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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Kemp" peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote in message ... On or about Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:36:11 +1100, "L'acrobat" allegedly uttered: "John Mullen" wrote in message ... Wrapped up neatly in mylar, huh? Regardless, they were not *accounted for* by Saddam in his numerous "disclosure" statements. Bad on him. Tut tut indeed. Think it justified going to war?! Certainly. Assuming they were Chem rounds, could you explain why you think that such a direct breach of the cease fire agreement wouldn't justify going to war? Well, from the UK point of view (where "regime change" was a bad phrase to use), the reason for going to war was the *immediate threat* of the WMD, which at the time I supported. A couple of dozen 120mm mortar shells in the condition that these were found are a threat to no one except the poor buggers who have to clean them up. Hardly worth dozens (let alone hundreds) of your own soldiers paying the big price. Well you seem to be ignoring the fact that they would have been workable when cached and Saddam was required to disclose the lot. A few WP shells course, leaves us back to where we were before. No WMD found, and no end to the casualties in sight. No weapons, but a great deal of evidence of WMD making intent - a secret network of labs and safe houses within the Mukhabarat, the Iraqi intelligence service; bioorganisms kept in scientists' homes, including a vial of live botulinum; and, ``new research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin'' -- all ``not declared to the U.N.'' It's pretty hard to argue that Saddam stuck to either the spirit or the word of the ceasefire agreement. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message ... "L'acrobat" wrote in message ... No weapons, but a great deal of evidence of WMD making intent - a secret network of labs and safe houses within the Mukhabarat, the Iraqi intelligence service; I would be careful about the 'weapon laboratories' claim if I were you... Have you seen this one? http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/video/39...evelyan_vi.ram I don't run real media, could you summarise? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
On or about Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:06:23 +1100, "L'acrobat"
allegedly uttered: "Peter Kemp" peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote in message .. . Well, from the UK point of view (where "regime change" was a bad phrase to use), the reason for going to war was the *immediate threat* of the WMD, which at the time I supported. A couple of dozen 120mm mortar shells in the condition that these were found are a threat to no one except the poor buggers who have to clean them up. Hardly worth dozens (let alone hundreds) of your own soldiers paying the big price. Well you seem to be ignoring the fact that they would have been workable when cached and Saddam was required to disclose the lot. Not at all. That wasn't my point. The point was, when we went to war there is currently no evidence that there was a viable threat. Was Saddam a bad man, no doubt. Did he want WMD, absolutely. Was there an active program in the last year? Unproven. IMO he was preparing for a new WMD production program to be launched when sanctions were lifted, but only a little R&D until then. --- Peter Kemp Life is short - Drink Faster |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Kemp" peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote in message ... On or about Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:06:23 +1100, "L'acrobat" allegedly uttered: "Peter Kemp" peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom@ wrote in message .. . Well, from the UK point of view (where "regime change" was a bad phrase to use), the reason for going to war was the *immediate threat* of the WMD, which at the time I supported. A couple of dozen 120mm mortar shells in the condition that these were found are a threat to no one except the poor buggers who have to clean them up. Hardly worth dozens (let alone hundreds) of your own soldiers paying the big price. Well you seem to be ignoring the fact that they would have been workable when cached and Saddam was required to disclose the lot. Not at all. That wasn't my point. The point was, when we went to war there is currently no evidence that there was a viable threat. Was Saddam a bad man, no doubt. Did he want WMD, absolutely. Was there an active program in the last year? Unproven. IMO he was preparing for a new WMD production program to be launched when sanctions were lifted, but only a little R&D until then. In which case he was in direct breach of the ceasefire agreement. He didn't have to constitute a 'viable threat', just breach the ceasefire agreement. We are in agreement that he did that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|