1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

ALERT: Military finds artillery round with sarin nerve agent...

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by ROXRAN, May 17, 2004.

  1. DavidS

    DavidS Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2000
    Messages:
    8,605
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trader_Jorge and ROXRAN,

    Do you know why it's dangerous for the media (Fox) to be used as "cheerleaders" for the Goverment? Because it's the job of the media to be critical of the government; to ask the tough questions. And, as you know, politicians have been known to blur the truth for political reasons. You know? To fool the "masses."

    The "crtical press" is necessary for any Democracy. If you aren't critical, well, then you may believe anything your government tells you. What you are seeing here is distrust with the administration. Which is fine. That's not as bad a "blind trust."

    P.S. I trust no politician. It's the nature of their job to either exaggerate the truth or brush things under the rug, i.e. politics.
     
    #81 DavidS, May 17, 2004
    Last edited: May 17, 2004
  2. underoverup

    underoverup Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,208
    Likes Received:
    75
    "David Kay, who last year led the post-invasion hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before stepping down, said the sarin was probably left over from the 1980s, produced either during the Iraq-Iran war or before the 1991 Gulf War.

    "It was probably just scavenged from one of the 125-plus ammunition storage points that still remain," Kay said. More forensic testing should determine with some confidence when it was produced, he said."

    ____________________________________________________________

    The rush to judgment on this (and all other major) WMD issues proves the desperation and the 'win at all costs' attitude of the neocon movement. Pump up any little scrap find boys because that is all you will ever have.
     
  3. phoenixfeng

    phoenixfeng Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    IDIOT
    r****d

    clinging on to a rusty artillery shell..man you guys are sad

    it looks like that oxycotin is getting to your heads conservatives

    i remember the days when the biggest controversy was a fat skank getting humidored..

    ahh the good old days
     
  4. twhy77

    twhy77 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,041
    Likes Received:
    73
    So...ummm really?
     
  5. nyrocket

    nyrocket Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2000
    Messages:
    448
    Likes Received:
    0
    This has been a thoroughly satisfying smackdown of the ever more desperate Bushmonkeys.

    I'll add this quote taken from another current thread. It's from the noted left-wing pacifist/socialist General Anthony Zinni:

    Mildly upsetting even? Nope!

    http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77711
     
  6. twhy77

    twhy77 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,041
    Likes Received:
    73

    Check the source of the quote. Now think to yourself, why would I try to say, even this guy didn't want to go to war!!

    That's the equivalent of using a warhawk's quote for defending going to war.
     
  7. DavidS

    DavidS Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2000
    Messages:
    8,605
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh yes.

    If you read some of the posts, a few Bush supporters were *amazed and appalled* that people and media would actually question the current administration.

    Almost like being skeptical was "un-American" or something (kinda like the infamous: If you question the president, then you aren't patriotic). It might be obvious to you. But apparently it wasn't to others here.
     
  8. Murdock

    Murdock Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    180
    Likes Received:
    2

    To trust Saddam with this existance of WMD is complete and utter folly...To disregard possible production and development labrotories is the same...To imagine cease and containment of the effects of the WMD found is wicked ignorance...How different would the situation be if the binary chemical reation was meant, intented and manipulated to occur?



    It's already happened in the past.. 3/20/95 in a subway in Tokyo Japan..

    It killed 11 people and injured 5,500.

    Here's the info on the incident.

    http://www.sma.org/smj/97june3.htm
     
  9. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    I'm waiting on the find. We have IED(the 'I' indicating that it wasn't part of an organized military's arsenal). We have an old shell that had no Sarin that would be a threat.

    rimrocker, posted a great list of all the past 'finds' of WMD. So far this appears to be another in that distinguished list.
     
  10. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    129,197
    Likes Received:
    39,691
    I thought Saddam claimed he had destroyed all those shells?

    Also, what about all those pesticides found in an underground camoflouged bunker?

    Mixed with others it creates a chemical bomb.

    Saddam had WMD, or the capability to produce them....no doubt.

    Sarin is bad stuff, and if they have more of these shells it is a bad thing.

    DD
     
  11. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    1) He said they had been destroyed, degraded, or lost due to inproper paper work; as is the case everywhere, including the the U.S.

    2) Is there a point here? You can make a momb out of pesticides, yes. So Iraq was not permitted pesticides!?!? O r fertilizer, I suppose.

    See., this is the thinking we're talking about. No one...NO ONE was saying Iraq could not have materials that could be made into explosives; not only is it impossible, but it would reduce them to a Stone Age existance...We were talking about 2 issues: 1) Whether he had violated the UN agreement and produced WMDs post 1995. or 2) Whether he had w cache of WMDs which constituted a threat.

    But now people are so desperate, they are pointing out pesticides and ineffective war relics. Something to behold, this.


    They used to have thousands upon thousands of these kinds of shells; they used them against Iran ( member, when they were our allies). I am sure, as is Kay and any other expert, that it would be inconceivable to not asume that there are probably a few more, dozens even, lying around the country somewhere.

    The point is, they're no longer effective, and almost certainly aren't known as what they are. Iraq never marked it's chem shells at the time, so now it is likely that some are amid other normal shells unrecognized.

    And, finally, 3)

    If, as is the case with this last one, they are degraded and ineffective,

    they are actually safer than regular shells, as Myers said. The one we found landed near US troops, and had it been packed with explosives, like a regular shell, would have done considerably more damage than it did packed with old, degraded chemicals.[/i]


    In all likelyhood, the people who lauched this shell thought it was a dud when it didn't really do anything upon impact. If the chemicals are degraded, and as such a minor concern, the more they are launched from IEDs, the better off we are.
     
  12. El_Conquistador

    El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    15,600
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Oh believe me, when Saddam says WMD were lost due to "improper paper work", then that says it all! How credible!

    Teacher! Teacher! The dog ate my homework! Ok, Saddam, we know you have a very hungry dog, I believe you 100%!!

    How incredibly naive. It's amazing how far the liberals will stretch themselves to make an argument which defends their territory. Stooping to believe tyrannical, murderous dictators at their word with no proof. What a joke.
     
  13. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,853
    Likes Received:
    41,356
    [​IMG]
     
  14. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    Ho Ho Ho....Verry funny, except...

    One little itty bitty point of contention, there, T_J.

    We, the United States of America, lose more chmical/biological weapons and material a year due to improper parer work than Saddam missed for any reason in it's entirety.

    Something people like to call the treal world. Means "Destoyed and not filed properly,' etc.
     
  15. El_Conquistador

    El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    15,600
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    ROFLAY ROFLAY ROFLAY ROFLAY ROFLAY ROFLAY !!!!

    (in case you are wondering what that stands for, it is "Rolling on Floor Laughing at You")

    You really will stoop to miraculous lows to defend the credibility of a tyrannical, murderous dictator like Saddam won't you Macbeth? Here you are attempting to equate Saddam's credibility with that of the United States. Truly laughable. The fatal flaw with your argument is that the US didn't kick out weapons inspectors and play the obstructionist game with the UN when questioned. Saddam was putting up red flags which really threw into question his credibility (as if everything else he did didn't throw it into question) OOPSIE DAISY! Your argument just got BLOW'D UP.


    [​IMG]
     
  16. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    It has NOTHING to do with relative credibility, though your rating of US cred. is clearly higher than mine.

    Point is, if the US, whom you rate high in the credibility department, admits to 'losing' more WMD material a year through clerical error, etc. than Saddam was missing in whole, that shows the reality of the situation.

    In fact, it only fails to do so IF YOU QUESTION US CREDIBILITY on the issue.



    Nice attempt at yet another straw man, T_J. We all know your habits.
     
  17. El_Conquistador

    El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    15,600
    Likes Received:
    6,572
    Ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho ho!!!!!!!! What an incredible joke!

    My friend, it has *everything* to do with crediblity when someone is making allegations with NO PROOF. It absolutely does. That is the key element that you are not grasping. It led to your fatally flawed argument, an argument that I have recently finished BLOWING UP. When a madman, MADMAN, like Saddam tells a country that he has destroyed his WMD, but offers no proof, no one can in take him at his word and still be doing a good faith job of protecting this nation's security. When you combine that with the fact that Saddam booted out the inspectors, and was obstructionist with the new ones, then you have a recipe for suspicion. While you may be naive enough to accept Saddam's word at face value, it is the height of irresponsibility to rest our great nation's security on it. While it fits your convenient political sniping standards, it simply does not fit the security precautions of this great nation.

    CASE CLOSED
     
  18. rimrocker

    rimrocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    23,120
    Likes Received:
    10,158
    We know Saddam once developed sarin weapons, but there was another in the area who was working on sarin right before the invasion and it just so happens he's been in the news lately.
     
  19. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    T_J let me explain this to you *like* you're an idiot;


    If the reality of the world is that these things het lost, than that reality applies as much to murderous dictators as to benevolent Republics, probably more given the technological inferiority of their records. 140 of X detroyed, someone writes 14, there you have 126 'missing' X. Etc. etc. Add to that the fact that shelll like these were indistinguishable from regular shells during the Iran/Iraq war, and yes, there will be some 'missing' and 'found' later. Fortunately, they were found after their due date, and by people who didn't know what they were.

    You can throw out as many condemnations as you like, but that's the way the world works, as any weapons expert acknowledges ( including Kay, BTW.).


    It should also be noted that clerical error is a minor part of the distinction between our records and theirs; degredation, which Kay et al acknowledge, is a larger part.
     
  20. Chump

    Chump Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    1,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    whatta joke you are

    diverting money, manpower and attention away from our fight against the people that actually did attack us is the gravest of irresponsible actions
     

Share This Page