Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by JohnRM, May 17, 2004.
If there is one criminal, there are almost always more.
RMShape-please use correct grammar.
There are probably a whole bunch of unexploded shells laying in Iran that Saddam fired on them in the Iran-Iraq War. Should we invade Iran now because of it?
This shell is likely from that war, why didn't we do anything about it then when they were actually being used?
Chemical weapons from past wars are found fairly often, in China, in Europe, so on...does that mean that Denmark is actively seeking weapons of mass destruction?
Sorry, false alarm again. Like when Bush said they found them when he was in Poland...but they turned out to be trucks full of weather balloons or something.
A single elderly Sarin grenade ... proof of WMD in Iraq? No, only remains from the Iran war, sponsored by the western world.
The outcry "WMD!!!" was certainly to be expected after this incident, yet it only shows that people wish for evidence of something they can't prove. And all that more than a year than after "mission accomplished" and controlling the country (well, partly).
You may say whatever you want. Ok, there wasn't WMD's, Ok, there wasn't any link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but at least, we've brought Democracy to a people who used to suffer because of Saddam's evil dictatorship. At least today, there's no more embargo on Iraq and people aren't tortured anymore in Abu Ghraib.
God bless Ameria.
LAst time I checked in the dictionaary the word "Democracy", the words "Torture" and "Anarchy" were not included in the description.
this is sarcasm, right?
YAY! Insy-winsy ikkle bomb with an ickle bit of gas in it. The war is justified!
You know, it is really hard to comprehend sarcasm in online forums.
Yeah it was.
I thought it would sound obvious, but you're right, sarcasm isn't easy to detect on a forum.
I know what you mean but the "At least today ... people aren't tortured anymore in Abu Ghraib." line kinda seals it for me.
Yeah, text is a very poor medium for that sort of thing. But it definately gets easier once you get to know someone. Stratego used to leave me puzzled everytime; now my sarcasm-detector seems to have calibrated itself. Either that or he's less subtle than he used to be.
Sorry nico-my comment aimed at you was when I thought you were not being sarcastic-but I know you were now so I apologise.
The phrase "weapons of mass destruction" doesn't really mean anything. The only thing that matters - apart for the risk that people start falling over dead from sarin or mustard gas poisoning in Iraq - is whether the shells really were forgotten relics of the Iran-Iraq war, or if they come from some hidden cache of Saddam's (or somebody else's - I were an Iraqi general charged with destroying a stash of CWs, I'd seriously consider hiding some of it somewhere for possible future use).
There is a possibility it's come from abroad recently, but I'd recon that massively unlikely - if someone outside were to take the risk of supplying the insurgency with CWs, they'd a) want to give more usable stuff than old artillery shells, b) told the repicients of more efficient ways to use it.
I, for one, am glad that they caught the warmongering bastard and brought peace and happyness to Iraq. Now it is definitely the place I will raise my future children in. That they stripped them of their WMD is just the icing on the cake.
Here's to you, GWB, and your daddy! Thank you for your noble and selfless deeds!
(That probably means I take it all back, now that the reason for this war is obvious. And to all you non-believers: 1. you will fry in hell, 2. just think of that shell exploding in your backyard.)
Actually, sarcasm isn't funny if you don't pretend to be serious. Actually, it's funny to get ironical this way but it's quite scary for the folowing events.
Would you have imagined one day republicans being overjoyed because som guys have found an old dusty shell of mustard gas remaining from the Iran Iraq war along a road ? Besides, the head of Iraqi Governing Council has been killed this morning which can't be good news for the democratization process. I hardly see anything good for the future.
The only rationale for employing chemical weapons in Iraq would be to ensure the re-election of GWB.
I don't think those who otherwise may have the mentality to commit such acts would do him the favour, even if they had the probably non-existant WMD at hands.
I say "probably non-existant" because I can't imagine the US administration not to do anything in their power to find them. A year should be enough to find them under these circumstances.
I think we should invade belgium. I'am very sure they still hide some old gas grenades from WWI to use them in the near future to destroy us all. I wish we've invaded yesterday. I really fear for my life. They could easily possess hundreds of it. And some of them may still be working!
Invade, right now, i join the coalition of stupitity right now!
I couldn't help but to laugh when I saw the massive headlines screaming "U.S. Confirms WMDs Found in Iraq" at Fox News.
One artillery shell can be a surprisingly large threat to the world peace!
And about the mustard gas:
"Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the Iraqi Survey Group (search) ? a U.S. organization searching for weapons of mass destruction ? and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective.""
They are just happy their boys found a lead. The existance of one does make it more probable that there are more in the area, and finding a large cache would pretty much seal up Bush's victory in the election.
Of course there might some old, forgotten artillery shells buried in the sand during the Iran-Iraq war when the West happily sponsored Saddam's slaughterhouse regime.
Separate names with a comma.