![]() |
| 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 |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message ... "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... that another 100 rounds may be in the cache. No doubt some folks will soon be screaming that 36, or 136 for that matter, chemical rounds are not indicitive of Saddam having had chemical munitions despite his protestations otherwise... Always happy to oblige :-) Assuming these are indeed filled with a blister agent, which still needs to be evaluated properly: Looking at their condition, this hardly amounts to "having chemical ammunitions." Surely the crime here is "having toxic waste". No remotely sane gun crew is going to try to load and fire these rounds! If this is your WMD standard, then I can tell Belgium must have a larger WMD arsenal than Iraq: We have tons of leftovers from WW1, in similar conditions. Farmers regularly unearth them while plowing their fields. Usually they just drag them to the side and leave them there until the collection truck comes round... Some pretty serious avoiding of the issue there. Saddam was not only required to destroy what he had, but to account for the destruction. If those rounds were missing from earlier wars or atrocities, they should still have been accounted for up until the point at which they were issued to a unit and then listed as missing as of whatever date and time. If Saddam can walk away from accounting for 36 buried chem rounds (assuming they are chem), why not 360 - at what point would you agree that he should have accounted for the rounds? |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|