Weapons of Mass Destruction found in Fallujah

[dtgunslinger]

Too little, to late. Get the troops out of there.(all of the countries) Let the Iraqis take care of themsleves.

[brakada]

I wasn't talking about them moving around in trucks like that stupid theory before.. but they needed to re locate, no?? They aren't there now but they were there once..

I wasn't serious, I was merely being sarcastic. But chill down a little, if you would have done some research, you would have found out, that after a while most sources admitted that the vials do not contain Sarin, but chemicel agents to determine the concentration of Sarin, Soman and V-Gases.

I found an interesting opinion on: http://powerlineblog.com/archives/008649.php

With respect to the possible dicsovery of Sarin in Fallujah, I believe those items may be part of a kit to test for the presence of Sarin (or other nerve agents). Labeled "Soman, Sarin, V-gases," and reference to an instruction leaflet are important clues. Sarin, as well as Soman and VX (as well as Tabun) are all nerve agents, act on the body in a similar fashion, and would be detected using the same type of device/method.

While all are extremely dangerous at low levels, the vials pictured appear to be packaged for ease of transport and limited use, as a testing agent might be. True, a vial of that size, full of nerve agent, could kill a human. Many humans. Dispersal of such a small amount would be the tricky part.

For lack of a better analogy, one could kill a fly with a bazooka. Getting the two together would be near impossible. Successful use of nerve agents on the battlefield require litres upon litres of agent, either dispersed over a wide area, or placed where the enemy will come into contact with it. In a confined space, the amount would be far, far less, something appropriate for a "targeted killing" rather than military use in theater.

Of course, this begs the question what the terrorists are doing with test kits in the first place. I wouldn't consider myself an "expert" on WMD, however I have had highly advanced training in WMD offered by the military, and have been a civilian paramedic for 10 years.

Also how was this a badly planned war? took over an entire country in a year and only lost 1100 soldiers. That my friend is a succes in war terms. We will see won't we when the USA goes into Iran and shit starts to go down in North Korea.

How was this a badly planned war? I will just quote a part of my post from another topic in this forum:

- too little diplomatic support was gathered (IMHO the US would have gotten a lot more diplomatic support if they hadn't rushed into with such a hurry, which would make the war and rebuilding of Iraq a lot easier and most importantly less expensive for the US),
- too few forces were allocated (one of the first things should be to secure (at least the most "critical") Iraq borders and prevent all the terrorists from neighbouring countries coming to Iraq)
- reconstruction is progressing too slowly,
- the US and the new Iraq army are a bit late "dealing" with insurgents, and are still not able to provide normal safety and security conditions.

Wars are not only about the number of military victims. Especially, the war in Iraq. The conditions in which civilians live are (sadly) today still worse than they were before the war, Iraq is a hotbed of terrorism and terror and one of the ironic thigs is that most of the victims were inflicted after the major military operations were supposed to be over, which I believe is not usually the case. And all in all Bush completely underestimated Iraq and promised a swift war, which unfortunately still isn't over. I still don't understand why Iraq had to be invaded so soon and why was it such an eminent threat to international security...

[brakada]

Too little, to late. Get the troops out of there.(all of the countries) Let the Iraqis take care of themsleves.

However, I do believe that moving troops out of Iraq before conditions change to normal would be a grave mistake, which would even worsen the conditions in the Middle East.

[Dzone]

BOLLOX

[brakada]

^^^^ Are we a little bit anxious to get to 50 posts?

[Yao]

Pretty sure he is.

If you yell bollocks, then tell us why you think so Dzone. Or don't you have an opinion?

[Dzone]

Pretty sure he is.

If you yell bollocks, then tell us why you think so Dzone. Or don't you have an opinion?

Man, WMD my ass, the UN went there sniffing the bloody country for about a year they found Fuck all, the US went after and been looking for another Year and they Found Fuck all, now u bring me photos from bloody Boots and you telling me this WMD ... Bollox
If you believe the Iraq had WMD is it's ur opinion and u got the rite to hold into it, but for any one who can use his 1% of his brain the WMD was never found there coz they never existed ...all he had was some chemical W that 60% of the world have it already FYI.

[davetlv]

Lets say you're right Dzone and that there were no WMD's. That only leaves two questions:-

1. What did he do with all the WMD's he acknowledged having for a large part of the 90's?

2. Why did he hamper the UN inspectors for so long?If he didn't have any, why not just help the inspectors?

[brakada]

^^^^ Here is my theory:

1. He moved them to Jordan and Syria... :wink: j/k, although it might be true. Honestly, I think we will never know what exactly happened to Iraq WMDs.

2. I think hampering the UN inspectors was more of a tactical move for Saddam. IMO, he wanted the world (esp. Iran and the US, Iraq's greatest enemies during saddam's reign) to think he has WMDs and probably he thought this might prevent the invasion on Iraq. But it seems like it didn't pay off. Probably he was trying to achieve some sort of Status Quo to remain in power. For example, I read that Soviets were using models of nuclear missiles (the actual missiles were developped much later) during their military parades, just to scare the Americans....

[brakada]

Man, WMD my ass, the UN went there sniffing the bloody country for about a year they found Fuck all, the US went after and been looking for another Year and they Found Fuck all, now u bring me photos from bloody Boots and you telling me this WMD ... Bollox
If you believe the Iraq had WMD is it's ur opinion and u got the rite to hold into it, but for any one who can use his 1% of his brain the WMD was never found there coz they never existed ...all he had was some chemical W that 60% of the world have it already FYI.

Now, that's a little bit better. If you had read more carefully, you would have noticed, that a lot of people here DO NOT believe Saddam had WMD's at the time of American invasion (me and Yao are amongst them). However, There is doubtless proof (Americans still have the receipts :wink: ) that Saddam definitely had a lot of WMDs (chemical and biological weapons) in the last two decades of the previous century, so like davetlv mentioned, it is a questions where have all those weapons gone (he probably didn't use them all up on Kurds now, did he?).

[Dzone]

The WMD ( Chemical & Biological) was given by the US to Saddam and used during his war on Iran and on the Kurds, wat was left was never a threat to ppl in LA for ex ...and lets face it most of the countries have Chemical & Biological, even Israel do have Atomic bomb or Nukes in Dimona whatever u call them and NO ONE ...no one dare to ask for UN inspection and when this issue was raised by some countries in the ME Israel refused !! what was the international community response ?? Zero ...wat was the UN response ?? they put their heads in the sand ... man I'm not trying to argue with you on this coz it's a clear fact for any one that this war was for 1000 other than WMD

[davetlv]

Dzone, I'm not going to argue with you over either Israel's nuclear weapons or general international rules on nuclear weapons in this thread. Feel free to start a new one if you like.

Here we are talking about Iraq. You have previously stated that Iraq did not have any WMD's - this seems to be contradictory to all the evidence prior to the war, evidence by his own admission and by the UN agencies whose job it was to dismantle his WMD's programme.

My previous questions to you stand! Please answer them.

1. What did he do with all the WMD's he acknowledged having for a large part of the 90's?

2. Why did he hamper the UN inspectors for so long?If he didn't have any, why not just help the inspectors?

BTW it was not just the USA who went to war with Iraq - over 30 other countries refused to bow to blackmail by the Sadaam appologists, sorry i mean the UN. Do you think that Poland, Spain or the UK really cared whether weapons could hit LA? I think most countries that entered into this war did so because they saw Sadaam as adirect threat to world order!

[fishingnut]

$50 bucks that it was crack in the vials

[Yao]

I'm still wondering if he hampered the inspectors so long to be able to move the Chemical and biological weapons unseen, but who'll tell?

Thanx for making my position clear to Dzone Brakada...

Isreal has Nukes, wasn't that already public? At least they don't use them to attack other people and convince them of the righteousness their religion.

[brakada]

Here we are talking about Iraq. You have previously stated that Iraq did not have any WMD's - this seems to be contradictory to all the evidence prior to the war, evidence by his own admission and by the UN agencies whose job it was to dismantle his WMD's programme.

Why don't you try answering the same question, posed in a different way. If there were so many evidence prior to war, how come noone has been able to find almost any evidence of existence of the Iraqi WMDs?

My previous questions to you stand! Please answer them.

I replied to your questions and I didn't hear your opinion, or am I not worth your comment on my replies? :wink:

BTW it was not just the USA who went to war with Iraq - over 30 other countries refused to bow to blackmail by the Sadaam appologists, sorry i mean the UN. Do you think that Poland, Spain or the UK really cared whether weapons could hit LA? I think most countries that entered into this war did so because they saw Sadaam as adirect threat to world order!

Well, this point of yours could be argued. There is a dillema, whether most of those countries really saw Sadaam as a direct threat to world order or were they just "kissing Bush's ass". However, I do believe that Dzone was referring to Bush's and Blair's arguments that Iraq was a direct threat to the US and the UK, which I think it was not. IMHO, Iraq was not a threat to world order ANYMORE. I believe it is more of a threat now (with all the terrorists), than it was before (last years when Sadaam was in power). However, Iraq today is a lesser threat to Israel, which was (again this is only my humble opinion) in fact the only country to which Iraq represented a threat (by funding suicide bombers).