Iraq Issues

[Sardauker-Kirov]

I would like to see pictures of those 'chemical' weapons.

They can make photo's about it, but every goon can make a picture of a building and call it a super uber Nuclear facility.

Once again, I don't trust Bush and the Americans and to be honest, I rather want to be on the side of the Rebels(Japanese, Arabic, European, etc) if America is ever going to start a World Conquest campaign.

[Gobalopper]

As Rumsfeld said, "We haven't found Saddam Hussein and I don't know anyone who's running around saying he didn't exist. It takes time."

Why is it everyone jumps to conclusions so quickly? Before the war it was the millions that were going to die, then it was the looting at the museum both turned out to be blown way out of proportion.

Instapundit

[zamboe]

Why is it everyone jumps to conclusions so quickly?

Precisely Gob, Why is it everyone jumps to conclusions so quickly ?, Why is it EVERYBODY... ?, If you know what I mean... ;)

[Gobalopper]

The everybody was in reference to everyone who has posted recently which is no suprise really. :)

[Dude_Doc]

I don't think it took one day to find out that 6 million Jews were slaughtered during WW2...

[Sardauker-Kirov]

My theory is this, Hitler wanted to remove his jew part from himself.

Because he was partially jew, so he wants to proof himself and act like a 'German'

Hitler is a EMBARRASMENT to Germany.

[SurlyPIG]

I'd like to quote one of Gob's alway excellent articles, because I doubt that the critics will read it.

" The absurdity of these accusations is mind-boggling. Start with this: The Iraqi government in the 1990s admitted to U.N. weapons inspectors that it had produced 8,500 liters of anthrax, as well as a few tons of the nerve agent VX. Where are they? U.N. weapons inspectors have been trying to answer that question for a decade. Because Hussein's regime refused to answer, the logical presumption was that they had to be somewhere still in Iraq.

That, at least, has been the presumption of Hans Blix. Go back and take a look at the report Blix delivered to the U.N. Security Council on Jan. 27. On the question of Iraq's stocks of anthrax, Blix reported there existed "no convincing evidence" they had ever been destroyed. On the contrary, he said, there was "strong evidence" that Iraq had produced even more anthrax than it had declared "and that at least some of this was retained." Blix also reported that Iraq possessed 650 kilograms of "bacterial growth media," enough "to produce . . . 5,000 litres of concentrated anthrax."

On the question of VX, Blix reported that his inspection team had "information that conflicts" with Iraqi accounts. The Iraqi government claimed that it had produced VX only as part of a pilot program but that the quality was poor and therefore the agent was never "weaponized." But according to Blix, the inspection team discovered that the Iraqi government had lied. The Iraqi government's own documents showed that the quality and purity of the VX were better than declared and, according to the inspection team, there were "indications that the agent" had indeed been "weaponized."

Blix reported as well that 6,500 "chemical bombs" that Iraq admitted producing still remained unaccounted for. Blix's team calculated the amount of chemical agent in those bombs at 1,000 tons. As Blix reported to the U.N. Security Council, "in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for."

Today they are unaccounted for. But the answer to the continuing conundrum is not that Bush and Blair are lying. The weapons were there. Someday we'll find them, or we'll find out what happened to them.

Unless, of course, you like your conspiracies to be as broad and all-pervasive as possible."

What do you say to that? First Iraq is admitting that they have all these weapons, then as the US starts talks of military action, Saddam says that 'peaceful Iraq doesn't have and has never had weapons!'

Yes, Zamboe, lying is an impeachable offense. Obviously, given the above, that didn't happen.

[zamboe]

What do you say to that? First Iraq is admitting that they have all these weapons, then as the US starts talks of military action, Saddam says that 'peaceful Iraq doesn't have and has never had weapons!'

You obviously - on purpouse I guess - avoided that part where Iraqi government said that they had destroyed all those weapons they said they had, so far since NOT A SINGLE SAMPLE of WoMD has been found, no matter how much I like the USA I cannot believe them.

[Gobalopper]

zamboe saying they destroyed the weapons is not enough. They have to actually show evidence of the destroying of those weapons. Why in the world would you trust a country like Iraq at its word given their past record? I mean come on if you actually believe what Iraq tells you without having them providing any evidence then you are already too far gone.

[zamboe]

zamboe saying they destroyed the weapons is not enough. They have to actually show evidence of the destroying of those weapons. Why in the world would you trust a country like Iraq at its word given their past record? I mean come on if you actually believe what Iraq tells you without having them providing any evidence then you are already too far gone.

"They have to actually show evidence of the destroying of those weapons"

They are no more. So we can only expect proff of the US "hard evidence", I mean I am not asking to see the thousands of litres of or tons of pounds of WoMD, just samples, at least....

"Why in the world would you trust a country like Iraq at its word given their past record? ", I have no other option, since the US cannot prove the contrary.

"I mean come on if you actually believe what Iraq tells you without having them providing any evidence then you are already too far gone."

I am not taking that personally.

[SurlyPIG]

Why isn't a left-winged media correct ?.

In fact I'd believe more in them rather than media sponsored by companies that smell like oil.

Is not what the media say what cares, is what you can conclude from that information, your own opinion, but coming here and discarding other sources just because you don't agree with them doesn't improve your view.

The trouble with left-winged media, Zamboe, is that you listen to it exclusively.

Corporate mass media like the CNN and NYTimes links you posted make their money by getting people to watch so that their ratings go up and advertisers pay more to get their stuff on the network. Overall, they devote the huge majority of their coverage to what will shock people into watching. Incidently, more shock = more profit. Incidentally, whatever they cover, they'll blow out of proportion in order to shock people. In times like during war, they'll tend to seek out cases of human trajedy. Since they won't report anything like "All's well in Kirkuk" they shift literally all of their focus onto things like the ooverblown museum looting.

Now, lets compare the CNN link you posted to the Instapundit link Gob posted. Which one's the slave to big corporations?

When you arrive at the CNN site, you are bombarded by logos, links, big menus, login features, a search engine, numerous outside advertisements, numerous internal advertisements,, a law dictionary, and even a lawyer finder.

When you arrive at the instapundit site, there are no ads, save a modest 'click here to donate' link at the very bottom of the page, there's no extra features pushed on you, you aren't asked to pay for premium service, and most importantly, the author actually linked to the material he/she wrote about.

Which one's the slave to big corporations?

[SurlyPIG]

You obviously - on purpouse I guess - avoided that part where Iraqi government said that they had destroyed all those weapons they said they had, so far since NOT A SINGLE SAMPLE of WoMD has been found, no matter how much I like the USA I cannot believe them.

What the dickens are you talking about? Iraq never said it destroyed its weapons. Saddam Hussein said that Iraq never HAD weapons.

You can't just neutralize 8500 litres of anthrax without leaving massive amounts of products you know. Use common sense.

Gob is right. If you actually believe Saddam Huseein over common sense, you are too fargone. Maybe if you swallow your bitter hatred of all things American, you'll make good decisions.

[zamboe]

Gob is right. If you actually believe Saddam Huseein over common sense, you are too fargone. Maybe if you swallow your bitter hatred of all things American, you'll make good decisions.

Gob might be right if he thinks so. I won't debate over who's right or who's not, I am satisfied with expressing my view.

I don't hate US citizens.

But you know, I am thinking why you and Gob in this case strongly disagree with me and support US. One possible answer to me is like this - I am going off topic, btw - you live in Canada, and that for southamericans in 99% is exactly the same as being US citizens, so having say that, you have never lived in an underdeveloped southamerican country, you have never know by life what the US really does here in the south, you don't go over this countries history, therefore you have no background of the -lies-foreing policy- the US had/have/will have/ , so I guess I understand you, based on your life, US is just like your country. You don't see every single day the efects of US lies & foreing policy. That's ok, you don't need to, we can believe all we want, isn't democracy good ?

[Gobalopper]

zamboe I don't have any problem with you not liking US administrations. But you can't just paint a picture of the current administration based off of past ones, to do so would be close minded. And to claim that because of pass administrations the US made up the weapons is simply not fair.

First you are jumping to conclusions and second you are assuming that this administration is completely stupid. I'm sorry but I don't think, despite what people say, that Bush is a complete moron. The administration would have known that if they were making this all up that it would come back to bite them in the ass. The Democrats would love to jump in and impeach Bush for lieing about the war, it would be political suicide to have lied about the weapons.

All I ask is that you stop jumping to conclusions about everything the US does, not every administration does things the same way you may be accustomed to.

[Egeides]

ACE, can you confirm you agree or disagree: people do not disagree because they hate America as a whole but the opposite, which is to oppose (hate for some) the American administration because they disagree.

Can you at least agree that it may be my case or zamboe's or John Doe's case? This isn't a minor issue!

[zamboe]

zamboe I don't have any problem with you not liking US administrations. But you can't just paint a picture of the current administration based off of past ones, to do so would be close minded.

So in your opinion I cannot paint a picture of the current US admin based on past events , at this point I recall a statment you just made :

"Why in the world would you trust a country like Iraq at its word given their past record?"

Paradox. So in your view I should use past records for Iraq and not for USA. That's not being coherent. To make my opinion, among other things, I use past records for both countries, and US past record in foreing policy is full of lies,conspiracy,sabotage,corruption, Iraq was full of it WITHIN THEIR BORDERS, on the contrary the US is full of that in poor, underveloped countries.

I fail to see how can someone can believe that US foreing policy is clean and fair, when the record and history proves the contrary, US didn't get the title of imperialist for nothing, somethings happened to get that title, obviously nothing to be proud of.

And to claim that because of pass administrations the US made up the weapons is simply not fair.First you are jumping to conclusions and second you are assuming that this administration is completely stupid. I'm sorry but I don't think, despite what people say, that Bush is a complete moron. The administration would have known that if they were making this all up that it would come back to bite them in the ass. The Democrats would love to jump in and impeach Bush for lieing about the war, it would be political suicide to have lied about the weapons.

All I ask is that you stop jumping to conclusions about everything the US does, not every administration does things the same way you may be accustomed to.

I don't question all the US does, on the contraty my critics are only to their foreing policy, which is the subject that dominates this forums since a year ago or so.

Second, I do not jump to conclussions, (btw jumping to conclussion is not bad if the analysis is well made), I just recall that the US said they had hard evidence and incredible ammounts of WoMD, I mean come on, months have past since the coalitions forces control Iraq at their will, not a single sample, not a single little trail has been found, they have found nothing, even in those 2 trucks, nothing, nothing inside.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

In WW2. They've even asked the British money when they sold weapons to the British, I suppose the Americans care so much about the good health of the health that they must always have cash in their pockets.

And zamboe is right, America always try to act like the good guy in the world and tries to be a police man at the same time.

That's the reason why Russia hates America, because they've double crossed them in past and even future agreements.

USA thinks that they can do everything they want, because they have the wings of god and all the nations are just products of evil.

[Gobalopper]

zamboe it was the same people in charge in Iraq. How does that make a paradox?

[zamboe]

zamboe it was the same people in charge in Iraq. How does that make a paradox?

The paradox is that you consider that past records of Iraq and not the past records of USA. Not coherent. Besides my previous post covered the subjects you pointed out before.

[Dude_Doc]

In WW2. They've even asked the British money when they sold weapons to the British, I suppose the Americans care so much about the good health of the health that they must always have cash in their pockets.

You do know that it costs to make weapons?

That's the reason why Russia hates America, because they've double crossed them in past and even future agreements.

Russia hates America? What are you talking about? You do know Russia is a democratic country, that is also involved in the oil-business? Why else would they be so interested in the Iraqui oil? And don't tell me Russia has been perfect, no country has.

[Gobalopper]

Of course I do, I know Saddam has lied in past whereas I don't remember any instances of *this* administration doing the same.

The UN knew that Iraq had weapons, Iraq even admitted they had weapons, the problem is they never provided any proof they had destroyed them. They just claimed to have destroyed them. That isn't good enough.

[zamboe]

Of course I do, I know Saddam has lied in past whereas I don't remember any instances of *this* administration doing the same.

The UN knew that Iraq had weapons, Iraq even admitted they had weapons, the problem is they never provided any proof they had destroyed them. They just claimed to have destroyed them. That isn't good enough.

Well, *this* administration as you call it, do not change US foreing policy, that policy has been unchanged (and will continue) since many administrations ago.

Interesting that you actually claim for proof of Iraq side when at the same time support the lack of US's proof. Certanly not objective, but that's just my opinion.

[SurlyPIG]

Zamboe, Gob is saying that it's unfair to judge this US administration on the actions of different administrations of the past because they aren't the same people and have different policies and make decisions differently. Iraq's hadn't because it was a dictatorship. No changes in government over 25 years.To judge Bush off of Nixon or Clinton off of Carter would essentially be stereotyping all administrations, and all Americans, as the same, which I know you do anyway but you could at least keep it off record.

Now all of a sudden Canadians are 99% the same as Americans? Oh puhlease! Have you ever lived in or even been to either country?

Gob, I don't recall ever hearing anything about Iraq even saying that they destroyed their weapons. I'm absolutely sure, though, when this all began, that Saddam Hussein himself said that Iraq doesn't have WMDs and never had them in the first place. Either way they're contradicting themselves, but do you have a link of them being quoted as saying that they destroyed the anthrax and VX?

ACE, can you confirm you agree or disagree: people do not disagree because they hate America as a whole but the opposite, which is to oppose (hate for some) the American administration because they disagree.

Can you at least agree that it may be my case or zamboe's or John Doe's case? This isn't a minor issue!

This is the case for guys like Nyar. For you or Zamboe? Not in a million years.

[Gobalopper]

zamboe the proof has to come from the Iraqi's because it has already been proven by the UN that they had weapons but had not destroyed them.

[DjCiD]

They just used all that time before the war to hide them right? Think they disassembled them and stored parts of them? Or did he ship them out to a safe haven to reacquire after his exile? ???

Was anything ever discovered at that underground nuke lab?