|Can you believe those Russians?||purplepaul|
Apr 17, 2003 8:25 AM
|Watching BBC news just now I heard that Russia will not support lifting the sanctions against Iraq until it is proven that it has no WMD. So, is that a tacit, but belated, admission that Russia knows that Iraq has them (and therefore the war was justified) or just sour grapes?|
|sounds anti-American nm||DougSloan|
Apr 17, 2003 8:33 AM
|What if WMDs are never found?||PdxMark|
Apr 17, 2003 9:41 AM
|I've been wondering what spin to expect if WMDs are never found in Iraq. A CNN military talking head has the answer:
"If absolutely nothing was found after months of thorough searching, my question would be -- where was it shipped? If such weapons are not in the country, they must have been shipped out because we absolutely know they were there."
I know where... SYRIA!
|No, no--we know exactly where they are||retro|
Apr 17, 2003 9:51 AM
|They're in a C-17 headed from Travis AFB to Baghdad....|
Apr 17, 2003 10:23 AM
|I know that's a popular theory among the conspiracy crowd but there are two problems with that scenario. One, if we were going to plant them, why wait so long that credibility is seriously questioned. Two, since it is a near certainty that the chemicals will be sent to labs all over the world for analysis, the origin of the chemicals would be publicly declared. If it turned out that they could have or did come from the US that would be a much more damaging crisis than not finding any at all.
Sorry to trouble you with reality.
|I don't see a problem.||czardonic|
Apr 17, 2003 12:07 PM
|Why wait? So it doesn't look suspicious when we find in a couple weeks what the UN couldn't find in months.
So far, the Pentagon isn't indicating anything like "near certainty" that it will allow anyone access to the materials they are certain they will find. Plus, these materials will be connected to the US whether it is because we plant them in Iraq next week or because we sold them to Iraq in the 80's.
So you see, all our bases are covered.
|Look a little harder||purplepaul|
Apr 17, 2003 12:21 PM
|Shaming the UN would be exactly what we would have wanted. If we could have found something the day after they left Iraq, it would have been extremely damning and strong proof that inspections were worthless.
It was reported in the media that all samples found will be sent to independent labs around the world. Samples from the 80's would be very different from current stocks. They also would likely be able to tell the conditions under which the chemicals were stored. If there are any inconsistencies, there will be hell to pay. Plus, a conspiracy like this is just bound to be exposed.
At what point will you admit there is no conspiracy?
|The US was helping with the UN inspections. .||czardonic|
Apr 17, 2003 12:30 PM
|. . .so we'd only be shaming ourselves (not that we aren't doing that already with each day that passes w/o finding WMD). On the other hand, "proof" of Iraq's deviousness in hiding these materials would be the ultimate proof that inpections wouldn't have worked.
"Reported in the media". That's gold!
|"Reported in the media". That's gold!||purplepaul|
Apr 17, 2003 1:27 PM
|You're right. That's so stupid, why do I feel I've heard it so many times before?|
|"Reported in the media". That's gold!||Live Steam|
Apr 17, 2003 1:41 PM
|"why do I feel I've heard it so many times before?"
Why do I get the feeling that the morally conscious posters above work for the DNC :O) These guys are just amazing. I don't think it matters what is found when and if the war was executed without even one causality, these pundits of RBR would still be attacking this administration from every conceivable angle. It's know as the shotgun approach. Just keep shooting and your bound to hit something.
|LOL Nailed it. Good job.||No_sprint|
Apr 17, 2003 2:02 PM
|They can carve a conspiracy out of an island inhabited by one.|
|That's the Spirit! nm||Live Steam|
Apr 17, 2003 2:30 PM