Guest NoCalMike Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 Ya know, there is an on-going debate over whether we should go to war and there are good points on each side, but I today I heard perhaps the WORST argument EVER. This from the whitehouse, "the mere fact that we have not found any weapons of mass destruction, should be enough evidence that Iraq is not doing enough to cooperate" Is this the best fucking argument Dubya and co. can make???
Guest Marlow Jr Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 According to the white house however, they have proof that Iraq have WMD. Because of this knowledge, and the lack of success by the inspectors, they claim that Iraq is not co-operating. Take it for what you will.
Guest DrTom Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 Unless something has changed since the post-Desert Storm weapons inspections, UN inspectors are not allowed to search any presidential buildings when looking for WMD. The problem is, Saddam has some 125,000 buildings that are designated as "presidential." That makes it very easy to hide something.
Guest JangoFett4Hire Posted January 16, 2003 Report Posted January 16, 2003 UN inspectors found 11 empty chemical warheads in "excellent" condition today at an ammunition storage area, where they were inspecting bunkers built in the late 1990s, a UN spokesman reported. (AP, 3:01 p.m.)
Guest DrTom Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 They also found a few other warheads and containers, contents suspect but presently unknown.
Guest NoCalMike Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 I thought the stuff they found was supposedly "accounted for in 1996" Well with 10 or 11 days left until the deadline, and going by what they have found SO FAR, would you say, 10 days till war, or give the inspectors an extension to find more evidence?
Guest Dopey Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 I smell war, like it or not. We are amassing too many troops to just let'em hang around and do nothing. Although I do not want a war, I think killing sadam would be a good idea. I don't care who comes to power after him, just kill him and get someone else in power. Whoever gets the throne next will have to be looking over his shoulder, to see if there are F-16's flying at him.
Guest Scarlet Pimpernel Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 These warheads were apparently empty, and long expired. A cause for concern but not war...yet.
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 "The problem is, Saddam has some 125,000 buildings that are designated as "presidential." That makes it very easy to hide something." LOL -- I didn't know there were 125,000 buildings in Iraq...
Guest DrTom Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 They also found some containers or warheads with unknown contents, not just the empty ones. I don't know if this has been reported yet. I heard it at work, since a horde of government environmental scientists work in the building next to mine. It may turn out to be nothing. We'll see.
Guest Tim Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 All those former Presidential buildings can now be inspected. And seeing as the warheads are empty, with their contents destroyed, that doesn't provide evidence he has NBC weapons, it gives evidence to his claim of them being destroyed.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted January 17, 2003 Report Posted January 17, 2003 Iraq's about the size of California so it would be easy for Hussein to hide weapons.
Guest Tim Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 Ya know, there is an on-going debate over whether we should go to war and there are good points on each side, but I today I heard perhaps the WORST argument EVER. This from the whitehouse, "the mere fact that we have not found any weapons of mass destruction, should be enough evidence that Iraq is not doing enough to cooperate" This shows the US is not co-operating, seeing as they maintain proof of WMD, yet seemingly they haven't given it to the inspectors. So... a) The US has no proof b) The US is not co-operating My guess is they have a very small amount of evidence, yet don't want to be embarrassed by being seen to use it as an excuse for this build up.
Guest The Old Me Posted January 18, 2003 Report Posted January 18, 2003 We were going to war with Iraq wether we found anything or not. Weapons searching is just an excuse to start something with them.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now