Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Iraq In Further Breach 17 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.

  • Stop the fear.

    Turn off Fox News and chill. I'm not afraid of Iraq and I dont feel that the United States is entitled to judge any other country in terms of disarmament as long as it's "death through firearms" rate is over 100 times as high as in most other developed countries. If you took away the guns you could drop a nuke on a small city every year and still have more people living than with the current situation.

    The whole notion of Preemptive War is wrong. Secretary Rumsfeld says "Who would have help

      • If you took away the guns you could drop a nuke on a small city every year and still have more people living than with the current situation.

      Oversimplistic. New York City and Washington DC takes away all guns, yet gun crime is very high in these areas. I guess we just have to periodically search all homes and persons for guns and imprison anyone who has guns?

      • The whole notion of Preemptive War is wrong.

      We don't need to use preemption as a reason for this war. This is just a continuance of the Gul

      • Oversimplistic. New York City and Washington DC takes away all guns, yet gun crime is very high in these areas. I guess we just have to periodically search all homes and persons for guns and imprison anyone who has guns?

        I neither said it was easy, nor that it it could be achieved fast. (Besides id you can still drive to say New Jersey and buy your gun there bans in limited locations are pointless).

        I agree that you might not need preemption; however, if you wouldn't need it why would the administration p

          • I agree that you might not need preemption; however, if you wouldn't need it why would the administration put it forward?

          Did you not read what I said?

          Now may be a good time to do it because it also provides preemption. We must do it eventually, or the International community loses all credibility. Mad dictators like Saddam will have a green light to develop these weapons and invade their neighbors when there are few consequences.

          That's why.

          • There it is, the _Fear_.

            • Fear is a motivation we do lots of things.

              Fear is why we don't allow children to play with firearms or explosives.

              Fear is why we avoid viscious animals.

              Fear is why we don't put our hands on a hot stove.

              Fear is why we eliminate threats before they eliminate us.

              No serious person really doubts that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction. The UNSCOM inspectors found them and they are still unaccounted for.

              No serious person doubts that Al Qaeda would like to use those sorts of weapons on the US.

              W

              • Re:Fear (Score:2)

                by pudge (1) on 2003.02.16 21:35 (#17132) Homepage Journal
                The UNSCOM inspectors found them and they are still unaccounted for.

                Hans Blix said they have NOT found weapons of mass destruction. He said they have found prohibited missles, and that they have found evidence of weapons that has not been explained away (such as unaccounted-for Anthrax and VX), but that they did not find actual weapons of mass destruction.
                • Hans Blix heads up the UNMOVIC inspectors. UNSCOM was decommissioned some years ago and performed the last Iraqi inspection regime before being kicked out after identifying or finding substantial evidence of many banned weapons, including tons of Anthrax, Botulinum toxin, VX nerve gas precursors [planetark.org]. Note also the reference in this article to the fact that there is substantial reason to believe that Iraq has smallpox virus and was experimenting with weaponizing it.

                  Hans Blix and the UNMOVIC inspectors are no [freerepublic.com]

                  • Ah, yes, UNMOVIC replaced UNSCOM as a result of Resolution 1284; I wasn't sure you were distinguishing them, and I sometimes use them interchangably.
                  • Weapons inspectors were not "kicked out" of Iraq in 1998, they were withdrawn, at the US's request.
                      • Weapons inspectors were not "kicked out" of Iraq in 1998, they were withdrawn, at the US's request.

                      Fair enough! [fair.org].

                      Thanks for pointing this out to me. You'll have to forgive me that I only heard this from ALL the media.

                    • It's technically true, but some would say it is in essence true that they were "kicked out," in that they left only because Iraq would not let them do their job.

                      And the UN ordered it.
                  • And pointing to the Free Republic as a source of information, is like someone on the Left pointing to the ISO's latest propaganda piece.

                    Its not very credible, and its not polite to do in mixed company :)
                      • And pointing to the Free Republic as a source of information, is like someone on the Left pointing to the ISO's latest propaganda piece.

                      It would be an Ad Hominem either way. A good way to distract from the facts at hand, but not very productive.

                      Is Jane's an acceptable source [janes.com]? The CBC [www.cbc.ca]? How about the Christian Science Monitor [csmonitor.com]?

                      This last source is particularly interesting. It goes into great depth about the challenges of performing inspections. It can take years to find anything and it's doubtful tha

                    • I think it would be cool if Jane's could do one their deep, detailed articles on how these supposed mobile bio-weapons labs actually work. Right now they are just a fairy tale, and there is doubt if they could exist, much less whether Iraq has the ability to build them.

                      But we were talking about media critique. Yes, all those sources are better then Free Republic. Which was all I said.

                      The CBC article is surprising as they normally do a better job then that, Iraq hardly counts as a "spiritual ally" of Af
                    • Hans Blix has made it quite clear that Iraq is not cooperating.

                      And having read Blix's actual transcript, not a UPI or AP summary, and not the editted version which appeared on CNN, I disagree with your interpretation of what he said.

                      You can disagree all you like, but you are clearly wrong. "Many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for." Repeat Blix's words until it sinks in. Blix has been asking for evidence Iraq is required to give in regards to those weapons -- including VX and anthrax -

                    • Re:Fear (Score:2, Informative)

                      by jordan (120)
                      • Right now they are just a fairy tale, and there is doubt if they could exist, much less whether Iraq has the ability to build them.

                      Why do you say this? There is supposedly detailed defector testimony as to their existence. [washingtonpost.com] Read this article, even the sceptical Biological Weapons specialist, Raymond Zalinkas states:

                      "We know it is possible to build them -- the United States developed mobile production plants, including one designed for an airplane -- but it's a big hassle. That's why this strikes me as

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.