![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
... Not 100% accurate. *If* Saddam managed to export his weapons to Syria (a very unforseen event by the way that dems seem anxious to exploit as if they knew this was going to happen) their chance of being used probably just got cut in half. The notion that Saddam might flush his chemical/biological weapons was discussed before the invasion. It doesn't take a lot of foresight to predict that someone with chemical weapons who was about to go down might -- if they chose not to use them -- give them away to someone who might. And, while I agree that any ex-Iraqi weapons under the control of the Syrian government are relatively safe, I'm not so sure that the Syrian government is the only recipient (by accident or design). Allowed? You'll have to show me how we were complicit with the looting of what were *suspected* facilities. Ask any democrat, they'll tell you Iraq didn't have any WMD; so what exactly was looted? Check out: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3002169.stm. Basically the US failed to secure know nuclear (not weapon related, but research and the like) and they were looted. Net result is that radioactive material suitible for making a dirty bomb are missing. So, "allowed" as in "had a responsibility to prevent and failed to do so". tied our hands is a new and more dangerous threat emerges I don't follow this one? Sorry, typo: "hands _if_ a new". Basically what do we do now if, for example, there is for example an Islamic revolt in Pakistan? and alienated the entire region Hardly. If we had alienated the entire region, we would not currently be hosted in nearly every country on the southern shores of the Persian Gulf. Check out: http://people-press.org/reports/disp...3?ReportID=185. It is a somewhat troubling sign when more people in think Osama is more likely to do the right thing than Bush. Uhh, because the closer you are to Iraq the less tankers you need. There would have been no way (unless you built a few more airfields in the region) to put up the same number of SOUTHERN WATCH sorties every day if most strike aircraft had to fly from Al Udeid or even Masirah or Thumrait. There just wasn't enough ramp space for all the tankers you would have needed. How many sorties/day were flown by SOUTHERN WATCH? I admit I'm surprised that we couldn't have supported it with a couple of airfields, but you are the expert. Even so, though, how much would it have cost to expand the ramp space? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
Open Letter to Kofi Annan and George Walker Bush | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 2 | March 12th 04 04:05 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |