Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 22:58:11 -0500, rickb308 wrote:


Thinking more along the lines of Syria or Libya.

I just don't see it. Since Reagan bombed Qaddafi, Libya has been trying
to rehabilitate it's image. It recently accepted responsibility for the
Pam Am bombing and paid reparations. Syria and Iraq may share a hatred
for Israel, but Syria sided with Iran in the Iran-Iraq war. It is true
that the relationship has been improving, but not to the point that they
would be willing to risk our wrath by accepting Iraq's weapons.

If you want to know about the WMD, I would look closer to home, to
Rumsfeld's Office of Special Plans. I would suggest they cooked the
intell on Iraq and I personally feel Rumsfeld should be fired.

Some interesting reads:

http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030512fa_fact

http://search.csmonitor.com/durable/1999/09/13/p7s1.htm

http://www.meib.org/articles/0103_s1.htm

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 04:50:55 GMT, "Mark Browne"
wrote:

snip
Known. Key operating word.

If we had "known", we would have gotten Saddam. We would have
"known" where he was. Thanks to budget cuts, and not being able
to hire "thieves", our humint assests were mighty thin on the
ground. We don't "know" everything they did.

Hell, we didn't "KNOW" that they buried 30 fully armed MIG
fighters in the sand. We found those by accident. And we admitted
they were found by accident. Would have been easy to claim we
knew where THEY were.
snip

Saddam effectively destroyed these arms. A turbine does not take well to
being buried in sand; without extensive refitting those birds will never
fly
again.
I can't begin to imagine why he chose to comply with the orders to
disarm,
but not to let the inspectors verify the fact. One working theory: it may
have been in Saddams best interest to make his neighbors think he still
possessed them so that he could maintain some control of his political
rivals.

Mark Browne


Were they cucooned or were they simply bulldozed over?

Gunner

snip
The pictures I saw looked like they had just dug a ditch, pushed them in,
and covered them up.
The sand was in direct contact with the birds.

Mark Browne

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

wrote in message
...


Known. Key operating word.


Interesting article on the limits of intelligence:

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2003_...n_julaug03.asp

The title makes it sound like left-wing stuff, but read it anyway. It was
just a poor choice of title, and the shortcomings described in the article
apply to ANY administration.

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Jim -" wrote in message
et...

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:by%8b.442621$o%2.199255@sccrnsc02...
snip
And because they reported it, it must be true.

Sounds good to me; it does dovetail rather nicely with what I have
personally experienced when traveling in the middle east. This is in
rather
sharp contrast with much of what has been said by people of the PNAC
persuasion.

Lets see, the story talks about the 1980's. Even Iraq admitted to
having
WOMD in the
1990's in their reports to the UN.

So where did they go Mark?

They said they destroyed them, and so far, it seems to be the truth.

So how did Saddam earn credibility in your eyes? Was it his rape and
torture chambers
or his mass killings of his own citizens?

I am not aware Saddam raped people but in any case I do not think the poster
was supporting Saddam Hussein. Where did he say that? Do you believe that if
I do not support you then I must be supporting your enemy?
By the way the US DID support Saddam. Rumsfeld oversaw the selling of
Anthrax to Iraq. And theUS supported other regiems who tortured raped an
killed people en masse. Suharto in Indonesia and Pinochet in chile spring to
mind but there are many more.


[snip]


Perhaps you wish to go over to the middle east and show these stupid
inspectors how to search of the "missing" WMDs. I have a shovel, if you
want to go over and dig up the missing weapons I would be happy to
borrow it
to you. Until then, the preponderance of evidence is that the weapons
are
destroyed.

How do you borrow a shovel to another person Mark?

When you cant tackle the arguemt do you resort ot attacking the person?



Regardless, even Hans Blix thought the WOMD existed as late as February of
this year:



http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/14/sprj.irq.un/

"In their third progress report since U.N. Security Council Resolution
1441 was passed
in November, inspectors told the council they had not found any weapons of
mass
destruction, but they urged Iraq to be more cooperative.

Hans Blix, executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and
Inspection
Commission, and Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International
Atomic Energy
Agency, said they were still investigating and had not ruled out the
possibility that
Iraq does possess chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

Here is the original: http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/blix14Febasdel.htm

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 inspections have taken place throughout Iraq at industrial
sites, ammunition depots, research centres, universities, presidential
sites, mobile laboratories, private houses, missile production facilities,
military camps and agricultural sites. At all sites which had been
inspected before 1998, re-baselining 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 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
Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's
declarations.

....

How much, if any, is left of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and related
proscribed items and programmes? 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. To take an example, a document, which Iraq provided, suggested to us
that some 1,000 tonnes of chemical agent were "unaccounted for". One 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.


We are fully aware that many governmental intelligence
organizations are convinced and assert that proscribed weapons, items and
programmes continue to exist. The US Secretary of State presented material
in support of this conclusion. Governments have many sources of information
that are not available to inspectors. Inspectors, for their part, must base
their reports only on evidence, which they can, themselves, examine and
present publicly. Without evidence, confidence cannot arise.

[end qoutes]


Blix said perhaps the most important inspection issue is determining what
happened to
stores of anthrax, VX nerve agent and long-range missiles that Iraq
previously was
known to have.


So where are they? And if the US invaded Iraq for this (and they SWORE BLIND
that the WMD existed) why haven't they left now?


One document suggests that "some 1,000 tons of chemical agent were
unaccounted for,"
but Baghdad has begun to provide more information that could help lead to
answers, Blix
added.


Is this doccument part of the "evidence " the UK governmnet made up?

[snip]

He said Iraq's al-Samoud 2 model of missile exceeds the range of 93 miles
(150
kilometers) allowed by U.N. resolutions. Iraqi officials have said the
missile does not
yet have a guidance system, which would reduce its range.


They didn't exceed the range AFAIK. Can you prove they did?


Blix also said a small number of empty chemical munitions had been found,
"which should
have been declared and destroyed."

Look! The US invaded after promising loads and loads of WMD terrorist
training camps etc. They didn't find any. so why dont they leave?



Have you been sleeping through the last twenty or so years? I am not
normally a fan of clip and paste politics, but your question does
not
merit
the work of personally answering:

Translation: I am not able to.


Would that be the last twenty years when the US moved an Army into
fundamentalist (women and jews cant vote) Saudi Arabia and sold Anthrax to
iraq?

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 10:19:00 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Jim - wrote:

"Mark Browne" wrote in message
news:iv_8b.443180$Ho3.71632@sccrnsc03...


So where did they go Mark?

Have you been sleeping throught the last twenty or so years? I am not
normally a fan of clip and paste politics, but your question does not
merit
the work of personally answering:

Translation: I am not able to.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Which is why Harry posts on subjects he is underqualified to comment
on. You also are evidently prone to that.

Ok guys..the UN report in the late 1990s, stated catagoricly that Iraq
had some moderately massive amounts of WMD.

Yes rumsfeld had the receipts for the anthrax he sold to Iraq. So what?

Then the UN inspectors
were kicked out. So you folks are claiming that Saddam, in an act of
pure altruism, destroyed the WMD, when no one was looking.

Where is it? You are shifting the shoe onto the other foot. The US claimed
evidence for WMD and claimed they were invading because of that threat.
where is the evidence? and now that the threat is gone why aren't the US?

WMD that
he has spent billions on developing. There is no half life on most
Chemical agents. Biological ones, if not fed or left unfrozen, yes.

Chemical agents e.g SARIN SOMBAN TAMUN are highly volitale and denaturate
rapidly on exposure to Air. One only has to open the container and stand
well clear. Within a few hours the agent is gone.


I further note that you folks are claiming that Saddam used up all the
WMD in the Iraq/Iran war,

I am claiming thast if Saddam had wmd and had the capability to launch them
in 40 minutes (which the US/UK alliance claimed) then where are they?

a number (10) yrs before the UN report came
out. Unless he owns a time machine and his military supply train
extends backwards in time..you have a problem with this statement. Its
at the least, to put it nicely..in error...

I suggest you get in your time machine and look at the point where the US
supplied Saddam with WMD in the first place. Oh Tempora oh Mores!

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 15:11:03 GMT, "Mark Browne"
wrote:


They said they destroyed them, and so far, it seems to be the truth. You
do
seem to think a lot of your opinion about how clueless the inspectors
are.
Perhaps you wish to go over to the middle east and show these stupid
inspectors how to search of the "missing" WMDs. I have a shovel, if you
want to go over and dig up the missing weapons I would be happy to borrow
it
to you. Until then, the preponderance of evidence is that the weapons are
destroyed.

Ah..Mark..there is no evidence, other than a claim by Saddam, that
they were destroyed. A paper trail. Period. And the paper trail itself
had serious holes in it, given a number of WMD that simply did not
appear in the claim, that the UN had indeed verified the Iraqis had in
their arsenal.

Ah gunner. If I accuse you of murder and you end up in court and the
prosecution claim loads and loads of evidence is it then up to you to
produce proof that you did not commit the murder? Or is it that you are
assumed not to have done so and the prosecution have to actually produce the
evidence? So where is this evidence? "I swrae your honour Exibhit A was
there only last week" is not evidence.

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:56:51 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:10:01 +0000, rickb308 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 04:05:01 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 05:09:33 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

What is really scary, other than your IQ, is that no WMD's were
found!
Where did they go? IS a known fact he had them, even your beloved
Clinton
believed the fact, especially the proven fact he used them on his own
people
as well as Iranians. Which country is the holder of the weapons now?
They
scary fact is that zero has been found. Means that there was a very
complete transfer out of the country.
Bill

Possibly, another explanation is that the UN inspectors were correct in
their estimation that up to 98% of the weapons were already destroyed.

Then they should have been able to point to where they were
destroyed at.

UN Inspectors have verified much of the destroyed weapons. The sticking
point has always been the verification/documentation of the remaining
weapons. There is much information on the internet about this, or do you
actually believe that Iran would accept Iraq's WMD? The same weapons
that
they had seen first hand in the Iran Iraq War, a war that cost the
Iranians 1/2 million people.

Thinking more along the lines of Syria or Libya.

Oh so you invaded the WRONG country then? so it is okay then. So the
evidence points to Libya (who you also sold weapons to ) or Syria? So you
should invade them then because it is them who are the real problem? Bit of
a US and them senario eh?



Also, you may want to consider that the weapons he had in the 1990s are
no
longer weapons. They do have a shelf live.

biological, maybe. Chemical? Who knows.

Iraq was known to produce three nerve agents, sarin, tabun, and VX.
Sarin
and tabun have a shelf live of five years. It is not known that Iraq
ever
stabilized VX.

Known. Key operating word.

Known because the US (Rumsfeld oversaw it) SOLD them Anthrax etc. Key pot
calling kettle black phrase.


If we had "known", we would have gotten Saddam.

Th Us did know. They SOLD him the stuff.

We would have
"known" where he was. Thanks to budget cuts, and not being able
to hire "thieves", our humint assests were mighty thin on the
ground. We don't "know" everything they did.


Budget cuts bollox! The Us have spent $75 billion on the currebnt Iraq
invasion. Haliburton (chaneys old employer) stand to gain $7 billion. This
is afet almost going bankrupt before the War. Clinto built up a trillion
dollars. do you look forward to your taxes increasing now that Bush has
squandered the lot?

Hell, we didn't "KNOW" that they buried 30 fully armed MIG
fighters in the sand.


But you knew that 400 migs had been flown to Iran in 1991. Lack of evidence
of something is not proof of something else. you may not know Mr x committed
rape. When you find out about Mr x does that mean Mr Y must be guilty of
murder?

We found those by accident. And we admitted
they were found by accident. Would have been easy to claim we
knew where THEY were.

Really? so before you knew about accidental discoveries you can predict
them. i might accidentaly win the lotto next week. care to predict the
numbers for me?



Without the 2nd Amendment,
the rest are just suggestions.

The 2nd Ammendment gives Us citizens the right to bear arms. does this
include nukes? How about SARIN?

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:30:22 -0700, Tim May
[snip]

You do realize that all three of those princelings have died since
9/11, are you not?

Do you realise that the poeple promulgating your trolling myths have not
answered the valid questions they were asked


Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired,
signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower
April 16, 1953

The present Iraq thing has cost the US $75 billion. Who do you want to pay
the extra taxes for this and the $1500 billion Bush squandered?

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

"Beacon" wrote in message
...

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:30:22 -0700, Tim May
[snip]

You do realize that all three of those princelings have died since
9/11, are you not?

Do you realise that the poeple promulgating your trolling myths have not
answered the valid questions they were asked


Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired,
signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not
fed,
those who are cold and are not clothed."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower
April 16, 1953

The present Iraq thing has cost the US $75 billion. Who do you want to pay
the extra taxes for this and the $1500 billion Bush squandered?



The fools believe that it's OK to simply sell more treasury debt to fund
this mess. Somebody else will pay for it. Doesn't this smack of entitlement,
the same practice that right-wing robots whine about constantly? Getting
something for nothing?

Failure to find banned Iraqi arms delays inspectors' report: press
 

[snip]
The fools believe that it's OK to simply sell more treasury debt to fund
this mess. Somebody else will pay for it. Doesn't this smack of
entitlement,
the same practice that right-wing robots whine about constantly? Getting
something for nothing?

Obligatory

Your marriage braakdown; your divorce;whether yousurvive; and can you afford
a boat
all this depends on what te Bush admisistration can cost you