WMD Found??????

[rsxer45]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...usa_cache_dc_3

It appears so, but nothing is for sure until we get a confirmation from the Pentagon or top military official. I assume we will find out the truth in a few days.

[Milliardo]

At this point it's more like, "Who cares?" Also, the possibility of it being planted by--who else--U.S. forces themselves is there. looking at it realistically, it would be inconceivable that such things would be missed by U.N. inspectors, so the conclusion would be one of two things: either U.N. inspectors have not looked hard enough, or the U.S. planted it. The latter would not be easily be dispelled, since whatever reason or excuse the U.S. give out, Bush's war invalidates it since it was without due authority from the U.N. In law, this would be tantamount to arresting the person without the proper warrant. It makes academic the finding, or not finding, of unlawful objects. Also, with U.S. troops inside, it makes it hard to make it look valid, since those inside it are naturally biased about it. That is the importance of having the U.N. inspect it: the report is impartial, and would be more credible. You can shout "I told you so" a thousand times, but it is no more credible than an unauthorized arrest and seizure. In the end, the U.S. still loses big time on this supposed "find".

[Pick]

Originally posted by Milliardo
At this point it's more like, "Who cares?" Also, the possibility of it being planted by--who else--U.S. forces themselves is there. looking at it realistically, it would be inconceivable that such things would be missed by U.N. inspectors, so the conclusion would be one of two things: either U.N. inspectors have not looked hard enough, or the U.S. planted it. The latter would not be easily be dispelled, since whatever reason or excuse the U.S. give out, Bush's war invalidates it since it was without due authority from the U.N. In law, this would be tantamount to arresting the person without the proper warrant. It makes academic the finding, or not finding, of unlawful objects. Also, with U.S. troops inside, it makes it hard to make it look valid, since those inside it are naturally biased about it. That is the importance of having the U.N. inspect it: the report is impartial, and would be more credible. You can shout "I told you so" a thousand times, but it is no more credible than an unauthorized arrest and seizure. In the end, the U.S. still loses big time on this supposed "find".

Yeah, I'm sure that we hate the world and the U.N. so much that we would plant WMD's. Shut up, that is the stupidest thing I've heard all week.

[rsxer45]

Originally posted by Milliardo
At this point it's more like, "Who cares?" Also, the possibility of it being planted by--who else--U.S. forces themselves is there. looking at it realistically, it would be inconceivable that such things would be missed by U.N. inspectors, so the conclusion would be one of two things: either U.N. inspectors have not looked hard enough, or the U.S. planted it. The latter would not be easily be dispelled, since whatever reason or excuse the U.S. give out, Bush's war invalidates it since it was without due authority from the U.N. In law, this would be tantamount to arresting the person without the proper warrant. It makes academic the finding, or not finding, of unlawful objects. Also, with U.S. troops inside, it makes it hard to make it look valid, since those inside it are naturally biased about it. That is the importance of having the U.N. inspect it: the report is impartial, and would be more credible. You can shout "I told you so" a thousand times, but it is no more credible than an unauthorized arrest and seizure. In the end, the U.S. still loses big time on this supposed "find".

Who cares?? Are you kidding? Im not going to even dignify your post by responding in a point by point fashion because you're just going to spit out more irrational BS and luny conspiracy theories such that the whole debate will become pointless..... US planted the weapons.........right . Inconceivable that the UN inspectors missed some WMDs in a country that is over 430,000 square km.....right .

For some reason I just thought of this qoute:
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

[The Educator]

Milliardo,
Right, it is absolutely inconcievable that the U.N inspectors couldn't find weapons in a country of 430000 square kilometers. I mean really, I could scour that myself in three or four lifetimes.
AHHHHHH. Conspiracy theory!! Yeah, we planted 'em alright, 'cause we do that kinda stuff all the time. So the government has planted bugs in your house, and you can only talk to people with loud music on or when the shower is running right?
And I don't see how you can rely on the U.N to lend validation to a war anymore after their performance in the past few months. That is just ridiculous. If they cannot follow up on their own resolutions, then what validity do they have to give? Yes, it's just like unauthorized arrest and seizure. Unauthorized arrest and seizure where the judge sits on the bench and exclaims "no warrant under any circumstances!" What do the police do when the judges decide not to enforce the law? Just say to hell with it and retire?

[jon@af]

Originally posted by The Educator


Milliardo,
Right, it is absolutely inconcievable that the U.N inspectors couldn't find weapons in a country of 430000 square kilometers. I mean really, I could scour that myself in three or four lifetimes.
AHHHHHH. Conspiracy theory!! Yeah, we planted 'em alright, 'cause we do that kinda stuff all the time. So the government has planted bugs in your house, and you can only talk to people with loud music on or when the shower is running right?
And I don't see how you can rely on the U.N to lend validation to a war anymore after their performance in the past few months. That is just ridiculous. If they cannot follow up on their own resolutions, then what validity do they have to give? Yes, it's just like unauthorized arrest and seizure. Unauthorized arrest and seizure where the judge sits on the bench and exclaims "no warrant under any circumstances!" What do the police do when the judges decide not to enforce the law? Just say to hell with it and retire?

Milliardo= OwNed

[Milliardo]

Let's see, that's 12 years of work over a country smaller than the U.S. It took only 3 weeks to do what 12 years can't do? Riigght. I guess Americans can't accept that it can happen, and had been done by nations in the past, to justify their intrusion or occupation of another, or to go to war against another. Briatain certainly falsified and doctored documents, as well as made sure such ships as the Lustiania become live baits for German U-boats to sink during World War I so the U.S. can enter the war. It's been done before, and it can still be done now. What is to stop Bush from doing the same thing, now that he practically owns Iraq? It's to justify his war, as well as take the heat off from those who oppose it. What does the police do when the judge won't issue an arrest? It can't do squat, or else the police will have every human rights organization breathing down their necks for harrassing someone. If the law must be upheld, it must be upheld in the right manner, not take the law into one's own hands and do what is fit. That's precisely what America did: no warrant to arrest and seize, so we take the law our own way and to hell with it.

[1985_BMW318i]

Go stick your head back in front of your TV and watch that Anime, Until you realize what is truely happening then don't comment, Milliardo you are certainly being mislead, When you grow up and can actually understand the events unwinding around you then you may actually be able to debate with reason, You don't have to agree but at least put forth something worth debating, Others here disagree with the majority of Americans that support this war and at least make sense, You ramble on like a little child, Its time you tell your Mama to stop breast feeding you and for you to see the world for it is, its not whats right outside your front door, Others suffer horrors you can't even imagine, Most don't realize this, I've been around this planet enough to see it. Don't take my word for it, Actually leave your front yard and see what is happening before you start to mumble next time

[taranaki]

Settle down guys.

interesting link there.Note copious usage of the words 'may', 'probably', 'unconfirmed', 'could'..etc.

It's my belief that if the U.S. military found these supplies in the 'facility'[fancy word for shed],they would have definitely been keen to identify them beyond reasonable doubt and parade them as justification for their presence.

The description of the BM-21 system as ' MISSILES' may be technically accurate,however,by failing to mention that they hare a tactical battlefield weapon with a maximum range of less than 16 miles,the information could easily be misinterpreted by those who believe that all missiles are huge projectiles that can propel multiple warheads across large distances.

http://www.rbs.ru/exhibition/UralExp.../gradbm-21.htm

The fact that these weapons have such a limited range lead me to wonder...why on earth would they be used for chemical weapons? if you dropped them at their minimum range[less than 3 miles],you'd be at very high risk of gassing yourself.


The bm-21 is a small,light[13 tonne]anti personnel and light vehicle weapon.Of soviet design,it would be readily available and affordable on the arms market to any minor dictator or terrorist group.

It is not a WMD.

I'd give the extremely vague reports of chemicals found more credibility if the articles in question were promptly handed over to the U.N. weapons inspectors for independant analysis....Please don't tell me that they missed these missiles and are incompetent,it's a highly mobile piece of equipment,and there's no indication in the story as to how long it has been in Iraq.


In summary.

The U.S. military found an elderly rocket-launcher abandoned in a shed.There were a couple of drums of chemicals there too,but as yet,the U.S.troops haven't had them analysed.

None of this equates to WMD.If Saddam had them,he would have them in greater quantities,and he would have deployed them by now.

[The Educator]

Ummm, yeah, copious usage of "may," "probably," "unconfirmed," and "could" duly noted. I believe that is why the thread was called "WMD Found??????" Note the copious use of six question marks. Nobody here is saying that a BM-21 equates to a weapon of mass destruction, and I don't see why your post focuses so much on its capabilities. Regardless, if we discover that there was mustard or sarin gas in those rockets, that means that he has WMD. It doesn't matter what we find them in, what matters is if he has them. We already know he has lower range variants of scuds, which could easily be used to deliver chemical warheads, so it would be foolish to assume that he couldn't put those chemicals on top of one of these missles. Also, a BM-21 could easily be used to deliver chemicals such as mustard or sarin gas, even within three miles, as they would quickly dissipate to harmless quantities in the air.

It is dangerous to assume that if he has the weapons that he would have them in great quantities, and that he would already have used them. Any military officer taking that stance on a battlefield risks losing a hell of a lot of lives if he's wrong. You cannot take what you think to be rational and project it onto Saddam. You have no idea how he thinks, and to assume he thinks rationally on something this important is potentially disastrous. Even if he does have them, it would be irrational to use them, as it would just turn much of the world against him.

[taranaki]

My post focuses on the capabilities of this missile launcher because clearly people are suggesting that WMD's have been found.Your hypothesisis that 'if this turns out to be what Ithink it is,then he could put it into Scud missiles' has no bearing on the topic.It's not in Scuds,it's not even been analysed yet,it may not even be relevant.If Saddam had weapons of mass destruction,as George Bush claims,and if he was as ruthless as George Bush claims,he would have used those weapons by now.There's no tactical advantage to withold your most effective weapons when you are backed into a corner.

This'news' story is irresponsible at best,lies by omission at worst.It implies that WMD exist on the strength of a few untested drums and fails completely to educate it's average reader,preferring to allow them to believe whatever misinformation they have been fed about missiles.

This find in no way represents a threat to America,the fact that whatever these chemicals are,they were found with a short-range delivery system would indicate that they were not intended for terrorist purposes.Yet another of the wafer-thin excuses for starting this war is still to be proven.

[The Educator]

The only person who actually suggested that they were actually weapons of mass destruction was Milliardo when he suggested that the U.S planted them ourselves, and nobody really liked his posted. Nobody here has said "oh, yup, we've got them now." Otherwise, didn't you read your last post? That's the same stuff you posted last time. How can you say that it matters what the weapons are found on? They are illegal no matter what. I mentioned the scuds because you seem to think that weapons on this BM-21 would pose no threat, but well, he's not supposed to have them on BM-anythings, so, if it turns out he does have them on this BM-21, why should we assume that he doesn't have them on scud-type missles? That's like "Oh look, we found this 10 megaton warhead on this BM-21, but well, I guess that's OK because he can only shoot it 16 miles." That is the same sort of dangerous logic that leads you to assume that if he has them he would use them.

[taranaki]

Originally posted by The Educator
The only person who actually suggested that they were actually weapons of mass destruction was Milliardo
.

Incorrect.Read the thread title.From the original article,it is transparently obvious that the military personnel who discovered these mysterious 'chemicals' also thought it a distinct possibilty and the reporting of the incident appears to play up the possibility.The fact is that any chemical which is detrimental to health,including pesticides,herbicides,solvents,caustic cleaning agents etc,etc ad nauseum will continue to be flagged by theose who are desperate to prove that they are not mistaken as'suspected chemical weapons'.Already some alleged 'chemical weapons' have been discredited,this from CNN [arguably one of the most biased pro-war news sites].

Laboratory tests on the 122 mm chemical rocket warheads found in an Iraqi bunker at Ukhaider earlier this month came back negative for chemical agents, Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector Hans Blix told U.N. Security Council members, diplomats said Wednesday.


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...racker.update/

[1985_BMW318i]

It's my belief that if the U.S. military found these supplies in the 'facility'[fancy word for shed],they would have definitely been keen to identify them beyond reasonable doubt and parade them as justification for their presence.

The US Military has stated today that the chemicals found in the bunker have not proven to be WMD, Samples were sent to the US as well as Germany who provided the equipment to test them.
With Germany also testing these chemicals that should provide a unbiased opinion considering they are antiwar. That in itself should settle the question at hand.

[rsxer45]

Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i



The US Military has stated today that the chemicals found in the bunker have not proven to be WMD, Samples were sent to the US as well as Germany who provided the equipment to test them.
With Germany also testing these chemicals that should provide a unbiased opinion considering they are antiwar. That in itself should settle the question at hand.

Thanks for the update .