Posted on 12/23/2003 6:10:07 AM PST by JohnGalt
Anyone that feels they have to use labels such as "neocon" in every other sentence does not peak my interest. Just in case you missed it...although Wolfowitz's timing was off, Bush defended the decision to exclude those countries.(P.S. Your second link came up "This Page Cannot Be Displayed").
There were no WMDs and your continue passing of lies and tin foil conspiracy theory is just as likely the actions of a disrupter as it of a partisan.
You really do live in an altered reality if you believe that. You might want to consider joining "Bush lied" crowd on DU, you would fit in much better there.
Oh I see...you have the insider info on Bush's strategery that no one else is privy to that allows you to make such statements. Right.....
Tin-foil and lies is better suited for Whatreallyhappend.com don't you think?
So everyone else but you lies about the WMD? Clinton, Daschle and the other Congressmen lied back in 2000, Bush lied, Powell lied, the United Nations lied...geez, this list could go on forever. You still have not cited any sources for your assertions that there were no WMD. What about the vial of botulinum bacteria they found in the scientist's refrigerator? Kay even testified before Congress, stating the discovery of the vial "illustrates the point ... about the difficulty of locating small stocks of material that can be used to covertly surge production of deadly weapons." Kay also cited multiple reports from Iraqis of substances being moved across borders. So I guess Kay is lying too. It is extremely apparent that nothing is going convince you, so there is not much point in continuing this argument with you. Buh-Bye now...
From a report by your good buddy Mr. Blix:
Iraq has declared that it only produced VX on a pilot scale, just a few tonnes and that the quality was poor and the product unstable. Consequently, it was said, that the agent was never weaponised. Iraq said that the small quantity of agent remaining after the Gulf War was unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991.These are all breaches of the resolutions. That the UN did not formally declare a breach is of no consequence. The UN was only interested in keeping the oil-for-food program in place so they could keep skimming the profits.UNMOVIC, however, has information that conflicts with this account. There are indications that Iraq had worked on the problem of purity and stabilization and that more had been achieved than has been declared. Indeed, even one of the documents provided by Iraq indicates that the purity of the agent, at least in laboratory production, was higher than declared.
There are also indications that the agent was weaponised. In addition, there are questions to be answered concerning the fate of the VX precursor chemicals, which Iraq states were lost during bombing in the Gulf War or were unilaterally destroyed by Iraq.
The discovery of a number of 122 mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions.
I might further mention that inspectors have found at another site a laboratory quantity of thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor.
Whilst I am addressing chemical issues, I should mention a matter, which I reported on 19 December 2002, concerning equipment at a civilian chemical plant at Al Fallujah. Iraq has declared that it had repaired chemical processing equipment previously destroyed under UNSCOM supervision, and had installed it at Fallujah for the production of chlorine and phenols. We have inspected this equipment and are conducting a detailed technical evaluation of it. On completion, we will decide whether this and other equipment that has been recovered by Iraq should be destroyed.
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.
There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991.
As I reported to the Council on 19 December last year, Iraq did not declare a significant quantity, some 650 kg, of bacterial growth media, which was acknowledged as imported in Iraq’s submission to the Amorim panel in February 1999. As part of its 7 December 2002 declaration, Iraq resubmitted the Amorim panel document, but the table showing this particular import of media was not included. The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.
Two projects in particular stand out. They are the development of a liquid-fuelled missile named the Al Samoud 2, and a solid propellant missile, called the Al Fatah. Both missiles have been tested to a range in excess of the permitted range of 150 km, with the Al Samoud 2 being tested to a maximum of 183 km and the Al Fatah to 161 km. Some of both types of missiles have already been provided to the Iraqi Armed Forces even though it is stated that they are still undergoing development.
The Al Samoud’s diameter was increased from an earlier version to the present 760 mm. This modification was made despite a 1994 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM directing Iraq to limit its missile diameters to less than 600 mm. Furthermore, a November 1997 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM to Iraq prohibited the use of engines from certain surface-to-air missiles for the use in ballistic missiles.
In addition, Iraq has refurbished its missile production infrastructure. In particular, Iraq reconstituted a number of casting chambers, which had previously been destroyed under UNSCOM supervision. They had been used in the production of solid-fuel missiles. Whatever missile system these chambers are intended for, they could produce motors for missiles capable of ranges significantly greater than 150 km.
Also associated with these missiles and related developments is the import, which has been taking place during the last few years, of a number of items despite the sanctions, including as late as December 2002. Foremost amongst these is the import of 380 rocket engines which may be used for the Al Samoud 2.
The UN can go f**k themselves as far as I am concerned, I felt that way before the whole Iraq issue, and it's lucky for you that you can hide behind that keyboard like a chicken**** and call me a liberal.
but I am amused that you concede you are wrong by switching the issue to whether Iraq fully explained what they did with their WMDs.
I did not switch issues, and I conceded nothing, you stated that the UN did not declare a breach. I showed you that they did cite breaches, but did not declare a formal breach because they did not want to lose the money they were skimming off of the oil-for-food program.
As far as I am concerned, this discussion with you has ended, do not address me again on this forum.
Switch topics? According to your logic the United States, absent full cooperation and proof of the destruction of known WMD, should have just taken Saddam's word for it. I don't care if you are a neo-con or a street kid in NYC, that just doesn't pass the common sense test.
Gothcha, Iraq is to England as North Korea is to France, cave dwellers all.
No, I am not that one. Happy Holidays all the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.