Printable View
Hehe! Just a note, you have in above post Originally posted by solarflare for the second quote, which should be Mick I think.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
Indeed. Last time I checked, 666 came before 2002.
So you can replace "solarflare" with "Mick665" ;).
Hasn't anybody said anything about Bush's successful attempt to solve the problem of overpopulation? US army's next destination: India. Only kidding :D!
I told you before, why not now, as it appears speed is more important than the lives of soldiers, which is in turn more important than hundreds of Iraqi's dying to starvation? And as far as the humanitarian aid is concerned, due to the war, it is drastically lowered. Another nice effect.Quote:
Originally posted by Mick_2002
Sorry I don't check the price of Gas as I fill up. But then I have a Gas friendly car. Humanitarin aid will flow when it is safe to flow. What you say is well again ridculous. Maybe you should look up how many Billions, that's with a 'B' the US puts out for humanitatiran aid.
Remains the fact that those seven oilwells are not that much of a problem as it will take a while to put them out anyway. The population is starving right now. And wasn't this about the people, getting a taste of US freedom, MacDonalds and Coke,... oh, the water must come druling in their mouth. And not for freedom, but from the hunger.Quote:
Originally posted by Mick_2002
EDIT: Engineers are being sent in to cap the oil fields set afire by iraqi's, I know I know, we bombed them and that set them on fire. Just like the oil trenchs we set on fire outside of baghdad. Nice pictures of Baghdad BTW lets make our own people breath the smoke from the oil trenches.
Sorry, it is 11 at night here. The thinking goes a lot worse, especially Mick will be able to tell you it's true. :DQuote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Hehe! Just a note, you have in above post Originally posted by solarflare for the second quote, which should be Mick I think.
You're the neighbour of the Beast? :DQuote:
Originally posted by solarflare
So you can replace "solarflare" with "Mick665".
And another point - Bush is doing the whole world a favor by teaching them a lesson, without getting them in direct danger. The ultimate moral we should learn from all this is: don't elect a stupid president. Oh wait, we didn't elect him.
Take a nap.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
Sorry, it is 11 at night here. The thinking goes a lot worse, especially Mick will be able to tell you it's true. :D
BTW: since this thread is about WMD and how we started babbling back in forth about absolutly nothing.
How is it, that people will believe that Saddam will try and obtain nuclear capabilities but cannot believe he would or has chemical/ biological weapons.
Requirement:
Res. 687 (3 April 1991) Requires Iraq to declare, destroy, remove, or render harmless under UN or IAEA supervision and not to use, develop, construct, or acquire all chemical and biological weapons, all ballistic missiles with ranges greater than 150 km, and all nuclear weapons-usable material, including related material, equipment, and facilities. The resolution also formed the Special Commission and authorized the IAEA to carry out immediate on-site inspections of WMD-related facilities based on Iraq's declarations and UNSCOM's designation of any additional locations.
Result:
Baghdad refused to declare all parts of each WMD program, submitted several declarations as part of its aggressive efforts to deny and deceive inspectors, and ensured that certain elements of the program would remain concealed. The prohibition against developing delivery platforms with ranges greater than 150 km allowed Baghdad to research and develop shorter-range systems with applications for longer-range systems and did not affect Iraqi efforts to convert full-size aircraft into unmanned aerial vehicles as potential WMD delivery systems with ranges far beyond 150 km.
Requirement:
Res. 707 (15 August 1991) Requires Iraq to allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to any site they wish to inspect. Demands Iraq provide full, final, and complete disclosure of all aspects of its WMD programs; cease immediately any attempt to conceal, move, or destroy WMD-related material or equipment; allow UNSCOM and IAEA teams to use fixed-wing and helicopter flights throughout Iraq; and respond fully, completely, and promptly to any Special Commission questions or requests.
Result:
Baghdad in 1996 negotiated with UNSCOM Executive Chairman Ekeus modalities that it used to delay inspections, to restrict to four the number of inspectors allowed into any site Baghdad declared as "sensitive," and to prohibit them altogether from sites regarded as sovereign. These modalities gave Iraq leverage over individual inspections. Iraq eventually allowed larger numbers of inspectors into such sites but only after lengthy negotiations at each site.
Requirement:
Res. 715 (11 October 1991) Requires Iraq to submit to UNSCOM and IAEA long-term monitoring of Iraqi WMD programs; approved detailed plans called for in UNSCRs 687 and 707 for long-term monitoring.
Result:
Iraq generally accommodated UN monitors at declared sites but occasionally obstructed access and manipulated monitoring cameras. UNSCOM and IAEA monitoring of Iraq's WMD programs does not have a specified end date under current UN resolutions.
Requirement:
Res. 1051 (27 March 1996) Established the Iraqi export/import monitoring system, requiring UN members to provide IAEA and UNSCOM with information on materials exported to Iraq that may be applicable to WMD production, and requiring Iraq to report imports of all dual-use items.
Result:
Iraq is negotiating contracts for procuring—outside of UN controls—dual-use items with WMD applications. The UN lacks the staff needed to conduct thorough inspections of goods at Iraq's borders and to monitor imports inside Iraq.
Requirement:
Res. 1060 (12 June 1996) and Resolutions 1115, 1134, 1137, 1154, 1194, and 1205. Demands that Iraq cooperate with UNSCOM and allow inspection teams immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to facilities for inspection and access to Iraqi officials for interviews. UNSCR 1137 condemns Baghdad's refusal to allow entry to Iraq to UNSCOM officials on the grounds of their nationality and its threats to the safety of UN reconnaissance aircraft.
Result:
Baghdad consistently sought to impede and limit UNSCOM's mission in Iraq by blocking access to numerous facilities throughout the inspection process, often sanitizing sites before the arrival of inspectors and routinely attempting to deny inspectors access to requested sites and individuals. At times, Baghdad would promise compliance to avoid consequences, only to renege later.
Requirement:
Res. 1154 (2 March 1998) Demands that Iraq comply with UNSCOM and IAEA inspections and endorses the Secretary General's memorandum of understanding with Iraq, providing for "severest consequences" if Iraq fails to comply.
Res. 1194 (9 September 1998) Condemns Iraq's decision to suspend cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA.
Res. 1205 (5 November 1998) Condemns Iraq's decision to cease cooperation with UNSCOM.
Result:
UNSCOM could not exercise its mandate without Iraqi compliance. Baghdad refused to work with UNSCOM and instead negotiated with the Secretary General, whom it believed would be more sympathetic to Iraq's needs.
I don't give a shit. None of these contains "by all means necessary" and I can give you an even longer list of violations by another state with weapons of mass destruction, you know which one I'm talking of: Israel.
And you don't answer me why it is more important the engineers have equipment with them to restore pipelines and oil installations while the burning ones aren't put out yet and the rebuilding hasn't started. Those trucks could contain food and supplies. And no answer either why speed is more important than the lives of soldiers, in turn more important than hundreds or Iraqi people, who it is supposed to be all about, starving of hunger, thirst and diseases due to the US bombing power plants and water pipelines and making food transports dangerous.
And before accusing me of the same (not answering something): I'm still looking for that documentary. I get too many hits on Google. Using Rocketshiki I found another documentary I saw on the BBC about their Russian equivalent.
Israel isn't in violation of resolutions passed by the UN.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
I can give you an even longer list of violation by another state with weapons of mass destruction, you know which one I'm talking of: Israel.
Oh reeeaaaallllyyyy?Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Israel isn't in violation of resolutions passed by the UN.
Amelioration of American displeasure for their own government.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
And no answer either why speed is more important than the lives of soldiers, in turn more important than hundreds or Iraqi people
Yes reeeaaaallllyyy. Those are opinions, not orders, from the UN. And look at the source, you fool. Do you think that site is the place to get unbiased facts about Israel?Quote:
Still reeeaaalllyyy?Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Yes reeeaaaallllyyy. Those are opinions, not orders, from the UN. And look at the source, you fool. Do you think that site is the place to get unbiased facts about Israel?
Okay, so Israel deported a few Palestinians, and Iraq wants to nuke the world.Quote:
Also, Israel's latest "crime" was over a decade ago. I tried looking for those citations on the un webpage (un.org), but trying to load the actual resolution documents kept freezing my computer. Doesn't my new optical mouse do anything to improve processor speed??
I know Israel is supposed to be a democracy (although it is going fast downhill now), but Iraq wanting to nuke the world? just the US and Israel and you know pretty well there is a difference between wanting and being able, both by not having the means (fake Nigerian documents, non-existing IAEA report about those aluminium tubes) and by knowing what the response would be. Saddam didn't use WMD last time against Israel and the US, remember, and remember why?Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Okay, so Israel deported a few Palestinians, and Iraq wants to nuke the world.
And Israel has more or less a system of Apartheid, where Palestinians are systematically discriminated and held back, undisputedly. Not an example of a model democracy either.
You're even giving me more fuel. Bush said Iraq has defied the UN for 12 years as argument to show Saddam's evilness, Israel for even decades more. Deporting hundreds of thousands of Palestinians (a few?!?!) in both 1948 and 1967 is not exactly a small crime either.Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Also, Israel's latest "crime" was over a decade ago.
First of all, MAD is not proven to work. And if he did fire off a nuke, it would affect every living being on this planet, not just a few million people.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
... knowing what the response would be. Saddam didn't use WMD last time against Israel and the US, remember, and remember why?
Additionally, Saddam did try to use WMD against Israel. He fired (I think this is the correct number, but not certain) 39 Scuds at Israel, many loaded with WMD cargo. And obviously he didn't do that to the US because he didn't (and doesn't) have the technology.
I think a huge problem here is that we're disagreeing on the facts.