[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
PakistaniAbroad,
I don't think it matters if they are expired or not. Fact would still be that Saddam did not fully cooperate with inspectors and neglected to declare these items.
[/QUOTE]
Very true AAG. Maybe the BM-21 missiles apparently armed with Sarin and Mustard gas were also remnants of 1991 which Saddam forgot about.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Rhia: *
But to be truthful I am a little disappointed that he wasted such good stock by not using it in this war.
[/QUOTE]
Rhia :(
I don't think you really mean that.
ermmm who were these missiles prepared for if they exist at all?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
Rhia :(
I don't think you really mean that.
[/QUOTE]
It's war you moron what do you think weapons are for, depleted uranium is not an additive in your meusli luv.
On second thoughts judging from most of your comments it probably is smile
yeah ... news came just in time to breathe new life into the 'liberation' movement ...
Oh people ... dont forget, SH had better technology to HIDE dem weapons than the newspaper-headline-reading spy sats up there ... hmmm .. i wonder ... or ** DID THE US HIDE THE LOCATIONS OF THESE WEAPONS TO MAKE AN EXCUSE TO RAID THE COUNTRY???** ... almost everyone knew that ass is hiding some kinda weapons .. some like me just questioned, why did the US not tell the UN about the locations? Acting childish to claim all the discovery credits or keeping a secrect to raid the country? ... hmmm ... me wonders ...
too late to ask any questins now ... who can stop the bully?
LOL
Now USA is guilty of having technology that can read newpapers from sky(BTW, it is not same as detecting from sky stuff like grenades and RPGs hidden inside buildings. That tech does not exist). US is guilty no matter what. SH is innocent kind of guy only playing hide and seek.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
Wow...I thought Saddam didn;t have any? I thought this was about oil. Unbelievable....
[/QUOTE]
You always think wrong.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Thap: *
ermmm who were these missiles prepared for if they exist at all?
[/QUOTE]
To scare the hell out of US. Or may be he was about to hit deal with OBL.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Thap: *
It's war you moron what do you think weapons are for, depleted uranium is not an additive in your meusli luv.
On second thoughts judging from most of your comments it probably is smile
[/QUOTE]
Hey...... It does a body good ;)
Seriously Thap,
I don't approve of depleted uranium weapons. Are they being used again? I haven't heard/read anything recently about them.
Gosh, If I could have my way the whole world would disarm. Maybe after this war is over world can get back to reducing it's weapons arsenols....but I'm probobly dreaming...guess I had to much meusli this morning...
Sorry to BURST Anyone’s Bubble, but that turned out to be Pesticide :rolleyes:
“Smoking gun” WMD site in Iraq turns out to contain pesticide
50 minutes ago Add Mideast - AFP to My Yahoo!
NEAR NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - A facility near Baghdad that a US officer had said might finally be “smoking gun” evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons production turned out to contain pesticide, not sarin gas as feared.
A military intelligence officer for the US 101st Airborne Division’s aviation brigade, Captain Adam Mastrianni, told AFP that comprehensive tests determined the presence of the pesticide compounds.
Initial tests had reportedly detected traces of sarin – a powerful toxin that quickly affects the nervous system – after US soldiers guarding the facility near Hindiyah, 100 kilometres (60 miles) south of Baghdad, fell ill.
Mastrianni said: “They thought it was a nerve agent. That’s what it tested. But it is pesticide.”
He said a “theatre-level chemical testing team” made up of biologists and chemists had finally disproved the preliminary field tests results and established that pesticide was the substance involved.
Mastrianni added that sick soldiers, who had become nauseous, dizzy and developed skin blotches, had all recovered.
The turnaround was an embarrassment for the US forces in the region, which had been quick to say that they thought they had finally found the proof they have been actively looking for that Iraq :rolleyes: (news - web sites) was hiding weapons of mass destruction.
A spokesman for the US army’s 3rd Infantry Division, Major Ross Coffman, had told journalists at Baghdad’s airport that the site “could be a smoking gun”.
“We are talking about finding a site of possible weapons of mass destruction,” he added.
The fact that the coalition forces have come up with no clear evidence of WMD after capturing much of Iraq in 19 days of fighting has raised questions over the war’s justification.
Well, aren't pesticide WMDs? They do kill pests just like WMDs.
What??? they could not plant it?
damn, these yankees are such naive people.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
Well, aren't pesticide WMDs? They do kill pests just like WMDs.
[/QUOTE]
You Better watch your Mouth Buddy, you might be NEXT for Carrying WMD :D
There are 3 different sites the U.S. is looking into, that’s one. I don’t think it's pesticide that's in the missiles.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Quasimodo: *
You Better watch your Mouth Buddy, you might be NEXT for Carrying WMD :D
[/QUOTE]
Ooops I have lots of pesticides at home, even Termite killer "poison".... I need to dispose it of now.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
Rhia :(
I don't think you really mean that.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry AvgAmericanGirl twisted as it sounds to you but I do mean it. The bottom line is Saddam is known for crushing his opponents by whatever means possible and is not averse to using chemical weapons when he feels threatened. This is a war in which the opposition has openly declared its intention to topple him and his regime. Saddam knows his days are few and must be feeling desperate. Its simple commonsense that a desperate man will do and use whatever he can to ensure his own survival. Now the fact is IF he did have WMD’s he is the type of man who would not hesitate to use them. The fact he hasn’t shows one of two things that either he has a capacity for enormous restraint (which we know can never be true) or secondly and more pertinently he never had the capability of wmd’s and their use in the first place. And this second point the coalition forces will never acknowledge because all of their justification for initially going to war rest on this single and very very shaky premise. So, the forces will do the next best thing; fake it. Lets hope that’s more believable.
Rhia: You seem to be quite ignoring a third and fourth equally plausible explaination:
Third possibility. The general and/or soldier with his hands on the trigger simply disobeyed the order.
Fourth possibility. It was not Saddam's restraint that kept the WMDs from being used but rather the disruption of the communication channels kept the order from getting to the triggerman.
I'm sure their is also a fifth, sixth and seventh possibility too.
myvoice i am sure there are many plausibles all equally plausible as the existence of fairies an all that.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Rhia: *
myvoice i am sure there are many plausibles all equally plausible as the existence of fairies an all that.
[/QUOTE]
Well Rhia, if you think that the only two explanations are that 1) Saddam showed restratint or 2) he didn't have WMD capabilities, you are reserving a very large portion of your grey matter for future use.
Actually in preserving that grey matter further, I explicitly stated I believe in only one of those "plausibles" to be possible. I hope you don't clog yours with fanciful imagination myvoice.