! :D

Don :D

[Destructo6]

Again, Don, you display both your ignorance and laziness.
Oh..... so I guess that means they would have to use the product almost immediately! That would also make it pretty hard for dispersal.....doesn't it?!!!
If "immediately" in your sentance means in the neighborhood of months and years rather than minutes or hours, yes. I've found little that gave a hard time from production, since viability depends on quite a few factors, but none implied that it would be worthless almost immediately.
THE FIRST STEP IN THE PRODUCTION OF CLOSTRIDIUM VAC- CINES. SUCH AS TET????, IS TO PRODUCE LARGE QUANTITIES OF THE TET???? TOXIN. TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, LARGE QUAN- TITIES OF CLOSTRIDIUM TETANI ARE GROWN IN FERMENTERS. AS CELLS DIE AND BURST, THE TET???? TOXIN IS RELEASED INTO THE MATERIAL IN WHICH THEY ARE GROWING. THE NEXT STEP IS TO PUT THE GROWTH MEDIUM-CONTAINING THE TOXIN-INTO ANOTHER CONTAINER TO WHICH FORMALDEHYDE IS ADDED. THE FORMALDEHYDE INACTIVATES THE TOXIN, MAKING IT NONTOXIC BUT STILL CAPABLE OF PRODUCING AN IMMUNE RESPONSE. (A TOXIN THAT IS INACTIVE BUT THAT CAN STILL PRODUCE AN IMMUNE RESPONSE IS CALLED A TOXOID OR AN ANATOXIN.) THE FORMALDEHYDE-TOXIN MIX- TURE IS STIRRED, AND, AT VARIOUS INTERVALS, SAMPLES ARE TAKEN OUT AND INJECTED INTO MICE. WHEN NO TOXIC OBSERVED IN THE MICE, THE TOXIN IS CONSID- INACTIVE AND READY FOR USE IN PRODUCING VACCINE.
In this case, simply omit the Formaldehyde for some nasty bugjuice.
WITH CURRENTLY AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY, PILOT-SCALE FERMENTERS OPERATED ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS COULD PRODUCE ENOUGH TOXINS OR LIVING AGENTS EACH DAY TO LETHALLY CONTAMINATE HUNDREDS OF SQUARE KILOME- TERS.
Pilot scale fermentors were my experience. To the best of my knowledge, we only produced genetically engineered E-coli. Since you seem to know it all, Don, what is the difference between an E-coli fermentation and that of tet???? or botulism, or ...?

Oh, and add a few smiley faces, so you can appear to be playing with the kid gloves.

PS, apparently the filter pics up "a-n-u-s" so any tet??? should be, well, you know.

[DonQatU]

since viability depends on quite a few factors,

And those would be? How long could you keep the spores viable? Equipment needed?

And dispersal?!!!!! :D There it IS Destructo! The smiley face again!

See you've avoided the questions on associated equipment.

Vacuum pumps (not needed that stuff just jumps out of the "fermentation tank" into the delivery system by itself)? Drier? Centrifuge? Canvas sides on the trailer?

Heck...... they could have been making beer in that "fermentor" (as you call it). But they weren't. It was designed and used as a hydrogen generator.

It's ridiculous to think the Iraqis were so careful to dispose of all their WMDS, but they just decided to leave a cleaned tank (with no autoclave built-in or otherwise) to be turned over to the Americans by the Kurds.

Hey, Destructo! Send me a picture of that "fermentation tank". I'd really like to see that giant mother! I'd love to see if it looked more like a fermentation vessel or the hydrogen generator it was designed to be! :D

Oops! Smiley face again! Sorry! Don :D

PS - What happened to the rest of the WMDs?!!! :D

[DRC]

Don,

You're so amazingly wrong about everything so far that it isn't funny. I'm seriously concerned about you ending up in a bell tower with a high powered evil black rifle or something to that effect.

I'm reading your post to me and you can't even discern between a statement and a question. I felt sure that Destructo had hands on experience with the equipment in question but didn't know to what extent (an assumption on my part but based on pretty decent facts to back it up) but I never asked a question. "He is." is a statement. "Are you?" is a question. The question was asked of you and meant more like "Surely you're not serious?" I hope that helps but if not let me know and I'll be happy to help you with some of the remedial aspects of grammar.

Also your question was assinine. What these pieces of equipment do and how they operate has little baring on what is being produced in them since the process remains pretty static if I'm reading Destructos information correctly. If I may; it would be like talking about a blender (in a very loose sense) It's operation remains the same and the finished product is still frapet when you're done. The only differnece is what comes out of said blender. Since Destructo has worked with fermentors I believe he is considerably more qualified to tell us what they produce and how better than you could ever dream of. Kind of like you being more qualified to give out misinformation than I; I would never want to over step my bounds by trying to do so.

In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in continuing any further with you Don and will simply let it lye. Let those reading decide who and what they believe and hopefully the many can understand logic and truth over fiction and fabrication.

Enjoy doing whatever it is you do and take care,

DRC

[DonQatU]

Thinking about it...... I would guess that Destructo probably worked in some Health Department or the testing facility of some food processing company.

Nothing wrong with that. BUT way different than a bio-weapons lab! Don

[DonQatU]

In my opinion, I believe that there is no point in continuing any further with you Don and will simply let it lye. Let those reading decide who and what they believe and hopefully the many can understand logic and truth over fiction and fabrication.

DRC, that's a very strange statement coming from someone who claimed "20 BM-21 warheads were found in Iraq filled with sarin and mustard". What does Destructo have to say about that story?

Don

[DRC]

I repeated what I have heard on the news and read.

http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1223246
http://www.acsa.net/bioterror/895392_asp.htm
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/news/040703_nw_iraq.html
http://www.ondragonswing.com/journal/gaggle/archives/001026.html

Hopefully these links will at least solidify the fact that I am "repeating" and they are "saying". There have been no retractions, no definitive confirmations and no disprovals. These are just four links and four different sources, but there were 11 pages of search results on google.

Enjoy,

DRC

[SkunkApe]

Don, ...I'm seriously concerned about you ending up in a bell tower with a high powered evil black rifle or something to that effect.
- DRC

Stay out of there, Don! The bell tower is mine. Mwuhahahaha!

-The sock puppet of vengeance

[Destructo6]

I worked for the world's largest Biotech company. If I'm not mistaken, "genetically engineered E-coli" isn't used in food processing. Another mistake you could have avoided if you'd simply bothered to read.

It is rather pointless to continue since Don doesn't bother supporting his assertions before moving on to the next and ignoring valid responses.

His whole argument seems to be based on little mor than one erroneous Guardian report. Keep it up Don, your credibility can only go up.

[DonQatU]

I repeated what I have heard on the news and read. - DRC

Yes, DRC, I understand that you're just repeating what you heard. But, that information was incorrect. It's like the many other false reports on WMD finds in Iraq that have proved false.


I'm not mistaken, "genetically engineered E-coli" isn't used in food processing. - Destructo

Uh, yes, Destructo, I know that E-coli isn't "used" in food processing. But they do have people who test for it. Sorry if you felt I was challenging your bonafides!

Sure you didn't work at Fort Dietrich?!!! :rolleyes:

I'm still waiting for pictures of that "fermentation tank" found on the Iraqi "mobile bio-weapons labs" ......or at least a description thereof. You said it weighed 1,000 pounds...... where did you pull out that information? :rolleyes:

And no....... it's not just based on the one Guardian article. In fact, I didn't even know about the Guardian article until you mentioned it. Thank-you. :D

This whole "mobile bio-weapons lab" thing is just a variation of the administration's "anodized aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment centrifuges" whopper. That one didn't go very far either before people figured it out.

Stay out of there, Don! The bell tower is mine. Mwuhahahaha! - Skunk Ape

OK, OK! You can have the bell tower. But I keep Esmerelda! And I get to say when the scalding grease is poured on the angry crowd below! :D

That IS the bell tower you're referring to ...... isn't it??!! :D

Don

[Destructo6]

I have no idea how much their vessel, whatever it may be, weighs. My point was that fermentors are large and unwieldy, so disassembling them, autoclaving, then reassembly is silly. You'd end up contaminating the thing in the process. The fermentor acts as an autoclave itself.

About the only parts you take off the fermentor while cleaning are the sensors (O2 and Ph), filters, and small lines that could have been contaminated by a foam out.

Here's a place with some Gi-normous fermentors, but they come in all sizes (even 1 liter versions). We probably had some of these over in the manufacturing building, but I tried to stay away from there as much as possible: donning the bunny suit is not my cup of tea.

http://www.altieri.it/fermentors.htm

They offer dryers, too. Maybe you could put together your own little facility.

[DonQatU]

My point was that fermentors are large and unwieldy, so disassembling them, autoclaving, then reassembly is silly. You'd end up contaminating the thing in the process. The fermentor acts as an autoclave itself.

Destructo, would you agree that IF this "fermentor" didn't have autoclave capabilities, that it was most likely just what the Iraqis said it was........ a hydrogen generator for artillery balloons?

No smileys. Serious question.

Don

[Feanaro]

Let us look at this situation in a different way, shall we? You see a man beating his child and it only seems to get worse. It seems as if he will kill him soon. Do you stop him or leave him be?

Now replace the child with thousands of people and beating with killing, raping and torturing. Replace man with Saddam Hussein. And replace you with you and a bunch of US military troopers.

Is that all there is to it? Of course not. If we attacked Saddam for that then why not China or some such other nasty nation?

[DRC]

"Yes, DRC, I understand that you're just repeating what you heard."

No, you obviously didn't since here's, and I quote, what you said:

"DRC, that's a very strange statement coming from someone who claimed "20 BM-21 warheads were found in Iraq filled with sarin and mustard"."

That says that I, Me, DRC claimed this when in reality I said that I heard on Fox News and then went and found links for you to look at and then I went and found more links from different sources with the SAME story and posted them as well.

"But, that information was incorrect. It's like the many other false reports on WMD finds in Iraq that have proved false."

Okay. Now maybe we're getting somewhere. If you would be so kind as to post your sources/links to prove your statement I will be happy to read them and respond accordingly.

Again I'm with Destructo on the fact that you've posted nothing to support your assertions and allegations. I and I'm sure many others are not going to believe the information just because you said it's true. Time for you to step up to the plate and prove something for a change.

The sky is plaid. I can even prove it. Just ask me. :)

Take care and if you're as good a shot as you are with viable information everyone should be quite safe ;)

DRC

[DonQatU]

That says that I, Me, DRC claimed this when in reality I said that I heard on Fox News and then went and found links for you to look at and then I went and found more links from different sources with the SAME story and posted them as well. - DRC

Oh, brother! I give up, DRC. If you want to believe they found BM-21 rockets filled with Sarin and mustard ready to use, FINE!
:rolleyes:

But.... THINK about it DRC! Wouldn't THAT have been the "smoking gun" the administation was (and still is) searching for? Wouldn't Ari Fleischer be talking about it night and day? Wouldn't it be more valuable for them to say the Iraqis had WMDs ready to deploy against US troops rather than trying to sell their bogus story about those "dual-purpose mobile hydrogen generator/mobile bio-weapons labs" turned over to us by the Kurds?

Don

[DRC]

Seriously Don...

"DRC. If you want to believe they found BM-21 rockets filled with Sarin and mustard ready to use, FINE!"

I'm sorry if links to several different reports aren't enough for you. I'm also sorry that you have no information of your own to sunstantiate your claims. At least I was able to find the information I repeated to support what I had heard. Did the missiles contain what has been claimed? Well, it's been claimed and neither proven nor disproven so I'll ask you a similar question to the one you asked me: Don't you think that if this report was proven to be false that the media would be all over it and somehow trying to use it to discredit George Bush for trying to plant evidence and then got caught? People such as yourself want Bush to fall on his face so bad that you are willing to use any and everything to create (if nothing else) the illusion that he has and or will. Your posts in this thread are a testiment to that.

Sad. Truly sad.

To each his own I guess. It just amazes me that some people can't see their hand in front of their face under a 100 Watt bulb.

Take care and keep on keepin' on.

DRC

[DonQatU]

DRC, I'm not going to waste much time answering your post. Here's an article that might explain it to you better than I care to.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html

Read it carefully. And read the entire article. Especially the part about those missiles you are talking about! :rolleyes:


April 7: Fox, echoing NPR, reports that U.S. forces near Baghdad have discovered a weapons cache of 20 medium-range missiles containing sarin and mustard gas. Initial tests show that the deadly chemicals are not "trace elements."

[In the coming weeks, this embarrassing non-discovery is quickly stomped down the Memory Hole. The missiles were never mentioned again.]

Don:D

[DRC]

Is this your website? The website in and of itself has several things that I could debunk very easily. The tip off was this part:

"[In the coming weeks, this embarrassing non-discovery is quickly stomped down the Memory Hole. The missiles were never mentioned again.]"

I will agree that the missiles were never mentioned again on Fox but were by others. But the sight offers a date and then says "It's a lie" but doesn't back it up with anything and I haven't found anything to substantiate it's claims. So we're right back to square one again with me asking where's the proof they used to come up with the deduction? I will say that I'm asking this question legitimately. If the reports are false and there is proof that they are I would like to see them, but I haven't found anything proving or disproving this other than hearsay thus far. Just because someone says something was "stomped down the memory hole" doesn't tell me anything. Where's the information/proof of said statement. I was hoping there was something to the link you posted but alas I'm disappointed once again.

Thanks for trying though,

DRC

[ahenry]

Don, I am not interested in dialogue with you, since past conversations have proven to me that you have zero credibility or critical thinking skills. However, for the sake of those reading this thread I wish to make a comment.


Here's an article that might explain it [“false reports”] to you better than I care to.
<snip>
Read it carefully. And read the entire article. Especially the part about those missiles you are talking about! Now, how in the world are you gonna tell us that what Lew Rockwell (that bastion of journalistic reporting) said, the sole extent of which is nothing more than an assertion that people forgot about the past report, somehow proves that those missile reports were false?! You should note that I am not saying those reports about the missiles are accurate, I am only saying that you have not even come close to providing credible evidence to backup your claims that those reports were in error. Personally I couldn’t care less what you think about this issue as I think your agenda is as clear as it is repugnant. However, I think it needs to be pointed that you enjoy making claims while you fail miserably at backing them up. Ironically you do exactly what you claim the administration and the media are doing regarding WMD in Iraq.


[Edit]
Hmmm,

Apparently great minds do think alike, but it looks like DRC is a little quicker on the draw.

[DonQatU]

You should note that I am not saying those reports about the missiles are accurate,

........ there you go DRC, not even your "sock puppets" are convinced by your claim.

I am only saying that you have not even come close to providing credible evidence to backup your claims that those reports were in error.

Well........ proove they aren't! :rolleyes:

Seriously..... the administration hasn't found SQUAT! Please tell me when they have so I can be SOOOOOO embarassed! :p

Don

PS - The term "sock puppet" is patent pending.

PPS - ahenry, that article wasn't written by Lew Rockwell. I guess you didn't read it carefully and completely as I recommended! :D

[DRC]

Don is Kisar Sose`. That has to be it! That's the only explaination I can come up with for his evasiveness.

"You should note that I am not saying those reports about the missiles are accurate,"...

Don you forgot the three dots after you took what was being said out of context.

"...I am only saying that you have not even come close to providing credible evidence to backup your claims that those reports were in error."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Well........ proove they aren't!"

Sadly, I already have but it's either not sinking in or you're just not reading.

Remember those little dots there big guy that way you can keep things straight. ahenry said the same thing I did. I've said I heard a report, proved that the report existed and then asked you to provide me with information proving the report false since your assertion is that it is. You've not upheld your end...so by default I declare myself the winner and heavy weight champion of this debate. :D

Sorry I couldn't help it. This debate has become so ludicrous that it's funny to me. I'm making light of it because there's just nothing left to do with it.

ahenry,

Would that I had known that Don was as adamant about his own incorrectness as he is I would not have carried this as far as I have. He does amuse me though and honestly does seem to be somewhat intelligent, just misguided.

Thank you for the kind words and take care,

DRC

[DonQatU]

OK, DRC! You are on record saying there were approx. 20 x BM-21 warheads filled with sarin & mustard.

I can't prove that these nonexistant warheads didn't exist.

Give it a rest, eh? Let the President parade these as evidence of finding WMDs......... like the two artillery balloon trailers! :D

When you've dug yourself into a deep, deep, deep hole, DRC. The best advice is to stop digging!

Those 20 sarin and mustard gas filled warheads are NEVER going to appear. Because they never existed! :rolleyes:

Don

PS - Reread the article!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/steinreich8.html

[SkunkApe]

I can't believe any rational man actually believes to this day that we found 20 warheads in Iraq filled with sarin and mustard gas.

[Paniolo808]

I have been readin these kinds of posts for quite some time now in disbelief. Im not a smart man, dont claim to be. But for the life of me i cannot see why anyone is taking sides with a dictator. I cant see why anyone would think this man is innocent until proven guilty.

innocent until proven guilty.


You would rather take the word of someone who has done horrible things to his own people than to believe your own countrymen. Your sticking up a defending a rapist, murderer,
someone who has brought his country to ruin, who openly hates even you, the one sticking up for him, and would just as well put a bullet in your head as shake your hand. Like i said im not a smart man but i think some people are lacking the ability to see this whole thing in 3-D.


Just my .2 yen take it or leave...the hell i care ;)

[DonQatU]

I can't believe any rational man actually believes to this day that we found 20 warheads in Iraq filled with sarin and mustard gas.

You're right, SkunkApe! Don

[SkunkApe]

Paniolo808,

I can't speak for others, but I, for one, am not "sticking up" for Hussein. What I am doing is questioning and criticizing the words and actions of our own government.

We're supposed to be the good guys; I hold our governemnt to the highest standard. I will not tolerate being fed a line of lies and propaganda in an attempt to gain my support for war, no matter how evil the target.

And consider this: if you catch a man in a lie, do you assume that lie is the only lie he's ever told?

[SkunkApe]

You're right, SkunkApe! Don

Thanks, puppet master!

[DRC]

Don,

I reread the "article" in the link you posted. First of all it's not an article, it's Dr. Dale Steinreich thoughts on some a web page which hardly equates to proof of anything especially since he offers none. After rereading the whole page I gathered nothing more than I did before except that Dr. Steinreich seems to be a conspiracy theorist.

"OK, DRC! You are on record saying there were approx. 20 x BM-21 warheads filled with sarin & mustard."

Wrong again. I'm on record as having said I heard the report about said missiles and then referrenced and linked to the reports to substantiate what I had heard and read. The question I posed to you is can you prove your statement that they didn't exist? No you can't and no you haven't.

As to giving it a rest I will be happy to as soon as you stop misquoting, misrepresenting and taking things out of context in an attempt to support a false assertion. Until then I'll be right here to show others the reality of the whole thing.

Skunkape,

I cannot believe that any rational person would believe that these things didn't or don't exist when nothing definitive has been offered up as evidence to the contrary. Think about it this way, if I decide these missiles do and did exist then it's based on the same "facts" and rational that one would use to determine that they do not. The difference presently is that I can reference supporting information which says these weapons were found but no information has been brought forward saying they didn't other than "I know a guy that knows a guy that said they never existed."

So the contention from the opposition is the reports were fabricated, if you or anyone else has information to support this I'm more than willing to accept it if it's viable and not hearsay. Not once in this entire thread have I said that what you or Don is saying is incorrect, I've merely asked that it be proven with something of substance but there's been nothing so far.

Well, I will leave you gentlemen to it. It's been intresting if nothing else,

DRC

[SkunkApe]

DRC, some WMDs may in fact exist in Iraq. But its obvious that even if they do, we haven't found them yet. For crying out loud, even the Bush administration concedes they haven't been found yet.

Let me get this straight. Do you actually believe that that the United States found chemical and biological warheads in Iraq?

[DRC]

"Let me get this straight. Do you actually believe that that the United States found chemical and biological warheads in Iraq?"

What I believe with regard to Iraq and the current war is that WMD will be found and that no, President Bush did not lie to sell this war (an assinine assertion in and of itself). What I believe with regard to this report of 20 missiles being found is that it's been neither proven nor disproven to be true or false as of yet. What can be proven thus far is that the reports exist and I didn't just make it up and that there is a possibilty that these missiles are what was reported since it's not been proven false.

The sad part is that at this point the burden of proof isn't my problem since I've posted the proof necessary to show the reports exist. The burden of proof lies with Don or yourself to offer up some proof that these reports are false. Neither of you have done so. If I were to agree with you and say that these reports were false and the 20 missiles didn't ever exist I would be basing that on specualtion only just like you and Don are doing now. Did I say you're wrong in your assessment? No, I did not. I've said over and over that you haven't and can't prove the reports are false and that is my assertion.

I think part of the problem right now is that I'm looking for information and you and Don think I'm arguing to hear myself talk. What I would like to see is the information you have to support your ideas that these reports are false. If they are false, they're false but lets have more proof than "I know a guy who knows a guy..." Where are the retractions? Where are the contradictory reports? Where are the CNN reporters jumping on this to lambblast this administration? I do find it somewhat strange that this report didn't go any farther than it did, but not from a "Their all liars" perspective but rather from an "uneasy" perspective. My thinking is that there is more to it and it needed to be kept quiet and taken out of the lime light for a more ominous reason.

My thoughts? I think there is much not being said presently in order to keep from causing a panic. I think that many of the materials and products in question have ended up in the hands of the wrong people and that some are closer than we think they are presently. So if no WMD are ever found will I breath a sigh of relief? Nope. If that were to happen I'm afraid I would be in some distress wondering who had them. There are some classified report that I'm waiting to be declassified. If those materials prove my case will I gloat? No. I will become more concerned.

Take care gentlemen,

DRC

[Esky]

DRC, yer doin' just great.

It may seem like you're talking to yourself, but not true- I hear ya. And I agree, but haven't chimed in because you're saying it better than I could!

One small thing to consider-

If there were truly no WMDs in Iraq, and the whole thing was a lie to get us into a war, well...

Don't ya think that France, Germany & Russia would have said so publicly? Loudly and to whoever would listen?

But that's one thing they didn't stoop to, I reckon because their own intelligence services said the same thing as Mr. Bush's.

Sorry I can't provide a link to what was never said... it's like the dog that didn't bark, and that's what was strange.

Esky
who knows that ALL politicians always put positive spin on what they're trying to do....

[DonQatU]

If there were truly no WMDs in Iraq, and the whole thing was a lie to get us into a war, well...

Don't ya think that France, Germany & Russia would have said so publicly? Loudly and to whoever would listen?

Uh, Esky, I guess you must have missed this while you were watching the pep rally on FOX!

SAINT PETERSBURG -- Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday criticized the US-led coalition for failing thus far to uncover any of the weapons of mass destruction Washington has accused Iraq of harboring.

Putin, referring to the US-led coalition that invaded Iraq on March 20, told reporters: "Had I been in their place, I would wish I had found something. It is strange that nothing has been found yet."

Speaking after talks with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac, Putin said that until Iraq's alleged weapons were found, the US-British coalition's objective "has not been achieved."

"Even in its dying throes, the regime did not use weapons of mass destruction. We still don't know that it had any," he said.

Well, Esky is that PUBLIC Enough for you? :D

Don

[DRC]

Aren't these the same countries we've more or less cut off relations with due to their lack of support, obstruction and dirty little fingers with regard to documents showing the sale of banned materials from these countries to Iraq? Isn't Putin, whom GW thought was a strong ally, the guy that surprised us all by his non support? And don't all these countries have oil intrests in a country that we liberated and are being cut off from those intrests?

Do you have any idea how much money these countries have to lose if they cannot get their contracts honored? Their already failing economies will be so far in the tank that it could cause a big ripple in the European economies in general. These countries are panicing and it shows.

As to the critisism by these people, I'll ask my same question that I've asked so many times of you, where's their proof? Just because they said it doesn't make it true just like when you say it doesn't make it true. I'm more willing to believe our guys than I am these other fellas from countires that stabbed us in the back but you believe whomever you will for whatever reason.

Esky,

Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate any that read and can truly understand that there is a difference between rational thought and whatever one can classify the other thought as (if there is any thought put into it at all) To each his/her own I guess.

Thanks again and ya'll take care,

DRC

[Esky]

Don-

Sorry I wasn't clearer about it in my earlier post, but I really meant that BEFORE the Iraq campaign started, there wasn't ANY opposition to it from the governments of France, Germany, Russia, etc. on the basis that there weren't any WMDs. Those countries apparently didn't want war, (seems like they were doing pretty well financially, with all those little deals they had going with Saddam) and did everything they could possibly do (and more, considering that they were supposed to be our allies) to stop the US from going to war. Why wouldn't they have SAID, "Hey, Yank imperialists, there aren't any WMDs, we know for a fact that he got rid of them all!"

That's undoubtedly because their own intelligence services confirmed that Iraq had them... and for that matter, everyone knew, and there has been no dispute about it at all, that they had been used by Iraq previously; like when they used WMDs on the Kurds, in the Kuwait war, etc.

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind whether Saddam still had them or not, although the threat that they posed was real.

Unless and until he came clean & proved that he no longer had them, which he never did, for the safety of OUR country it had to be assumed that he DID have them, and would use them if he got the chance. He wasn't supposed to have SCUD missiles either, and it was a good test of our missile defense when he fired those 'non-existent' missiles at our base in Kuwait.

If in fact he HAD got rid of them, why the heck didn't he say so? Must like bombs on his head, I guess.

And for finding the missing WMDs- hey, this is a country the size of California, remember, and he had lots of time to hide things or smuggle them out to somewhere else. I reckon they'll be found eventually, and I can only pray (and I do!) that they aren't found when they are set off by jihadists in one of our cities.

Oh, and one last thing: I read the last... story? (who was it by/from? AP? Presse-France? CNN? It wasn't The Bleat, for sure!) you posted, Don, but all I get from it-- is that Putin merely said that the WMDs haven't been found yet; it still isn't known for sure that he had them; and that until we do know our objective hasn't been accomplished. That doesn't change anything, does it?

In fact the only 'criticism' in that story was put in by the unnamed reporter, in the first sentence: "Putin on Friday criticized the US-led coalition for failing thus far to uncover any of the weapons of mass destruction Washington has accused Iraq of harboring." but nothing Putin is quoted as actually saying comes out as criticism, only observations of fact.

Oh, and yeah, he found it "strange that nothing has been found yet." Me too. In fact it sorta looks to me like the 'reporter' put a heck of a lot of spin on the few words that Putin said, in order to get 'criticism' out of it. From what he was quoted as saying, I'd get the idea that Putin actually DID expect that WMDs would have been found by now, so I reckon that he too had been advised that Saddam did in fact have them.

I also find it strange that you are so adamant that Mr. Bush was 'lying' about all this. Personally, I reckon safe is better than sorry, and when you're looking at a murdering, torturing madman who doesn't like you and who has a history of wiping out people he doesn't like... well, I'd try to err on the side of caution. I'd assume the worst, and make plans accordingly; a good plan would be to disarm the madman, or to make absolutely sure that he isn't armed after all, regardless of what somebody else may think about it; and that's just what Mr. Bush did.

DRC-- just noticed your post while I was writing this one, looks like we're still on the same wavelength! And I agree once again! (Hmmm... maybe my tinfoil hat is leaking/picking up vibes....;-)


Esky
who's more interested in the Fox babes than the pep rally, if you really want to know 'the truth'