- May 17, 2004 at 5:42 pm #1523
Yes that is correct WMD has been found in Iraq – its not breaking news because the media hates our current President. An artillery shell that was turned into an IED (improvised explosive device) was attempted to be detonated – it was found to contain Serin nerve gas. Just a drop of this stuff will painfully cause a choking, twitching death where your muscular convulsions become so violent your bones begin to snap! Good stuff – lets pass it around.
The poison nerve gas (WMD) was not effectively mixed with the active agent due to the device being an artillery shell. This shell needs to be fired from a rifled barrel to cause a spin which after so many rotations will arm the shell – causing the agents to mix – creating the deadly toxin (WMD).
- May 17, 2004 at 7:47 pm #14644
not sure what you’re trying to say here, I actually heard about this single artillery shell through the media and unless you were in Bagdhad I would suspect that’s how you found out about this story. In addition, the media report I saw stated that upon inspection of this one shell, it was determined to have been produced during or prior to the first gulf war. Oh wait, that must be part of a left-wing, media plot.
- May 17, 2004 at 9:31 pm #14645
My father just returned from Baghdad. Touchy subject. He was chief of reconstruction of Baghdad for the US Army Corps of Engineers. When I want to find out what’s really going on, I just ask him. It was a really hard time for him while he was there, since many things they rebuilt got blown up again. I am so thankful he’s back home. I am also very proud of him and his efforts to do good work in a difficult situation. Most of the Iraqi people appreciated it, as well.
- May 18, 2004 at 2:52 pm #14646
The media I heard it through was a conservative talk show. It was not on Fox news, CBS, NBC, ABC or the like. Why is that? 😉 Plus now that GW is vindicated on the issue are you liberals going to say “oh, it is just a little bit of WMD not a whole bunch.” ? Lets get real – HE HAD THE OUTLAWED POISON!! Just like GW and Tony Blair stated!
- May 18, 2004 at 3:10 pm #14647
well, the media outlet through which I found out about this shell was the Washington Post – a rather liberal paper – and I saw the story at around 10am. I’m not sure how this vindicates GW. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 (GW even admitted this) and the quantity of WMD that has been discovered could not threaten the US. What I do know is that tens of billions of tax dollars have been spent, over 3000 Iraqui civilians and almost 800 US servicemembers are dead, any sympathy we had from the rest of the world over 9/11 is gone and we have found a whopping 2 shells, one with mustard gas (last week) and one with what seems to be sarin (it has not been confirmed).
- May 18, 2004 at 4:33 pm #14648
I love how liberals shift the topic when they lose their point! He had WMD and the United nations made a resolution (law) outlawing that. All you liberals chanted time and time again was “where are the WMD” Well here they are!! By the way two sheels can, if handled correctly could kill thousands and sicken tens of thousands. By the way have you every served your country? Or are you the typical liberal that ignores what a great liberal was stated. Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. The real JFK did not intend ranting and bitching as part of doing your part. By the way your man for president the fake JK commited war time attrocities by his own admission when he started his agressive protests where he threw his medals over the gate at the White House. And not only did he do that but he falsely accused fellow soldiers of attrocities that JK admitted he lied about! Good man he is!
- May 18, 2004 at 6:17 pm #14649
well, so much ignorance in one post, I’m not sure where to begin. You know, it’s kind of ironic that you keep referring to Iraq’s violations of the UN security council resolutions (the UN can’t pass binding resolutions on sovereign states) when that’s exactly what the US did by invading Iraq (if you recall, the resolution authorizing use of force failed).
Since you don’t seem to know who you’re dealing with, I’m going to be nice today. FYI, I am not a “liberal” (although I don’t think you really know what that means), John Kerry is not “my man,” and I am a veteran (Army). Are you a veteran too, or are you one of these Reagan-youth, misfits that goes to college to study political science and beats their chest, but never dares to serve because “that’s not their job”?
- May 18, 2004 at 7:45 pm #14650
Where ever your political aspirations may lie, Fox News just reported that they’re claiming to have found three to four liters of sarin in that shell. That would kill quite a few thousand people if deployed correctly.
Ed’s got a point, the left can’t scream “Where r teh WMDS!!!111one lol” anymore.
- May 18, 2004 at 8:26 pm #14651
The authorization to use force failed because the French whom were owed billions of dollars by Sadam, voted against it. The Germans had plenty of illegal (resolution violating) deals with Sadam and the Russians were selling illegally, military and high-tech technologies to Sadam. Gee, why did they want us to keep our noses out of the situation ? Also, many of those points in the UN resolutions were agreed to by Sadam to end the first gulf war as part of the cease-fire HE SIGNED THEM.
Lets talk about ignorance – if the Sadam could not violate UN resolutions then how could we? Sadam violated treaty agreements – we did not.
I was in the Army during the first gulf war. Joined after operation Desert Shield started up. I come from a family with much military history and I am willing to put my life on the line for the US and freedom throughout the world.
What liberals purport to be is very different from what they are truly about.
Where are the WMD – peekaboo there they are!!
Is Sadam (OOPS) WAS Sadam a financier of murder, rape and terrorism – YES he WAS. Did you see the pole that tens of thousands of Iraqi’s want to put Sadam to death? Did Sadam murder relatives that gave info to the US – YES he did.
Could you please make more than a blank point about the ignorance – lists these out point by point, please.
Who by the way is your man? You bash GW, state JK is not your man – is it Ralph Nader whom is so left he is almost to the right? Who is your candidate? And if you say no-one then we don’t need to continue because if you don’t vote your complaints don’t count.
Where are the WMD – peekaboo there they are!
- May 19, 2004 at 3:54 pm #14652
1) the resolution on the use of force failed because a majority of the security council voted against it, the French abstained. As far as illegal sales of weapons in violation of separate resolutions, that sucks if it’s true, but that’s one of the unfortunate realities in the world we live in. During the 1970s and 1980s Israel shared military equipment & technology with South Africa in violation of resolutions against this (I’m sure you remember why).
2) The resolutions that Iraq didn’t comply with are not treaties – there is a difference.
3) Prior to the invasion, Iraq was complying with resolution 1441 and was destroying chemical weapons stockpiles. Ironically, it was the invasion that stopped this, so in a way it should come as no surprise that we have stumbled on some. I actually expected to find more than what we have seen.
4) So you were in the Army, great. I’m not sure how they got to you, but you should know that you are being used by these ideologues (Limbaugh, et al). You need to at-ease the bullshit and find the truth.
5) As far as my preferred candidate for the white house, I thought that Wesley Clark (formerly, General Clark) would have been a great nominee for the democratic party. I was very disappointed that the republicans didn’t put forth anyone to challenge GW.
- May 19, 2004 at 6:00 pm #14653
1. In the 70’s and 80’s I was a preteen – so I don’t even remember that. But by the tone of your messages – shifting the topic to Israel – I would have to guess that you are an anti-Semite – which would explain your justifying and poo-pooing the WMD that has been found. The majority of the Security Council was Germany, France and Russia all in cahoots with Sadam. Question for you – if the UN will not back up its resolutions or other decisions do they even matter at all? They are like the parent whom has told their child don’t do that a thousand times or else – but never brought the or else. Well guess what, false threats bring no behavioral changes. Another point for you to ponder – Do two wrongs make a right? I.e. just because Israel violated sanctions is it ok for others to do the same?
2. Some of the points in the treaties were duplicates not necessarily word for word but in the intent of them with items in the resolutions.
3. You must be crazy if you believe that Iraq was destroying the WMD – they wouldn’t let any one see the process or the remains or even the paperwork proving their destruction. If they were compliant then why would the not let the whole world see this to put egg on the face of us Americans, whom they hated long before we got involved with them? How do you know they were destroying them – we you there helping them out?
4. I don’t listen to Limbaugh – he is over the top – not too mention a drug addict. If your family was killed by the “small amounts” “just one shell’s worth” of Serin nerve gas it would be truly a tragedy and you would scream an entirely different song. (Rightfully so).
5. Wesley Clark was a Republican until – by his claim the party didn’t respond timely enough to him so he switched sides. Also, did you know that former President Clinton fired him? I was pulling for him for a while but he spoke a lot with out saying how things would be achieved. So he lost my interest – I don’t want words I want action. For many years former President Clinton stated that “those responsible will be hunted down” yet his administration spent more money chasing Bill Gates than the terrorists. Have you heard the quote by former President Clinton when he addressed Congress in the late 90’s, stating that Sadam was a threat, had WMD and that he would use them. Former President Clinton guaranteed that Sadam was use them if given the chance. If I can find a link to the speech I’ll post it for you.
- May 19, 2004 at 8:57 pm #14654
1) Ok, so because I point out the fact that Israel sold military technology to the South Africans during the apartheid era (when there was a global ban on that even the US adhered to) this makes me an anti-Semite? That really explains why my boss is Jewish and why I have Jewish friends. From the tone of your post, one could get the impression that they were justified in selling such technology to the South Africans and that would make you a racist.
2) Your point is senseless. Iraq never signed any treaty and no resolutions were passed that automatically allowed for the use of force for non-compliance.
3) Yes, I’m the one whose crazy because I believe Hans Blix and Mohamed Baradei who reiterated that they were being cooperated with by the Iraqis and that wmd were being destroyed. In fact, on 27 January, Mr. Blix said that “more than 400 inspections at 300 sites had been conducted without notice, access was almost always provided promptly, and there was no convincing evidence that Iraq knew in advance that the inspectors were coming. The recent acceptance of aerial surveillance and interviews of scientists without witnesses, as well as appointment by Iraq of a second commission entrusted with relevant documentation search, had also been positive developments.”
4) Glad to know you’re not listening to Rush, but who the hell are you listening to? They can’t be any better.
5) Wesley Clark is a soldier and is much more well qualified to send US troops into battle than GW or Bill Clinton.
- May 20, 2004 at 1:11 am #14655
Sorry RD, Wesley Clark is a tool. Who in their right mind waffles on their party affiliation because one was not fast enough to contact them for running? That’s worse than John Kerry’s waffles, from where I sit; at least he’s still a Democrat.
- May 20, 2004 at 12:40 pm #14656
I do agree with your point number five. Wes whom has been to battle is better fit to send to battle but as far as the rest of a Presidency goes he would not cut the mustard.
1. I never stated that it was ok for Israel to do what they did – Did I not state that TWO wrongs don’t make a right?
2. Iraq did sign a cease-fire agreement and never followed through completely with what he signed.
3. I remember scientists not being allowed to meet with inspectors until after they were briefed for weeks at one of Sadam’s palaces. Also, why would you have currently active weapons scientists if you have no program? Blix, a tool of the anti-American German Chancellor was against the idea of inspections – of course he made comments that weakened the American stance. Not to mention – some of the compliance started after 12 yes 12 years of defiance.
4. Ever wonder why there is such a market for conservative radio – maybe because the liberal point of view is the mainstream media.
5. My choice for President is GW because JK is a phony that has been making choices to mimic former President John F. Kennedy. Did you know that JK has copied JFK’s career down to hanging out with rich women? I can’t ever let a tax lover get into the office of the White House. If you want big brother – keep voting for democrats.
- May 20, 2004 at 3:39 pm #14657
1) No, but you did infer that I was anti-Semitic for pointing it out. This was very calumnious and should be apologized for.
2) True, and to the extent that the UN didn’t pressure Iraq to follow through is a weakness with the UN. This is why security council resolution 1441 was passed in 2002 (this means that the French, Russians and Chinese sided with us) to force Iraq to disarm. The quote from Hans Blix shows the extent to which Iraq was complying. I’m not aware of any relationship between Blix and the German government.
3) Yes that was true up until 2003. Look, I’ve never claimed that Saddam Hussein was pristine or that he doesn’t deserve to be deposed & tried, but rather that whatever wmd capability Iraq had was not a real threat to the US and the cost in human and other terms for us from this was is greater than the supposed reward.
4) Sorry, I just don’t see how the mainstream media lacks that much objectivity.
5) Hanging out with rich women is not a crime. You should try it sometime.
- May 20, 2004 at 5:30 pm #14658
1. You are very correct in that I owe you an apology – I am sorry that I made that statement. I over reacted and I do apologize. I get so angry when people (like myself) ignore facts and pass judgment (as I do).
2. The UN almost made itself irrelevant by not following through. We saved their butts – now if the UN passes something – somebody will back it up. What did 1441 mean by “force” beg for 50-60 years or slap his hand in bull-sh!t sanctions that he gets around and ends up building palaces instead of delivering food to his own people? Time came to end his regime regardless of 9/11. 9/11 brought the war to reality – we are not only at war with those responsible for 9/11 but all terrorists. Sadam’s regime was exactly that.
3. What do you consider a “real threat” the capability to kill only a couple thousand or does it need to be tens of thousands? What is a “real” threat? I feel that if they can kill one with WMD they are a threat.
4. How many headline stories have there been about the schools, hospitals, improvements in the electrical and water grids and so forth? I have seen none. But every death brings top stories every single news cast. If this was done during WWII it would have been 24 hour reading of names that died every day. In no way am I saying that they do not need to be honored – they do. But the media has begun to only dwell on bad news and not just related to the war. Look at the economic picture – all indicators but one – job rate – which is a lagging indicator were above average yet headlines in newspapers and news programs are “bleak look for the economy” X number out of work!! Maybe I am very tired of the negative news – that never seems to point out anything good no matter what the story or topic. Do you remember the days when newspapers put pictures of engaged couples announcing at no cost their engagements – good stuff – cheerful stuff. Why are we the Prozac nation -look to our media.
5. If I was single I might have given that serious consideration because they could always afford to look and feel good 😉
Quick question now that hostilities are over – when and where did you serve?
- May 21, 2004 at 5:22 pm #14659
1) Ok, thanks. I’m sorry if I was condescending or abusive. My main point in all of this is that in this war on terrorism, our enemy is Al-Queda and its sympathizers/allies like the Taliban. Saddam’s regime & Ba’ath party was certainly despotic and helped finance Palestinian terrorists, but they were not in bed with Al-Queda. The Ba’ath party is part of the secular, Arab nationalist movement that originated in the 1940s & 1950s and led to governments like those in Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. They are as close to Osama Bin Laden as the pope is to Anton Lavay (leader of the devil worshipers). I’m not saying that they should not have been on “the list,” but by attacking Iraq we’ve done very little to neutralize/eliminate Al-Queda.
2) Now, as far as the UN and saving their butts, you have to remember that we are one of “their butts.” Resolution 1441 went very far in terms of infringing on the sovereignty of Iraq with the random inspections and requirements of Iraqi government employees to hand over documents & destroy weapons stocks. The irony behind it is that if 9/11 had not happened, even that resolution would not have been passed.
3) I would consider a country’s ability to kill one American citizen with wmd a threat. In order to do this, such a country must not only posess wmd, but should be able to deliver it. The Iraqis didn’t have the vehicles to reach the US with their wmd. Could they have been trying to acquire it? Possibly, but I think that Al-Queda is much more active in trying to do something like that and we should focus on them.
4) I think you’re onto something. I remember seeing coverage of the rebuilding efforts last year (oil wells & pipelines, roads & other infrastructure). This spring all of that has dried up as the violence has intensified.
1986-1989: Ft. Benning, Hunter AAF, Ft. Stewart. MOS was 11B1P. And you?
- May 21, 2004 at 7:19 pm #14660
1. From the way that we both responded at least we have passion and care deeply about our Country and all that is involved in it. And after the sparks were done flying we agreed about a lot.
2. True enough.
3. Problem was – Sadam hated the US and would not hesitate to sell that crap to Al-Queda not to mention that he could not keep track of everything he had – which could easily end up in the hands of Al-Queda even if he did not want that.
4. The violence is intensifying for a reason that I hope is very wrong. The Al-Queda plan is to get the US to run away from Iraq so that they can attack and overtake Saudi Arabia. Remember they already bombed the central intelligence agency of Saudi Arabia and destroyed it entirely. They will then take over the country – especially with the anti-Western surge and stop the flow of oil. All Western societies will crash – forcing us to go into the most holy Muslim areas where the real Jihad will be declared and start. The draft will return as we place millions along the borders and coast lines. There will be horrible police actions within the country as the minorities refuse the draft. I whole heatedly believe that a WMD attack of some kind will either hit New York or Washington DC very close to the 4th of July – in an attempt to sway the vote just like in Spain. There has also been concern of a massive attack at the Nuclear power plant in New York – the radiation could sicken millions. I fear that a nuclear response from us is likely. I hope and I pray that all of this is wrong. The main reason that we want Iraq is for close air support and air bases to get into Saudi Arabia.
1990-1993 Baumholder, Germany. MOS 19K10H – (a tanker with teaching qualifications).
- May 21, 2004 at 8:23 pm #14661
That was what my dad was doing in Baghdad, all the waterlines and pipelines and buildings and dams, etc. Yes, good things are happening in Iraq. And we are not despised by all Iraqis.
- May 22, 2004 at 1:59 am #14662
It’s kind of fitting that Puffintoad comes through with real “news” from iraq.
ED1 was remarking that the “news folks” don’t tell us all the news because they’re “against” Bush.
I just wish Bush or I guess president Cheney would tell what they are doing in Iraq. They kind of already admitted that WMDs were not the “real reason.”
Maybe they’ll tell us if we re-elect them. I’m sure they have good reasons. Bush says that he wants to give Iraqis freedom and that we’ll have to kill all the iraqis that don’t want to get “free”.
But president Cheney isn’t letting on if he wants to setup the same deal with an “unknown” Iraqi family as they have setup with the Saudi family.
I guess these guys know what they’re doing. They both went to good schools and had the sense to stay out of VietNam……
It’s probably best that we went into Iraq alone, much like the Britsh Petroleum did in the the twenties, that way there are no other competitors for oil contracts.
The American people have spoken. Let’s not derail these guys before they can get the job done………
- May 22, 2004 at 5:12 am #14663
Camel Lung, I thought you had dead cat there under your name. It’s just stretching, isn’t it?
To clarify my last post, I was responding to 5) on runnerdude’s last post. At that time, I didn’t see what Ed had posted next (which is interesting in a nightmarish kinda way).
- May 22, 2004 at 5:16 am #14664
Oh, and in response to fears about oil shortage, hey, we have plenty of oil up here, so come on and get it, everyone! The caribou won’t mind, I promise. They really got a kick out of the last pipeline that went up, as it was the only thing happening on a Friday night for miles and miles.
- May 22, 2004 at 1:43 pm #14665
I’ve been called a lot of things but never “dead cat”.
I just got back from my 7-miler, I was stretching…… 😆
- May 25, 2004 at 6:46 am #14666
Holy cow, I mean 4) on runnerdude’s post, not 5).* My father was definitely not trying to seduce wealthy women.
*This post is an edit to the clarification on the explanation in conjunction to a segment in a multiple-pointed response, several days past expiration.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.