Rita Will Accomplish What Katrina and Cindy Could Not

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
I believe that if we had not pushed, and pushed, and pushed on Iraq in a credible way, it would now have a serious secret stockpile of WMD, or would be close to it.

Interesting that you do believe this, seeing as there isn't a single piece of evidence supporting the idea that Saddam had the capability to produce a stockpile of WMD anytime soon, and a great amount contradicting this claim....

It shows how removed from reality you are, Brandon; Saddam wasn't a threat to us at all.

Cycloptichorn

Here are some facts about Iraq's WMD and programs at about the time of the invasion. It's reasonable to conclude that if he had merely hidden his program better, but was continuing to work on it, in a few years he might have been a very lethal thread.:

From Source :

Biological WeaponsAnthrax - Iraq declared producing nearly 8,500 liters but denied its ability to produce dry agent. UN inspectors believe Iraq may have produced 26,000 liters and can produce dry agent.
Botulinum toxin - Iraq declared 19,000 liters. The UN believes it could have produced more than double that amount.
Chemical Weapons

VX Nerve Gas - The UN concluded that Iraq had not accounted for 1.5 tons of the VX agent. Just one drop is enough to kill a person.

Chemical and Biological Weapons Delivery Systems
UNMOVIC had reported that Iraq failed to provide evidence to account for 1,000 tons of mustard gas, 550 mustard gasfilled munitions, and hundreds of biological weapons-capable aerial bombs. Iraq has denied any connection between its Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) Programs and chemical or biological agent dispersal, despite a previous admission and has failed to turn over all of its UAVs to the UN. From a truck in Iraq, its small UAVs can reach Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, or Israel. From a ship, one can reach New York, Paris, London, Berlin, or Beijing.

Nuclear Development
Iraq had repeatedly sought to illegally procure aluminum tubes controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, that are consistent with its pre-Gulf War design to enrich uranium

From Source :

Mahdi Obeidi, former head of Iraq's uranium enrichment program, voluntarily gave the documents to U.S. officials in Baghdad...according to the Institute for Science and International Security, which advised Obeidi on his decision to surrender the materials (see GSN, May 5).

Obeidi gave U.S. officials several components of a gas centrifuge, along with design plans for the machines, said ISIS Assistant Director Corey Hinderstein. Obeidi buried the materials in his backyard in 1991 under orders from former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's son Qusay, according to the Washington Post.

The design plans provided by Obeidi would have saved Iraq considerable time in relaunching its nuclear program if Hussein had given an order to do so, Hinderstein said.

"If the order was given, these documents and materials could be used to restart the program...."

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Craven de Kere wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:

The recent poll results for Bush aren't good, but I attribute most of this to the efforts of people like you and the liberal media, slinging mud at him in the hopes that some will stick.

When his poll results were good did you attribute most of it to "people like you" and the "conservative media"?

Come on Brandon! This kind of silliness is below you.

I believe that he has been the victim of an organized and successful effort to accuse him of everything possible so that a few bits will stick.

As the sustained and hysterical Republican mud slinging at and witch hunt of Clinton (which you rightly acknowledge) cost him his second term?

Exactly so.

0 Replies

Brndon

Quote:

Iraq had repeatedly sought to illegally procure aluminum tubes controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, that are consistent with its pre-Gulf War design to enrich uranium

In order to enrich Uranium you need much more than ALUMINUM TUBES. This would be like buying radiator caps and then claiming that you have a program to produce cars.
You need to get Uranium oxide (the cake),thats been debunked
Then one needs to make Uranium hexaflouride(such plants are quite distinctive and give off other radionuclides incluing molybdenum. Not only had the inspectors NOT found any UF6 plants, they had no fingerprint nuclides that indicate that HF6 had been produced in the past.
Then you need a steam distillation or steam centrifuge unit (none of these found either)
They did find the Al tubes but as was said in the 9/11 report"these Al tubes were not of the style commonly associated with centrifugal enrichment.
No equipment to eval the enrichment levels was found in all the years of looking.

Its not so much that he was hiding the stuff , he duped everyone, and this is what SCott Ritter told everyone . Mr Ritter, to me a national hero, was villified and almost branded a traitor by the regime in DC.

Im not as familiar with the anthrax and the rest of the "WMDs" but we, as a natuion were mostly scared of nukes in a suitcase and such diseases as smallpox.

0 Replies

Chrissee wrote:

First of all, we need a committment to 1)Re-examining and re-tooling our coastal infra-structure. 2) We need to end our dependence on fossil fuel. Oil has reached it's peak capacity, we cannot go on like this. We need a commitment to vehicles that can get 200 mpg or use no gasoline at all. This needs to be equivalent to JFK's commitment to go to the moon. We can do this. With the right leadership.

Can you be more specific on "re-examining and re-tooling our coastal infra-structure?"

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

dlowan wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
Craven de Kere wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:

The recent poll results for Bush aren't good, but I attribute most of this to the efforts of people like you and the liberal media, slinging mud at him in the hopes that some will stick.

When his poll results were good did you attribute most of it to "people like you" and the "conservative media"?

Come on Brandon! This kind of silliness is below you.

I believe that he has been the victim of an organized and successful effort to accuse him of everything possible so that a few bits will stick.

As the sustained and hysterical Republican mud slinging at and witch hunt of Clinton (which you rightly acknowledge) cost him his second term?

Exactly so.

I'll never try irony again...

0 Replies

Encountered that problem several times myself.

It seems those I-ronians just dont get it.

0 Replies

Excess of heavy metals?

0 Replies

heamatite I should think

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Brndon
Quote:
Iraq had repeatedly sought to illegally procure aluminum tubes controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, that are consistent with its pre-Gulf War design to enrich uranium

In order to enrich Uranium you need much more than ALUMINUM TUBES. This would be like buying radiator caps and then claiming that you have a program to produce cars.
You need to get Uranium oxide (the cake),thats been debunked
Then one needs to make Uranium hexaflouride(such plants are quite distinctive and give off other radionuclides incluing molybdenum. Not only had the inspectors NOT found any UF6 plants, they had no fingerprint nuclides that indicate that HF6 had been produced in the past.
Then you need a steam distillation or steam centrifuge unit (none of these found either)
They did find the Al tubes but as was said in the 9/11 report"these Al tubes were not of the style commonly associated with centrifugal enrichment.
No equipment to eval the enrichment levels was found in all the years of looking.

Its not so much that he was hiding the stuff , he duped everyone, and this is what SCott Ritter told everyone . Mr Ritter, to me a national hero, was villified and almost branded a traitor by the regime in DC.

Im not as familiar with the anthrax and the rest of the "WMDs" but we, as a natuion were mostly scared of nukes in a suitcase and such diseases as smallpox.

(1) Did you read the addendum about the buried blueprints?
(2) I believe that there is enough in my post to disprove Cycloptichorn's assertion that Hussein wasn't a danger, bearing in mind that we were afraid of what he would become more than what he was at that moment.

He may not have been as much of a danger at the moment of invasion, largely because of our continuous warnings to him to disarm, but had until some point in time had had a lot of weapons that would have been lethal on a mass scale if used.

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Excess of heavy metals?

In lieu of an actual, on point argument, I guess. Yes, stay with petty little snipes. It's safer for you than engaging my actual arguments.

0 Replies

Nope, Brandon. The fact is we didn't find any of those things you listed. Ergo, Saddam wasn't a threat.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Nope, Brandon. The fact is we didn't find any of those things you listed. Ergo, Saddam wasn't a threat.

Cycloptichorn

In 1996, Iraq declared that it had produced a total of 3.9 tons of VX nerve gas, etc., etc. ( Source ). Iraq had had WMD, had concealed them from inspectors, and had lied about them. The only open question was how recently it had had them. WMD kill with a lethality rarely seen in warfare. Just based on the superficial history of Iraq's WMD, at the time of invasion there was a non-negligible probability that Iraq was still lying, and simply doing a better job of concealing the WMD they had had. A moderate probability of a WMD attack on a city is certainly a danger.

Besides the probability that Iraq had the WMD, there was also a probability that if the sanctions were lifted at some point, and the spotlight shifted off Iraq, Hussein would quietly begin his WMD program again. As I posted above, one of Hussein's sons ordered a uranium enrichment program employee to bury centrifuge designs in his garden.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Nope, Brandon. The fact is we didn't find any of those things you listed. Ergo, Saddam wasn't a threat.

Cycloptichorn

Then why did most of those in the know consider him a threat? You've read all the quotes from both sides of our gov't. Why would they have said that Saddam represented a threat if he didn't?

0 Replies

There were an equal number of "on the ground" witnesses who stated under oath that the Saddam threat was smoke and mirrors.
Brandon still wishes to believe that "plans" for a nuke enrichment facility and a "Ronco" home centriguge would result in a nuclear bomb. Maybe in about 10 years of hard work. As soon as we would get wind of a specific" atmospheric "cocktail" that could be monitored hundreds of miles awy, maybe then we do something sbout it. Remember it takes a while to enrich HF6 to get about a 90 kilo
of U235 (about as big as a 12 pack of "SNAPPLE").
Its a ridiculous proposition that most nuclear scientists poo pooed from day 1. Politicians voted on "giving GW AUTHORITY" to use force "as a last resort" The spinmeisters are playing that to mean that Congrees voted to go to war.

Ive said many times before, given today, what we know, I dont think the vote woulda gone his way. He would have lost in Congress by a margin that would include all but the War Crazy conservatives. Those guys are hopeless. The rest of Congress , IMO, learned an important lesson about this "morally centered" regime. Its less than truthfull always.

PS, I dont agree with the rpemise of this threaed, I wish no evil opn anyone. I wish only a speedy and comfortable retirement for all the turds in the GW regime. I( wanna attend a speech in which I can heckel him as a simple citizen, since Id never meet his demographics test to be allowed in his speeches of today.

0 Replies

Why do we know today what we know?

Is it because we spent 12 years of pussyfooting around with an evil, dispicable peice of feces like Saddam negotiating and appeasing?

or, because we took the bull by the horns and decided our countries interests were no longer served by the appeasement crowd?

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

There were an equal number of "on the ground" witnesses who stated under oath that the Saddam threat was smoke and mirrors.
Brandon still wishes to believe that "plans" for a nuke enrichment facility and a "Ronco" home centriguge would result in a nuclear bomb. Maybe in about 10 years of hard work. As soon as we would get wind of a specific" atmospheric "cocktail" that could be monitored hundreds of miles awy, maybe then we do something sbout it. Remember it takes a while to enrich HF6 to get about a 90 kilo
of U235 (about as big as a 12 pack of "SNAPPLE").
Its a ridiculous proposition that most nuclear scientists poo pooed from day 1. Politicians voted on "giving GW AUTHORITY" to use force "as a last resort" The spinmeisters are playing that to mean that Congrees voted to go to war.

Ive said many times before, given today, what we know, I dont think the vote woulda gone his way. He would have lost in Congress by a margin that would include all but the War Crazy conservatives. Those guys are hopeless. The rest of Congress , IMO, learned an important lesson about this "morally centered" regime. Its less than truthfull always.

PS, I dont agree with the rpemise of this threaed, I wish no evil opn anyone. I wish only a speedy and comfortable retirement for all the turds in the GW regime. I( wanna attend a speech in which I can heckel him as a simple citizen, since Id never meet his demographics test to be allowed in his speeches of today.

First of all, farmerman, my only point was that Iraq was dangerous. Secondly, I resist your characterization of my position. My actual position is that there was a non-negligible probability that Hussein was still hiding WMD and WMD work, as he had been, and that the totality of Iraq's nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs might well have resulted in a WMD being used within the next several years. Please state my position correctly.

0 Replies

apology accepted

0 Replies

BRandon said

Quote:

there was a non-negligible probability that Hussein was still hiding WMD and WMD work,

.
"non-negligible" I guess that means a very tiny chance?
SCott Ritter found nothing, as did Dr Wilson, The UNmovc was also somewhat dubious but ultimately bought into the Bush harangue. Bush was exposing us to the political trick that ,
"If you repeat something often enough, and say it loud enough, people will believe you". I wonder how Colin Powell feels about himself in this matter.

GW has shown to have little respect for truth.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

BRandon said
Quote:
there was a non-negligible probability that Hussein was still hiding WMD and WMD work,
.
"non-negligible" I guess that means a very tiny chance?

A chance large enough that it can't intelligently be disregarded.

farmerman wrote:

SCott Ritter found nothing, as did Dr Wilson, The UNmovc was also somewhat dubious but ultimately bought into the Bush harangue. Bush was exposing us to the political trick that ,
"If you repeat something often enough, and say it loud enough, people will believe you". I wonder how Colin Powell feels about himself in this matter.

GW has shown to have little respect for truth.

Not relevant to my point. You have a dictator who invades his neighbors, and rapes, murders, and tortures his own people. He seeks nuclear, biological, and chemical WMD. He has WMD, he has ongoing programs to develop other and better ones. Upon being ordered in a surrender treaty to verifiably disarm, he spends years concealing the weapons and lying about it. Now, once again, he is saying, "They're all gone, but we have no convincing proof of it." Surely there is some reasonable probability that the man is once again lying like he did before. In view of the incredible lethality of the weapons, it simply has to be determined.

0 Replies

I guess if Brandon keeps posting the same bullshit on multiple threads he will find one where people will tire of refuting his nonsense.

0 Replies

Rita Will Accomplish What Katrina and Cindy Could Not

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know