Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2006 General Board Posts >> wmds
        
(Message started by: maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:36pm)
Title: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:36pm
500 chemical munitions found in Iraq,
Just saw Rick Santorum's news conference. Bush wouldn't realease the information, why?
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Mattrf on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:42pm
Where did you get this?
I just did a search and found nothing on it?

Inquiring minds want to know.
:o
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:43pm
Just saw Rick Santorum having a news conference.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by brewcrew on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:44pm
Get ready for it ... They're old weapons. They don't count. Bush lied, people died. </sarc>
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:47pm
if they are old it just goes to show he did not live up to the UN mandates. That means he had no intention of keeping up to the cease fire agreement from the very start doesn't it?
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Jonny on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:50pm

on 06/21/06 at 17:47:51, maffumatt wrote:
if they are old it just goes to show he did not live up to the UN mandates. That means he had no intention of keeping up to the cease fire agreement from the very start doesn't it?



Thats the way I see it!
Title: Re: wmds
Post by brewcrew on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:51pm
I should have been clearer - </sarc> means now turning off the sarcasm.

I can hear this one coming, too:

LIARS, there are no WMD. Sean Penn told us so.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:54pm
I wonder how many news programs and newspapres will either not carry the news conference or bury it on page 10?
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Mattrf on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:56pm
Well if an actor says it, it must be true!
[smiley=bow.gif]

[smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif]
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Jonny on Jun 21st, 2006, 5:57pm
I wonder what time Ted will be by to tell us we just dreamed it.....LMAO ;;D
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 21st, 2006, 6:04pm
After all the shit Bush has taken over WMDs why in the hell did Rick Santorum have to fight to get this  declassified?
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 21st, 2006, 6:43pm

on 06/21/06 at 18:04:26, maffumatt wrote:
After all the shit Bush has taken over WMDs why in the hell did Rick Santorum have to fight to get this  declassified?


Maybe they were stamped Made in U.S.A. ??
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Jonny on Jun 21st, 2006, 6:52pm

on 06/21/06 at 17:36:41, maffumatt wrote:
500 chemical munitions found in Iraq,
Just saw Rick Santorum's news conference. Bush wouldn't realease the information, why?


Matt, just heard on the radio that it was 500 TONS of munitions.

Hope I heard that right ;;D
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Charlie on Jun 21st, 2006, 7:07pm
Looking at Santorum on CSPAN. Still catching up.

Have to wonder why Santorum got stuck with this one other than that he's getting a real challenge in his re-eleciton campaign and they assume this will help.

It seems to me that if they were found though, it's a "good" thing. Wow Santorum is bubbling over. He does that kind of thing.

Charlie
Title: Re: wmds
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 21st, 2006, 7:54pm
The next batch of wmds could be pointed at us now by North Korea. We think they are still fueling the missle. Once it is fueled, they have 5- 10 days to fire it or scrap it.

If it is fired and is headed this way, wouldn't the responsible thing for our government to do is to at least attemp to shoot it down ? Or should we let it fly and hope LA is still there when it's over ?

UNsolved
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Tom K on Jun 21st, 2006, 7:58pm
Ok, this is what I heard, don't rip me for it.  "Bush's team didn't want to put this out there because they are sick of the WMD/No WMD fight."  That is from some talking head on MSNBC.  Don't know what to think other than if this stuff starts popping up, it can only be a good thing for all of us, since maybe he, Saddam, didn't seed a bunch of it to Syria as suspected.  Discuss
Title: Re: wmds
Post by mynm156 on Jun 21st, 2006, 8:26pm
IRAQ is Old News.  Yes People are still dying but I am worried about North Korea!  They are going to cause some TROUBLE you watch!
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 21st, 2006, 8:30pm

on 06/21/06 at 19:58:22, Tom K wrote:
Ok, this is what I heard, don't rip me for it.  "Bush's team didn't want to put this out there because they are sick of the WMD/No WMD fight."  That is from some talking head on MSNBC.  Don't know what to think other than if this stuff starts popping up, it can only be a good thing for all of us, since maybe he, Saddam, didn't seed a bunch of it to Syria as suspected.  Discuss


I don't agree with the MSNBC person - if they had clear-cut proof, there would be no reason not to release it. They have no problem staying the course with other 'controversial' positions.   My guess is that the military and Bush Administration don't consider it proof of anything, but that Santorum does.

We haven't heard anything about particular sites with large caches - which suggests that these were fragmented left-overs from Gulf War I, not part of a modern, functional arsenal.  The quoted report says discovered 'since 2003'  (not on a particular date like March 12, 2004) again suggesting a larger number of small finds.  The reports also mentioned empty shells and 'degraded' sarin and mustard gas, but not fresh and functional weapons, again suggesting 20 - 30 year old munitions scattered by the chaos of earlier wars.  There is no question that he had a large stockpile up through 1991 - with the blessing of the US, Germany and Russia.  During the roll-back of Iraq from Kuwait, we blew entered part of Iraq and attacked some Iraqi munitions bunkers in person, some by special air mail. If one/one-thousandth of the targeted arsenal were not completely destroyed and later came to light, that would easily be 500+ shells.   And it would prove nothing about the rationale for going to war.

Title: Re: wmds
Post by medic1852 on Jun 21st, 2006, 8:37pm

on 06/21/06 at 20:30:59, Floridian wrote:
We haven't heard anything about particular sites with large caches - which suggests that these were fragmented left-overs from Gulf War I, not part of a modern, functional arsenal.  The quoted report says 'since 2003' - not on March 12, 2004, again suggesting a larger number of small finds.  The reports also mentioned empty shells and 'degraded' sarin and mustard gas, but not fresh and functional weapons, again suggesting 20 - 30 year old munitions scattered by the chaos of earlier wars.  There is no question that he had a large stockpile up through 1991 - with the blessing of the US, Germany and Russia.  During the roll-back of Iraq from Kuwait, we blew entered part of Iraq and attacked some Iraqi munitions bunkers in person, some by special air mail. If one/one-thousandth of the targeted arsenal were not completely destroyed and later came to light, that would easily be 500+ shells.   And it would prove nothing about the rationale for going to war.


Check the shelf life on this stuff. It is very temperature sensitive. Check the normal summer temps in Iraq.
Rodger
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 21st, 2006, 9:35pm

on 06/21/06 at 20:37:50, medic1852 wrote:
Check the shelf life on this stuff. It is very temperature sensitive. Check the normal summer temps in Iraq.
Rodger


Sure, I get your point - anything that is left at the surface would be rendered near worthless in quick order.  But if it were in a collapsed bunker, covered with several feet of dirt, it would not be exposed to the same extremes. As one goes deeper under the surface, the temperature soon gets close to the annual average temperature.

My point (and Charlie's) is that we have seen a partial, selective release of classified information - no assessment of when the stuff was manufactured and when Saddam lost institutional control of it. Was it part of a functional chemical armory in 2001?  That is what people are implying, but I haven't heard Santorum read from the report to say that was or wasn't the case.  Only that some weapons were found - which could be a big deal, or could mean nothing.


on 06/21/06 at 19:54:10, unsolved1 wrote:
The next batch of wmds could be pointed at us now by North Korea. We think they are still fueling the missle. Once it is fueled, they have 5- 10 days to fire it or scrap it.

If it is fired and is headed this way, wouldn't the responsible thing for our government to do is to at least attemp to shoot it down ? Or should we let it fly and hope LA is still there when it's over ?

UNsolved


So they are willing to have their entire country destroyed to take out one U.S. city?  Call me a sceptic - I think Kim is having too much fun with his car collection, his personal cinema, his multiple mistresses, etc..  Why mess with that?

Title: Re: wmds
Post by BMoneeTheMoneeMan on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:03pm
It just another page in the bullshit book of politics.  

Is there not even one politician that is focused on meaningful issues?
:'(
Title: Re: wmds
Post by AussieBrian on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:11pm
Politicians are like babies' diapers - they should be changed regularly for the same reasons.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by brewcrew on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:13pm
I said it above in post #4:  Get ready for it ... They're old weapons. They don't count. Bush lied, people died.

Didn't take too long. 4 or 5 hours.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:19pm

on 06/21/06 at 21:35:31, floridian wrote:
But if it were in a collapsed bunker, covered with several feet of dirt, it would not be exposed to the same extremes.



That wouldn't matter either Jon.  In 1989, one priority task was to improve the stability of the nerve agents, the low quality had caused them to deteriorate in a matter of weeks.  Even storing Sarin-filled munitions in refrigerated bunkers had failed to solve the problem.
 Iraqi scientists addressed the problem by developing binary munitions, field mixed.   One component, DF could be kept separately for a few years, added to a 60/40 mixure of isopropyl alcohol and cyclohexl alcohol in the missile warhead, once mixed would only last months though.  
 Iraqi experimented with dual-chamber artillery shells and 122 mm  rockets, in which the DF and the alcohol mixture were stored in separate compartments and allowed to combine and react after the munition was fired.  About a hundred "true binary" shells were tested in 1989 and 1990 with "encouraging" results but the technology never worked reliably enough to warrant large scale production.*



*358.3 T
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:21pm

on 06/21/06 at 22:13:10, brewcrew wrote:
I said it above in post #4:  Get ready for it ... They're old weapons. They don't count. Bush lied, people died.

Didn't take too long. 4 or 5 hours.


Just like the "invade because there is Al Qaeda in Iraq" argument - it does make a difference whether they were in parts of Iraq controlled by Saddam and/or receiving his support (which would be a reason to invade), vs. being in Kurdistan where Saddam had no control, along with assessments by every other western intelligence agency that secular Saddam hated the fundamentalists, saw them as a threat to his rule, and did not support them (which would make "Al Qaeda in Iraq!" a non-reason to invade).   Such subtle distinctions.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 21st, 2006, 10:56pm

on 06/21/06 at 22:13:10, brewcrew wrote:
I said it above in post #4:  Get ready for it ... They're old weapons. They don't count. Bush lied, people died.

Didn't take too long. 4 or 5 hours.



It was mostly the CIA's thoughts about reconstituting of the Iraqi nuclear program that pushed things.

There were important dissenting voices on the key piece of evidence for Iraq's reconstitution, the confiscated aluminum tubes thought to be used for centrifuges-- the State Dept's INR and more importantly, the Energy Dept's Office of Intelligence, supported by the national laboratories.  Unfortunately, a single analyst was allowed to determine the CIA's position on the significance of the aluminum tubes, which then became the intelligence community's position based on a vote among six agencies.  That officials, such as the director of WINPAC, did not inform George Tenet of the differing views contributed to the failure.  Tenet's failure, once he learned of the dispute in Sep. 2002, to ensure that the issue was brought before the JAEIC or to at least seek outside opinions was, unfortunately, all too typical of his tenure as director of central intelligence.
 It was George Bush who questioned the persuasiveness of the information presented to him concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program and George Tenet who reassured him that it was a "slam dunk' -- and it was Bush who told Tenet that he did not want analysts to stretch to make a case.*

INR = Bureau of Intelligence and Research

WINPAC = Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation and Arms Control Center (CIA)

JAEIC = Joint Atomic Energy Intelligence Committee


*327.1747 R
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Charlie on Jun 22nd, 2006, 1:45am
Santorum was so happy. He was gushing at his desk and effectively saying: "so there smarty pants!"  

Santorum is the Senator that warns us that civilization will end so long as there are gay people and is the poster boy for the neocon Christian right that is more right than religious. His thing is abortion, abortion, abortion so I have my reservations and need backup on him. Depth is not something expected from this guy.

Naturally, if these weapons....chemicals, I take it like Saddam used in the Iran-Iraq war that we found convenient then, and that came from Godknowswhere, have been found, it will continue to be used entirely for politics....as we are doing here. Fun though. Look how quickly we found our pulpits.

Charlie
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 22nd, 2006, 2:46am
An estimated 15 of those shells killed 5000 Kurds. Reports show 500 were found and it is insignificant? Sadam disposed of all of his chemical weapons, at least that is what he told the UN. In a decade of looking the UN inspectors didn't find them ? What were they doing? Some were degraded, some were not, does that really matter? They were a violation of the cease fire, they were a vialation of the UN mandates, a vialation of 17 resolutions. Any way you look at it it was a significant find and should have been reported. It is not something you dismiss with a wave of the hand as insignificant. Thiose on the far left will however will dismiss it. You will never hear them say Bush was right on anything no matter what the evidence shows.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 22nd, 2006, 7:44am

on 06/22/06 at 02:46:35, maffumatt wrote:
An estimated 15 of those shells killed 5000 Kurds. Reports show 500 were found and it is insignificant?



I'm unsure which incident this references.  During the Iran-Iraq War, political prisoners, mostly Kurds and Shi'ites were imprisoned at Al-Hadaitha, which was near the secret chemical weapons testing facility Unit 2100.  No prisoners sent to Al-Haditha ever returned alive.
 Saddam gave the task of putting down the Kurdish rebellion to his cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, thereafter known as "Chemical Ali" who used nerve agents on the Kurds.  This happened from late '87 through March '88.  An Iraq victory was April 18, 1988, pre-Desert Storm.
 After the Iran-Iraq War ended Bagdad scrapped its degraded stocks of chemical weapons existing then, are you saying these are what were found?  
 The nerve agent program was accelerated again before Desert Storm.  

My computer is down right now and I'm on an old one that I can't access any news without getting "update your browser".   Any details would be appreciated.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by chewy on Jun 22nd, 2006, 9:02am
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/6303442358.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Redd715 on Jun 22nd, 2006, 9:04am
The red X of death
Title: Re: wmds
Post by imnotbub on Jun 22nd, 2006, 10:42am

on 06/21/06 at 19:54:10, unsolved1 wrote:
The next batch of wmds could be pointed at us now by North Korea. We think they are still fueling the missle. Once it is fueled, they have 5- 10 days to fire it or scrap it.

If it is fired and is headed this way, wouldn't the responsible thing for our government to do is to at least attemp to shoot it down ? Or should we let it fly and hope LA is still there when it's over ?

UNsolved



This is a very touchy situation. Remember when star wars was big in the news because the USSR was afraid it would remove there launch deterent. If I remember correctly, star wars never really worked, but the thought that it might was enough. If we try to shoot down the missile and can't, this sends a big message out to the worlds loonies. Stating that the missile could be shot down, but not doing it because it would send the wrong message or some such bologna would keep the fear of it being a working system in tact. It's a tough call. My thought is that the Koreans are not going to send an active warhead anywhere, they would be holding the wrong end of a very nasty stick.

Steve
Title: Re: wmds
Post by KingOfPain on Jun 22nd, 2006, 10:50am

on 06/21/06 at 17:42:31, Mattrf wrote:
Where did you get this?
I just did a search and found nothing on it?

Inquiring minds want to know.
:o


A link:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/22/060622055545.07o4imol.html

*Just providing a link to what I found on the topic.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Goblin on Jun 22nd, 2006, 11:15am
No matter what anyone may think of George W. good bad or ugly, he truly believes in what he does and says, and he doesn't back down because of threats. If I remember after 9-11 he did state he would go after the worlds terrorist preemptivly, the public will know some of what goes on but alot we will not know because of various reasons wether it be security or other reasons. He did in fact also state either you are with us or against us. As far as wmd's there has been thousands found in Iraq, many of which still effective. True we knew they existed, that was what the UN resolutions where for, Sadam was suppossed to dismantle and destroy them and provide proof it was done and he did not comply. He blocked inspectors, he even kicked them out several times. He had a history of using them, on not only Iran but His own people. He admitted to paying families of Palistinian suicide bombers that blew up in Isreal.
All arguments aside these are admitted and proven facts. He may or may not have had mobile labs, who cares all the other FACTS are why we went into Iraq and removed a murderous Dictator.
I havent gotten into the political debates till now but It confuses me how some will look at the same information and see different things. I may get flamed for this but I just felt the facts needed to be stated instead of little tidbits being used for ones own purposes just to further there own agenda. Disreguarding facts to prove a point is like wiping you butt with sandpaper so you can prove it is dangerous to wipe.

ok I am done Flame on!
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 22nd, 2006, 12:27pm

on 06/22/06 at 11:15:27, Goblin wrote:
I may get flamed for this but I just felt the facts needed to be stated instead of little tidbits being used for ones own purposes just to further there own agenda.


OK, so how do you deal with the fact that on the day of 9-11, notes taken in a White House meeting "quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H." - meaning Saddam Hussein - "at same time. Not only UBL" - the initials used to identify Osama bin Laden . . . "Go massive," the notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."  Maybe call that a tidbit instead of a fact?

The Project for a New American Century called for a radical reshaping of the Middle East - a new American show of force to establish U.S. hegemony, a toppling of undesirable regimes like dominoes.  Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, Feith and other members or former members of the administration were authors and signatories to the PNAC project.  And the project wrote that inertia would make it difficult to obtain their objectives, but a 'new Pearl Harbor' would create an opportunity.  Well, they got their emergency, and within hours were lining up justification for invading Iraq.

So Rumsfeld tells U.S. troops: "It is unknowable how long that conflict will last. It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months."  And we stuck in a war that will probably last well over six years.  Government officials were fired for predicting that the cost of the war would be higher than Rumsfeld's estimate, and now even that estimate is way low.  Your doing a heck of job, Rummy!


Title: Re: wmds
Post by tanner on Jun 22nd, 2006, 1:06pm


 Rumsfeld is one of the words that the filters on the board change.... starts with a and ends with hole ;;D

i don't believe in using a broad brush for anything except painting barns.......Tim
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 22nd, 2006, 1:12pm

on 06/22/06 at 12:27:32, floridian wrote:
Your doing a heck of job, Rummy!

At last we agree on something.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Bob P on Jun 22nd, 2006, 1:17pm

Quote:
OK, so how do you deal with the fact that on the day of 9-11, notes taken in a White House meeting "quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H." - meaning Saddam Hussein - "at same time. Not only UBL" - the initials used to identify Osama bin Laden . . . "Go massive," the notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."  Maybe call that a tidbit instead of a fact?  

I deal with it by saying Fuckin A!!!!!
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Tom K on Jun 22nd, 2006, 1:27pm
I'm not jumping into this, I've pretty much stated my opinion on all the other political threads.  I do have a piece of info to pass on, though.  On CNN's crawl this morning, I'm not going to use quotes because I don't remember it verbatem, Troop numbers down in Iraq, in April 161,000 troops, today 131,000 troops.  Guess they are coming home slowly.

Discuss
Title: Re: wmds
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 22nd, 2006, 2:51pm
One 'expert' just made his opinion clear on CNN saying that we should 'strike and destroy' the North Korean missle while it's still on it's launchpad. (Warning them first so they can evacuate personel)

UNsolved
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 22nd, 2006, 3:03pm
Thanks for the link KOP.




Quote:
Nevertheless, "the impression that the Iraqi Survey Group left with the American people was they didn't find anything," Hoekstra said.


This is a curious statement by Hoekstra because David Kay stepped down from heading the Iraq Survey Group in Jan. '04.   He subsequently said he resigned largely because he objected to the administration's decision in November '03 to transfer intelligence from the hunt for weapons to counterinsurgency efforts within Iraq.  That decision came right after he released the interim report in October '03 of his findings of no significant new developments of chemical weapons as U.S. intelligence had thought there to be.  
 The survey's report made clear Saddam Hussein had not given up his desire for wmd and said they had turned up a variety of instances in which Iraq had violated its disarmament commitments in ways not detected by UN inspectors.
 


Quote:
A Pentagon official who confirmed the findings said that all the weapons were pre-1991 vintage munitions "in such a degraded state they couldn't be used for what they are designed for."

This is true.


Quote:
Last year the head of Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, said that insurgents in Iraq had already used old chemical weapons in their attacks.

This is true.  I've read, within the last few months a binary shell went off as a roadside bomb.  However, it's not designed to be used that way, the chemicals didn't mix.  The quick forward motion of a shell in flight breaks the seal between separate chemicals and rotation mixes them.  The origin of the shell I don't know though.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by chewy on Jun 22nd, 2006, 4:23pm
We know N. Korea cant launch at night. They dont have electricity.

If our satelites pick up 4000 flashlights at 3 AM in one area, then heads up.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Jonny on Jun 22nd, 2006, 5:13pm
http://myspace-001.vo.llnwd.net/00651/10/02/651742001_s.gif
Title: Re: wmds
Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 22nd, 2006, 5:13pm
They always had WMD'S --We all know that---Why doesn't the Media get over themselves. CBS Has had enough of the Liberal Broadcasting---as they Bitch-Slapped Dan Rather. Iraq Chemed their own people !!! You cannot dispute this,
Title: Re: wmds
Post by floridian on Jun 22nd, 2006, 5:51pm

on 06/22/06 at 17:13:56, zwibbs/Scott wrote:
They always had WMD'S --We all know that---Why doesn't the Media get over themselves. CBS Has had enough of the Liberal Broadcasting---as they Bitch-Slapped Dan Rather. Iraq Chemed their own people !!! You cannot dispute this,


No, nor can you deny that the United States was fine with Saddam's use of chemical weapons - we provided him with material and intelligence through the Iran-Iraq war when he was using chemical weapons.  Then he invaded Kuwait and the outrage began.


Quote:
Colonel Walter Lang, who was a senior defence intelligence official at the time, said the defence intelligence agency and the CIA were "desperate" to make sure that Iraq did not lose the war with Iran. "The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern," he told the Times.

Another veteran of the programme said the Pentagon "wasn't so horrified by Iraq's use of gas. It was just another way of killing people - whether by bullet or phosgene, it didn't make any difference."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,776844,00.html


Call me a stickler for the truth, but if they are too degraded to kill masses of people, then they are not wmds.  What we found were artifacts of a long defunct wmd program - not a threat to the US, not a reason to invade.
Title: Re: wmds
Post by chewy on Jun 22nd, 2006, 8:18pm
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9gnMiE1M5tE69kAHVijzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=12ajp05d2/EXP=1151108277/**http%3a//www.tucsonchargers.com/images/armchair_fan.jpeg
Title: Re: wmds
Post by maffumatt on Jun 22nd, 2006, 8:41pm
Call me a stickler for the truth but how were we suppose to know what condition they were in ? He said he didn't have them and hid them from the UN inspectors for years so how were we to know? We have another storage facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal in Arkansas they dispose of Chemical weapons.Those rounds are treated with a light touch and are still considered dangerous as hell. Degraded does not mean harmless. Sometimes it just means more dangerous. You should listen to their saftey briefing to gain entry. The whole town has an evacuation plan that is drilled often. I guess they should sleep a little better at night knowing that the stuff in there is harmless.

edited to pull a sentence
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Charlie on Jun 22nd, 2006, 8:44pm

Quote:
They always had WMD'S --We all know that---Why doesn't the Media get over themselves. CBS Has had enough of the Liberal Broadcasting---as they Bitch-Slapped Dan Rather. Iraq Chemed their own people !!! You cannot dispute this,


Of course the perception that a lot tv media leans a little left more than right is because the right has always treated them like dirt and even more so this time. Democrats don't employ fake newscasts or plant stories on such as scale as Bush & Co. The press gave them a lot of room to no avail. Finally they have found their gonads and are holding their feet to the fire. About time.

On the withdrawl... I hope they aren't going to withdraw like that. No timetable should be given. This is something that needs finesse but Dubya isn't known for it. He probably actually believes in what he begins  but never admits to making a mistake. He wants us to believe that only he has the wherewithal to right all the wrongs perpetrated but all those people whose images are on our coinage and shortsighted politicians of the last 230 years. Lucky for us.

On the other, liberal press or not, if this WMD discovery is so big, it would be getting a lot more airtime and print. So far, not much has been seen by me. Believe me, when the Times goes after someone, it does so after the fact. Unlike the new conservative press, it does its job of reporting first.

I only hope that Little Kim comes to whatever senses he has....unlikely...and knocks it off. This is good for nobody and serves no purpose but for giving our iffy defense system a real target. Not good kids.  http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/juggler.gif

Charlie
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Jonny on Jun 22nd, 2006, 8:47pm

on 06/22/06 at 10:42:19, imnotbub wrote:
This is a very touchy situation. Remember when star wars was big in the news because the USSR was afraid it would remove there launch deterent. If I remember correctly, star wars never really worked, but the thought that it might was enough. If we try to shoot down the missile and can't, this sends a big message out to the worlds loonies.



http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060622/nyth152.html?.v=39

"During the test, a medium-range ballistic missile target equipped with a separating warhead was launched from the Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The target was detected and tracked by a U.S. Navy cruiser, the USS Shiloh (CG 67), which launched the SM-3 for an exo-atmospheric engagement. The SM-3 Kinetic Warhead successfully acquired the target and computed an accurate guidance and control intercept trajectory for the hit-to-kill intercept."
Title: Re: wmds
Post by imnotbub on Jun 23rd, 2006, 3:27pm

on 06/22/06 at 20:47:26, Jonny wrote:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060622/nyth152.html?.v=39

"During the test, a medium-range ballistic missile target equipped with a separating warhead was launched from the Navy's Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, Hawaii. The target was detected and tracked by a U.S. Navy cruiser, the USS Shiloh (CG 67), which launched the SM-3 for an exo-atmospheric engagement. The SM-3 Kinetic Warhead successfully acquired the target and computed an accurate guidance and control intercept trajectory for the hit-to-kill intercept."


Not saying it won't work, just that a big can of worms opens if it doesn't.

Steve
Title: Re: wmds
Post by blood_Redd_son on Jun 23rd, 2006, 5:03pm
what kind of chemical was it that they found?
Title: Re: wmds
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 23rd, 2006, 7:06pm
Since dismantling of the Pine Bluff binary production complex started in Oct. '03, leaving only the Fill and Close Facility to neutralized then incinerate the U.S. stocks held there, it's been an expensive process.  Estimates for the eliminating the entire U.S. stocks was over $28 billion in 2004.   Pine Bluff alone held U.S. made, 56,000 DF-filled canisters for the M687 projectile, six 55-gallon drums of DF, and 291 drums of QL for the Bigeye bomb.  Also 3,850 tons of unitary nerve and blister agents needing more than five years of incineration.  

never again for your generation Blood
Title: Re: wmds
Post by KingOfPain on Jun 24th, 2006, 1:59pm
Look closely...

http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/


  [smiley=mellow.gif]


Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved.