I am Staying up late to get on a nocturnal schedule the next few days, I decided to take a walk down memory lane... I found it interesting how our justifications for the war have been so changeable for some here- I am not free of guilt in that- I was a fence-sitter, actually believing some of our claims...

The following is long, but I think it is an important reminder

http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/267721.html

Are you betting that Sadam got rid of his WMD Program?

If you make bets like that then you must be flat broke.

I would give the inspections a 90% chance of finding Sadam's "non-existant" WMD program. The 10% left over is only because the UN might have already decided the the inspections won't find Sadam's WMD program.

The whole inspections game is designed to delay and prevent the enevitable: A short but violent war that ends with UN Troops occupying Iraq and Sadam in a QITMO prison cell next door to Bin Ladin and Mullah Omar, awaiting a well-deserved trial for Crimes Against Humanity.

Scott

http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/267723.html

The whole thing is a charade.
Posted by Tom Brosz on 11/20/2002 12:07:08 PM

This entire weapons inspection business is a farce. The odds of finding anything, particularly a biological weapons program, in an area the size of Texas are microscopic. Even if we can get scientists to fink for us, if Saddam has the brains of a chipmunk there would be several parallel programs unknown to each other, and we would have to get ALL the scientists. There may be better odds of finding a nuclear program, if we are allowed to use the equipment we would need, but Saddam has had years to conceal what he needs to.

All Saddam needs to do is stall, fiddle, and play games for enough time to take us into next summer. Meanwhile, he can be doing any number of things: continuing research in carefully prepared hidden area, trucking labs over the borders, you name it.

The only thing that will render Iraq harmless is the destruction of Saddam Hussein's regime. As long as he is in charge, his programs will continue with the specifically stated goals of conquest of the Arab world and then some. The Politically Correct of both parties are breaking their backs bending over to avoid this obvious conclusion. So, we go through the motions, appease the U.N., and mollify all those who think that signed agreements mean anything to monomaniacal tyrants.

And Saddam keeps on moving ahead.

inspection programs have found SOME weapons programs.
Posted by Tom Brosz on 11/21/2002 9:21:25 AM


There is absolutely no way to prove an inspection program has found ALL the weapons, despite what appears to be cooperation.

Imagine a serial killer living in a house with a known record of taking rifle shots at neighbors. The killer has lived in this house unmolested for several years without being observed.

Now imagine we decide the best way to deal with him is to simply confine him in his big old house and search the house for weapons so he can't snipe out the windows any more. Does this make sense?

How do you know he didn't hide one you didn't find, short of dismantling the house down to the nails? Now imagine the house is the size of Versailles. Now what? Leave him be, and let him shoot someone else? Then what? Search the house again?

Isn't it much more sensible to haul him out of the house permanently? Then who cares how many guns are still hidden there?

This one is great!:

Exactly
Posted by Scott on 11/20/2002 1:00:03 AM


My bet is Sadam announces: "OK. I must come clean. Here is my program and my materials..."

And then Kofi Annan goes before the world and announces the great UN victory over evil WMD while some insignificant small part of Sadam's program is disbanded...

Meanwhile, the real program will continue in areas that are kept off limits to the inspectors.

Mark my words. This is exactly the way the charade will go down.

Scott

This one is a gem....
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/268111.html

Is the Iraqi leadership really that stupid?
Posted by Gary on 11/25/2002 10:45:04 AM


Latest news from CNN indicates the Iraqis are going to stand pat with their earlier nonsense that they have no WMDs.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/11/25/iraq.inspectors/index.html

It's hard to believe the Iraqis are going to be this stupid. Their best ploy is to claim they are victims of American propaganda and the alledged WMD factories are innocent industrial sites, i.e. pharmaceutical and baby formula factories. They would then hand Blix reams of data concerning "dual use" sites and leave him and the UN inspectors running around like headless chickens. If their best tactic is to simply stonewall Blix claiming the WMDs are total fiction then the Iraqi leaders really are a bunch of imbeciles.

I'm reminded of the "nightmare scenario" prior to the Persian Gulf war. After our big military buildup in Saudi Arabia but shortly before kicking the Iraqis out of Kuwait, the American leadership was very worried the Iraqis would loot Kuwait of everything that was portable, announce to the world media that they were going to "give peace a chance" and then simply withdraw from Kuwait with their military power intact to reinvade. The US military coallition would have immediately evaporated. The Americans would have been left standing alone, foolishly holding their private parts. This was the obvious tactic but Saddam was either too stupid or evil to see it. I wonder if history is about to repeat itself?

Gary

And a 'prediction from Tom':
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/268428.html

War
Posted by Tom Brosz on 12/3/2002 10:36:27 AM
If the Iraqis really do know that, the chances of an actual slaughter are greatly reduced. I'm still having trouble figuring out why you think we're morally wrong to engage in a conflict unless there's a good chance our side will take enough casualties to make it "fair." Maybe we should tie our soldier's hands behind their backs, or only give them five bullets each.

IMO, and that of George Patton, the ideal conflict would be one in which ALL the casualties are on the other side, with a minimum of noncombatants. This latter will be hard, given the Iraqi tendency to pile women and children between their soldiers and our guns, but we'll do the best we can.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and predict that the vast majority of Iraqi civilian casualties will be the result of desperate and suicidal tactics on the part of Saddam and his goons. Most likely: explosive booby traps, bombing of civilian areas to take out our forces, or the dispersal of deadly gas across a wide area in total disregard of how many Iraqis are in that area. Clip and save.

And this prediction from scott:

Don't worry Bowser we'll have enough Iraqi's on our side that they will be the ones going into the cities.
Posted by Scott on 12/3/2002 1:23:58 AM


The US will just sit back and watch Kandahar and Kabul....Opps, I mean Basra and Bahgdad fall to the local warloards...

I hear CNN is really looking forward to the jump in ratings.

Scott

another from Scott

They destroyed 90% of what they found...
Posted by Scott on 12/9/2002 12:38:11 PM



Now they can't even find the remaining 10%.

Now the real question what percentage of what exists now is NOT in the 11,000+ page document?

Care to take a guess? I'll give you a hint it begins with "100" and ends with "%".

Scott

SDAI jumps the gun to gloat about a mistaken claim of WMDs:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/270820.html

I think I can speak for the collective Righties re: Iraq's WMD
Posted by SDAI-Tech1 on 1/16/2003 4:34:59 AM



TOLD YOU SO!
;-)

SDAI-Tech1

As Drudge would say..."developing."

And Lest I be left out: (I still agree with this BTW)
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/270855.html

Re: Jenghiz Kahn
Posted by R.L. on 1/17/2003 11:44:28 AM



Kahn never owned a baseball team... so the analogy fails :)

comparing 21st century rulers to 13th century rulers makes as much sense as well...comparing 21st century rulers to 13th century rulers...

I believe saddam should be taken out... I just hate the idea of a few hundred thousand Iraqui "soldiers" and a few hundred of our soldiers dying in the process...

If wo go to war again with Iraq there is no doubt that it will be a complete rout.. they will lose hundreds, or thousands for our one.... what we need to do is just kill the bastard in charge and all those that would act as he has...

People call assasination barbaric, but when the alternative is killing tens of thousands as opposed to the few true evil ones what can a moral person choose?

As usual Raoul hit the nail on the head:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271442.html

The burden of proof
Posted by Raoul on 1/25/2003 12:55:24 PM



Doesn't the burden of proof rest on the plaintiff?

Doesn't it mean the US and the UN must bring up a positive proof Iraq has WMD's?

To force Iraq to prove it doesn't have them is impossible.

A negative proof? The ROW won't follow.

Raoul

some of us are now bitter that the lies of WMD swayed us:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271452.html

Re: The burden of proof
Posted by McFly on 1/25/2003 4:46:13 AM


The concern, as I see it (and maybe I'm wrong), is that if we prosecute only after the crime, the western world may have lost a major city. Can anyone claim that it's beyond the realm of the possible?

There was a doctor interviewed on television a couple of days ago who said that a bioattack using smallpox could cause tens of millions of deaths in a matter of a few weeks.

Saddam Hussein has shown an eagerness to acquire and use horrible weapons, and has ample reason to hate the west, especially the US and Britain.

The past is prelude. Those who can't break with history are just as doomed as those who can't learn from it.

Ahh... It all seemed so simple back then:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271470.html

I agree that nothing now will stop the war
Posted by Matt Burley on 1/25/2003 2:27:10 AM


Let's just hope it's over quickly, with a minimum of casualties on all sides. And with Saddam gone.

Based upon the fact of the widespread Iraqi uprising against Saddam in March 1991 (which was mercilessly crushed when the US regretably failed to provide support) we have very good reason to hope and believe that an inital massive aerial attack on Saddam's power base and communication centers will again trigger a revolt among the Iraqi military against Saddam. That's our best chance of bagging Saddam without a bloodbath. Coordinating US/UK military actions with sympathetic Iraqi military commanders who will turn on Saddam should be central to our plans.

President Bush should include in his State of the Union a public apology to the people of Iraq for the US not coming to their aid in 1991 when they rose up against Saddam, and promise them that the same mistake won't be made twice.

Followed by the parroting of the discredited claims:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271466.html

No, the burden of proof is clearly on Iraq, not on the US or anyone else
Posted by Matt Burley on 1/25/2003 1:37:37 AM


Why? Because everyone is in agreement that Iraq had programs of WMD in place 4 years ago when the last UN inspection teams left the country in failure. Iraq needs to account for the all the nasty stuff which was known to exist then. Where is it now? Where did it go? For starters, where are the missing stockpiles of chemical agents? Where are the missing Scud missiles?

Chemical Weapons

Saddam Hussein launched a large-scale chemical weapons attack against Iraq's Kurdish population in the late 1980s, killing thousands. On at least 10 occasions, Saddam Hussein's military forces have attacked Iranian and Kurdish targets with combinations of mustard gas and nerve agents through the use of aerial bombs, 122-millimeter rockets, and conventional artillery shells. Saddam Hussein continues his efforts to develop chemical weapons:

Gaps identified by UNSCOM in Iraqi accounting and current production capabilities strongly suggest that Iraq maintains stockpiles of chemical agents, probably VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard.

Iraq has not accounted for hundreds of tons of chemical precursors and tens of thousands of unfilled munitions, including Scud variant missile warheads.

Iraq has not accounted for at least 15,000 artillery rockets that in the past were its preferred vehicle for delivering nerve agents, nor has it accounted for about 550 artillery shells filled with mustard agent.

Iraq continues to rebuild and expand dual-use infrastructure that it could quickly divert to chemical weapons production, such as chlorine and phenol plants.

Iraq is seeking to purchase chemical weapons agent precursors and applicable production equipment, and is making an effort to hide activities at the Fallujah plant, which was one of Iraq's chemical weapons production facilities before the Gulf War.

At Fallujah and three other plants, Iraq now has chlorine production capacity far higher than any civilian need for water treatment, and the evidence indicates that some of its chlorine imports are being diverted for military purposes.

Nuclear Weapons

Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program before the Gulf War and continues his work to develop a nuclear weapon:

A new report released on September 9, 2002 from the International Institute for Strategic Studies - an independent research organization - concludes that Saddam Hussein could build a nuclear bomb within months if he were able to obtain fissile material.

Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb. In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes which officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium (the relevance of this item is being debated at present...)

Iraq has withheld documentation relevant to its past nuclear program, including data about enrichment techniques, foreign procurement, weapons design, experimental data, and technical documents.

Iraq still has the technical expertise and some of the infrastructure needed to pursue its goal of building a nuclear weapon.

Saddam Hussein has repeatedly met with his nuclear scientists over the past two years, signaling his continued interest in developing his nuclear program.

Ballistic Missiles

Iraq is believed to be developing ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometers - as prohibited by the UN Security Council Resolution 687.

Discrepancies identified by UNSCOM in Saddam Hussein's declarations suggest that Iraq retains a small force of Scud-type missiles and an undetermined number of launchers and warheads.

Iraq continues work on the al-Samoud liquid propellant short-range missile (which can fly beyond the allowed 150 kilometers). The al-Samoud and the solid propellant Ababil-100 appeared in a military parade in Baghdad on December 31, 2000, suggesting that both systems are nearing operational deployment.

The al-Rafah-North facility is Iraq's principal site for testing liquid propellant missile engines. Iraq has been building a new, larger test stand there that is clearly intended for testing prohibited longer-range missile engines.

At their al-Mamoun facility, the Iraqis have rebuilt structures that had been dismantled by UNSCOM that were originally designed to manufacture solid propellant motors for the Badr-2000 missile program.

A desperate attempt to justify this by the war an terrorism:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271575.html

If Bin Ladin is hiding in Iraq, does that make Sadam an accessory to the 9/11 attacks?
Posted by Scott on 1/27/2003 1:18:35 AM


Certainly it would mean that Sadam is wholeheartedly supporting Al Quedia, and hasn't Al Queda declared war on the United States?

Stranger things have happened, and Bin Ladin does seem to have dissapeared off the face of the Earth.

If it could be established that Bin Ladin has or is hiding in Iraq, then wouldn't the United States be justified in invading Iraq?

Scott

Another attempt based on now discredited garbage:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/271554.html

Re: The world waits
Posted by Tom Brosz on 1/27/2003 11:05:38 AM



I have heard a lot of questions about why Bush doesn't put his cards on the table as far as evidence is concerned. The obvious reason is that it compromises intelligence sources before we are prepared to act on the information.

It's possible that such a compromise would be bad for us even after a war has started, or after it has been won.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that there are terrorist cells based in Iraq. When it all hits the fan, these cells will no doubt head across the borders to other nations like many Al Quaeda did in Afghanistan. If our sources are in these cells, they would "escape" with them, and remain useful even after a war with Iraq is won. If Saddam flees with his cronies, any sources inside that network would also flee with them.

This is only speculation on my part, of course. But given how easy it would be to reveal information and raise its credibility, the Bush administration must have a good reason for keeping this stuff under its hat.

OH and this one is absolutely PRECIOUS!!!:
http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/270945.html

Re: Another opinion on Iraq
Posted by Tom Brosz on 1/18/2003 9:40:07 AM



When the Iraqis thank God we saved their asses, and line the roads waving American flags, you are SO going to eat this stuff.

SDAI looks forward to a glorious future of a liberated Iraq...2 years ago...

Bush gives a great press conference
Posted by SDAI-Tech1 on 3/6/2003 7:16:34 AM


As usual, the "dummy" seems to be able to run rings around the Washington press corps.

It's amazing how such a "moron" can appear so in command and determined in his course of action.

It's truly amazing he can even pronounce the words on the cards...right?

;-)

Looking forward to a liberated Iraq,

SDAI-Tech1

PS Watch the polls show a boost once again.

A very impatient SDAI expresses discontent that the carnage is so slow in coming to entertain him (Note the unrealistic hope for a short involvement...):

Let's go to war already.
Posted by SDAI-Tech1 on 3/12/2003 5:18:53 AM


This waiting around is a total waste of time, hurts the economy and has no more benefits at this point. It will only make things tougher as the heat rolls in. I know that by mid-April it will be 100+ in Iraq and will cause heat exhaustion, heat stroke and all sorts of problems.

The special forces have done their job, now it's time for the 82nd airborne and the marines to do their bit. Let's set up shop, make sure France Russia & Germany get one bucket full of grade A jack squat, clean up the mess and bring the rest of the troops home, before May 1st.

SDAI-Tech1

More silly insane reasoning to justify the war:

No evidence? what is the point of Sadam's Secret WMD Programs?
Posted by Scott on 3/13/2003 10:51:21 AM



Why keep them secret if he's not planning on using them.

Kind of like having a doomsday weapon but not telling your enemy that you have it.

He certainly isn't developing WMD as a deterant. And he is continuing the programs in defiance of the terms of surrender at the end of the Gulf War. As such, he is pissing all over international law. Which is the same international law you seem to believe that the United States is breaking with its invasion of Iraq.

So apparently international law will be broken and enforced at the same time!

What a novel idea! I think that is nearly the definition of a just war!

Scot

and this- note the certainty of WMD(emphasis is mine):

Now be reasonable
Posted by FrankC on 2/26/2003 12:08:17 PM



TONY: he was executing, gassing, bombing em back in the friends-with-Ronald-and-Donald days.

I suppose he was but it is still a good reason.

TONY: Can't be links to terrorism - there were "bomb Iraq now" noises coming out of the administration before 9/11, and the Al Qaeda link has still to appear.


I haven't seen proof and if this were the only thing, I would feel different but still apprehensive that he would share with a terrorist group.

tony:Possibly WMD - though no-one knows whether these exist (well, WE do, but WE ain't telling).

This one is a slam dunk. Any reasonable person knows that as the sun rises in the East Saddam has hundreds if not thousands of chemical and biological weapons. He just "found" one and turned it over yesterday. To refuse to acknowledge this is beyond reasonable doubt. Just admit that you are for peace in spite of WMD.

REB before the change of heart:

Over 70% of Americans support taking action against Iraq.
Posted by REB on 3/14/2003 5:15:49 AM


Despite the massive effort the protestors are throwing against the US taking action against Iraq, over 70% Americans support the US taking action against Iraq.

I wonder what the true % of Europeans that support action against Iraq.

AND THEN THE MESS STARTS:

http://www.habitablezone.com/currentevents/messages/274985.html