The Iraq Questions

Here is another UK article on how they are reporting Colin Powell's speech of a few days ago.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=363156

Dyslexia

Thanks for the information--The CDC did send small amounts of bio-agents but it appears that it was done as a humanitarian effort to help Iraq indentify the various strains.

I don't know if Iraq or anyone could use a vial or a culture to replicate and make large quantities. Does anyone know for sure.

If any larger quantities were sold, it was surely done by private companies without the permission or knowledge of the US gov't. That only proves the bureacracy is out of control not any complicity on the part of any administration---not even Clinton's)))).

Steve
Please accept my apology---I have been proven wrong---it isn't the first time and I'm sure of one thing---it won't be the last.
Perception

Dyslexia

Thanks ---I can see the smile at your lips.

Perception

No need to apologise old boy!

If you take a look at the other thread about Iraq, I've spelled out what I really think about Saddam.

In war truth is the first casualty, and it takes a hit before the first bullet starts to fly.

perception: anyway i am totally unsure of this as it is only my memory but it think that the CIA determined that Iraq did use the materials it received from the CDC to start up their labs for manufacturing the bio-agents we now refer to as their WMD.

It can be done with ease in a highschool chemistry lab. It can be done in staggering bulk by common commercial facilities dedicated to the process.



timber

Though not on the topic of 'did Iraq get it's chemical weapons program started and viable through US help?' (I'm searching this out now)... I did come across this item here on Iraq use of chemical agents...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/3441

Here we even get flow charts... http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/flow/iraq/seed.htm

blatham, What I got out of your links were, 1) no proof Iraq used chemical weapons against the Kurds, 2) the US shipped toxins to Iraq in the eighties. What can we conclude from this info? c.i.

ci

Actually, I thought the first conclusion depends on which of the two parties one finds more credible. But it was interesting to me that this matter was unclear enough such that debates at that level were part of the story. Governmnent statements and press coverage have not reflected this ambiguity.

On the second, the big fat unknown remaining for me here is how much of this was known/aided by US intelligence. If it is simply corporation X finding a buyer for supply Y, then that is innocent enough.

Sometimes, the more ya learn, the more confusing the damned thing is. But my mother loved me, and I can hold tight to that.

Timber
Thanks for confirming that---my lack of scientific knowledge is apparent---- I find the information about the CDC very disturbing but I still must think it was done from a humanitarian point of view.

Another thing that is very disturbing was the item listed as West Nile virus---this has now spread to the Rocky Mountains from New York where is was first discovered just 2 years ago. This disease is not often fatal but a very high percentage suffer severe neurological damage----this could cause us to go back to mosquito control similar to that used to eradicate malaria and other mosquito born diseases. This may be an indication the Bio war has already started here in this country.

Here are some links I found that I consider conclusive proof that the Saddam gased the Kurds and some other interesting tidbits I found relevant to this thread:

http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1140

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/06/1038950195085.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/14/opinion/14KELL.html?ex=1040446800&en=9aa5921f0eccc7e1&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2002/12/09122002172250.asp

http://www.boston.com/globe/magazine/2002/1215/coverstory.htm

BillW

Those links are terrific and very relevant to this thread. I don't suppose you would care to divulge your search technique.

perception

I don't know BillW's technique, but most of the links you can get by searching in 'google.com'.
Some more (especially the recent ones, but others, too) can be got by 'news.google.com'.

Walter

I use Google almost exclusively but still have not mastered the wording to find what I want. Maybe I need to "read the instructions" given by Google yet again.)))))))

Narrow your search (e.g. by writing more specific words).


Reading instructions is said to be a good way. But I, too, love to learn by own experience.

Well, I s'pose ... but where's the adventure in that?



timber ... who generally considers "Instructions" to be Documents of Last Resort

Your opinion is shared ... by me!



(E.g., I consider 'handbooks' to be carried by hand. One of me 'life truths' is: "Those, who keep order, just are too lazy to search" and "Learning is best done by 'try and error' ".)
[I went to a special course in "adventure pedagogics/educationary sciences" at univeristy.]

Timber

All wives observe their husbands fumbling like Chimps on Christmas day tryin to assemble "toys" and then tap them on the shoulder and "trumpet" these words of wisdom---"ever thought of reading the instructions?)))))))

perception, for those articles, I used:

www.news.goggle.com

and put in

Iraq gases Kurds

I usually start out with my search words in " ". This way the words become related to each other in a more direct way. This time I got nothing until I took the " " off.

Also, the search words do not matter what order they are placed in and as mentioned before; use as few words as possible that is the best indicators of what you want. Then play around with those words.

That's my methodology. Also, I try not to take out of context, if you notice - those articles give good agruments for both sides. That is the reason in true Politics, there is no right and wrong - just the way you play the game. (I will admit, if the game is being played unfairly, I will be unfair - now blatham, he has too much conscious me thinks - ha!)