General Zinni on Sixty Minutes

ArtKramr wrote:
Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: "Kevin Brooks"
Date: 6/1/04 1:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: "Vaughn"
Date: 5/31/04 6:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

This from the guy who thinks we went to Iraq to fight

terrorists?

Informed people understand we're fighting terrorists in Iraq.

I will concede that we may actually be fighting a few terrorists in

Iraq

now, but they are likely foreign "true believers" who have gravitated to

Iraq

because our guys are there (and have perhaps by now managed some local
recruiting). There was very little documented international terrorism
activity
in Iraq before we invaded, certainly less than in certain other Arab
countries.
Don't forget; Iraq was a comparatively secular society. We have now

thrown

open
the gates for the religious crazies to come in to Iraq and do their work.

I still haven't figured out what Iraq is all about, but it wasn't

9-11

and
it has little or nothing to do with terrorism. Perhaps it was supposed

to

have
something to do with assuring Bush's second term (thus "mission
accomplished"),
but today it seems more likely to have the opposite effect.

Vaughn


Lrt's review the bidding. All the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. So we

invaded

Iraq. Makes sense to me. (sheesh)

Then why were you one of the louder "Yeah, let's do it!" and "Screw the
French for not supporting us" types a year ago?

Brooks



Arthur Kramer


Who knew we were being lied to about WMD? We never should have believed that
bum and his neocon liars..

It's not clear to me that they were lying, though they are certainly
capable of it. Iraq is a classic case of what Barbara Tuchman
characterized as "woodenheadedness."

Cheers

--mike



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

In article , "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:


When an Iraqi government source told you it was sunny, bring an
umbrella.

But even liars are right sometimes, even by mistake (institutionalised
falsehood has some interesting effects)

Credit where credit is due. When Baghdad Bob lied, it was usually
entertaining. I still think he has potential for a job in Redmond.

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: Mike Dargan
Date: 6/1/04 3:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: mq7vc.28861$IB.2083@attbi_s04

ArtKramr wrote:
Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: "Kevin Brooks"
Date: 6/1/04 1:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...

Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: "Vaughn"
Date: 5/31/04 6:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
rthlink.net...

"Vaughn" wrote in message
...

This from the guy who thinks we went to Iraq to fight

terrorists?

Informed people understand we're fighting terrorists in Iraq.

I will concede that we may actually be fighting a few terrorists in

Iraq

now, but they are likely foreign "true believers" who have gravitated to

Iraq

because our guys are there (and have perhaps by now managed some local
recruiting). There was very little documented international terrorism
activity
in Iraq before we invaded, certainly less than in certain other Arab
countries.
Don't forget; Iraq was a comparatively secular society. We have now

thrown

open
the gates for the religious crazies to come in to Iraq and do their work.

I still haven't figured out what Iraq is all about, but it wasn't

9-11

and
it has little or nothing to do with terrorism. Perhaps it was supposed

to

have
something to do with assuring Bush's second term (thus "mission
accomplished"),
but today it seems more likely to have the opposite effect.

Vaughn


Lrt's review the bidding. All the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. So we

invaded

Iraq. Makes sense to me. (sheesh)

Then why were you one of the louder "Yeah, let's do it!" and "Screw the
French for not supporting us" types a year ago?

Brooks



Arthur Kramer


Who knew we were being lied to about WMD? We never should have believed
that
bum and his neocon liars..

It's not clear to me that they were lying, though they are certainly
capable of it. Iraq is a classic case of what Barbara Tuchman
characterized as "woodenheadedness."

Cheers

--mike



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


And Tuchman was one of the great ones. They don't make historians like that
anymore. (sigh)


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Conveniently overlooking the recent Sarin discovery in Iraq and the
presence of Al-Zawaheri at the beheading of Nick Berg.

Are you serious?

That's -one- round in -one- year. It's a non-story.

And there is no proof Al-Zawaheri was there. It was reported a few days ago
that 2 of the perps of Berg's murder had been captured. That story dropped out
of sight. I wonder why?

Walt

In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

They supposedly only did "research" on binary sarin rounds, and that
*after* 1991.

Well, Mr. Adam says they had a "fair amount pre-1991 and had since
destroyed almost all of it". At least one of you is wrong.

The "wrong" person is the one who doesn't know there are different kinds
of "binary" rounds (i.e., you).

They had "binary sarin," which was pre-mixed and poured into the shell
immediately before firing, and which led to a high number of accidental
exposures by gun crews. They did *not* have a binary shell that mixed
in flight, like the one found recently (according to the reports they
made to the UN).

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
Howard Berkowitz wrote:

If more don't show up, I'd be inclined to suspect some participant in
the research program that took one, or a few, prototypes home for
safekeeping. We know this was done for some nuclear and biological
components. Said somebody may have decided he didn't want this in his
backyard, and gave it to insurgents, possibly with an explanation they
didn't understand.

But someone from the research program would know that this sort of round
needs to be fired so the chemicals would mix correctly, and wouldn't set
it off the way they did.

So it was someone *outside* of the program who had this one at hand.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

In message , Chad Irby
writes

Yep. Note that this was apparently employed in a standard roadside IED,
as if it was just an ordinary HE shell - about as suboptimal an
employment as you can get, if you assume the insurgents knew what they
had.

The math is way against you here. Literally millions-to-one odds.

Thousands-to-one odds, anyway.

Nope. Millions. Out of the couple of dozen artillery rounds that have
been set as roadside IEDs, versus the tens of millions of rounds of
artillery shells they had available.

At worst, hundreds of thousands to one.

Not very much in your favor...

So which is more likely? That someone hid a pile of chemical weapons (a
medium-sized arsenal of the things would fit in a building the size of a
house) in a country the size of California, versus your contention that
they didn't have any and were complying with the UN sanctions?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

The "wrong" person is the one who doesn't know there are different kinds
of "binary" rounds (i.e., you).


Hmmm..., how can I be wrong about something I did not comment on?

In article ,
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

In message , Chad Irby
writes

They supposedly only did "research" on binary sarin rounds, and that
*after* 1991.

"36. However, it was not possible to verify the full extent of several
R& D projects carried out by Iraq from 1989 to 1990, due to the absence
of sufficient data from documents and other verifiable evidence. Those
include the research on new chemical warfare agents, BZ and Soman. These
also include Iraq's efforts to develop new delivery means for CW-agents,
such as special warheads other than for Al-Hussein missiles, i.e. FROG
missile, and real binary artillery munitions and aerial bombs. Evidence
of such studies was found in the documents from the Haider farm. On the
other hand, the Commission did not find evidence that Iraq had reached
the stage of industrial production of these materials and items.

http://cns.miis.edu/research/iraq/ucreport/dis_chem.htm is the first
source to hand.

So we found one of your production rounds. 155mm sarin. Thanks.

The UN inspectors screwed up. What a shock, coming from the same folks
who told us that Libya didn't have a nuke program, and that Iran doesn't
have one (while the Iranians admit they do to everyone *except* the UN
inspectors)...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article , Chad Irby
wrote:

In article et,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

They supposedly only did "research" on binary sarin rounds, and that
*after* 1991.

Well, Mr. Adam says they had a "fair amount pre-1991 and had since
destroyed almost all of it". At least one of you is wrong.

The "wrong" person is the one who doesn't know there are different kinds
of "binary" rounds (i.e., you).

They had "binary sarin," which was pre-mixed and poured into the shell
immediately before firing, and which led to a high number of accidental
exposures by gun crews. They did *not* have a binary shell that mixed
in flight, like the one found recently (according to the reports they
made to the UN).

Not precisely. They had the field-mixed binary operational. Item 36 of
the UNSCOM report identifies an R&D program on true in-flight mixing
binary. Presumably, some actual shells were made as part of the R&D.