Note that they have not determined how old the warheads are, whether or not they ever actually contained weapons, whether those weapons were convential or B/C/N, etc.
But yes, Saddam's a liar! And no, I'm not raising my hand, it was pretty obvious something like this was going to happen.
Now all we need to do is fill those warheads with the appropriate chemicals, mount them on missiles, aim them at appropriate targets, give the Iraqis sufficient motive to launch them, and we've got a clear threat (to those targets). Then we can destroy the weapons.
Let's destroy the weapons!
Edit: Rockets, not missiles. I'm curious as to their range.
Originally posted by Peri Oh come on. Barely a dozen artillery shells.
Not even worth a slap on the wrist for that.
They couldnt even hit Basra from Baghdad with those
Cgannon64 they ARE 122mm artillery shells which could have M and Ms in them if they so wished. My point is that battlefield weapons are hardly a threat.
Basra is a city a few hundred kms from Baghdad( in Iraq).
Iraq say they have decleard them in the report, and also say that they have not broken any agrement(cuz they were so old, bough in the mid 80). Now I don't know about if any of the two statments is true or not.
But if they are false we will read about when they(we) point out that it have not been decleared in the report or that they have broken some agrement. So if we don't read anything like that, then I guess there was nothing about the shells.
On the other hand, if they are illegal, then it would prove that the inspectors does work right?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.