1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

WMD in Iraq!

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by JohnRM, May 17, 2004.

  1. Voynich

    Voynich Letter of Napoleon

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    359
    Location:
    Pages of the tome.
    Suprisingly sometimes a sizeable quantity of leftists argue that Hussein was a supposed "asset" to the U.S. and then screams the Reagan Administration was one of the worst in history.
     
  2. FearlessLeader2

    FearlessLeader2 Fundamentalist Loon

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2001
    Messages:
    4,271
    Location:
    Standing atop the K-12.
    I wonder if anyone has considered using an old sub-hunting trick to locate buried stockpiles...

    There's this thing called a magnetic anomaly detector that can spot large metal objects through intervening objects (like oceans) that P3C Orion airplanes use to locate submarines at sea. If these devices can penetrate the ground, it would sure speed up the discovery of good places to start digging...

    I don't know if So-Damned Insane had any such stockpiles or not, but this seems like a way to find them if they're out there to be found...
     
  3. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
  4. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
    My point was that so many people seem more afraid of us finding WMD at this point because it would be such a blow to those trying to get Bush out of office, rather than any danger those weapons actually pose. Maybe some of you actually consider Bush a bigger threat to the world than WMD? (that wasn't the least bit sarcastic)
     
  5. yoshi74

    yoshi74 Tourist from Mars

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,197
    Location:
    Halle/Germany
    Well, bush has his finger on the button of the biggest atomic arsenal of the world. So yes, IMO bush is the bigger threat than any WMD hussein ever possessed.
     
  6. FearlessLeader2

    FearlessLeader2 Fundamentalist Loon

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2001
    Messages:
    4,271
    Location:
    Standing atop the K-12.
    Bush is a threat to the world, but a boon to the US. I like the fact that he's working (even if it is accidentally) on prolonging my stay outside the cannibal stewpot. Y'all from other countries can just go soak your heads. We're getting the oil, you're gonna starve in droves, we'll join you in fifteen years or so.

    (Unless, of course, someone figures out cold fusion, or builds a better heat shield...)
     
  7. The Last Conformist

    The Last Conformist Irresistibly Attractive

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    27,779
    Location:
    Not on your side
    FL2: Those detectors don't work well on land.

    You could run around with metal detectors all over the place, but that'd would be hideously expensive, and still miss stuff that's too deep down. (Not to mention getting any number of false positives.)
     
  8. Zeekater

    Zeekater hasn't been using drugs

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,245
    Location:
    Belgium
    Why dislike the americans? It's very obvious they are doing this for the best of humanity, thank god for them protecting us. :crazyeye: :rolleyes:

    GOD BLESS AMERICA
     
  9. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
    And you honestly believe he would ever use them? He isn't insane, you know...he doesn't want to destroy the world. If it makes you feel better for some reason to believe that he is going to nuke everyone, go right ahead, but you will be very far from the truth.
     
  10. KaNick

    KaNick Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,704
    Location:
    Kapolei, HI
    I wouldn't care if Sadam had millions of mustard gas shells. They are not WMDs and they do not justify an pre-emtive illegal war.
     
  11. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
    There was a legal war at some point?
     
  12. KaNick

    KaNick Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,704
    Location:
    Kapolei, HI
    Lots of them. The US declaring war after the attack on Pearl Habor was one of them.
     
  13. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
    And what made it legal? That we were right to counterattack? Who is right and who is wrong is almost always debatable. There has, and never will be, a legal war. It would be pointless to assign such an adjective to wars anyway, as it does nothing but make them seem more 'right'.
     
  14. Zeekater

    Zeekater hasn't been using drugs

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,245
    Location:
    Belgium
    Indeed, 'legal' is the last adjective I would use for any war.
     
  15. Enkidu Warrior

    Enkidu Warrior Ultramagnetic

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,415
    Location:
    Takoyaki Province, Sushistan
    The UN charter provides a somewhat clear basis for for what constitutes a legal war. UN member states are entitled to act in self defense, and the security council has the authority to declare a war. All nations are also obliged to act to prevent genocide.

    Korea was a legal war. Had the UN existed at the time America's entry into the war would have been legal. Iraq could be declared illegal on the basis that Iraq posed no threat, if that is your opinion. Had we gone to war in 1988 it would have been legal as a response to Saddam's genocide against the Kurds.
     
  16. FearlessLeader2

    FearlessLeader2 Fundamentalist Loon

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2001
    Messages:
    4,271
    Location:
    Standing atop the K-12.
    Hey! Whoa! Don't get me wrong! I'm not sayng Bush's actions are moral, just, or even ethically neutral. I'm just acknowledging that they benefit me in the extreme, and not being a hypocrite by decrying them out one side of my mouth while I thank him with the other side.

    At some point in US history, possibly just after Jefferson warned against it, the government realized that it could bribe the nation with its own money, and the wealthy have owned this country ever since. The US economy has grown so large, that even the crumbs that fall from the fat-cats' mouths are enough to keep us 'dirt-po' Americans high on the hog. The two major parties in this country are owned part and parcel by business and industry, and there is nothing I can do about it. I live in a state owned fully by the Democrat party, and there is no state I can move to that is not owned by it or the Republicans, and through either of them, by business and industry.

    I, and all Americans who are not independantly wealthy, are basically chattel of the plutocracy that runs 'our' nation. Our fortunes rise and fall with those of the power elite, and for all my and other fools' blather about the 2nd Amendment, we really can't do anything to change it, and even if we could, most of us wouldn't bother because as bad as it has gotten, we still have it pretty good. As long as the lights come on when we flick the switch, there's gas at the station to fill up our SUVs, and food on the grocery shore shelves, we're not going to change that attitude one whit.

    We are, in a word, domesticated. The days of Davy Crockett and the Wild Frontier are over. The Minute Men are gone, the Armchair Quarterbacks have taken their place, and as long as there's Monday Night Football, that's not gonna change. If the powers that be play their cards right, and slip our freedoms out from under us slowly enough for us to take no notice untile they're gone, then when the store shelves empty, and the gas stops pumping, and the lights go out, we'll be too busy killing our neighbors for what little they have to worry about getting revenge on the ones who did this to us, and they'll be safe in their walled communites patrolled by troops that are well-fed and well-armed (with guns that explode when the right radio signal is sent, no doubt, to prevent any change of hands in power).

    I know all of this, and I could tell it to everyone I know, and I have to some of them, and the reaction is always the same: 'So what?'

    So I ask you, wise and goodly neighbors...

    So what? What is there to be done about it? I can't and won't do anything about it. Can and will you?
     
  17. eyrei

    eyrei Deity Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    9,162
    Location:
    Cary, NC USA
    If you want to approach it like that (even though I think it is still a ridiculous way to approach war), I'll play along for a bit.

    If I recall correctly, a peace treaty was never signed to end the first Gulf War. The ceasefire was violated by Saddam's military on a regular basis, and so the war never really ended. So, as an extension of the first Gulf War, the recent conflict could be deemed legal.
     
  18. Nico92

    Nico92 Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    143
    The problem isn't about being legal or illegal, the problem is about legitimacy. Washington has tried all tactics to make that war looking legitimate. As such, they've been to the UN security council saying we should do something against the WMD proliferation which was at work in Iraq. It's Washington itself who have established its own rules to respect with their 1441 resolution. A resolution saying "severe consequences" were to be expected if he didn't renounce to WMD's.

    Why people talk about it as being legal or illegal then ? Well, simply because Washington didn't respect the rules they've created themselves. The "severe consequences" happened, but where are the biological facilities ? Where is the nuclear program ? Do you have only old dusty mustard gas shell from the 80's to justify that ?

    The great problem about that war is dishonnesty. If George W. Bush had said that he wanted to go to Iraq to increase US control in a strategic region, we wouldn't talk about WMD's, unrespected resolutions, legitimacy or moral. It's George W. Bush himself who wanted his war to be moral. No, that war is not moral, it's strategic. Here lies all the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration.
     
  19. Enkidu Warrior

    Enkidu Warrior Ultramagnetic

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2003
    Messages:
    3,415
    Location:
    Takoyaki Province, Sushistan
    Yes, this and many other legal loopholes can and have been used to deem the war legal. You're absolutely right to describe this approach as ridiculous, I certainly wouldn't defend it. Legal in this case certainly doesn't mean just, and illegal in some cases would not amount to unjust. The general and vague principle however, that wars should be purely self-defense, UN authorised missions, or prevention of genocide, is quite a good standard even if it doesn't stand up to legal pressures.
     
  20. yoshi74

    yoshi74 Tourist from Mars

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    1,197
    Location:
    Halle/Germany
    Not really, but i also don't thought Saddam would use WMD against a western country. He was a politican who wanted might and power. He would not be so stupid to use them, because this would surely ended his reign.
    This was actually proven during the '91 gulf war, where he possessed chemical weapons, which he don't used, neighter against Americans nor Israel even under war conditions. So when your gov says Saddam is a threat with his weapons, i could assume they are threat to the whole world as well.
    Personally i would feel a lot safer when someone brighter were sitting in the oval office.
     

Share This Page