Boeing757/767
Topic Author
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:07 pm

Something to ponder:

Why is it that when the UN inspectors needed more time in Iraq the US said "Sorry, enough time"? And yet now that the US can't find WMDs, they're saying they need more time to find them.




Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:38 pm

Given the UN inspectors were given 12 years, I think it'll be a long time yet before you can speak of double standards  Laugh out loud
I wish I were flying
 
Boeing757/767
Topic Author
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 9:49 pm

12 years, yes, but just a few months of full-time, serious inspection opportunities.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:08 pm

Boeing757/767:

Well, Bush said (over and over again) he did have evidence, so really it shouldn't take this long...
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:22 pm

You're forgetting that all pieces of evidence have been hauled to Syria, including the entire ABC weapons programmes. Those mobile labs are mobile for a reason. Yeah sure
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2566
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 10:30 pm

Hey! This is the United States of America. It's all about double standards.

I wonder how Americans would feel if a greater military power were to emerge and announce that the U.S. had to disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction by a deadline or face a preemptive invasion?
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13438
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:01 pm

I wonder how Americans would feel if a greater military power were to emerge and announce that the U.S. had to disarm itself of weapons of mass destruction by a deadline or face a preemptive invasion?

Well, all mankind would band together to fight along side the U.S. in such a case, as any such military power would be from another planet...  Big grin
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:08 pm

Saddam kicked out the inspectors in 1998, not the US. Blame him if the UN was shortchanged on time.

The truth is, whether you like it or not, the world is safer because of the US nuclear arsenal. While the US may be imperfect, it is a lot better than any alternative hegemon. Unlike past powers, we do not go fight wars of conquest despite the inane babbling from Europe and the American left these days.
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:35 pm

N79969:

"Saddam kicked out the inspectors in 1998, not the US. Blame him if the UN was shortchanged on time. "



"16 Dec 1998 The Special Commission withdraws its staff from Iraq."
(Source: http://www.un.org/Depts/unscom/Chronology/chronology.htm)


  1. Guess when Operation Desert Fox started?

  2. Guess which nation used their inspectors on the UNSCOM team to secretly plant monitoring devices for their own intelligence?

  3. Guess how long it took before this nation admitted it had indeed misused the UNSCOM weapon inspectors team for their own purposes, thereby undermining the whole UN Security Council and the Iraqi inspection process?




N79969, is it really that hard to get the right info? It only happened 5 years ago!



Answers:
1. 16 december 1998.
2. US
3. 2 days (8 January 1999, after it had been officialy denounced by Kofi Annan two days earlier).
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
4holer
Posts: 2726
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2002 1:47 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:43 pm

Hate to make such a simple-minded point, but in the minds of some posters here, I wonder, if Saddam Hussein is not found, did he also not exist?



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:48 pm

Spare me your "right info" nonsense. Look at December 15 and the days before.... Quit selectively reading the facts to paint the distorted picture you want.

I am glad that someone was keeping an eye on the Iraqis since the UN is ready to roll-over to any dictator.

I am glad that our country is not led by people who cower at the prospect of dealing with people like Saddam and prefer debate endlessly in the style of Neville Chamberlain and put their faith in the words of people like Saddam Hussein.
 
Sabena 690
Posts: 6065
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2002 12:48 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 12:18 am

Given the UN inspectors were given 12 years, I think it'll be a long time yet before you can speak of double standards

No no no, again untrue Jeroen.

You need MILITARY PRESENCE in the Gulf before you can put pressure on Saddam.

America had to show it's power in the Gulf first. Now that they finally did this, the inspectors only had a few weeks to do their job.
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 5:49 am

4holer:

"Hate to make such a simple-minded point, but in the minds of some posters here, I wonder, if Saddam Hussein is not found, did he also not exist?"

You said it yourself,... it is a simple-minded point!


N79969:

"Spare me your "right info" nonsense."

No, I already assumed you prefer to be lied to...

"Quit selectively reading the facts to paint the distorted picture you want. "

You're the one 'inventing' Saddam kicked out the inspectors in 1998 when it's simply not true! Don't blame me for your imagination!

"I am glad that someone was keeping an eye on the Iraqis since the UN is ready to roll-over to any dictator."

Apparently, they were able to disarm this dictator.

"I am glad that our country is not led by people who cower at the prospect of dealing with people like Saddam..."

You're completely right. We were SO AFRAID of Saddam...

"...and prefer debate endlessly in the style of Neville Chamberlain "

Remember that your country is also a permanent UN Security Council Member. Many countries have tried to find a solution at the Security Council over all these years, only to find the opposition of the US with its veto-power. If this has all taken too long for you, the US is also to blame in a great way.

"...and put their faith in the words of people like Saddam Hussein."

I would agree if indeed the UN Weapons Inspectors would have believed before this war started Saddam was a threat and did have those WMD's Bush has been scaring you about. Ask the parents of the dead US soldiers in Iraq if they still have faith in the words of Bush & Co.? After all, he send their children to fight a war over a cause that didn't exist!
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 6:30 am

Schoenorama,

What do you think happened in 1998? The inspectors went back to Vienna for a coffee break? Saddam quit cooperating: i.e. inspectors, take a hike. He got rid of them.

You do selectively read. Read your own link and see what precipitated the departure of the UN.

From what I hear, I think the parents of fallen US soldiers are proud of their children, their country, and our President.

Implicit in your posts is that unless weapons are found they did not exist. Bad logic.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6419
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 6:46 am

What a stupid word twisting going on here. The facts are:

1. Iraq used WMD against Iran.

2. Iraq used WMD against its own people.

3. Iraq did not co-operate promptly and willingly with the UN inspectors in 1991. Not even in 1992 to 2003.

4. Thanks to the coalition forces Britain, Denmark, Poland and the USA there will not be WMDs in Iraq in the future.

That's the whole ten yards for me.

And the coalition was backed verbally by 40+ brave countries.

The discussion about how easy or difficult WMDs are to find, or how easy or difficult WMDs are to hide inside or outside the country, is fruitless.

The bottom line is that a somewhat better world has been created for all people who are uneasy having WMD capability in the hands of ruthless and brutal dictators. It is no more complicated than that.

As an extra bonus the latter includes the Iraqi people as well.

Kind regards, Preben Norholm
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 7:49 am

Here we go again. Those of us who see this appalling two-faced game by the Bush Administration will never be convinced that the're telling the truth on this one.

The UN did not have 12 years of inspections, so Jwenting, you can stow that one good buddy. The UN didn't have the balls for 12 years to make their declarations stick, so they deserve a lot of the blame. But so does Bush, for this constant, daily pounding on the airwaves and in the print media that Saddam was capable of launching an massive WMD attack on his neighbors, when that is now obviously not the case.

We have lack of action from one quarter-the UN, and over-reaction from the other-the US, which has lead to one big fucked-up situation of war, occupation, and guerilla warfare is sure to drag on into next year's presidential election cycle.

Same old, same old.
 
B747forlife
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 9:36 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:23 am

Actually 4-holer, that is not a simple minded post. It makes perfect sense and it blows a lot of the ideas that Bush lied out of the water. I mean, Saddam cannot be found, so therefore, under the liberal rhetoric here (the US) and the UK about fabricated evidence, etc. he never existed and was also fabricated.

Obviously, the WMD were not destroyed (if they had been I'm sure Saddam would have been able to prove it (what dictator would give up the chance to make a US president look like an absolute IDIOT)) and are just waiting to be found. We know they did exist because Saddam used them in the past multiple times. Therefore, because there is no proof of their destruction, and they did exist, Saddam must have had them.

-Nick
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:31 am

N79969:

"You do selectively read. Read your own link and see what precipitated the departure of the UN. "

I do know what happened prior to 16 December 1998. But there's a BIG difference between being KICKED OUT by Saddam and leaving the country voluntarily.

"From what I hear, I think the parents of fallen US soldiers are proud of their children, their country, and our President."

Poor parents...

"Implicit in your posts is that unless weapons are found they did not exist. Bad logic"

How do you mean, implicit in my post? All I said to 4holer is that his remark (No Saddam Found = He Didn't Exist) was indeed simple-minded. Please do read my posts more carefully!

Prebennorholm:

"What a stupid word twisting going on here."

Stupid? I believe it all makes pretty good sense...

"3. Iraq did not co-operate promptly and willingly with the UN inspectors in 1991. Not even in 1992 to 2003."

True. Guess why Iraq didn't do so. If the UN Security Council would have been a completely independent body with consistent policies throughout the 12 years of inspections, an attack on Iraq would have been totally acceptable. But the UN Security Council has been anything but consistent in its policies and inspections over all these years, mainly, if not entirely, due to the fact that some countries, with a veto power, have used the sanctions to accomplish their own political interests. One country in particular, the US, stated they would not support (or would even veto) a resolution for the lifting of the sanctions even in the case Iraq complied with all resolutions.
Now guess why Saddam didn't cooperate with the UN during all these years. Because he knew that the sanctions wouldn't be lifted anyway and that some countries tried very hard, through the UN Security Council, to get him out of power.

"4. Thanks to the coalition forces Britain, Denmark, Poland and the USA there will not be WMDs in Iraq in the future."

Prior to this war, and according to UNSCOM, UNMOVIC and IAEA, there wasn't a threat comming from Iraq, as Bush and Blair (and Aznar, you forgot about him  Smile/happy/getting dizzy) repeated over and over again. And as things are now, 2 months after the Saddam Regime fell, the combined weapons inspectors' assessment of the situation in Iraq has already been proven more accurate than the assessment by the coalition forces, Spain included.

"And the coalition was backed verbally by 40+ brave countries."

And wasn't backed, both verbally as oficially, by the rest of the world, nor did the coalition have a specific UN Security Council Resolution. (Resolution 1441 can only be applied in case WMD's are actually found.)

"The discussion about how easy or difficult WMDs are to find, or how easy or difficult WMDs are to hide inside or outside the country, is fruitless."

Is it? Mind you, I might even agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that Bush, Blair and the other Hawks have made numerous statements saying they had evidence, they had documents, which all proved Iraq was an imminent threat to the US.

"The bottom line is that a somewhat better world has been created for all people who are uneasy having WMD capability in the hands of ruthless and brutal dictators. It is no more complicated than that."

It is A LOT more complicated than that.

"As an extra bonus the latter includes the Iraqi people as well."

Don't jump to conclusion too early, please. See what happened in Afghanistan and what is actually happening there NOW.

B747forlife:

"I mean, Saddam cannot be found, so therefore, under the liberal rhetoric here (the US) and the UK about fabricated evidence, etc. he never existed and was also fabricated."

Guess what Mr Keneth Adelman, Member of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, told the Washington Post on April 10th?

"..with fear of Saddam almost gone, the United States should have the information on Iraq's WMD in the next five days."

Guess what he said on May 17 to the same newspaper?

"It was possible that Saddam's whole program of WMD was a gigantic hoax. Not a hoax perpetrated by the Bush administration, mind you, but by Saddam himself. Saddam may, said Adelman, have launched "a massive disinformation campaign to make the world think he was violating international norms, and he may not have been."

Mind you, this guy is on the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee !!!

And you complain about 'liberal rhetoric'?

" Obviously, the WMD were not destroyed (if they had been I'm sure Saddam would have been able to prove it (what dictator would give up the chance to make a US president look like an absolute IDIOT))"

Don't you see that now, while there is still not a single trace about any WMD's and people are slowly starting to wonder why, Bush already looks like a complete IDIOT? He was the one that said they had evidence, that there was an imminent threat, yet nothing has been found yet, not even Saddam himself.

"Therefore, because there is no proof of their destruction, and they did exist, Saddam must have had them."

Yes there is proof of their destruction. Read the Weapons Inspectors reports. There all online. You complain about 'liberal rhetoric' yet your argument (He had them, no proof, he still has them) is based on wrong and incomplete information.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
delta-flyer
Posts: 2631
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:47 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:03 am

We have a double standard because we are just simply EVIL. We all wish to conquer the world and take all its oil. We also want everyone to speak English and eat pizza (which at one time may have been Italian, but we stole it from them, just as we stole French ... er ... freedom fries). We also want to take away everyone's freedom of speech (but only if they disagree with us) and all their civil rights as well. We also want to force our culture on the whole world (which many say is not a culture at all, as they chow down a Big Mac and a Coke), and force everyone to watch CNN and and Michael Jackson.

I can go on and on, but I notice that many of you have already discovered our secret conspiracy.

Pete
"In God we trust, everyone else bring data"
 
david b.
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:18 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:10 am

You discribe the bush admin pete
Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 12:08 pm

Hey N79969-did you happen to catch that parent of an African American soldier killed in the first 2 weeks of battle cuss out the camera and blame G Dubya for the loss of life?

Being proud of their children...yes, because they gave their life for a cause, no matter what cause, but being proud of a nation that sent their children to fight an unneccessary war and DYING...no, of course they're not proud of that.

Many people don't go to the Army and serve to protect their nation, they can go and have a career only after doing the basic foot soldier work, unfortunately, those who did, may and have been killed.
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
delta-flyer
Posts: 2631
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:47 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:20 pm

You discribe the bush admin pete

I was describing ALL Americans. Including you, bubba.

Pete
"In God we trust, everyone else bring data"
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:44 pm



No Pete,

You're precisely describing what Bush wants to do.

But you should take away the word "Evil" who is a religious term used mainly by Bush and Republican senators to frighten Americans (so it's easier to bomb countries or to make huge tax reduction while making huge military expenses raise).
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Wed Jun 18, 2003 9:50 pm


What a stupid word twisting going on here. The facts are:

1. Iraq used WMD against Iran.

2. Iraq used WMD against its own people.



If the US were afraid of something, that was not of the gas they sold to Saddam Hussein to help him fight Iran.
That's more of nuclear or biological weapons. I even don't know if the gas is called "WMD".
I don't think it would scare anybody in the US to see a mad islamist with an hair spray full of mustard gas.

But was Bush afraid of weapons or afraid to lose control in this region ?

[Edited 2003-06-18 15:05:04]
 
Boeing757/767
Topic Author
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:29 am

Also, if the chemical attacks were such a concern, why didnt' the US act sooner?

The point, made above, sums it up nicely: It's not whether Iraq ever had WMD, but whether they had them before the war, as Bush accused.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:45 am

B757/767,

The answer to your question is 9/11. There was a definite before and after effect on our thinking.

Sebolino,

Give it a rest. France armed Saddam to teeth during the 1980s. Your country helped him develop a nuclear reactor at Osirak.

Vafi,

I did not say all. I said most. I stand by it.

Schoenorama,

Give me a break. Saddam halted the UN inspectors from working. What were they supposed to do? Wait around until Saddam changed his mind again? Wait for official deportation orders?

Although you strenuosly claim otherwise and I have tended to believe you until this point, you strike me as an apologist for Saddam Hussein. While I do not believe that you condone his conduct as dictator, you seem to split many a hair in order to find fault with the US but then make dubious claims such as the UN just packed up and left in 1998.



 
david b.
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:18 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:49 am

N79969, open up your mind and realize that bush may have lied his ass off about this.
Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:53 am


Give it a rest. France armed Saddam to teeth during the 1980s.


During the 1980's ? That's possible. Your country did exactly the same.


Your country helped him develop a nuclear reactor at Osirak.


Yeah. Do you think it's easy to throw a civil nuclear reactor on your enemies ?
And it waS made at the same time YOUR country armed IRAQ against IRAN. Some time after, YOUR country armed IRAN against IRAQ. And now, YOUR country is blaming IRAN to have weapons.
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:00 am

David b.,

Please refrain from ever telling anyone about keeping an open mind. The irony of it is simply too much to bear.

I acknowledge the possibility that George Bush, Tony Blair, Colin Powell, and George Tenet may have lied in concert in order to garner support for the invasion of Iraq. But I find it extremely improbable. I am convinced that Saddam Hussein attempted to obtain WMD and took some steps. I think the leader that I mention took imperfect information (= all intelligence) and took a gamble in the sincere and well-founded belief that Saddam Hussein was a threat to world stability.

You or I may not take that bet. Personally, I probably would have walked away from the entire mess when France went into grandstanding hysterics at the UN and would have dropped Iraq right in their lap. Let them deal with it.

Sebolino, You are probably right. We should have just ignored Iran after their hostage-taking and their sponsorship of terrorism. That would have been the wiser course of action. We should pick easier targets like Greenpeace.



[Edited 2003-06-18 18:02:25]

[Edited 2003-06-18 18:04:09]
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6419
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 5:25 am

Sebolino: I even don't know if the gas is called "WMD". I don't think it would scare anybody in the US to see a mad islamist with an hair spray full of mustard gas.

Dear Sebolino, you obviously haven't served in the military and learned about ABC-warfare.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:18 pm

Dear Sebolino, you obviously haven't served in the military and learned about ABC-warfare.

Dear Prebennorholm,

Yes that's right I didn't make war. Probably the only one here ???  Smile/happy/getting dizzy  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

But I still don't think Bush said he made this war for a bottle of gas.
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:20 pm

Sebolino, You are probably right. We should have just ignored Iran after their hostage-taking and their sponsorship of terrorism. That would have been the wiser course of action.

I don't know what "you" should have done, but facts are that YOUR country gave weapons to everybody including Saddam Hussein and Osama BinLaden, and that YOUR country is in trouble because of that, and that YOU and your friends are accusing Europe for all your problems.
 
Boeing757/767
Topic Author
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:49 pm

Here's an interesting quote from Hans Blix in today's New York Times:

"What surprises me, what amazes me, is that it seems the military people were expecting to stumble on large quantities of gas, chemical weapons and biological weapons. I don't see how they could have come to such an attitude if they had, at any time, studied the [U.N. inspectors'] reports."
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: What The World Thinks Of America

Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:32 am

N79969:

The US themselve also halted the inspections from working. They did so over and over. Ask Scott Ritter what he believes of the US interference with the UN inspection team. Of course Saddam wasn't cooperating. I wouldn't have done so either if I were in the same situation.

The UN sanctions were imposed to disarm Iraq, but they were being used by a few nations to achieve a Regime Change. Saddam knew that even in the case he complied with all the resolutions and completely disarmed, there would be a very good possibility the sanctions would NOT be lifted because of the opposition of these nations, some of which on numerous occasions had already threatened to use its veto power on the same issue.

" Although you strenuosly claim otherwise and I have tended to believe you until this point, you strike me as an apologist for Saddam Hussein..."

You're talking complete b0ll0cks again! The typical Bush rhetoric, the 'You're with me or your against me'-bullsh!t. All I have done is inform people a bit better about what exactly happened over these past 12 years. I you don't like what you read, don't blame me, blame history!

While I do not believe that you condone his conduct as dictator,..."

Bush's reasons to go to war were WMD's, not Saddam being a terrible dictator!

"...you seem to split many a hair in order to find fault with the US but then make dubious claims such as the UN just packed up and left in 1998."

Dubious claim? I even gave you a link! Here's another one. Note the 'departure date' of the UN inspectors and the date on which Operation Desert Fox began.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/page/0,12438,793802,00.html
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
LSTC
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 11:45 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:02 am

1. Iraq used WMD against Iran.

Yes. The WMDs that were supplied by various countries including the US.

2. Iraq used WMD against its own people.

Yes. This statement can apply to any civil war or uprising. How about LSD or agent orange? Remember Gulf War Syndrome? And again, he wouldn't have been able to do it without the expertise and supplies from several countries including the US.

3. Iraq did not co-operate promptly and willingly with the UN inspectors in 1991. Not even in 1992 to 2003.

Yes. But it's starting to look like Saddam was correct when he said he had nothing to hide and that inspections were not only warranted, but inappropriate.

4. Thanks to the coalition forces Britain, Denmark, Poland and the USA there will not be WMDs in Iraq in the future.

Yes...at least not until the US or some other countries deems it in their best interests. Then the cycle will be restarted. Does that seem like an unlikely scenario? Lets wait and see if the Iraqi people eventually support a "Saddam-like" leader that the US doesn't like. You can be sure the US will back anyone who attempts to remove him/her.

Let's get serious here. The US and the coalition forces have unprecedented access to the entire country and the benefit of evidence supporting by loads of intelligence......or maybe they don't and Bush just lied to win popular support for the occupation of Iraq thinly veiled as a war against terrorism.

If this guy gets re-elected without evidence of WMDs being presented, I really will lose respect for the American public.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:41 am

Prebennorholm,

4. Thanks to the coalition forces Britain, Denmark, Poland and the USA there will not be WMDs in Iraq in the future.

Uh, aren't you forgetting the another significant military partner - Australia?





Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
delta-flyer
Posts: 2631
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:47 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 12:00 pm

If this guy gets re-elected without evidence of WMDs being presented, I really will lose respect for the American public.

Sounds to me like you already have.

Pete
"In God we trust, everyone else bring data"
 
LSTC
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 11:45 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 12:30 pm

Sounds to me like you already have.

No Pete, anyone can be fooled once, but "fool me twice shame on me..."

There are good and bad administrations. The records speak for themselves. Nobody could have forecasted exactly how this administration would perform, although many took a shot at it. History will document Mr. Bush's record and reveal his true character.
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 6:30 pm

Lets get this thing straight... Bush/Blair said they were going to war because of the WMDs. Of course, that was a load of rubbish - they were going to war to remove Saddam Hussien. Don't believe me - well, if they'd gone to war and got rid of the WMDs, would they have left Saddam in power - I think not. Saddam could still have operated and performed genocide without WMDs, and because of the way he dealt with his own population and the rest of the world they needed to get rid of him. They just couldn't put it like that, at least not without stirring up even more resistance to war than they actually did. Nothing wrong with wanting to get rid of Saddam, in my opinion, but of course going to war to force regime change is illegal whilst removing the threat of WMDs sounds much more pallitable.

So they went to war on a WMD basis, in all probability fudging the evidence to justify that approach, and now of course they have a minor problem... Despite assuring us Saddam still had WMDs, despite telling us they had proof, they can't find the things. Quite bizzare how that proof has suddenly become useless. So right now, the whole basis on which the war was undertaken starts to look a little shakey. If Bush/Blair had been a little more honest about their motivations and justifactions for war in the first place, they may well have had more problems getting the action of the ground, but right now they'd be having a much easier job of justifying what they'd done and why, and the WMD issue just wouldn't be one.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:22 pm

Of course, that was a load of rubbish - they were going to war to remove Saddam Hussien.

That's right.
But if the point was only to help Iraq's people, it could have been done before. The US have great interest to remove S. Hussein, to have this region under control. It will allow a pull out of Saudi Arabia.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:32 pm

If Blair knew the WMD's didn't exist but pursued the strategy he did. He knew it would be political suicide. The weapons will be found, Saddam is gone.
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:22 pm

FDXMech is exactly right. Bush and Blair and others took a gamble on the well-founded belief that Saddam had an active WMD program. He used them before and there many indications of continued activity. The removal of Saddam Hussein is an unequivocally good thing and was a laudable goal on its own.

Sebolino,

You may not have noticed but the US is leaving Saudi Arabia. It was announced 6 or 8 weeks ago.
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Fri Jun 20, 2003 11:52 pm

You may not have noticed but the US is leaving Saudi Arabia. It was announced 6 or 8 weeks ago.

I didn't know, but that's a proof of what I am saying !
Now it's sure the US will stay for a long time in Iraq.l
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sat Jun 21, 2003 12:33 am

The US bases have been move to Qatar. I don't think there are plans to build a long term military presence in Iraq.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sat Jun 21, 2003 12:59 am

>>>I didn't know, but that's a proof of what I am saying !
Now it's sure the US will stay for a long time in Iraq.
<<<

I strongly disagree. The U.S. does not want to stay in Iraq for any longer than necessary. But that being said, I think it would be unwise or more to the point, wrong, to leave Iraq too soon. Because agree or disagree, we went into Iraq and rid them of Saddam. Now we have the responsibility to stabilize the situation. If we knowingly left prematurally and Iraq degenerated into chaos, that would be unforgivable.

The stategic implication of leaving Saudi Arabia was this. S.A. feared for its security with Saddam in power. The U.S. military presence in Arabia, though invited had Riyhad walking a tightrope. Security vs. non-Muslims troops stationed in Islamic holyland. OBL's official gripe with the U.S. was having troops in Saudi Arabia.

With the threat of Saddam gone, the U.S. by mutual interest, left S.A.

9/11 forced upon us all sorts of strategic options that must now be, and are at this moment being reckoned with.
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
jaysit
Posts: 10186
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 11:50 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sat Jun 21, 2003 3:24 am

WMDs don't matter anymore, you see.

Now that Saddam Hussein is gone, the world is a safer place. So it didn't matter if he spent his people's money on WMDs or if he was a toothless tiger who spent his hapless people's money on ugly art.

That still leaves open the issue that the chimp we call President and his two-faced regime, lied to us, left right and center. It only goes to show that this regime will do just about anything to get its way. And that the American press will kiss its arse to get some cheezy real-time footage of US marines rolling across the Iraqi desert.

So in 6 years we have been lied to by a chronic philanderer about blow jobs, and a thuggish dullard about blow-up jobs.

Time for a regime change in this country.
Atheism is Myth Understood.
 
DC10GUY
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 5:52 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sat Jun 21, 2003 3:35 am

Jaysit, At least dubya didn't lie about getting a blow job .... So a few thousand Iraqis are killed and a few hundred US g.i.s die .... At least Bush & co. Will be richer .... Watch out Iran ... If dubya gets re-elected your next.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
 
pacificjourney
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:12 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sun Jun 22, 2003 1:32 am

Heard the latest ? Those looters took the WMD's.

The world's most efficient and organised looters, it's obvious really.
" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sun Jun 22, 2003 10:12 am

The looters also tied up Saddam & sons, right? He never really existed since he cannot be found.
 
pacificjourney
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:12 pm

RE: A Double-standard On WMDs

Sun Jun 22, 2003 12:36 pm

They also shot JFK. War on Looters anyone ?
" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests