12 year old buried centrifuge unearthed

debbie mannas · Joined: 30 Sep 2002 Posts: 1352

WMDs WMDs WMDs... deployable in 45 minutes OMG OMG OMG!!!!!

:aua

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/26/sprj.irq.centrifuge/index.html

AQUARIAN AGE · Austrian Peacekeeper Joined: 22 Dec 2001 Posts: 612

Well, its obviously not an U.F.O.!

What more proof do you need! :eyebrow

memphis mike · Joined: 21 May 2003 Posts: 228

once again, Debbie, you write it off as a non-issue....

debbie mannas · Joined: 30 Sep 2002 Posts: 1352

How was the war sold to the world on the basis of forgeries and plagiarism and BS.

YOU've written off a concocted WAR where thousands died as a non issue when bush and thugs are getting rich.

Are lies a non issue?

memphis mike · Joined: 21 May 2003 Posts: 228

regardless of how the war was sold---i find comfort in the fact that more lives were saved than lost--don't you remember that Sadaam gassed his own and slaughtered innocent civilians on a daily basis?

I'm actually believing you find that Sadaam was a just and honest man; Jeez, give me a break!

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
regardless of how the war was sold

Sorry, one can not disregard how the war was sold, since the salesmens way to go about it disrupted International Law and the US constitution (as long as the salesmen will not take responsibility for the fact that the hype they successfully pushed did not correspond with the actual goods). If the sales strategy and the arguments used does not have an aftermath worth the name, the events occured will have made changes of historical importance. Not positive ones.

In real life, salesmen who knowingly lie about their product and people die because of it first lose their jobs and then they go to prison.

Quote:
Sadaam gassed his own

Actually, according to the CIA, the jury is still out on that one.

They say it's more likely that it was Iran.

(and the CIA is always right, right?)

That is not saying that Saddam did not terrorize and slaughter innocent civilians, he did. I am simply giving the CIA view on a very talked about issue, repeated by every official (and by you here on this board) to add to the WMD argument.

Quote:
I'm actually believing you find that Sadaam was a just and honest man; Jeez, give me a break!

Don't be absurd, noone think that. It is, however, beside the point. Saddams personal character was not the central argument for going to war, Weapons of Mass Destruction in huge amounts was.

Don't you ever forget that.

LarreeMP3 · Joined: 12 Apr 2002 Posts: 1935

Quote:

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

I'm actually believing you find that Sadaam was a just and honest man; Jeez, give me a break!

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

I feel it!

debbie mannas · Joined: 30 Sep 2002 Posts: 1352

Nobody thinks that sadam is a "just and honest man". Thats not the point. The point was WMDs. So don't avoid the issue by personal attacks of sadam lover or american hater. It would seem you have perfected the childish tactics of your beloved administration. :frankie

It would seem YOU think Bush is a just and honest man, when there is ample evidence to the contrary... How come you condone the actions of a criminal in your country and condemn the actions of a criminal in another???

The world has condemned both. Unfortunately, the one running the US has more firepower and WMDs and so "prevails".

memphis mike · Joined: 21 May 2003 Posts: 228

Again, i say if there are no WMD found, we have made a grave error, i don't dispute that, i'm only saying thank God

and luck we didn't destroy a legit regime....We must learn a lesson from this as we may unleash upon the totally innocents

given certain circumstances,,that would be the ultimate nightmare......

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Thanks Mike, we probably do not think so different afterall.

Quote:
if there are no WMD found, we have made a grave error

Yes. Do you think the ones machinating that presumptive grave error should have to pay up?

Quote:
We must learn a lesson from this

Do you think we will? I highly doubt we will learn anything from it.

memphis mike · Joined: 21 May 2003 Posts: 228

you're still assuming Iraq had no WMD-I believe otherwise-if they had a program that's enough for me to attack.

debbie mannas · Joined: 30 Sep 2002 Posts: 1352

is still not enough reason for a war. That is what is so worrying for the rest of the world. There was no proper proof, but they manufactured it to get approval from Congress and the Senate which would NOT have been given without the forged Nigerian documents and other stuff. This is heinous and can be repeated with other countries in a blink of the eye. No one will be safe.

But even this is secondary to the fact that under any light, this invasion was illegal - a flouting of international law and UN mandate. The whole world order has been turned topsy turvy with this terrible precedent (no pun intended) and other countries can now justify their own expansionist plans in the future.

Remember too, saddam and his sons are still alive, while thousands of his people are not. This was was very much a crime against innocents.

Further, the US/UK used banned WMDs as well: Depleted Uranium and Cluster bombs. The effects of these munitions will be see for years to come on further innocent people.

Worse, they didn't protect Iraqs nuclear plant (legal) which got looted, with people dumping nuclear material in order to take the containers to use for holding water. There is now tons of villagers who are irradiated and dying terrible deaths.

There may still be WMDs found [or invented, I cannot put anything past bush and blair] but would they have been an immediate threat that warranted urgent invasion? Remember the haste? They said that Sadam could deploy those weapons in 45 minutes. That's why they called off the UN inspections. I dont believe you can deploy nukes in 45 minutes if they're buried in some remote site, do you? They had and still have NO evidence of a nuclear programme. I dont understand what makes you believe they did.

BTW, N. Korea has admitted to starting up their nuclear programme for energy.

Edited by: debbie mannas at: 6/28/03 2:19 am

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
you're still assuming Iraq had no WMD

I said *presumptive* grave mistake, until there are real proof (verified by IAEA and UNMOVIC) that Iraq had the WMD Bush/Blair claimed they had before the war there is precious little to built a case on. A situation just like we've had for the last year, in fact.

The burden of proof lays on the attackers.

Blair refuses to be heared, a public US hearing was blocked by congress.

Doesn't that strike you as odd?

Quote:
I believe otherwise

You have the right to believe anything you want.

Quote:
if they had a program that's enough for me to attack.

Sure. The 100,000 slaughtered Iraqis killed by the Iraqi government would have been ample grounds too for many.

That is not how the situation was being presented, though.

We need to distinguish between what would be enough for you, me and some guy on the street and what material the congress was being feeded for taking the vote.

The clear and present danger that is required to give a green light was painted with a very broad brush.