GAO Report: GA Security Threat

"Bob and Mary Beard" wrote in message
...
The following individuals apparently feel that this site is for their
personal bickering.


This is not a "site."

Ian,

The UN didn't stop saying that Saddam had WMD until Ignorance S. Blix
was unable to find anything (including an explanation for what had
happened to them) last year.

For that matter, they never said that he didn't have them, only that
they needed more time to find them.


Simply not true.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Ian,

The UN didn't stop saying that Saddam had WMD until Ignorance S. Blix
was unable to find anything (including an explanation for what had
happened to them) last year.

For that matter, they never said that he didn't have them, only that
they needed more time to find them.

Simply not true.

Both Hans Blix and Jacques Chirac said that there was no reason to
believe that Iraq did NOT have WMD. Now of course, Blix is doing some
retroactive spinning.

Mark Hickey

Mark,

Both Hans Blix and Jacques Chirac said that there was no reason to
believe that Iraq did NOT have WMD.


Which IS different from saying "They have them", like Bush did - and
then being unable to find them.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Ian,


The UN didn't stop saying that Saddam had WMD until Ignorance S. Blix
was unable to find anything (including an explanation for what had
happened to them) last year.

For that matter, they never said that he didn't have them, only that
they needed more time to find them.



Simply not true.

If you say so.

Go read the final report (http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm)

"There is a long list of items unaccounted for . . ."

"The unaccounted-for weapons could have been either destroyed or hidden
by the Iraqis."

"He has called on the Security Council to allow UN inspectors to resume
the search for Iraq's proscribed weapons that was halted in early March,
just before the U.S.-led invasion."

"These reports do not contend that weapons of mass destruction remain in
Iraq, but nor do they exclude that possibility. They point to lack of
evidence and inconsistencies, which raise question marks, which must be
straightened out, if weapons dossiers are to be closed and confidence is
to arise."

"The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the
Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that
19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a
discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs
would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now
unaccounted for."

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Mark,


Both Hans Blix and Jacques Chirac said that there was no reason to
believe that Iraq did NOT have WMD.



Which IS different from saying "They have them", like Bush did - and
then being unable to find them.

Well, hell, Thomas, there's no proof that YOU exist . . !

"Kevin Horton" wrote in message news
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 09:22:17 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:

"Holger Stephan" wrote:

The question is what do you want to achieve with this discussion. It is
well known to most here in the US that a large part of the world
disagrees with the US Iraq politics. In particular Germany and France.

One could look at the amount of business France, Russia and Germany were
doing with the Baath government in Iraq and reach a conclusion that
their objections had very little to do with anything but money.
Personally, I hope Saddam owed them all billions of dollars when he went
under.

It's kind of amusing that there are those who honestly feel that the
fact the US Vice President used to work for a military contractor who
got some business in reconstructing Iraq think that's significant, but
who can't imagine that France, Russia and Germany were influenced by
billions of dollars of commerce in their opposition to war. Go
figure...

Mark Hickey

The opposition to the war in Iraq went far beyond just France and Germany.
The polls seem to indicate that the majority of the people in all European
countries were opposed to the war in Iraq.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2747175.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/98398.html

Canada was quite divided, but the majority was against the war.

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030329.uchre0329/BNStory/National

The vast majority of Mexicans opposed the war.

http://www.iraqcrisisbulletin.com/archives/040403/html/mexican_anti-war_sentiment.html




and many here in the good ol' US of A opposed it also...

One word... filter...


--
Dan D.



..
"Bob and Mary Beard" wrote in message ...
The following individuals apparently feel that this site is for their
personal bickering.

Below is some of the unwarranted garbage they have been whining about.
Personally I am tired of seeing it and sifting through it. There is no
relevance to this site, and I find it as compelling as tapeworm to have to
delete all this fluff and name-calling. Will you guys either quit or move to
a site where it would be welcome. Maybe you could meet at a bar, have a few
drinks and bash each other in person.
Bob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Halpenny wrote:


Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote

| "Thomas Borchert" wrote in message

| I can't see much of a difference for the world with Saddam
missing................ (

There are no WMD, period....................
| |
|
Well, I heard it on NPR........................

Do you recall the context? ..................

I have speculated that the Iraqi military ...........

I don't claim that to be anything but my own
speculation..................

And you are a moron........................

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 05:56:44 +0000, Bob and Mary Beard wrote:

The following individuals apparently feel that this site is for their
personal bickering.

Below is some of the unwarranted garbage they have been whining about.
Personally I am tired of seeing it and sifting through it. There is no
relevance to this site, and I find it as compelling as tapeworm to have
to delete all this fluff and name-calling. Will you guys either quit or
move to a site where it would be welcome. Maybe you could meet at a bar,
have a few drinks and bash each other in person. Bob

And I thought we've been pretty civilized up to ... your posting.

Oh well, back to the tapeworm...

- Holger

That, while true, is irrelevant. The important message is STOP IT!

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
t...

"Bob and Mary Beard" wrote in message
...
The following individuals apparently feel that this site is for their
personal bickering.


This is not a "site."