luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:19 am

You can cut the irony with a knife
 
TechRep
Posts: 1877
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2002 6:53 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:26 am

When your trying to steal Iraqi oil, I guess it's important to cancel all the debt first and install a government picked democratically.

TechRep
 
luv2fly
Posts: 11056
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 2:57 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:45 am

Yeah that is why we went to war, cheap oil! Then why am I paying more to fill up my car each and every time I pull into the gas station.......
You can cut the irony with a knife
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2099
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:47 am

like this should be a surprise......it was about time they announced it...we all knew it was coming....
The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:50 am


We all know Mr Allawi is a puppet for the US Govt.
If he wins, there be democracy in Iraq.

0,02

Micke/SE  Insane
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
commander_rabb
Posts: 723
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:59 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:53 am

Talk about giving support to a new government. Only America in the world today has such power!

Here's to the people of Iraq!
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:56 am

Yes, Rabb, because the interest of the Iraqi people is all the US is looking out for, right? And only America has such power to destroy a country than support a puppet government they put there.

Here's to the WMDs!
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
commander_rabb
Posts: 723
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:59 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:05 am

Here's to a peaceful Iraq!

I realize some of you scoundrels don't want that because in the end the U.S. may come out looking good? Perish the thought.

Get real.
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:10 am

Yes Rabb, i'm more concerned with the image of the US than whether my friends' families in Baghdad are going to be able to live in peace anytime soon. You know, the universe does not revolve around the US, as much as you'd like to think it.

Anyway, at least something in your post was (*SHOCK*) intelligent.

To a peacful Iraq, and may all the innocents killed in this conflict rest in peace.

I'm off to bed.
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:11 am

"Here's to the WMDs!"

Your right QR332, we were stupid for invading, we should have waited until Saddam was finished. Then he could have blown up half the Middle East, and our invasion would have been legitimate.




Friday, Oct. 8, 2004 11:16 a.m. EDT
No WMD Stockpiles in Iraq? Not Exactly ...

Is it really true that Saddam Hussein had no "stockpiles" of weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invaded in March 2003?

Not exactly - at least not if one counts the 500 tons of uranium that the Iraqi dictator kept stored at his al Tuwaitha nuclear weapons development plant.

The press hasn't made much of Saddam's 500-ton uranium stockpile, downplaying the story to such an extent that most Americans aren't even aware of it.
But it's been reported - albeit in a by-the-way fashion - by the New York Times and a handful of other media outlets. And one of Saddam's nuclear scientists, Jaffar Dhia Jaffar, admitted to the BBC earlier this year, "We had 500 tons of yellow cake [uranium] in Baghdad."

Surely 500 tons of anything qualifies as a "stockpile." And press reports going back more than a decade give no indication that weapons inspectors had any idea the Iraqi dictator had amassed such a staggering amount of nuke fuel until the U.S. invaded.

That's when the International Atomic Energy Agency was finally able to take a full inventory, and suddenly the 500-ton figure emerged.

Still, experts say Saddam's massive uranium stockpile was largely benign.

Largely? Well, except for the 1.8 tons of uranium that Saddam had begun to enrich. The U.S. Energy Department considered that stockpile so dangerous that it mounted an unprecedented airlift operation four months ago to remove the enriched uranium stash from al Tuwaitha.

But didn't most of that enrichment take place before the first Gulf War - with no indication whatsoever that Saddam was capable of proceeding any further toward his dream of acquiring the bomb?

That seems to be the consensus. But there's also disturbing evidence to the contrary.

David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector who was hailed by the press last year for pronouncing Iraq WMD-free, shared some interesting observations with Congress this past January about goings-on at al Tuwaitha in 2000 and 2001.

"[The Iraqis] started building new buildings, renovating it, hiring some new staff and bringing them together," Kay said. "And they ran a few physics experiments, re-ran experiments they'd actually run in the '80s."

"Fortunately, from my point of view," he added, "Operation Iraqi Freedom intervened and we don't know how or how fast that would have gone ahead. ... Given their history, it was certainly an emerging program that I would not have looked forward to their continuing to pursue."

Kay's successor, Charles Duelfer, also has confirmed that nuclear research at al Tuwaitha was continuing right up until the U.S. invasion, telling Congress in March that Saddam's scientists were "preserving and expanding [their] knowledge to design and develop nuclear weapons."

One laboratory at al Tuwaitha, Duelfer said, "was intentionally focused on research applicable for nuclear weapons development."

Still, most experts say that Iraq was nowhere near being able to produce nuclear weapons, which is a good thing, considering how much raw material Saddam had to work with.

Writing in the London Evening Standard earlier this year, Norman Dombey, professor of theoretical physics at the University of Sussex, walked his readers through a simple calculation:

"You have a warehouse containing 500 tons of natural uranium; you need 25 kilograms of U235 to build one weapon. How many nuclear weapons can you build? The answer is 142."

Fortunately for the world, Saddam didn't have the nuclear enrichment technology to convert his 500-ton uranium stockpile into weapons-grade bombmaking material.

Or did he?

After he was captured by U.S. forces in Baghdad last year, Dr. Mahdi Obeidi, who ran Saddam's nuclear centrifuge program until 1997, had some disturbing news for coalition debriefers.

He kept blueprints for a nuclear centrifuge, along with some actual centrifuge components, stored at his home - buried in the front yard - awaiting orders from Baghdad to proceed.

"I had to maintain the program to the bitter end," Obeidi said recently. His only other choice was death.

In his new book, "The Bomb in My Garden," the Iraqi physicist explains that his nuclear stash was the key that could have unlocked and restarted Saddam's bombmaking program.

"The centrifuge is the single most dangerous piece of nuclear technology," he writes. "With advances in centrifuge technology, it is now possible to conceal a uranium enrichment program inside a single warehouse."

Last week Dr. Obeidi warned in a New York Times op-ed piece that Saddam could have restarted his nuclear program "with a snap of his fingers."

Perhaps the 500-ton stockpile of nuclear fuel that Saddam kept at al Tuwaitha wasn't quite as benign as our media like to pretend.

"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
theCoz
Posts: 3933
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:06 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:12 am

Good, now the Iraqis have one fewer excuse to whine and complain.

It's up to them to build their country; not us. They have every opportunity they need to succeed. If they're not able to build their country with our support, they'll simply get what they want, and deserve.

 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 6:39 am

Talk about giving support to a new government. Only America in the world today has such power!

Here's to the people of Iraq!


Yes, here's to swindling a billion from the American taxpayer.

God, you are gullible. That's OUR money they forgave. What a crock of shit this is.

Here's to a peaceful Iraq!

HAHAHAHAHA! A peaceful Iraq? After this invasion that we started a year and a half ago, and you want to raise a toast to a peaceful Iraq. God Almight, you just take my breath away sometime.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:11 am

JetMechMD80:

Nice to see you posted a link to your little article.

Now let's have a look at this article itself:

"Not exactly - at least not if one counts the 500 tons of uranium that the Iraqi dictator kept stored at his al Tuwaitha nuclear weapons development plant. "

Complete and utter bullsh!t! Saddam did not have 500 tons of uranium. The UN Weapons Inspectors had this material and did not have enough time to move it out of the country, because Mr Bush was so eager about invading the place!

"The press hasn't made much of Saddam's 500-ton uranium stockpile, downplaying the story to such an extent that most Americans aren't even aware of it."

Perhaps because the press, unlike the author of this 'article', haven't misunderstood who actually was in control of those 500 tons of uranium? Just a wild guess....

"And one of Saddam's nuclear scientists, Jaffar Dhia Jaffar, admitted to the BBC earlier this year, "We had 500 tons of yellow cake [uranium] in Baghdad.""

Oh, they sure had it! Until the UN Weapons Inspectors came along and took it!

"Surely 500 tons of anything qualifies as a "stockpile.""

How about 500 tons of bullsh!t?

"And press reports going back more than a decade give no indication that weapons inspectors had any idea the Iraqi dictator had amassed such a staggering amount of nuke fuel until the U.S. invaded."

What a strange sentence! To the writer of this 'article', the 'fact' that in 10 years time no media ever reported that the weapons inspectors knew Saddam had this material proofs that these inspectors didn't know. WTF? That sentence is false twice: the Weapons Inspectors did know what Saddam had and took it from him and the media DID report about it.

"Activities of the IAEA Iraq: [As of October 1997 the IAEA had completed a series of 30 inspection campaigns in Iraq involving some 500 site inspections and utilizing more than 5000 person-days of inspector resources] ... [The IAEA also arranged for and supervised the removal from Iraq of all weapon-usable nuclear material --essentially highly enriched uranium (HEU) research reactor fuel-- and accounted for and placed under its control, all other known nuclear materials -- some 500 tons of natural uranium in various chemical compounds and some 1.8 tons of low enriched (2.6 %) uranium dioxide.".
(Source: http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/IAEA/iaea-facts-042502.htm
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull442/article3.pdf)

"That's when the International Atomic Energy Agency was finally able to take a full inventory, and suddenly the 500-ton figure emerged."

If the IAEA didn't come up with the 500 ton figure until after March 2003, how come a 2002 U.S. "National Intelligence Estimate" says: "Iraq has about 500 metric tons of yellowcake and low enriched uranium at Tuwaitha, which is inspected annually by the IAEA?" Or did the 'writer' of this 'article' forget about that?
(Source: http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html)

"Largely? Well, except for the 1.8 tons of uranium that Saddam had begun to enrich. The U.S. Energy Department considered that stockpile so dangerous that it mounted an unprecedented airlift operation four months ago to remove the enriched uranium stash from al Tuwaitha."

Where it had been succesfully monitored for years by the IAEA and UNMOVIC, the author of the 'article' conveniently forgets to mention.

"Last week Dr. Obeidi warned in a New York Times op-ed piece that Saddam could have restarted his nuclear program "with a snap of his fingers.""

Mr Obeidi is the only Iraqi claiming this. I wonder if he's related to Ahmed Chalabi...

"Perhaps the 500-ton stockpile of nuclear fuel that Saddam kept at al Tuwaitha wasn't quite as benign as our media like to pretend."

Nice final sentence for an article, if only it were correct. Everybody knew about these 500 tons at Tuwaitha. They had already been discovered ages ago by UNSCOM and the IAEA. The fact that the author of the 'article' hasn't been able to find any press-report on that finding, only indicates that the author isn't very well-informed on this issue and nothing else! What's worrying is that there are still people out there that actually believe this crap!
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:29 am

jetmech....I would like a source reference for that article.

I will also say that unless an actual wmd is produced or used somewhere it will be difficult to find a european on this forum who will support the invasion of Iraq. They have set their minds about this and will not admit that the behaviour and past history of deception and murderous activitly of the Hussein government was adequate reason for the invasion. They would rather get hit first so that they can react in righteous anger.

Forgiving the debt is putting our money where our mouths are. We are setting them up for success, and to do any less would be irresponsible if we want to see Iraq succeed.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Sun Dec 19, 2004 12:21 pm

I will also say that unless an actual wmd is produced or used somewhere it will be difficult to find a european on this forum who will support the invasion of Iraq.

ROTFL. Gee, since it was THE REASON GIVEN, I wonder why that is? You're getting as bad as B757300 on here in some ways, with your denial of what is and what was.

What part of what the Administration said leading up to this fucking war didn't you understand?

We are setting them up for success, and to do any less would be irresponsible if we want to see Iraq succeed.

Gee, that's nice. Why don't we just fogive EVERYONE'S debt, so we can set them up for success?

Can I throw up now?
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
airplay
Posts: 3369
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:58 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:19 am

The current price of gas is due mainly to the huge world-wide demand and the lack of the ability to process crude oil. There is plenty of oil available if it we were only able to process it.

That doesn't diminish the desire of the US to control the oil industry. Firmly establishing themselves in Saudi Arabia and Iraq guarantees that at least some of the world will be forced to deal in American dollars when they trade in oil. That, is the main underlying reason to insert themselves into the oil industry whenever and whereever they can.

Bush doesn't care how much the average American pays for car gas. He is much more concerned about the collapse of the US economy if the US dollar loses any more ground to the Euro and countries start to liquidate their US dollar reserves.
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:30 am

Well the US was forced to, since Russia and France among other members of the Paris-club had done it. Interesting would be to see the US debt to the Irani gov with interest, over 20 years since US froze the assets...
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
qr332
Posts: 2592
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 11:16 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:33 am

JetMachMD80,
Your right QR332, we were stupid for invading, we should have waited until Saddam was finished. Then he could have blown up half the Middle East, and our invasion would have been legitimate.

There isnt any evidence of him even trying to build up WMDs, and you went in making it sound like the world was doomed tomorrow. Dont change what has already been said by Bush and the US now.

Whats the source for this article of yours? And if what you were saying is true, why isnt it being reported all around the world? I like how this source of yours seems to have better investigation skills than the UN inspectors, too.

Thecoz,
Good, now the Iraqis have one fewer excuse to whine and complain.

The Iraqis have every reason to whine and complain, after what you've done.

It's up to them to build their country; not us. They have every opportunity they need to succeed. If they're not able to build their country with our support, they'll simply get what they want, and deserve.

No, it is up to you. You fix what you broke, Iraq has been completley devestated due to the war of lies you started. What they want and deserve is not an invasion based on bullshit.
"The greatest threat to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."
 
theCoz
Posts: 3933
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:06 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:21 am

QR332: Thecoz,
Good, now the Iraqis have one fewer excuse to whine and complain.

The Iraqis have every reason to whine and complain, after what you've done.

It's up to them to build their country; not us. They have every opportunity they need to succeed. If they're not able to build their country with our support, they'll simply get what they want, and deserve.

No, it is up to you. You fix what you broke, Iraq has been completley devestated due to the war of lies you started. What they want and deserve is not an invasion based on bullshit.


Right, it's all my fault.  Yeah sure

The bottom line is, the Iraqis will make their choices as a country. Their fate is in their hands, and they're doing a pretty pathetic job of rebuilding their country so far.

They like to think that they are hurting the Americans, but they're hurting themselves.
 
L.1011
Posts: 2163
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:46 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:32 am

There isnt any evidence of him even trying to build up WMDs

*cough*5,000 Kurds gassed*cough*
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

L.1011

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:52 am

L.1011: *cough*5,000 Kurds gassed*cough*

You don´t get it, do you?

The claim was that Saddam had been developing new WMDs after his old ones (such as those you were erroneously referring to above) had been dismantled and the remains locked up by the UN and IAEA inspectors.

And as we all know now (except you, apparently), there was nothing of that sort going on, except a marginal range increase by the Al Samoud missiles which were already being destroyed by the UN inspectors before Bush had Iraq invaded.

Tough luck, eh?  Nuts
 
david b.
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:18 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:00 am


Right, it's all my fault. Yeah sure

The bottom line is, the Iraqis will make their choices as a country. Their fate is in their hands, and they're doing a pretty pathetic job of rebuilding their country so far.

They like to think that they are hurting the Americans, but they're hurting themselves.



Damn right its your fault. Remember we invaded based on lies. We lied to the world. WMDs my ass. Fate of their country is in our hands and we have to rebuild what we destroyed. Like it or not, the USA lied, USA invade now you like most other pathetic Americans, shift blame to others. Take some damn responsibility and admit this is all the fault of the USA.
Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
 
aa61hvy
Posts: 13021
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 9:21 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:26 am

The people who are complaining that the debt doesn't matter blah blah, are the same people that would complain if we did not relieve the debt.
Go big or go home
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 6:49 am

DL021:

"They have set their minds about this and will not admit that the behaviour and past history of deception and murderous activitly of the Hussein government was adequate reason for the invasion."

Then why the story about the WMD's, Dl021? Then why did the U.S. desperately seek a UN Security Council resolution stating that Saddam did not comply with earlier resolutions ON WMD's? And why lauch a pre-emptive war to remove a dictator after he's killed thousands of people and after he's been acting like a terrible oppressor?

"They would rather get hit first so that they can react in righteous anger. "

Hit by what? By one of his WMD's out of his extremely large stockpiles?

Airplay:

"That, is the main underlying reason to insert themselves into the oil industry whenever and whereever they can."

Not only that, it is also the mere access to rich ME oil-fields for the next decades which is extremely important, to Worldwide economy in general and to US hegemony in particular.


Thecoz:

"The bottom line is, the Iraqis will make their choices as a country. Their fate is in their hands, and they're doing a pretty pathetic job of rebuilding their country so far."

Ever since the first bombs fell on Baghdad, their fate is in Bush's hands, the U.S. is responsible for them. What's more, the pathetic job of rebuilding their country as you call it, was and still is the responsibility of Bush since he single-handedly launched the pre-emptive (and illegal) war which lead to all this destruction in the first place.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
theCoz
Posts: 3933
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:06 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:09 am

Damn right its your fault. Remember we invaded based on lies. We lied to the world. WMDs my ass. Fate of their country is in our hands and we have to rebuild what we destroyed. Like it or not, the USA lied, USA invade now you like most other pathetic Americans, shift blame to others. Take some damn responsibility and admit this is all the fault of the USA.

David, let me make myself clear on one point:

An entire year before this whole invasion started, and Bush was going all ape-sh*t over the invasion, do you remember how the majority of Americans we're all for it?

It goes to show how blatently ignorant people can be.

It pisses me off that my tax dollars are going toward this retarded quagmire, but it is even worse when you're blaming me for it. I had nothing to do with it.

It's Bush, and his daddy, along with the other 50-some million goons who decided we need four more years of absolute bullsh*t.

Point the blame in the right direction.
 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:26 am

The Bush administration formally canceled Iraq's $4.1 billion debt to the United States on Friday and urged others to do the same to help the country rebuild.


LMAO! Let me get this straight, the USA wants all countries who Iraq owe money to to wipe off any outstanding debt to allow Iraq to rebuild after the USA invaded? Sure thing! Think of all those 'evil' arabs who'll now have an easy ride thanks to the wonderful USA, without all that debt they'll be able to double their WMD production! It would be much more futile to cancel the debt of starving African countries who are crippled by loan commitments brought about by unfair trading practices? No wait, cancelling the debt of a starving African nation isn't going to bring any long term gains for the US or eradicate the egg off their faces from the initial invasion. And how nice of the adorning US public to swallow this up as a goodwill gesture and a vent for more uneccassary bullshit nationalism.
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:20 am

Hans Blix Reports That Iraq Is Not In Compliance With UN 1441

By Rick D.

Since Hans Blix gave his report to the United Nations on Friday, February 14, 2003, the general consensus seems to be that he was reporting basic Iraqi compliance with UN resolution 1441.

In fact, the Chicago Tribune on Saturday proclaimed that 'Inspectors Say Iraq Cooperating'. I believe the truth is actually the opposite, but it does require some effort to translate the bureaucratic language of Hans Blix. I also believe that the terrorists are winning the propaganda war because people of good will who want peace are not paying close enough attention to facts, but are being led by their emotions. In that light, I present this web page.

My credentials: I have none other than being a political junky. In the interest of full disclosure, my politics are libertarian-to-conservative. The world is at a crossroads and the wrong choices now could very well prove disastrous for the world.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The pertinent paragraph of UN 1441:

(The United Nations) Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;

Now, with this paragraph in mind, I have highlighted sections of the Blix report that we would not be seeing if a country had satisfied the demands of a final opportunity to disarm. Had this report been issued at the beginning of the inspection process, that would be a different story.

In the following transcript I have highlighted in red those passages which to me indicate non-cooperation with this final opportunity to comply with UN 1441. I have used blue to indicate passages which I feel show that Mr. Blix is giving Iraq every benefit of the doubt and/or not giving Colin Powell equal treatment. I have made some comments which are in italics.

After reading the Blix report, please read Colin Powell's address to the UN.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HANS BLIX: Mr. President, since I reported to the Security Council on 27th of January, UNMOVIC has had two further weeks of operational and analytical work in New York and active inspections in Iraq. This brings the total period of inspections so far to 11 weeks.

Since then, we have also listened on the 5th of February to the presentation to the Council by the U.S. secretary of state and the discussion that followed.

Lastly, Dr. ElBaradei and I have held another round of talks in Baghdad with our counterparts and with Vice President Ramadan on the 8th and 9th of February.

Let me begin today's briefing with a short account of the work being performed by UNMOVIC in Iraq.

We have continued to build up our capabilities. The regional office in Mosul is now fully operational at its temporary headquarters. Plans for a regional office at Basra are being developed. Our Hercules L-100 aircraft continues to operate routine flights between Baghdad and Larnaca. The eight helicopters are fully operational.

With the resolution of the problems raised by Iraq for the transportation of minders into the no-fly zones, our mobility in these zones has improved. We expect to increase utilization of the helicopters.

The number of Iraqi minders during inspections has often reached a ratio--had often reached a ratio as high as five per inspector. During the talks in January in Baghdad, the Iraqi side agreed to keep the ratio to about 1:1. The situation has improved.

(Colin Powell refers to the minders in his statement)

Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming.

(the key word here is almost - remember we are talking about substances like anthrax where a thimble's worth will kill you)

The inspections have taken place throughout Iraq, at industrial sites, ammunition depots, research centers, universities, presidential sites, mobile laboratories, private houses, missile-production facilities, military camps and agricultural sites.

At all sites which had been inspected before 1998, rebase lining activities were performed. This included the identification of the function and contents of each building, new or old, at a site. It also included verification of previously tagged equipment, application of seals and tags, taking samples, and discussions with the site's personnel regarding past and present activities. At certain sites, ground-penetrating radar was used to look for underground structures or buried equipment.

Through the inspections conducted so far, we have obtained a good knowledge of the industrial and scientific landscape of Iraq, as well as of its missile capability. But as before, we do not know every cave and corner. Inspections are effectively helping to bridge the gap in knowledge that arose due to the absence of inspections between December 1998 and November 2002.

More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened, using our own analytical laboratory capabilities at the Baghdad center. The results to date have been consistent with Iraqi declarations.

In the current situation, one would expect Iraq to be eager to comply.

While we were in Baghdad, we met a delegation from the government of South Africa. It was there to explain how South Africa gained the confidence of the world in its dismantling of the nuclear weapons program by a wholehearted cooperation over two years with IAEA inspectors. I have just learned that Iraq has accepted an offer by South Africa to send a group of experts for further talks.

How much, if any, is left of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and related proscribed items and programs? So far, UNMOVIC has not found any such weapons, only a small number of empty chemical munitions which should have been declared and destroyed.

Another matter, and one of great significance, is that many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for.

(remember, 1441 is a final opportunity, not the first opportunity)

To take an example, a document which Iraq provided suggested to us that some 1,000 tons of chemical agent were unaccounted for. I must not jump to the conclusion that they exist; however, that possibility is also not excluded. If they exist, they should be presented for destruction. If they do not exist, credible evidence to that effect should be presented.

(remember, 1441 is a final opportunity, not the first opportunity)

We are fully aware that many governmental intelligence organizations are convinced and assert that proscribed weapons, items and programs continue to exist. The U.S. secretary of state presented material in support of this conclusion.

Governments have many sources of information that are not available to inspectors. The inspectors, for their part, must base their reports only on the evidence which they can themselves examine and present publicly. Without evidence, confidence cannot arise.

Mr. President, in my earlier briefings, I have noted that significant outstanding issues of substance were listed in two Security Council documents from early 1999 and should be well known to Iraq.

I referred, as examples, to the issues of anthrax, the nerve agent VX, and long-range missiles, and said that such issues--and I quote myself--"deserve to be taken seriously by Iraq rather than being brushed aside," unquote.

The declaration submitted by Iraq on the 7th of December last year, despite its large volume, missed the opportunity to provide the fresh material and evidence needed to respond to the open questions.

This is perhaps the most important problem we are facing. Although I can understand that it may not be easy for Iraq in all cases to provide the evidence needed, it is not the task of the inspectors to find it. Iraq itself must squarely tackle this task and avoid belittling the questions.

In my January update to the Council I referred to the Al-Samud II and the Al-Fatah missiles, reconstituted casting chambers, construction of a missile engine test stand and the import of rocket engines, which were all declared to UNMOVIC by Iraq.

I noted that the Al-Samud II and the Al-Fatah could very well represent prima facie cases of proscribed missile systems, as they had been tested to ranges exceeding the 150-kilometers limit set by the Security Council.

I also noted that Iraq had been requested to cease flight test of these missiles until UNMOVIC completed a technical review.

Earlier this week, UNMOVIC missile experts met for two days with experts from a number of member states to discuss these items. The experts concluded unanimously that, based on the data provided by Iraq, the two declared variants of the Al-Samud II missile were capable of exceeding 150 kilometers in range. This missile system is therefore proscribed for Iraq pursuant to Resolution 687 and the monitoring plan adopted by Resolution 715.

As for the Al-Fatah, the experts found that clarification of the missile data supplied by Iraq was required before the capability of the missile system could be fully assessed.

With respect to the casting chambers, I note the following. UNSCOM ordered and supervised the destruction of the casting chambers, which had been intended for use in the production of the proscribed Bader (ph) 2000 missile system. Iraq has declared that it has reconstituted these chambers. The experts have confirmed that the reconstituted casting chambers could still be used to produce motors for missiles capable of ranges significantly greater than 150 kilometers. Accordingly, these chambers remain proscribed.

The expert also studied the data on the missile engine test stand that is nearing completion and have assessed it to be capable of testing missile engines with thrusts greater than that of the SA-2 engine. So far the test stand has not been associated with the proscribed activity.

On the matter of the 380 SA-2 missile engines imported outside of the export-import mechanism and in contravention of paragraph 24 of Resolution 687, UNMOVIC inspectors were informed by Iraq during an official briefing that these engines were intended for use in the Al-Samud II missile system, which has now been assessed to be proscribed. Any such engines configured for use in this missile system would also be proscribed. I intend to communicate these findings to the government of Iraq.

At the meeting in Baghdad on the 8th and the 9th, February, the Iraqi side addressed some of the important outstanding disarmament issues and gave us a number of papers--for instance, regarding anthrax and growth material, the nerve agent VX and missile production.

Experts who were present from our side studied the papers during the evening of 8th of February and met with Iraqi experts in the morning of 9 February for further clarifications.

Although no new evidence was provided in the papers and no open issues were closed through them or the expert discussions, the presentation of the papers could be indicative of a more active attitude focusing on the important open issues.

The Iraqi side suggested that the problem of verifying the quantities of anthrax and two VX precursors, which had been declared unilaterally destroyed, might be tackled through certain technical and analytical methods. Although our experts are still assessing the suggestions, they are not very hopeful that it could prove possible to assess the quantities of material poured into the grounds years ago. Documentary evidence and testimony by staff that dealt with the items still appears to be needed.

Not least against this background, a letter of the 12th of February from Iraq's National and Monitoring Directorate may be irrelevant. It presents a list of 83 names of participants, I quote, "in the unilateral destruction in the chemical field which took place in the summer of 1991," unquote.

As the absence of adequate evidence of that destruction has been and remains an important reason why quantities of chemicals had been deemed unaccounted for, the presentation of a list of persons who can be interviewed about the actions appears useful and pertains to cooperation on substance.



The Iraqi side also informed us that the commission, which had been appointed in the wake of our finding 12 empty chemical weapons warheads, had its mandate expanded to look for any still existing proscribed items. This was welcomed.

A second commission, we learned, has now been appointed with the task of searching all over Iraq for more documents relevant to the elimination of proscribed items and programs. It is headed by the former minister of oil, General Amir Rasheed, and is to have very extensive powers of search in industry, administration and even private houses.

(Why doesn't Iraq give the UN commission the list of sites that this Iraq commission would be working from?)

The two commissions could be useful tools to come up with proscribed items to be destroyed and with new documentary evidence. They evidently need to work fast and effectively to convince us and the world that it is a serious effort.

(This means that Iraq has not convinced the inspectors)

The matter of private interviews was discussed at length during our meeting in Baghdad. The Iraqi side confirmed the commitment which they had made to us on the 20th of January to encourage persons asked to accept such interviews whether in or out of Iraq. So far, we have only had interviews in Baghdad.

A number of persons have declined to be interviewed unless they were allowed to have an official present or were allowed to tape the interview. Three persons that had previously refused interviews on UNMOVIC terms subsequently accepted such interviews just prior to our talks in Baghdad on the 8th and 9th of February. These interviewed proved informative.

No further interviews have since been accepted on our terms. I hope this will change. We feel that interviews conducted with any third party present and without tape recording would provide the greatest credibility.

At the recent meeting in Baghdad, as on several earlier occasions, my colleague, Dr. ElBaradei, and I had urged the Iraqi side to enact legislation implementing the U.N. prohibitions regarding weapons of mass destruction. This morning we had a message that a presidential decree has now been issued, containing prohibitions with regard to importation and production of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. We have not yet had time to study the details of the text of the decree.

(Doesn't this decree indicate that up until now it has been legal in Iraq to produce these weapons?)

Mr. President, I should like to make some comments on the role of intelligence in connection with inspections in Iraq.

A credible inspection regime requires that Iraq provide full cooperation on process, (inaudible) granting immediate access everywhere to inspectors, and on substance, providing full declarations supported by relevant information and material and evidence.

(Why would Blix say this unless Iraq is not providing full cooperation?)

However, with the closed society in Iraq of today and the history of inspections there, other sources of information, such as defectors and government intelligence agencies, are required to aid the inspection process.

(Maybe Blix is starting to get suspicious?)

I remember myself how in 1991, several inspections in Iraq, which were based on information received from a government, helped to disclose important parts of the nuclear weapon program. It was realized that an international organization authorized to perform inspections anywhere on the ground could make good use of the information obtained from governments with eyes in the sky, ears in the ether, access to defectors, and both eyes and ears on the market for weapons-related material.

It was understood that the information residing in the intelligence services government could come to very active use in the international effort to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. This remains true, and we have by now a good deal of experience in the matter. International organizations need to analyze such information critically and especially benefit when it comes from more than one source. The intelligence agencies, for their part, must protect their sources and methods. Those who provide such information must know that it will be kept in strict confidence and be known to very few people.

UNMOVIC has achieved good working relations with intelligence agencies, and the amount of information provided has been gradually increasing. However, we must recognize that there are limitations and that misinterpretations can occur.

Intelligence information has been useful for UNMOVIC. In one case, it led us to a private home where documents mainly relating to laser enrichment of uranium were found. In other cases, intelligence has led to sites where no proscribed items were found. Even in such cases, however, inspection of these sites were useful in proving the absence of such items and, in some cases, the presence of other items, conventional munitions. It showed that conventional arms are being moved around the country and that movements are not necessarily related to weapons of mass destruction.

(The fact that intelligence information has been useful indicates that the information is not coming freely from Iraq)

The presentation of intelligence information by the U.S. secretary of state suggested that Iraq had prepared for inspections by cleaning up sites and removing evidence of proscribed weapons programs.

I would like to comment only on one case which we are familiar with, namely the trucks identified by analysts as being for chemical decontamination at a munitions depot. This was a declared site, and it was certainly one of the sites Iraq would have expected us to inspect.

We have noted that the two satellite images of the site were taken several weeks apart. The reported movement of munitions at the site could just as easily have been a routine activity as a movement of proscribed munitions in anticipation of imminent inspection.

(this is an example of where Iraq gets the benefit of the doubt. Remember, Iraq is supposed to be proving it has complied)

Our reservation on this point does not detract from the appreciation of the briefing.

Yesterday, UNMOVIC informed the Iraqi authorities of its intention to start the U-2 surveillance aircraft early next week under arrangements similar to those UNSCOM had followed.

We are also in the process of working out modalities for the use of the French Mirage aircraft starting late next week and for the drones supplied by the German government. The offer from Russia of an Antonov aircraft with night-vision abilities is a welcome one and is next on our agenda for further improving UNMOVIC's and IAEA's technical capabilities.

These developments are in line with suggestions made in a non-paper recently circulated by France suggesting a further strengthening of the inspection capabilities.

It is our intention to examine the possibilities for surveying ground movements, notably trucks, in the face of persistent intelligence reports, for instance about mobile biological weapons productions units. Such measures could well increase the effectiveness of inspections.

UNMOVIC is still expanding its capabilities, both in terms of numbers of staff and technical resources. On my way to the recent Baghdad meeting, I stopped in Vienna to meet 60 experts who had just completed our general training course for inspectors. They came from 22 countries, including Arab countries.

Mr. President, UNMOVIC is not infrequently asked how much more time it needs to complete its task in Iraq. The answer depends upon which task one has in mind: the elimination of weapons of mass destruction and related items and programs, which were prohibited in 1991, the disarmament task; or the monitoring that no new proscribed activities occur.

The latter task, though not often focused upon, is highly significant and not controversial. It will require monitoring which is ongoing, that is open-ended, until the Council decides otherwise.

By contrast, the task of disarmament foreseen in Resolution 687 and the progress on key remaining disarmament tasks foreseen in Resolution 1284, as well as the disarmament obligations which Iraq was given a final opportunity to comply with under Resolution 1441, were always required to be fulfilled in a shorter timespan.

Regrettably, the high degree of cooperation required of Iraq for disarmament through inspection was not forthcoming in 1991. Despite the elimination under UNSCOM and the IAEA supervision of large amounts of weapons, weapons-related items and installations over the years, the task remained incomplete when inspectors were withdrawn almost eight years later, at the end of 1998.

If Iraq has provided the necessary cooperation in 1991, the phase of disarmament under Resolution 687 could have been short and a decade of sanctions could have been avoided. Today, three months after the adoption of Resolution 1441, the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short if, I quote, "immediate, active and unconditional cooperation," unquote, with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming.

(note that in this final passage of his statement, Blix had an opportunity to say that Iraq was cooperating, but did not. Instead he used words that you wouldn't expect to see if Iraq were providing immediate, active and unconditional cooperation, which of course, is the whole essence of UN 1441.)

Thank you, Mr. President.

"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:21 am

Here is the link to the earlier article.


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/8/112447.shtml
"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:26 am

How did these end up in a scrap yard? Iraq was not supposed to have them to begin with.

Missile engine find stirs concern over Iraq proliferation


By Edith M. Lederer
ASSOCIATED PRESS


NEW YORK — Twenty engines from banned Iraqi missiles were found in a Jordanian scrap yard with other equipment that could be used for weapons of mass destruction, a U.N. official said, raising new security questions about Iraq's scrap metal sales since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Acting chief United Nations inspector Demetrius Perricos revealed the discoveries to the U.N. Security Council in a closed-door briefing Wednesday.

The U.N. team that found the 20 engines was following up on a discovery of a similar al-Samoud 2 engine in a scrap yard in the Dutch port of Rotterdam. Mr. Perricos said inspectors also want to check in Turkey, which also has received scrap metal from Iraq.
Mr. Perricos suggested that the interim Iraqi government, which will assume sovereignty of the country on June 30, may want to reconsider policies for exporting scrap metal that apparently began in mid-2003. The sales are regulated by the U.S.-led coalition.
"The removal of these materials from Iraq raises concerns with regard to proliferation risks ... thereby also rendering the task of the disarmament of Iraq and its eventual confirmation more difficult," Mr. Perricos said.
The missile engines and some other equipment discovered in the scrap yards had been tagged by U.N. weapons monitors because of their potential dual use in legitimate civilian activities as well as banned-weapons production.
Mr. Perricos said in his briefing to the Security Council that U.N. inspectors do not know how much material has been removed from Iraq. But he later told reporters that up to a thousand tons of scrap metal was leaving Iraq every day.
"The only controls at the borders are for the weight of the scrap metal, and to check whether there are any explosive or radioactive materials within the scrap," he said in the briefing.
U.N. inspectors were pulled out of Iraq just before the war began in March 2003, and the United States has refused to allow them to return. Instead, it deployed its own teams to search for weapons of mass destruction.
Mr. Perricos told the council that the 20 SA-2 missile engines were discovered when U.N. experts visited "relevant scrap yards" in Jordan last week.
The U.N. team also discovered some processing equipment with U.N. tags — which show that it was being monitored — including heat exchangers, and a solid propellant mixer bowl to make missile fuel, he said. It also discovered "a large number of other processing equipment without tags, in very good condition."




"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:46 am

Here is some more interesting reading, with photos.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html


I know this is not going to convice anyone. The only way to convice some of these people would be if they found a ICBM, with MRIV warhead in front of Saddams place with a flashing neon light that said "banned WMD" on it.
"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:08 am

So let me get this straight...

Bush and friends are trying to
1) invest in the war
2) raise the spending for homeland
3) raise the spending for education

While...
1) balancing the budget
2) cancelling national debt of Iraq
3) lower taxes

Sounds like Bush has never taken even an entry level economics class...
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:14 am

I know this is not going to convice anyone. The only way to convice some of these people would be if they found a ICBM, with MRIV warhead in front of Saddams place with a flashing neon light that said "banned WMD" on it.

Actually, I might have been convinced if we actually FOUND SOME FREAKING WEAPONS!!!

Is that good enough for you? I didn't think so.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:18 am

Open your eyes, they have found everything they need to build the weapons. I guess thats not good enough for you.
"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:21 am

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:42 a.m. EDT
WSJ: Precursor WMDs Stockpiled in Iraq

Far from being an isolated incident, yesterday's discovery in Iraq of an artillery shell filled with sarin gas is just the tip of the iceberg of recently uncovered evidence that Saddam Hussein had a weapons of mass destruction program that was fully operational until the U.S. invaded in March 2003.

Tuesday's Wall Street Journal reports that U.S. inspectors have found within the last few months "warehouses full of commercial and agricultural chemicals," which, if mixed and packaged properly, "could quickly become chemical weapons."

U.S. forces in Karbala have also recently uncovered 55-gallon drums loaded with chemicals that were said to be "pesticide," some of which were stored in what military sources described as a "camouflaged bunker complex."

Why camouflage insect spray?

The alleged agricultural site just happened to be located alongside a military ammunition dump, reports Insight magazine.

According to the Journal, Iraq Survey Group head Charles Duelfer recently told Congress that some of Saddam's WMD facilities were newly built and contained "stockpiled" raw materials that would have allowed him to "produce such weapons on a moment's notice."

There's more.

In early April, Jordanian authorities foiled an al-Qaida plot to kill 80,000 people in a chemical weapons attack in Amman.

According to one of the conspirators, whose confession was broadcast on Jordanian TV, al-Qaida WMD specialist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who reportedly was last seen in a chilling video beheading Nick Berg, trained and outfitted the WMD attackers in pre-war Iraq.

Like notorious terrorists Abu Nidal and Abu Abbas, Zarqawi enjoyed sanctuary in Baghdad, courtesy of Saddam.

Jordanian TV coverage of the Zarqawi plot included video footage of hundreds of gallon jugs containing chemical weapons that had been intercepted 75 miles from the Syriian border, where much of Saddam's pre-war WMD stockpile is believed to have been hidden.

The Zarqawi revelation comes on the heels of the April 26 explosion at a suspected chemical weapons factory in Baghdad, just as a U.S. weapons team arrived to inspect its contents.

Disguised as a "perfume factory," the facility was booby-trapped, investigators believe, to destroy evidence of whatever was inside.

We won't be surprised if, in the coming weeks, more sarin-laden shells are uncovered in Iraq. But in the meantime, the media focus on the Abu Ghraib prison scandal has obscured that fact that the WMD case against Saddam is already compelling and continues to grow.

"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:22 am

JetMechMD80:

The bottom-line of this whole "Is-this-an-illegal-war-or-not" issue is whether Saddam was actually complying with UN resolutions or not.

The whole 1441 resolution and the preceding resolutions were about disarming Saddam. That was and always has been the primary issue and what has got this whole thing started 12 years ago.

Given the hard fact that not a single WMD has been found by the Coalition after March 2003 (and which wasn't already under UN/IAEA sealing and monitoring), indicates that Saddam was complying with those UN resolutions on disarming. And given this hard fact of no WMD's whatsoever, one can establish that the cooperation of Iraq with the UN Weapons Inspectors has been extremely positive, as the objectives of the resolutions (disarming Iraq) has been accomplished.

"How did these end up in a scrap yard? Iraq was not supposed to have them to begin with."

You really don't get it, do you?

From your 'own' article:

"The missile engines and some other equipment discovered in the scrap yards had been tagged by U.N. weapons monitors because of their potential dual use in legitimate civilian activities as well as banned-weapons production. "

They had been tagged, which means that the material was found and removed by the UN Weapons Inspectors while Saddam was still in power. They were being monitored by the UN, and they did so successfully up until March 2003, when 'Bush' marched in pre-emptively.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:29 am

No I get it, I don't think you do.

If Iraq has provided the necessary cooperation in 1991, the phase of disarmament under Resolution 687 could have been short and a decade of sanctions could have been avoided. Today, three months after the adoption of Resolution 1441, the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short if, I quote, "immediate, active and unconditional cooperation," unquote, with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming


YOU say Iraq "was complying", Has Blix in his own words says they were not. So bottom line, they were in violation of Resolution 1441.
"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:30 am

Open your eyes, they have found everything they need to build the weapons. I guess thats not good enough for you.

You're right, it's not. You see, you're another sad soul who is trying to rewrite history, aren't you? Bush didn't say "they ahve everything the need to build the weapons." (which as a freaking lie, btw) He and Dickless, and Rummy and Powell all said THEY HAVE THE WEAPONS.

Well, they didn't. 1441 wasn't violated because he didn't have these overwhelming stockpiles that SecState talked about before the UN. In fact, NONE OF THOSE WEAPONS EXISTED!!

And you give me a hard time because it isn't enough. Maybe it's enough to apoligizing revisionists, but not for me.

yesterday's discovery in Iraq of an artillery shell filled with sarin gas is just the tip of the iceberg of recently uncovered evidence that Saddam Hussein had a weapons of mass destruction program that was fully operational until the U.S. invaded in March 2003.

ONE artillary shell-and you're going all the way back to May! Hello??? Where is the rest of the iceberg?? I haven't seen it yet. Maybe one shell was worth 1500 Americans giving up their lives in your reality, but it's not in mine.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:15 pm

ONE artillary shell-and you're going all the way back to May! Hello??? Where is the rest of the iceberg?? I haven't seen it yet. Maybe one shell was worth 1500 Americans giving up their lives in your reality, but it's not in mine.




According to the Journal, Iraq Survey Group head Charles Duelfer recently told Congress that some of Saddam's WMD facilities were newly built and contained "stockpiled" raw materials that would have allowed him to "produce such weapons on a moment's notice."


Whatever Falcon84, they wouldn't convince you until someone lit off a nuke in DC. Then you would be the first person screaming "they should have done somthing".

Your pissed off because Bush was elected, and your pissed off because he was re-elected. Thats what it is about, you know it, and I know it. If Al Gore was president, you would be one here defending it. Where were you and all the other "war protesters" when Clinton was bombing the hell out of half the world, and they were draging the bodies of our people through the streets of Somolia? YOU AND ALL THE REST WERE SILENT. Which proves you DO NOT CARE ABOUT OUR TROOPS. I suspect you are concerned about your own ass. No need to worry, the U.S. Army does not want, nor do they need your help. There is no draft.

Iraq was inviolation of Resolution 1441 Hans Blix said it in his own words. End of argument. But I will post it again anyway.

If Iraq has provided the necessary cooperation in 1991, the phase of disarmament under Resolution 687 could have been short and a decade of sanctions could have been avoided. Today, three months after the adoption of Resolution 1441, the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short if, I quote, "immediate, active and unconditional cooperation," unquote, with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming

Now, time for you to go to bed.





"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:24 pm

JetMechMD80:

Nice to see how conveniently use what Blix said before the war to justify that no WMD's have been found after the war. BTW, nowhere does Blix say that Iraq wasn't complying with Resolution 1441. That's your interpretation of what he said, not what he really said.

Resolution 1441 was adopted in November 2002. The US, the UK and Spain at that time believed that any (even the smallest) 'material breach' by Saddam of that resolution could justify an attack on Iraq. Other UN Security Council Member nations did not agree with that interpretation, stating a separate Resolution was needed.

On March 7, 2003 Blix gave an oral introduction to the UN Security Council along with his periodical reporting on UNMOVIC's work in the previous months. He finished his speech by saying that to fullfil his task of verifying the disarming of Iraq, "It would not take years, nor weeks, but months.".(1) That statement was at that time in sharp contrast with claims of the US, UK and then Spanish Goverment about Saddam still having huge stockpiles of WMD's. These 3 countries did actually try to put together a draft resolution (known as the 'second' resolution) claiming Saddam was in material breach and, thus, to authorize a war, but this was quickly dropped when it became clear the Security Council would not approve it.

The question now remains: was Saddam, the moment the war started, in material breach of Resolution 1441? With no huge stockpiles of WMD's found to date, I'd say he wasn't. It seems that that is also the opinion of Mr Blix:

"Former UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix believes the US-led war in Iraq was illegal, a British newspaper reported on Friday.

Blix told the London Independent that a second United Nations resolution explicitly authorising the use of force would have been required to make the invasion of Iraq last March lawful.

"I don't buy the argument the war was legalised by the Iraqi violation of earlier resolutions," Blix said.
" (2)

Where are the huge stockpiles of WMD, JetMechMD80? Where are the vast amounts of VX and Anthrax that allegedly legitimized pre-emptively attacking a country which had absolutely nothing to do with The War on Terror?

And where's Osama?


Sources:
(1) http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/SC7asdelivered.htm
(2) http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_1493820,00.html
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

JetMechMD80

Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:28 pm

JetMechMD80: Iraq was inviolation of Resolution 1441 Hans Blix said it in his own words.

You´re wrong. Blix reported some minor infractions, the largest being the Al Samoud slightly exceeding the allowed range.

That´s it.

Or why else had Bush to shove Blix aside as violently as they did if Blix had supposedly given them carte blanche?

You´re not making any sense.

JetMechMD80: End of argument.

Better luck next time. Maybe you´ll have actual arguments to stand on then...  Nuts
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:33 pm

According to the Journal, Iraq Survey Group head Charles Duelfer recently told Congress that some of Saddam's WMD facilities were newly built and contained "stockpiled" raw materials that would have allowed him to "produce such weapons on a moment's notice."

Again, we've gone from him actually having stockpiles, to MAYBE he could have produced such weapons? Hello, we went to war because we said LGW-Luftfahrtgesellschaft Walter (Germany)">HE HAD THEM, not that LGW-Luftfahrtgesellschaft Walter (Germany)">HE COULD PRODUCE THEM!! Again, some revisionist history and add a healthy pinch of selective amensia, and presto, you have a nice warm serving of denial. I'm not impressed.

Whatever Falcon84, they wouldn't convince you until someone lit off a nuke in DC. Then you would be the first person screaming "they should have done somthing".

Another soul filled with abject fear and paranoia. You're one of these souls who has become convinced that someone is going to blow him up, that you're willing to invade anyone who looks funny at you. When you get over your stinking terror and get a clue, you might see what a sham this war was and still is.

Your pissed off because Bush was elected, and your pissed off because he was re-elected.

His election and re-election has no part in this. I think he was wrong in March of 2003 to invade Iraq, as I don't think he made the case for war based on the evidence. I fully supported him on the invasion of Afghanistan, and still support him on it, as it was fully justifed in my mind.

So his incumbency does not play a part in my opinion of the war. I don't like him; I think he's a lousy president, but it isn't the reason for my opinion. If it were, don't you think I woldn't have backed him 100% on Afghanistan?

Which proves you DO NOT CARE ABOUT OUR TROOPS.

Keep on raving. It's only making you look bad. My cousin served over there-he's a doctor and Naval Officer. I certainly do care. But again, you're another sad sould who cannot separate the fact that I do support the troops, think they've done a fantastic job given the mess they were handed by their Commander-In-Chief, and my opposition to the POLITICAL DECISION to send them into a war I don't think we should have started.

But if it makes you feel better, you can say what you want. I know it isn't the truth, so it won't keep me awake at night.  Smile
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:54 pm

Another soul filled with abject fear and paranoia.


No fear or paranoia here, you know nothing about me. I have been there, have you?

As for your statement, I will make the case again, YOU are the President, Your own CIA, the British, and Russions, tell you that Saddam has these weapons. You already know he is willing to use them. What do you do, do you wait? Do you try and get more info? Keep in mind, the intel that you have says he has them. If you wait, what happens if he acts? We have already been attacked once. What do you do? Remember you are charged with the secruity of the United States. What do you do? With the information that he had, at the time, if you wait, and we are attacked, its your fault. Remember that. Its easy to sit at your computor and monday morning quarterback. Not so easy when its your call.

Schoenorama:

Where are the huge stockpiles of WMD, JetMechMD80? Where are the vast amounts of VX and Anthrax that allegedly legitimized pre-emptively attacking a country which had absolutely nothing to do with The War on Terror?

Nothing to do with the War on Terror? Paying Scuide Bombers families with money skimmed from the UN oil for Food Program, has nothing to do with terror?

ROTFLMAO

Sorry, Saddam, Kofi, and the UN has made France and Germany both look foolish.

And as for Spain, Osama told you to get out of Iraq, and you did. Your country caved in. So what is your problem. Your government did just what the terroists wanted.



"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:01 pm

No fear or paranoia here, you know nothing about me.

Nor you me. Yet it didn't stop you from making idiotic generalizations about me, did it?

What do you do?

I would have continued and increased the presence of weapons inspectors; I would have flooded Iraq with them. Remember, there were already reports form the UN inspectors that they weren't finding anything in that nation, before Bush told them to get out so he could start his war.

I would have keep searching, and then we would have known what eventually we found out-that there were no wepaons. If they had been found, then 1441 would have been violated, and the US would have been fully justified in taking out Saddam and his weapons. But instead, we went in, without exhausting the political and diplomatic pressure, and WE looked like the bully.

Had it turned out he had the weapons, he would look like the loser he is (Saddam, that is), and we wouldn't be feeling the grief we're feeling from the rest of the world.

We could have found out before the war what we found out afterwards, and billions of $$ would have been saved ,and more importantly, 1500 of our fellow countrymen would still be alive.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:39 pm

Yeah and you ignored my question, First off Iraq was already in violation of Resolution 1441, I have already shown you that, but you refuse to accept it.
If Iraq was in compliance, Blix would have said so in his report. And he didn't say they were. Bottom line.

You said you would have waited, fine, and if you were wrong, a lot more than 1500 of your countrymen could have died. Since you are more worried about the way the rest of the world views us, than you are the security of our country. I ask you, when Kofi and Saddam were bribing France and Germany, were they worried about how the United States would view them? No, nor should we be worried.

I also noted that you did not address what I said about Somalia, you did not care about those countrymen, did you?

History has already proven a few things,
1. Saddam scamed the UN
2. Saddam was in violation of 1441
3. Germany was paid off.
4. France was paid off.
5. Saddam supported terror.
6. Saddam had all the componets to manufacture WMDs.
7. Appeasement of terrorists does not work, just ask the Dutch.
8. Saddam had terrorist training camps.


Now, I have posted a ton of information on here to support what I have said. You have posted nothing to support your views but you own statements. Please post some information to dispute what I have listed above. I don't believe you can.

It hurts me more than you know, everytime someone dies in Iraq, for unlike you, they are not only my countrymen, they are my brothers. I also know this, having spent some time there. The people we are fighting are Islamic Radicals, they know only death, and submission. They hate us, its didn't start with the invasion of Iraq, nor did it start with 9-11.They're hate of western ideas dates back to before the United States exsisted. We are the great Satan. They want nothing less than to see Israel driven into the sea, and the destruction of the Western World. You can scoff at this all you like, I have herd it with my own ears, and read it with my own eyes. Now having said that, this is not a war against Muslims, it is a war against Islamic Radicals. Do some reading, look at what is happening in Europe right now. The Islamic Radicals show no tolerance to the Western world. Like I said, ask the Dutch.
I have a son, and now I have a grandson. I do not want my grandson to have to kneel and face Mecca, unless that is his choice. We are at war, 60 million American know this, parts of Europe are starting to understand it. The Russians understand it, and Israel understands it. I hope the rest of America comes to understand it before its too late.
"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:50 pm

First off Iraq was already in violation of Resolution 1441, I have already shown you that, but you refuse to accept it.

No, they weren't, insofar as the fact he HAD no weapons, which was the key thing, the tripwire for war. Sorry, but that's the truth.

It hurts me more than you know, everytime someone dies in Iraq, for unlike you, they are not only my countrymen, they are my brothers.

Please, don't try to make yourself as more an American than I am. It's insulting, it's degrading, it's arrogant, and it's not anywhere near the truth.

You said you would have waited, fine, and if you were wrong, a lot more than 1500 of your countrymen could have died.

History says now I am right, and it's conjecture on your part to speculate anything else as far as any casualties. The way it played out, 1500 of our contrymen have died, in essence, for a lie.

I also noted that you did not address what I said about Somalia, you did not care about those countrymen, did you?

Again, spare me your arrogant righteousness. It bothers me when any of our soldiers are killed in something like Somolia, or Iraq, or Afghanistan. Your arrogance is breathtaking.

Reading the rest of your stuff, we'll live in a bloody, war-filled world, left to the likes of you. You reek with fear over terrorism, it's palpable in everything you write. You go on living scared, and under the belief that we have some divine right to invade whoever the hell we want, even if the reasons end up being a lie. I have a higher standard for this nation.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
commander_rabb
Posts: 723
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:59 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:46 pm


You know alphafalcon? You are obsessed with Iraq and the United States being there.

What are you doing about it if you hate it so?

Vote for Kerry?
Write your Congressman?
Post here?

If so, that's a dismal record in being involved and effective.

You say you have a higher standard for this nation? Prove it other than postings on a foreign aviation picture site.

Well? Let's see something of substance from you for a change.

Are you up for it?

 
JetMechMD80
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:27 pm

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:55 pm

No, they weren't, insofar as the fact he HAD no weapons, which was the key thing, the tripwire for war. Sorry, but that's the truth.

The truth is, how you interpret UN Res 1441 does not matter. Iraq WAS is violation not matter what you say or think.

Please, don't try to make yourself as more an American than I am. It's insulting, it's degrading, it's arrogant, and it's not anywhere near the truth.

Never did I say I was "more American than you are. I Said "they are my brothers", its a veteran thing, you wouldn't understand.

History says now I am right, and it's conjecture on your part to speculate anything else as far as any casualties. The way it played out, 1500 of our countrymen have died, in essence, for a lie.

History has proven no such thing, has all of Iraq been searched yet? No. Saddam had plenty of time to stash anything he didn't want us to find. He also had plenty of time to get it out of the country. As was proven with the missile engines.

Again, spare me your arrogant righteousness.

Spare me yours. You have no idea what's going on over there, your only information is from the media. The same media that has been proven to slant the news, and outright lie. In another thread a poster told us about just getting back from Iraq, and you didn't want to believe what he said. So who is the arrogant one here? YOU.

Reading the rest of your stuff, we'll live in a bloody, war-filled world, left to the likes of you. You reek with fear over terrorism, it's palpable in everything you write. You go on living scared,

Say what you want I am not going to change your closed mind. However I would rather be accused of being scared by someone like you. Than to be scared of standing up for yourself, and your family when someone threatens it, as you are. Like I said before, which you chose to ignore, you sound like the Dutch, who, by the way, are know finding out they were wrong.

BTW: In WWII Germany did not attack us. Italy did not attack us. Using your logic, we should have never fought in Europe or North Africa during WWII. After all, they had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor. Sometimes connecting the dots is a hard thing to do, for some people. You appear to be one of them.







"I get along great with nobody"~ Billy Idol
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:55 pm

You know alphafalcon? You are obsessed with Iraq and the United States being there.

Obsessed? No, not at all? Angry that we did what we did? Yes, absolutely. If you had said that, I'd agree with you.

What are you doing about it if you hate it so?

Vote for Kerry?
Write your Congressman?
Post here?


1. Yes.

2. Yes

3. Yes

I've done all three. Next question?

You say you have a higher standard for this nation? Prove it other than postings on a foreign aviation picture site.

Well? Let's see something of substance from you for a change.


ROTFL. Now, since my only contact with you, thank God, is on here, how else should I "prove" it? It's called free speech, and protesting my government's actions via writing a memeber of Congress, or making my views known, via vote or in discussing the issue, I think, is perfectly acceptable.

Secondly, you asking me for substance is pretty damn funny.

You see, you know that, via here, there's no way for me to prove it, so you can bitch about it, right? I thought so.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
pilotaydin
Posts: 2099
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:30 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:01 pm

"History has already proven a few things"
1. Saddam scamed the UN
- and the US owes them how much? wait...the UN=US...to is it a shock someone from the USA said Saddam is scamming them...

2. Saddam was in violation of 1441
-and so let's invade all countries violating resolutions....

3. Germany was paid off.
- The US pays off a lot more ppl than you think

4. France was paid off.
- see #3

5. Saddam supported terror.
- and the US trained the Taliban.....

6. Saddam had all the componets to manufacture WMDs.
- And the USA does too, and used it in Japan

7. Appeasement of terrorists does not work, just ask the Dutch.
-What the USA is doing isn't working any better, but they seem to proud to
admit

8. Saddam had terrorist training camps.
- So did the USA if you look at it from the USSRs view as far as the Taliban....but we arent allowed to look at it from anyone else's view, otherwise the US military will come crashing through.
The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: U.S. Cancels Iraq's $4.1 Billion Debt

Mon Dec 20, 2004 3:03 pm

its a veteran thing, you wouldn't understand.

I may not understand it like you do, but, trust me, I think I understand it more than you might think. I understand the bond and the trust you acquire with each other. And I can understand, on a purely human level, that that's a big thing.

History has proven no such thing, has all of Iraq been searched yet? No.

If that entire nations hasn't been searched in 18 months of war, then our taxpayer money is being wasted. We wouldn't give the UN Inspectors 4 months, but how long do you propose we give US inspectors? 5 years? Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

We haven't found squat, and we won't find squat. But keep up your delusions.

Than to be scared of standing up for yourself, and your family when someone threatens it, as you are.

Yaaawn. I'm fully prepared, if I have to, to protect my family. Again, you show a profound arrogance, a "I'm better than you" attitude because you served. Big hair freaking deal. It doesn't mean you're any more or less willing than me to stand up for your loved ones. Spare me that hero shit, OK?

You go on being scared. It seems to fit you well.
Work Right, Fly Hard

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747 and 6 guests