5280AGL From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 414 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 987 times:
Oh my god, that was about the dumbest repsonse I have ever seen on this board. How is Israel different from Iraq? Ummm, well, for starters...Lets talk about SADDAM HUSSEIN! Iraq would actually use their weapons if given the chance...would Israel? Well, considering they haven't already, what makes you think they would now or in the future?
Racko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4853 posts, RR: 20 Reply 4, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 979 times:
Blix and Baradei said that Iraq's cooperation has improved over the last week and want the inspections to go on and to expand them, as proposed by France & Germany and supported by China and Russia. The missiles which were called a material breach by Blair had been reported in the 12.000 page dossier which Iraq handed over in december. Blix has also questioned some of the "evidence" from Powell, particularly the vehicles which Powell called "Decontainment trucks" by Powell. Blix also said that Iraq has to comply further with the inspections. And Blix complained that some intelligence agencies are not handing over informations about possible WMD.
Currently the French foreign minister is making his statement. He wants to continue and expand the inspections, as Blix and Baradei have requested and as France & Germany had already proposed earlier this week. He says the use of force is not entitled by the results of the inspections.
The Syrian representative is btw always talking about Israel and Palestine, no matter what's the agenda, and if they were talking about the weather.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 978 times:
5280AGL, how could you prove Iraq would use those weapons? This is just typical propaganda, which you catched. No country is stupid enough to use WOMD, because they knows how this would end up. You can see how Saddam tries to do everything to stay in power and avoid war... Well, usage of WOMD would immidietly force him out of power. He is not that stupid.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 975 times:
Yes, I have to agree that Israel is a bit better than Iraq because it is democratic. But I doubt however if USA would let Iraq or any other muslim state in the region to get WOMD even if they would be democratic...
Mt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6479 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 964 times:
If the US attack.. Iraq will become another Israel.. in the sense that groups will "fight" for the ocupation just like Israel and fight to "get back" Iraq.. just groups want to "get back" Israel.. I just think that it will be a bigger mess than that it is now, and that in the long run it will do more harm than good. Unfortunately the US is knee deep in a pissing contest with the rest of the world and even if Saddam allowed George Bush to personally inspect his countyr the US will attack just so that no one says that they were wrong or backed off (IMHO, of course). One more thing:
Does anyone else get the impression that Powell is not fully convinced that war is the best option, but just going along with his boss? (something in his eyes)
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 961 times:
Iran is far from getting WOMD. WIth Pakistan it is a completely different issue - remember, until about 1994 USA supported Pakistan in Indian/Pakistan conflict. Thus they also supported/turned a blind eye on Pakistani program, as India already had WOMD. I believe if pakistan still wouldn't have WOMD and would try to get them now, USA would protest.
Mt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6479 posts, RR: 6 Reply 11, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 945 times:
sorry.. but i guess nitpickers her will comment on my "rest of the world" thing.. i meant other nations (so there)
ive been hearing all these things about the UN becoming irrelevant (as stated by the US-side of the argumnet).. It seems the the US-sides is saying the the UN is not relevant beacause they dont let us do what we want when we want it.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 812 times:
Whoever thought of this particular piece of idiocy (all indications I have seen are France) is delusional and actually suggesting it borders on lunacy. Saddam Hussein is a dictator. Laws do not apply to him in Iraq and apparently the UN. The stupidity of anti-WMD legislation in Iraq at this point is almost beyond words.
Cyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 789 times:
It is clear that Blix's report is a blow to the US push for war.
Blix openly questionned the so-called proofs Powell showed last week, and neutral countries like Chile joined the franco-german-russian position.
Even Spain began to take a more neutral stance...
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 758 times:
Nice transition Cyril.
I am convinced that Iraq has WMD. The evidence is clear that Saddam is hiding something.
I am not convinced that the US (and the UK) should take on the burden of disarming him alone. As I have stated before, I am for full withdrawal from the Iraq theater. I think the US should hand over the challenge of disarming Iraq to France and Germany and walk away.
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 747 times:
Saddam Hussein will be glad to know that he has convinced somebody. Only the most naive actually believe that Saddam does not have WMD. In 1999, the UN reported that Saddam had enough botulinum toxin to kill everyone on the planet 3 times over. That is just one kind of weapon. The UN also reported on stores of VX, sarin, and anthrax. Now Saddam claims that they never existed and people rushing to believe him.
If Powell went and showed photos of missles or of anthrax under a microscope, would you have believed him? How about a picture of Saddam holding a vial of VX smiling? How about then?
Among reasonable people, there is no question about whether he has them or not. He clearly is hiding WMD. However there is debate among reasonable people about whether his possession of these weapons justifies waging a war before he can use these weapons or give them to some group who will. That is the question the world needs to be debating. The debate on whether he has WMD is a waste of time.
Mt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6479 posts, RR: 6 Reply 23, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 738 times:
Well the US seems to be asking the UN to do something impossible which is to prove a negative statement: "Prove that Iraq has no WMD" What Dr. Blix said is completly true and does not support the US claims: "We havent seen WMD but that doesnt mean that there arent any".
Let me take a radical turn to the left here: "Prove to me that the biological weapons the US has will not be used agains civilians"
I agree that the world would be a better place ifIraq, Russia, France, US, britain and all countries got rid of WMD. Iraq Should disarm Saddam is crazy and he may be trigger happy, but there are ways to get this done. I also agree that the "cooperation" that iraq has shown latetly has only been due to the pressure that has been placed on it latley and probably would not have cooperated other wise. Lets keep the pressure level up.. lets allow the inspectors to contuine to do their job.. then lets talk about war
BTW, yes a picture of Saddam would convince me and many other (the smile is not necessary, though) Do you have one?
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 723 times:
This is not simply proving a negative. Saddam had this stuff in 1999 (and of course used mustard gas in 1980s). He has offered no proof that he destroyed any of it. Instead he pretends that it never existed.
WMD are not like pennies in a coin tray...countries that have them keep an eye on them, make sure the containers don't leak, and are otherwise careful. If he destroyed them, there would almost certainly some evidence that he did so: paper, a toxic waste dump, something.
I agree with you Mt99 that we should keep the pressure up. The problem is that Europe and to a lesser extent Russia are sending the following message to Saddam: you can keep doing what you have been doing and we will do nothing but talk about it. In the process, they are watering-down our effective message of "comply or else." Any results in the disarmament of Iraq should be credited to the Bush Administration's pressure.
Our allies need to stand with us in telling Saddam he needs to disarm or face actual, meaningful consequences. He will not respond to anything else if at all.
25 Klaus: N79969: WMD are not like pennies in a coin tray...countries that have them keep an eye on them, make sure the containers don't leak, and are otherwise
26 Cfalk: That’s exactly what the inspectors are working on as we speak. This topic was explicitly mentioned in the report. So why are so many people willing
27 Klaus: Cfalk: So why are so many people willing to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt? If that were the case, there would be no inspections, obviously. Cfa
28 Thumper: Cfalk: Great post! Glad to see someone across the pond has the brains they were born with!