WMD's founfd in Iraq

[Capitalist Imperial]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

This merely scratches the surface. However, it is all that is needed to indicate that unaccounted for WMD's exist in Iraq.

What in the heck do all of you commie oukes think of these findings?

[Misodoctakleidist]

The chemicals used were made pre-1990, this doesn't support the accusations that iraq had or, more significantly, made WMDs after the first gulf war.

[monkeydust]

The war was not simply based on the premise that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

The war was based upon the premise that Iraq had weapons of mass desruction, which it was capable of mobilising in 20 minutes.

If these weapons were able to be used in such a short period of time, it would not have taken us over a year to find them.

[The Feral Underclass]

Very convinient isn't it. George Bush certianly needed exactly this very thing to get him out of the shit these pictures have put him in, and 6 months before the elections no less...

[STI]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:24 PM
Very convinient isn't it. George Bush certianly needed exactly this very thing to get him out of the shit these pictures have put him in, and 6 months before the elections no less...
And it was reported on none other than Fox news. Interesting.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Sounds like leftist squirming, rationalization, and excuses to me.

[STI]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:46 PM
Sounds like leftist squirming, rationalization, and excuses to me.
Sounds like rightist shit-talking, blind patriotism, and irrationality to me.

pwned.

[Shredder]

They found a sarin gas shell that didn't work. Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound like mass destruction to me.

If Hussein had WMDs, he would have used them on the united states forces when they initially attacked. That's just common sense.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by socialist_tiger+May 17 2004, 07:50 PM--> (socialist_tiger @ May 17 2004, 07:50 PM)
Capitalist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:46 PM
Sounds like leftist squirming, rationalization, and excuses to me.
Sounds like rightist shit-talking, blind patriotism, and irrationality to me.

pwned. [/b]
How so? This has been a major issue on this board and the Iraq war in general. it has nothing to do with Patriotism or talking mess, and everything to do with facts.


The war was based upon the premise that Iraq had weapons of mass desruction, which it was capable of mobilising in 20 minutes.

Not true, sir. The accounting for of pre-existing and unaccounted for WMD's were a large part of security council resolution 1441's mandates.


Very convinient isn't it. George Bush certianly needed exactly this very thing to get him out of the shit these pictures have put him in, and 6 months before the elections no less...

The timing is an incidental benefit, and nothing more.


The chemicals used were made pre-1990, this doesn't support the accusations that iraq had or, more significantly, made WMDs after the first gulf war.

Post-GW1 production was not a prerequisite for Iraq's WMD's to be considered in violation.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2004, 07:56 PM
They found a sarin gas shell that didn't work. Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound like mass destruction to me.

If Hussein had WMDs, he would have used them on the united states forces when they initially attacked. That's just common sense.
Not necessarily true.

For instance, Hussein had an airforce, but he did not use his aircraft in GW2 for fear of losing them so easily.

Use of WMD's may have been restrained out of fear that the US has many more and much worse weapons to retaliate with, and Saddam may have wanted to avoid reciprocation by the US if he attempted to employ WMD's

[The Feral Underclass]

Is this not what the definition of clutching at straws is...

...yes, it is!

[Guest1]

What about the idea that these weapons of a tiny and improvised kind were used by the resistance, and have nothing to do with Saddam?

By your logic, the rape of iraqi detainees is proof that Bush likes sodomizing people with chemical lightsticks.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 08:06 PM
Is this not what the definition of clutching at straws is...

...yes, it is!
Ahhh, I see.

So even 1 human rights violation or 1 dead Iraqi civilian is too much, but one (or two, actually) WMD's is "Clutching a Straws?"

Apparently, the classic leftist double-standard applies.

[Guest1]

Doesn't a weapon of mass destruction have to cause mass destruction?

Silly me, I must have forgotten that a tiny improvised weapon that does no damage when it explodes is actually a WMD and must have come from Saddam.

[Vinny Rafarino]

N'sync.....now that's a weapon of mass destruction. I'm surprised the USA has not placed them in Syria so they have a reason to invade.


Find that comment stupid CI? I certainly hope so as it compares brilliantly with your little tid-bit from Fox News.

[Severian]

Yup, some people are getting real excited over "we finally found the WMD!"

Excited about what, exactly?

One shell, apparently a leftover from the Iran-Iraq War. BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722255.stm)

Bloomber News Service (http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a_eQwYx7vT6I&refer=us) quotes Gen. Kimmit as admitting that "Whoever rigged the round to explode appears not to have known the shell contained nerve agents" and it was ineffective. On the other hand, his statement that it was a binary shell is interesting, if true. Relates to the shelf-life issue. But what's certain is it was less dangerous than a regular shell as used; whether it might've been more dangerous if used differently is uncertain.

But they were supposed to declare it! every Bush administration sycophant in the world declares in chorus, thereby turning this into a legal-technicality question...

That was always an unreal and unreasonable demand, which the Iraqi regime could not possibly comply with. Resolution 1441 was carefully designed to ensure Iraq couldn't possibly comply, so there'd be an excuse for war.) There is no way they could possibly track down every artillery shell produced during the Iran-Iraq War.

It's quite likely that a fair number of them are rusting away in forgotten ammo dumps, possibly dumped there during the Iran-Iraq War, and may be discovered as time goes on. Most will probably be useless as weapons - poison gas has a limited shelf life - except perhaps for binary weapons and conceivably mustard gas.

The U.S. government sure as hell doesn't know the location of every chemical and biological weapon it ever produced...


Two years of digging at the U.S. Army's Fort Detrick in Frederick has unearthed more than 2,000 tons of hazardous waste -- including vials of live bacteria and nonvirulent anthrax that the military did not know was buried there, Detrick officials said. Link - (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42036-2003May26) Washington Post local news story from a year ago. Yup, local news, not a big deal.

A similar story appeared in local news around here, about chemical weapons found on a farm not far from the Anniston Army Depot...the Army apparently forgot about burying 'em there.

Countries like the US, UK, and Japan also have trouble accounting for significant amounts of plutonium and enriched uranium....but some people will make a big deal 'cause Iraq didn't keep track of every artillery shell. US, (http://www.wise-paris.org/index.html?/english/ournews/year_2001/ournews011217.html&/english/frame/menu.html&/english/frame/band.html) UK, (http://www.sundayherald.com/38953) Japan (http://financialtimes.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&expire=&urlID=5240919&fb=Y&partnerID=1703)

If these countries have trouble keeping track of plutonium, does any sane person think Iraq was able to keep track of every last one of the legions of chemical artillery shells they produced - with Western help - for use against Iran? So why is it a big deal if one of them turns up, and maybe a few more in the future?

[Loknar]

It doesnt matter if Iraq had them or not. People will stick with their political party through thick and thin.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Capitalist Imperial+May 17 2004, 10:17 PM--> (Capitalist Imperial @ May 17 2004, 10:17 PM)
The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 08:06 PM
Is this not what the definition of clutching at straws is...

...yes, it is!
Ahhh, I see.

So even 1 human rights violation or 1 dead Iraqi civilian is too much, but one (or two, actually) WMD's is "Clutching a Straws?"

Apparently, the classic leftist double-standard applies. [/b]
It wasn't a weapon of mass destruction though was it!

[antieverything]

It is certainly a bit humorous to me that you people could actually use such a pitifull excuse to claim victory. What a joke...Last I checked, if something isn't capable of killing a single person, it isn't a WMD!!!

[John Galt]

It is a WMD, but its probably from before the 1st gulf war.

[Severian]

The only real "weapons of mass destruction" are nuclear weapons. Iraq's chemical weapons were WWI-style tactical battlefield weapons.

In any case, Rumsfeld admits there may not have been any nerve gas at all, that it may be (yet another) false alarm due to "initial tests."

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=5169086 (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=5169086)

[Daniel Karssenberg]

What makes small weapons, a totalitarian government, economic embargos less of a WMD than the nuclear weapons you're talking about?


What in the heck do all of you commie oukes think of these findings?

Look Capitalist Imperial, I think their problem is you barely provided your source with any of your own words or arguments, neither will they be convinced that Fox is a reliable News Agency.

[BuyOurEverything]

Hasn't the US admitted that a large portion of the insurgents in Iraq are not Baathists or Sadaam loyalists, but foreign Islamic fundamentalists? How do they know this was even Iraqi?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

The true left has never denied that Saddam Hussein is a brutal leader who wields weapons. Whether or not they are illegal is trivial. Many countries including Israel and the United States break UN resolutions constantly. The fact that America has singled out Iraq reveals a lot. Firstly, we will oppose any foreign military action by the US, because it will always be strictly part of an imperialist agenda. Secondly, such actions are extremely detrimental to the people of Iraq. As a matter of fact, the people of Iraq will not be "better off" under the oppression of a leader installed by the US. Whether or not the living conditions in the new Iraq are better or worse (for the bourgeoisie, as always), the new regime's position in regards to the US is what also worries us. This new Iraqi regime will not wield power over its people for nationalistic and religious reasons, but instead it will wield power over its people for capitalist subjugation of Iraq's resources and labor for the United States. It will be a lackey of the US. The people will not be subdued by a nationalistic ruling elite, but by American corporate interests.

[Invader Zim]

LOL, this is what the BBC said: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

See that Capitalist Imperial DOES NOT. So even senior officials in the cohilition say its Not a WMD.

[dopediana]

well, that's rather encouraging that the US feels the desperation to make a big deal about some outdated, obsolete non-functional weapons...... they'd have more luck clinging to the sympathy garnered from the nick berg story. whose assassins weren't iraqis anyway.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I agree ATP. It apepars the USA is going to look a gift horse in the mouth. At least for now.

I can easily see the USA dredging up the Berg story when the elections are a bit closer however.

I would imagine they are going to add the clip of him to into another advert featuring the towers. Perhaps even include some nice "emotional" music to support the "outrage" we are supposed to feel.

Then a nice slow motion shot with a freeze frame right on his face that fades into his headstone, accompanied by funeral shots no less ( a nice piano solo will do well here)

All we need is a closing message printed atop a the waving, tattered flag found in the rubble of the towers.....

"In these years of turmoil, vote for George W. Bush, he promises not to lose his head"

[Don't Change Your Name]

I'm sure that if we invade CI's house we will find he has more dangerous things than this.

Hell! They did all this war thing just to find this! It seems Saddam wanted to take over the world with all his WMDs, but when he got attacked it seems he thought the gringos were kidding so he didn't launch them.
Trust me, if he would have had such weapons they would have already killed all yanquiland.

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:17 PM

What in the heck do all of you commie oukes think of these findings?
Who the hell cares if he has WMD's?! So does every one else.

[Morpheus]

Perhaps the US should be invaded, it has thousands of nuclear weapons - far worse than the non-functional ww1 weapons being discussed here.

[fuerzasocialista]

If Donald Rumsfeld is saying that its still not considered to be a WMD, then its probably nothing significant.

[mEds]

Regardless even if there were biological and/or nuclear weapons in Iraq the war is still not justifiable. It is a war based on greed, materialism, capitalism and is fueled by the ignorance of the young American army soldiers and by the biases of rich WASPS in America. Those who support it are in some way either supported by it in some sort of economical way or to stupid/young/ignorant to realize what America is really doing.

[Professor Moneybags]

Originally posted by socialist_tiger+May 17 2004, 07:50 PM--> (socialist_tiger @ May 17 2004, 07:50 PM)
Capitalist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:46 PM
Sounds like leftist squirming, rationalization, and excuses to me.
Sounds like rightist shit-talking, blind patriotism, and irrationality to me.

pwned. [/b]
Sounds like moving goal posts to me.

[Eastside Revolt]

Yeah they just happened to find them near to a military checkpoint, it wouldn't be possible that they planted them there would it? Nah

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:46 PM
Sounds like leftist squirming, rationalization, and excuses to me.
How about your Reaganite excuses for supplying Saddam Hussein with WMD's to fight the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during the 1980's? He was a "Freedom Fighter" then, wasn't he? Just like the Afghan Mujahideen (Al-Qaeda & the Taliban).

[Intifada]

CI, i have to give you credit.

you do make me laugh :D

[RedAnarchist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:50 AM
Yeah they just happened to find them near to a military checkpoint, it wouldn't be possible that they planted them there would it? Nah
Careful, they cannot think for themselves. It is too hard for these sheep to even consider that their "freedom fighting" American Government and Army may have planted those chemicals in Iraq.

If the Islamic fundamentalists had chemical weapons, dont you thinkl they would attack a major capitalist city instaed of using a tiny amount in a small roadside bomb that didint do much damage?

[SittingBull47]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 17 2004, 07:24 PM
Very convinient isn't it. George Bush certianly needed exactly this very thing to get him out of the shit these pictures have put him in, and 6 months before the elections no less...
just wait. In a few months we might see the gas prices falling insanely and directly after, we're going to "capture" a load of the most dangerous terrorists. There were rumours of such things being staged in order for Bush to redeem himself.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 01:50 AM
Yeah they just happened to find them near to a military checkpoint, it wouldn't be possible that they planted them there would it? Nah
If they were going to plant evidence, they would plant some actual evidence that actually proved something, rather than a shell left over from the Iran-Iraq War which may or may not have actually contained any sarin....

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Are you suprised? Didn't your President Bush sr. give it to his Buddy Saddam?

- Breaking News -

WMD in mass quantities were found today. This country is the first country which has used Nuclear Weapons. This country has sent masses of information and WMD's to other terrorist states. This country is currently the biggest user of Uranium in warfare. According to the UN use of DU has caused the death of half million Iraqi's in the previous Gulf War. This country accuses another country who has been provided by themselves of posessing WMD's (Well Duh!) This country bans other countries from developing WMD's, while they are currently the biggest user and posseser of them. Ra ra ra who is it?

I want Capitalist Imperial to answer this. Name a country. Com'n show your nonignorance.

[lucid]

You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.

[Louis Pio]

Everybody know they used sarin in the Iran/Iraq war.
Some time ago some danish soldiers stationed in Iraq found a grenade with traces of Sarin and the media made alot of fuss about it. They shut up when it was discovered it was from the Iran/Iraq war.

[canikickit]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
Personally, I don't give a fuck how many weapons he ever had or how many times he lied.


who cares how little or how much is found.

Not me!

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 05:46 PM



Personally, I don't give a fuck how many weapons he ever had or how many times he lied.

At least you admit that you sided with a murdering dictator that gassed his own people.



Not me!

So typical of a peace loving commie. The world could burn up around you and you wouldn't notice it because you would be to busy bashing the US. Loser.

[mEds]

Why do we still allow shitheads even in opposing ideologies. Even if they have a different opinion they still talk trash. Time to call a witch hunt I say.

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:07 PM
Why do we still allow shitheads even in opposing ideologies. Even if they have a different opinion they still talk trash. Time to call a witch hunt I say.
Calling someone a "shithead" isn't talking shit? I think it is you hypocritical commie coward.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 05:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
My god you are so dumb, how you survive is beyond me: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

The fact that I have had to repeat this post, shows that you obviously cant read.

[lucid]

Originally posted by Enigma+May 18 2004, 06:42 PM--> (Enigma @ May 18 2004, 06:42 PM)
[email protected] 18 2004, 05:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
My god you are so dumb, how you survive is beyond me: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

The fact that I have had to repeat this post, shows that you obviously cant read. [/b]
So I am the stupid one. What is sarin? Where was it found? What does it signify if not a weapon of mass destruction?

The fact that you have to repeat yourself is the result of ignoring the fact that a weapon of mass destruction was found. The same kind of weapon that you commies have been crying that Saddam didn't even have. It's ok thought, I am used to liberals changing directions to save face.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by lucid+May 18 2004, 07:00 PM--> (lucid @ May 18 2004, 07:00 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:42 PM

[email protected] 18 2004, 05:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
My god you are so dumb, how you survive is beyond me: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

The fact that I have had to repeat this post, shows that you obviously cant read.
So I am the stupid one. What is sarin? Where was it found? What does it signify if not a weapon of mass destruction?

The fact that you have to repeat yourself is the result of ignoring the fact that a weapon of mass destruction was found. The same kind of weapon that you commies have been crying that Saddam didn't even have. It's ok thought, I am used to liberals changing directions to save face. [/b]
Yes you are the stupid one, a senior member of the coalition has stated, it is NOT a WMD. So I have no clue what does signify a weapon of mass destruction, but as leading member of the coalition have stated, that this individual shell is not, then I will take their word for it. It is not, by the coalition's own admition!

It's ok thought, I am used to liberals changing directions to save face.

Listen sunshine no one has changed directions, because this is not a WMD, its that simple, at least so your leaders say.

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction"


Have you got that? Do I need to repeat it again for you dimwitted fools?

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 05:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
Wrong! You Capitalist God-Bless-America idiots change directions and partners once they've outlived their usefulness to the USA: Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and Manuel Noriega to name a few. Why don't you tell us how he got those WMDs? About a little war between Iran and Iraq when the US gave Saddam Hussein such weapons in the hopes he would bring down the Ayatollah Khomeini? Capitalist Imperial seems to be too brain dead to ever give a clear answer. Perhaps you can?

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:07 PM
Why do we still allow shitheads even in opposing ideologies. Even if they have a different opinion they still talk trash. Time to call a witch hunt I say.
Step off, punk. I was in here submitting legitimate commentary and shaking down commie-pukes before you even knew about this site. If you don't like OI, don't come in, but don't even try and dictate who should and should not be here, you don't even have 500 posts, and te ones that you do have are shallow and ill-informed.

[lucid]

Originally posted by Enigma+May 18 2004, 07:09 PM--> (Enigma @ May 18 2004, 07:09 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 06:42 PM

[email protected] 18 2004, 05:35 PM
You reds change directions faster than square dancers change partners. who cares how little or how much is found. If this turns out to be sarin then it shows that Saddam possessed weapons that he swore he didn't have. Can you please tell me the amount and type of weapons that will need to be found before you concede that Saddam did in fact lie about having them.
My god you are so dumb, how you survive is beyond me: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

The fact that I have had to repeat this post, shows that you obviously cant read.
So I am the stupid one. What is sarin? Where was it found? What does it signify if not a weapon of mass destruction?

The fact that you have to repeat yourself is the result of ignoring the fact that a weapon of mass destruction was found. The same kind of weapon that you commies have been crying that Saddam didn't even have. It's ok thought, I am used to liberals changing directions to save face.
Yes you are the stupid one, a senior member of the coalition has stated, it is NOT a WMD. So I have no clue what does signify a weapon of mass destruction, but as leading member of the coalition have stated, that this individual shell is not, then I will take their word for it. It is not, by the coalition's own admition!

It's ok thought, I am used to liberals changing directions to save face.

Listen sunshine no one has changed directions, because this is not a WMD, its that simple, at least so your leaders say.

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction"


Have you got that? Do I need to repeat it again for you dimwitted fools? [/b]
I don't give a shit if Santa Clause said it isn't a WMD. Sarin is a nerve gas and has been categorized as a WMD. You can decide that it isn't because of what somebody else says and I can decide that it is because of logic.

There are some reports saying that it has been confirmed as sarin. I don't know how accurate they are but if it is true then Saddam possessed weapons that the UN said he should not have. You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.

[Louis Pio]

For the love of god! (or the allmighty $ if that's what you worship)
Everybody knows Saddam have had Sarin, he used it in the Iran/Iraq war.
American, british, french, russian and even danish companies supplied him with it, that's why they knew he had it.
The whole question was if he had some just before america attacked and nothing points in that direction. The shells were old and useless.

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:59 PM
For the love of god! (or the allmighty $ if that's what you worship)
Everybody knows Saddam have had Sarin, he used it in the Iran/Iraq war.
American, british, french, russian and even danish companies supplied him with it, that's why they knew he had it.
The whole question was if he had some just before america attacked and nothing points in that direction. The shells were old and useless.
So let me get this straight. It seems, at least to me, that the liberals biggest gripe was the fact that no WMD where found therefore we didn't belong in Iraq. Now that a biological weapon has been found it doesn't count because of it's age. It's that kind of logic that keeps rational people from taking you and your party seriously. Your a joke. Tell me another one.


Maybe we can get the marines to send you the shell and you can let your kids play with it since it's not dangerous.

[New Tolerance]

Hmm, alright.

But I would like to wait a few days to see what the experts has to say about this. When they found those missiles earlier, Bush and Blair also said it was a major development, but now they never mention them.

However, I would like to point out that the Fox News agency also said that Sarin gas will soon no longer be considered as a threat, since the antidote for it has become so good.

[Capitalist Imperial]

To all of you commie-pukes theat responded with half-truths, rationalization, hair-splitting, off-topic diatribes, and ill-informed answers:



The chemicals used were made pre-1990, this doesn't support the accusations that iraq had or, more significantly, made WMDs after the first gulf war.

Those were not the only constituents of security council resolution 1441. Exisiting weapons were also to be accounted for. This one obviously wasn't. How many others were not? Next.


The war was based upon the premise that Iraq had weapons of mass desruction, which it was capable of mobilising in 20 minutes.

This is simply incorrect. Any WMD's, regardless of mobility or delivery systems, were outlawed per resolution 1441. Next.


Very convinient isn't it. George Bush certianly needed exactly this very thing to get him out of the shit these pictures have put him in, and 6 months before the elections no less...

Off the topic, rhetorical at best. A commet could strike the earth tomorrow, and you Reds would try to assign it election significance. Next.


They found a sarin gas shell that didn't work. Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound like mass destruction to me.

Are you serious? Because it happened to be a dud, it is not a WMD? Detonation is not a prerequisite. The fact that this binary device happened to not mix correctly and thus produce Sarin takes nothing away from the fact that it was a chemical weapon outlawed per security council resolution 1441. Next.


What about the idea that these weapons of a tiny and improvised kind were used by the resistance, and have nothing to do with Saddam?

Your analysis is incorrect. The shell itself was improvised, but it was a whole leftover munition from Saddam's regime. Next.


It wasn't a weapon of mass destruction though was it!

About a gallon of Sarin, and it only takes a gdrop to kill you? What in the heck do you call that? Next.


It is certainly a bit humorous to me that you people could actually use such a pitifull excuse to claim victory. What a joke...Last I checked, if something isn't capable of killing a single person, it isn't a WMD!!!

But it was very capable of killing many people. It just happened to not denonate correctly. Capability is not even an issue. Next.


The only real "weapons of mass destruction" are nuclear weapons. Iraq's chemical weapons were WWI-style tactical battlefield weapons.

In any case, Rumsfeld admits there may not have been any nerve gas at all, that it may be (yet another) false alarm due to "initial tests."

The only real "weapons of mass detruction" pertinent to this thread are those outline in security council resolution1441, thus your definition is incomplete. Yes, there was about a gallon of nerve gas, and also some mustard gas found earlier. Now we have 2 unaccounted for chemical agents.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html

Next.


What makes small weapons, a totalitarian government, economic embargos less of a WMD than the nuclear weapons you're talking about?

I'm not talking about nukes or governmental ideologies. Off topic. Next.


Hasn't the US admitted that a large portion of the insurgents in Iraq are not Baathists or Sadaam loyalists, but foreign Islamic fundamentalists? How do they know this was even Iraqi?

Off topic, but the markings on the shell indicate Iraqi origination. Next.



The true left has never denied that Saddam Hussein is a brutal leader who wields weapons. Whether or not they are illegal is trivial. Many countries including Israel and the United States break UN resolutions constantly. The fact that America has singled out Iraq reveals a lot. Firstly, we will oppose any foreign military action by the US, because it will always be strictly part of an imperialist agenda. Secondly, such actions are extremely detrimental to the people of Iraq. As a matter of fact, the people of Iraq will not be "better off" under the oppression of a leader installed by the US. Whether or not the living conditions in the new Iraq are better or worse (for the bourgeoisie, as always), the new regime's position in regards to the US is what also worries us. This new Iraqi regime will not wield power over its people for nationalistic and religious reasons, but instead it will wield power over its people for capitalist subjugation of Iraq's resources and labor for the United States. It will be a lackey of the US. The people will not be subdued by a nationalistic ruling elite, but by American corporate interests.

A diatribe, rambling rhetoric, basic leftist arguments re-hashed 1 million times. Off topic. Next.


LOL, this is what the BBC said: -

"However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained."

I will highlight the important parts for those who have trouble reading: -

the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction

See that Capitalist Imperial DOES NOT. So even senior officials in the cohilition say its Not a WMD.

Agreed. However, it does signal that WMD's exist at least on some scale. I believe that we have merely scratched the surface here. By the way, the coalition never said that the shell itself was not a WMD, they said that it did not signal the discovery of a stockplie of WMD's. The shell, by definition, is definately a WMD. Next


well, that's rather encouraging that the US feels the desperation to make a big deal about some outdated, obsolete non-functional weapons...... they'd have more luck clinging to the sympathy garnered from the nick berg story. whose assassins weren't iraqis anyway.

It was functional enough to make it into an IED. It just happens that the Sarin did not disperse that much. So, a gallon of Sarin, enough to kill over 1000 people, is not a big deal? At what point is it a big deal? Nick berg is irrelevant here. Next.



Hell! They did all this war thing just to find this! It seems Saddam wanted to take over the world with all his WMDs, but when he got attacked it seems he thought the gringos were kidding so he didn't launch them.
Trust me, if he would have had such weapons they would have already killed all yanquiland.

Again, it is not the one shell but what the one shell suggests: Where did it come from? How many more are there? Where are they? Can't you guys even concede this? Your understanding of Iraqi military capability is limited. No one ever thought that Saddam could deliver a significant number of weapons to US soil. That is a function of the delivery system more than the weapon. For you to think he could "kill all of yankeeland" is ill-informed at best, plain ignorant at worst. Next.


Who the hell cares if he has WMD's?! So does every one else.

The UN does, and more importantly, the US does. Iraq was the only nation to use them en masse without a declaration of war. Next


Perhaps the US should be invaded, it has thousands of nuclear weapons - far worse than the non-functional ww1 weapons being discussed here.

A very, very old, irrelevant argument. Reseach the worldwide Nuclear Arms Prolifieration Treaty and SALT treaty. They both justify American possession of a nuclear deterrrent, and the world agrees. Next.


Regardless even if there were biological and/or nuclear weapons in Iraq the war is still not justifiable. It is a war based on greed, materialism, capitalism and is fueled by the ignorance of the young American army soldiers and by the biases of rich WASPS in America. Those who support it are in some way either supported by it in some sort of economical way or to stupid/young/ignorant to realize what America is really doing.

Meaningless, off topic, ad-hoc attack. And wrong at that. I can simply dismiss anyone I don't agree with as ignorant as well.


Yeah they just happened to find them near to a military checkpoint, it wouldn't be possible that they planted them there would it? Nah

Put down the pipe. Next.


How about your Reaganite excuses for supplying Saddam Hussein with WMD's to fight the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during the 1980's? He was a "Freedom Fighter" then, wasn't he? Just like the Afghan Mujahideen (Al-Qaeda & the Taliban).

Among the oldest and most flawed arguments here. I hope that anyone who subscribes to this notion has never divorced or broken up with a significant other, quit their job, or has ever changed relations with any person or entity on the face of this earth. Apparently, relationships are not allowed to change? Next.


Careful, they cannot think for themselves. It is too hard for these sheep to even consider that their "freedom fighting" American Government and Army may have planted those chemicals in Iraq.

Rhetoric, unsubstantiated, meaningless and subjective. "You are a sheep for the leftist agenda." See how easy it is? Next.


just wait. In a few months we might see the gas prices falling insanely and directly after, we're going to "capture" a load of the most dangerous terrorists. There were rumours of such things being staged in order for Bush to redeem himself.

Put down the peace-pipe, sitting-bull. Next.


If they were going to plant evidence, they would plant some actual evidence that actually proved something, rather than a shell left over from the Iran-Iraq War which may or may not have actually contained any sarin....

about a gallon of Sarin. Next.


Are you suprised? Didn't your President Bush sr. give it to his Buddy Saddam?

- Breaking News -


WMD in mass quantities were found today. This country is the first country which has used Nuclear Weapons. This country has sent masses of information and WMD's to other terrorist states. This country is currently the biggest user of Uranium in warfare. According to the UN use of DU has caused the death of half million Iraqi's in the previous Gulf War. This country accuses another country who has been provided by themselves of posessing WMD's (Well Duh!) This country bans other countries from developing WMD's, while they are currently the biggest user and posseser of them. Ra ra ra who is it?

I want Capitalist Imperial to answer this. Name a country. Com'n show your nonignorance.

Off topic ,. However, see above. Next.

It is all to obvious. 1st, you pukes were touting the fact that no WMD's were found. Now that we've scratched the surface, you change your argument to address the size and scope of the WMD's that are found. This is why you guys are so illegitimate, you just can't concede when you are wrong.

[lucid]

Originally posted by New [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM
Hmm, alright.

But I would like to wait a few days to see what the experts has to say about this. When they found those missiles earlier, Bush and Blair also said it was a major development, but now they never mention them.

However, I would like to point out that the Fox News agency also said that Sarin gas will soon no longer be considered as a threat, since the antidote for it has become so good.
If you have the antidote. It is hundreds of times more potent than cyanide and very little can kill a man in several minutes. It's oderless and colorless and you usually don't know you have been exposed until you start showing symptoms. Most people don't carry an atropine shot around with them.

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by lucid+May 18 2004, 09:04 PM--> (lucid @ May 18 2004, 09:04 PM)
New [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM
Hmm, alright.

But I would like to wait a few days to see what the experts has to say about this. When they found those missiles earlier, Bush and Blair also said it was a major development, but now they never mention them.

However, I would like to point out that the Fox News agency also said that Sarin gas will soon no longer be considered as a threat, since the antidote for it has become so good.
If you have the antidote. It is hundreds of times more potent than cyanide and very little can kill a man in several minutes. It's oderless and colorless and you usually don't know you have been exposed until you start showing symptoms. Most people don't carry an atropine shot around with them. [/b]
If that's the really case then I wonder why the scientists are going to declare Sarin gas no longer a threat.

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 18 2004, 08:58 PM

How about your Reaganite excuses for supplying Saddam Hussein with WMD's to fight the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini during the 1980's? He was a "Freedom Fighter" then, wasn't he? Just like the Afghan Mujahideen (Al-Qaeda & the Taliban).

Among the oldest and most flawed arguments here. I hope that anyone who subscribes to this notion has never divorced or broken up with a significant other, quit their job, or has ever changed relations with any person or entity on the face of this earth. Apparently, relationships are not allowed to change? Next.

Once again my point is proved that Republicans will never admit to their screw-ups of supporting tyranical dictators who in the long run out live their usefulness, i.e go from being "Freedom Fighters" to "Terrorists". Relationships change, that is true. But that still doesn't change the fact that the USA gave Saddam Hussein WMDs. Only when he outlived his usefulness to Capitalism did he earn the title of a "tyranical dictator". Your beloved Reagan gave him these weapons, so idiots like you have no right to complain. Its hilarious when you do, as it just shows what a bunch of ignorant hypocrites you Republicans are. Anyone with a brain could see how badly-informed you are with your lies and poorly defended arguments of dismissing US support for fanatics who mysteriously became an enemy overnight.

[John Galt]

Originally posted by New Tolerance+May 18 2004, 09:24 PM--> (New Tolerance @ May 18 2004, 09:24 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 09:04 PM

New [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM
Hmm, alright.

But I would like to wait a few days to see what the experts has to say about this. When they found those missiles earlier, Bush and Blair also said it was a major development, but now they never mention them.

However, I would like to point out that the Fox News agency also said that Sarin gas will soon no longer be considered as a threat, since the antidote for it has become so good.
If you have the antidote. It is hundreds of times more potent than cyanide and very little can kill a man in several minutes. It's oderless and colorless and you usually don't know you have been exposed until you start showing symptoms. Most people don't carry an atropine shot around with them.
If that's the really case then I wonder why the scientists are going to declare Sarin gas no longer a threat. [/b]
The same time they declare fire no longer a threat because we have water.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 18 2004, 08:58 PM
Are you suprised? Didn't your President Bush sr. give it to his Buddy Saddam?

- Breaking News -


WMD in mass quantities were found today. This country is the first country which has used Nuclear Weapons. This country has sent masses of information and WMD's to other terrorist states. This country is currently the biggest user of Uranium in warfare. According to the UN use of DU has caused the death of half million Iraqi's in the previous Gulf War. This country accuses another country who has been provided by themselves of posessing WMD's (Well Duh!) This country bans other countries from developing WMD's, while they are currently the biggest user and posseser of them. Ra ra ra who is it?

I want Capitalist Imperial to answer this. Name a country. Com'n show your nonignorance.

Off topic ,. However, see above. Next.

It is all to obvious. 1st, you pukes were touting the fact that no WMD's were found. Now that we've scratched the surface, you change your argument to address the size and scope of the WMD's that are found. This is why you guys are so illegitimate, you just can't concede when you are wrong.
You didn't answer, name a country! Name it, or are you too afraid to place the name of your precious in a bad context?

It's not offtopic. I am simply refering to which scum gave that scum (Saddam Hussain) his weapons of WMD's. I am explaining why there is a possibility that WMD's can be found.

Love generalising, don't you? This "c-ommiepuke" was quite suprised that easy-to-built biological and chemical weapons were not found. You have to be really stupid - like you - to believe that Saddam had ICBM's. In fact it's the US that supplied the satelite pictures containing the position of Iranian troops and militia. Terrorist State, terrorist friends.

Again. Saddam Hussain was friends with who? Yes Bush sr. and Rumsfeld. Saddam isn't friends with who? Yes, exactly, us the c-ommiepukes!

[John Galt]

Fine, we made a mistake in supporting Sadam.

We are busy fixing it.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Even then, what prospect was Saddam offering when the US started supporting.

Who's paying the price?

It's not Rumsfeld, Bush, The Ba'ath Party Members, Blair, The dozens of Companies who supplied WMD's, Haliburton or the Carlyle Group.

Edit: http://www.bushflash.com/liberation.html Just watch it, don't whine because the title.

My guess:

[Vinny Rafarino]

It is all to obvious. 1st, you pukes were touting the fact that no WMD's were found.

That is because none have been found. Not that I really care as it makes no difference at all. Iraq is occupied by the USA and will remain occupied by the USA until their labour pool is sufficiently exhausted.

It makes no difference at all if WMD's are found or not. What do I care if some cracker in the Whitey House "saves face" or not? So what if none are found and that in itself leads to Bush losing the next election? All we as communist will get is yet another rich cracker that will settle for a few "social crumbs".

Bush, Kerry, Mickey fucking Mouse...there is NO DIFFERENCE between them.

Fuck them all.

[New Tolerance]

On MSNBC.com there is a video of Reagan selling nuclear technology to the communist government in China. There's also a picture of him arm in arm with the Chinese premier (who is a communist) at one of their meetings.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:35 PM

I don't give a shit if Santa Clause said it isn't a WMD. Sarin is a nerve gas and has been categorized as a WMD. You can decide that it isn't because of what somebody else says and I can decide that it is because of logic.

There are some reports saying that it has been confirmed as sarin. I don't know how accurate they are but if it is true then Saddam possessed weapons that the UN said he should not have. You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.
Ahh I see, you get proved wrong, utterly wrong, your own leaders admit this is not a WMD. So what do you do, you have a tantrum and utterly refuse to here any oppostion to your views, because your so desperatly clutching at these last straws.

You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.

Tell that to the caolition leaders, who deny this is a WMD.


Man your such a loser.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:35 PM
There are some reports saying that it has been confirmed as sarin. I don't know how accurate they are but if it is true then Saddam possessed weapons that the UN said he should not have. You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.
Yes, and we all know how much "the liberators" respect the UN. He, wasn't it your precious who stated they were going to attack Iraq, wethever the UN approved or not. And actually DID!

[ComradeRed]

That was the islamic fundamentalists who used the WMDs that they could have brought from outside Iraq, WMDs that didn't belong to Hussein!!!!!!. Moreover, as previously said, this -as acknowledged from coalition leaders- is no wmd.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 18 2004, 10:00 PM

Love generalising, don't you? This "c-ommiepuke" was quite suprised that easy-to-built biological and chemical weapons were not found. You have to be really stupid - like you - to believe that Saddam had ICBM's. In fact it's the US that supplied the satelite pictures containing the position of Iranian troops and militia. Terrorist State, terrorist friends.

Again. Saddam Hussain was friends with who? Yes Bush sr. and Rumsfeld. Saddam isn't friends with who? Yes, exactly, us the c-ommiepukes!
No one ever, ever accused Saddam or Iraq of having ICBM's, what are you talking about?

Talk about stupid!!!

Again, 30 year old relationships have no bering on the contemporary political climate.. We are in no way bound by outdated treaties and alliances that no longer yield benefit to America.

Your point is moot, sir.

[lucid]

Originally posted by New Tolerance+May 18 2004, 09:24 PM--> (New Tolerance @ May 18 2004, 09:24 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 09:04 PM

New [email protected] 18 2004, 08:48 PM
Hmm, alright.

But I would like to wait a few days to see what the experts has to say about this. When they found those missiles earlier, Bush and Blair also said it was a major development, but now they never mention them.

However, I would like to point out that the Fox News agency also said that Sarin gas will soon no longer be considered as a threat, since the antidote for it has become so good.
If you have the antidote. It is hundreds of times more potent than cyanide and very little can kill a man in several minutes. It's oderless and colorless and you usually don't know you have been exposed until you start showing symptoms. Most people don't carry an atropine shot around with them.
If that's the really case then I wonder why the scientists are going to declare Sarin gas no longer a threat. [/b]
What mad scientists said that? This is what the CDC has to say about it "Sarin is a human-made chemical warfare agent classified as a nerve agent. Nerve agents are the most toxic and rapidly acting of the known chemical warfare agents. They are similar to certain kinds of pesticides (insect killers) called organophosphates in terms of how they work and what kind of harmful effects they cause. However, nerve agents are much more potent than organophosphate pesticides. "

[lucid]

Originally posted by Enigma+May 18 2004, 10:36 PM--> (Enigma @ May 18 2004, 10:36 PM)
[email protected] 18 2004, 07:35 PM

I don't give a shit if Santa Clause said it isn't a WMD. Sarin is a nerve gas and has been categorized as a WMD. You can decide that it isn't because of what somebody else says and I can decide that it is because of logic.

There are some reports saying that it has been confirmed as sarin. I don't know how accurate they are but if it is true then Saddam possessed weapons that the UN said he should not have. You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.
Ahh I see, you get proved wrong, utterly wrong, your own leaders admit this is not a WMD. So what do you do, you have a tantrum and utterly refuse to here any oppostion to your views, because your so desperatly clutching at these last straws.

You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.

Tell that to the caolition leaders, who deny this is a WMD.


Man your such a loser. [/b]
Sarin is a toxic and deadly substance that can be vaporized so that it can cover a larger area. It sticks to your clothes so that other people get exposed when you get near them. It has long been known that sarin is capable of being used as a chemical weapon that can kill large numbers of people. That makes it a wmd in my book. Think what you will. That shit gets sprayed from a plane over a loaded stadium and lots of people die. Your the idiot that refuses to see what sarin really is. Do me a favor and go take a bath in it pinky.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by Capitalist Imperial+May 18 2004, 10:48 PM--> (Capitalist Imperial @ May 18 2004, 10:48 PM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 18 2004, 10:00 PM

Love generalising, don't you? This "c-ommiepuke" was quite suprised that easy-to-built biological and chemical weapons were not found. You have to be really stupid - like you - to believe that Saddam had ICBM's. In fact it's the US that supplied the satelite pictures containing the position of Iranian troops and militia. Terrorist State, terrorist friends.

Again. Saddam Hussain was friends with who? Yes Bush sr. and Rumsfeld. Saddam isn't friends with who? Yes, exactly, us the c-ommiepukes!
No one ever, ever accused Saddam or Iraq of having ICBM's, what are you talking about?

Talk about stupid!!!

Again, 30 year old relationships have no bering on the contemporary political climate.. We are in no way bound by outdated treaties and alliances that no longer yield benefit to America.

Your point is moot, sir. [/b]
Why am I discussing with you? What prospect is someone giving when he only cares about "his" nation. As soon as you take a nationalistic stand, you already know that there are 5.7 billion people who are likely not to choose your side (seen from a nationalistic point of view).

Just say immediatly, that you don't care about the WMD's that Saddam has used in the past. Just say that you didn't care about the Jews killed by Nazi Germany. Just say that you care about the money that coorperating with Saddam brought in for the chiefs of America. Just say you're happy that Germany declared the war on the US, so that you had to attack them. You're not on a search for truth. You're local FOX. Nevermind then, we already know that FOX is bullshit.

Why would I ever side with you as long as you stay nationalistic? How does it help me and billions of people if I side with you?

Edit: Out of curiousity. Why are you actually at this board?
Trying to convince us that the US is the "better" one?
Chickend out when the c-130 left for Iraq and decided to pick on lefties?
Need to yell on others, to feel good about yourself?
A lack of self esteem?
What it is?

Anyway. ICBM. The famous British 45 minutes report. That Saddam could blow you up in 45 minutes. And the US always in search of truth denied that right? :lol:

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 18 2004, 10:48 PM
Again, 30 year old relationships have no bering on the contemporary political climate.. We are in no way bound by outdated treaties and alliances that no longer yield benefit to America.

Your point is moot, sir.
This is exactly why Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were cut from the "freedom" tree. As you noted they "no longer yield benefit to America". What a conservative moron. The "30 year old relationships" are the essential reason for the mess America got itself into.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 18 2004, 10:14 PM

It is all to obvious. 1st, you pukes were touting the fact that no WMD's were found.

That is because none have been found. Not that I really care as it makes no difference at all. Iraq is occupied by the USA and will remain occupied by the USA until their labour pool is sufficiently exhausted.

It makes no difference at all if WMD's are found or not. What do I care if some cracker in the Whitey House "saves face" or not? So what if none are found and that in itself leads to Bush losing the next election? All we as communist will get is yet another rich cracker that will settle for a few "social crumbs".

Bush, Kerry, Mickey fucking Mouse...there is NO DIFFERENCE between them.

Fuck them all.
"Craker in the whitey house"?

Dude, you're weak. put down the Nas CD and stop talking ebonics.

Although that American Slang does sound good.

Hypocrite.

[Louis Pio]

Edit: Out of curiousity. Why are you actually at this board?
Trying to convince us that the US is the "better" one?
Chickend out when the c-130 left for Iraq and decided to pick on lefties?
Need to yell on others, to feel good about yourself?
A lack of self esteem?
What it is?


All of the above I think :D
Seriously it seems that way, quite sad but funny at the same time

[fuerzasocialista]

one round of sarin, ninja please! Lord knows how long that shit was sitting there for.

[New Tolerance]

By Lucid:
What mad scientists said that? This is what the CDC has to say about it "Sarin is a human-made chemical warfare agent classified as a nerve agent. Nerve agents are the most toxic and rapidly acting of the known chemical warfare agents. They are similar to certain kinds of pesticides (insect killers) called organophosphates in terms of how they work and what kind of harmful effects they cause. However, nerve agents are much more potent than organophosphate pesticides. "

These are last two paragraphs of the article that Capitalist Imperal gave us:

"Nerve gases work by inhibiting key enzymes in the nervous system, blocking their transmission. Small exposures can be treated with antidotes, if administered quickly.

Antidotes to nerve gases similar to sarin are so effective that top poison gas researchers predict they eventually will cease to be a war threat. "

Go back to that article and read it again to confirm if you want.

[pandora]

What a bunch of bs.
They have been occupying the country for how long now?
reminds me of cops planting drugs, very funny how "FOX NEWS" got the news first,
this bull shit makes me want to barf.
Funny it took them so long to find them when they were "Right There"
;)

[New Tolerance]

Weird though, either the Bush administration does not consider this to be too big a deal or there is a Liberal media conspiracy. The "WMD Found" hasn't hit the headlines at MSNBC, or CNN...

[lucid]

Originally posted by New [email protected] 19 2004, 01:01 AM

By Lucid:
What mad scientists said that? This is what the CDC has to say about it "Sarin is a human-made chemical warfare agent classified as a nerve agent. Nerve agents are the most toxic and rapidly acting of the known chemical warfare agents. They are similar to certain kinds of pesticides (insect killers) called organophosphates in terms of how they work and what kind of harmful effects they cause. However, nerve agents are much more potent than organophosphate pesticides. "

These are last two paragraphs of the article that Capitalist Imperal gave us:

"Nerve gases work by inhibiting key enzymes in the nervous system, blocking their transmission. Small exposures can be treated with antidotes, if administered quickly.

Antidotes to nerve gases similar to sarin are so effective that top poison gas researchers predict they eventually will cease to be a war threat. "

Go back to that article and read it again to confirm if you want.
Ok, since your being so damn stubborn I'll spell it out for you. If someone flew over a stadium, today, and sprayed vaporized sarin over everyone thousands of people would die. The antidote doesn't mean shit if someone is severly exposed to sarin and doesn't get a shot in minutes. I love how "eventually will cease to be a threat" means, to you, that they are not dangerous right now. Do me a favor and go do a line of anthrax and put a couple of drops of sarin in your pink eyes.

[New Tolerance]

Ok, since your being so damn stubborn I'll spell it out for you. If someone flew over a stadium, today, and sprayed vaporized sarin over everyone thousands of people would die. The antidote doesn't mean shit if someone is severly exposed to sarin and doesn't get a shot in minutes. I love how "eventually will cease to be a threat" means, to you, that they are not dangerous right now. Do me a favor and go do a line of anthrax and put a couple of drops of sarin in your pink eyes.

Tell that to those researchers, if you are an expert, they said:" it will eventually cease to be a threat", I didn't.

The "no longer a threat" thing doesn't really mean anything to me either, I was just pointing it out that they said this, doesn't mean I think the war is somehow less justified because the sarin gas is less of a threat. My point was that it doesn't seems to be hitting headlines anywhere else. (from where it looks like now, it doesn't seem to be exactly what the administration is looking for)

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 07:44 PM
Ok, since your being so damn stubborn I'll spell it out for you. If someone flew over a stadium, today, and sprayed vaporized sarin over everyone thousands of people would die.


Doubtful, depending on quantity and quality. Poison gas is more effective in closed spaces; nevertheless Aum Shinri Kyo managed only to kill 12 people with sarin. As for anthrax, how many people were killed with Ft. Detrick's finest product, again in enclosed spaces? 5?

And in this case, the alleged sarin shell killed exactly nobody. As nerve gas has a limited shelf life, it's to be expected that some shell leftover from the Iran-Iraq war, probably dumped, forgotten, and later dug up, would be ineffective. Even though this was allegedly a binary shell, which have a longer storage time.

"Do me a favor and go do a line of anthrax and put a couple of drops of sarin in your pink eyes"

Moron. There's a considerable space between "mass destruction" and "good to sprinkle on your breakfast cereal."

None of this matters at all as far as justification for the war, of course...but it does illustrate another point: appeasing aggressors doesn't work. Iraq was invaded precisely because it had no weapons of mass destruction or other means of effectively defending itself or deterring U.S. aggression.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 12:22 AM

Edit: Out of curiousity. Why are you actually at this board?
Trying to convince us that the US is the "better" one?
Chickend out when the c-130 left for Iraq and decided to pick on lefties?
Need to yell on others, to feel good about yourself?
A lack of self esteem?
What it is?


All of the above I think :D
Seriously it seems that way, quite sad but funny at the same time
Seriously. I wonder what he is doing on this board. Since he hasn't answered, but has read my post, I assume that yelling at lefties is his "brave" contribution to the war on terror.

He admits, that he is only saying what the US gov't is saying. He is a guy without an opinion. How can you debate without an opinion. It's not like we have missed out the opinion of FOX and the US gov't. "Freedom for those who support me and death for those with other toughts".

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by lucid+May 18 2004, 10:58 PM--> (lucid @ May 18 2004, 10:58 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2004, 10:36 PM

[email protected] 18 2004, 07:35 PM

I don't give a shit if Santa Clause said it isn't a WMD. Sarin is a nerve gas and has been categorized as a WMD. You can decide that it isn't because of what somebody else says and I can decide that it is because of logic.

There are some reports saying that it has been confirmed as sarin. I don't know how accurate they are but if it is true then Saddam possessed weapons that the UN said he should not have. You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.
Ahh I see, you get proved wrong, utterly wrong, your own leaders admit this is not a WMD. So what do you do, you have a tantrum and utterly refuse to here any oppostion to your views, because your so desperatly clutching at these last straws.

You can distort it anyway you want but its still a shell filled with sarin and it still was found in Iraq.

Tell that to the caolition leaders, who deny this is a WMD.


Man your such a loser.
Sarin is a toxic and deadly substance that can be vaporized so that it can cover a larger area. It sticks to your clothes so that other people get exposed when you get near them. It has long been known that sarin is capable of being used as a chemical weapon that can kill large numbers of people. That makes it a wmd in my book. Think what you will. That shit gets sprayed from a plane over a loaded stadium and lots of people die. Your the idiot that refuses to see what sarin really is. Do me a favor and go take a bath in it pinky. [/b]
I know what sarin is, however this shell contains neither enough saran to be a significant danger to consider it a weapon of mass destruction. MASS being the important word. It was a 155mm shell round, which when exploaded didn't kill anyone. A WMD by defition has to be a weapon of mass destruction, this was never going to cause mass destruction.

Even if a whole arsenal did exist if these shells, then in order to be of use, then you would have to have a divise to launch it from. These shells work by being fired like a normal shell, and the chemicals mix after launch. So these weapons could never be a threat to the US. It is also doubtful that any such arsenal would be effective as stage three chemicals used in this kind of weapon degrade over time. As this weapon was left over from the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980's, this is a high possibility. Though admittedly some probably would have survived.

However as it has been stated this weapon does not even remotly consititue as a WMD.

[Louis Pio]

Seriously. I wonder what he is doing on this board. Since he hasn't answered, but has read my post, I assume that yelling at lefties is his "brave" contribution to the war on terror.


Yes I wonder too. To me it seems that he considers himself a "brave" soldier for democracy. He just lacks the intellectual capacity to argue his points.
As I said: quite sad but funny at the same time...

[Commie Girl]

:D This is funny! One little device constitutes a WMD? Can't wait till they drag out OBL for the cameras right before the election! Stupid people.

[lucid]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 02:56 PM
:D This is funny! One little device constitutes a WMD? Can't wait till they drag out OBL for the cameras right before the election! Stupid people.
How many little devices need to be found before they can be concidered a WMD? Please give me a number. Is a small tactical nuclear weapon concidered a WMD?

I know what you guys are saying. You just don't think that the finding of one gas filled round is enough to settle the no WMD in Iraq debate. I agree with you. But you do fail do to see the significance of this find. While it isn't much it does show, contrary to Saddams and the inspectors words, that saddam didn't destroy all of the stuff he was supposed to. I think we will continue to find weapons like this during this war.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Dude, you're weak. put down the Nas CD and stop talking ebonics.


Yeah dude, like totally weak dude. Totally.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by lucid+May 19 2004, 04:03 PM--> (lucid @ May 19 2004, 04:03 PM)
[email protected] 19 2004, 02:56 PM
:D This is funny! One little device constitutes a WMD? Can't wait till they drag out OBL for the cameras right before the election! Stupid people.
How many little devices need to be found before they can be concidered a WMD? Please give me a number. Is a small tactical nuclear weapon concidered a WMD?

I know what you guys are saying. You just don't think that the finding of one gas filled round is enough to settle the no WMD in Iraq debate. I agree with you. But you do fail do to see the significance of this find. While it isn't much it does show, contrary to Saddams and the inspectors words, that saddam didn't destroy all of the stuff he was supposed to. I think we will continue to find weapons like this during this war. [/b]
Comon Sarin and mustardgas have have been invented in WOI. Knowledge about them is pretty widespread. He, your government even gave it to Saddam, just in case that Saddam had missed the knowledge about Sarin and Mustardgas. So what's the suprise that a Granade (made in the era that Saddam was a "freedomfighter") is filled with Sarin?

We are not naive to think that the US or Saddam keeps to their promise to destroy their WMD's. The fact is that there are no institutions in Iraq left, capable of massproducing Sarin and Mustardgas. They need the help of the US for that and I am sure that the future dictator of Iraq will get it too.

Edit: Weapons of Mass Destruction, means that you can Mass destruct people and enviroment. See the difference between the US nuclear arsenal and that ol' granade filled with a American Versions of Sarin?

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!+May 19 2004, 10:39 AM--> (Non-Sectarian Bastard! @ May 19 2004, 10:39 AM)
[email protected] 19 2004, 12:22 AM

Edit: Out of curiousity. Why are you actually at this board?
Trying to convince us that the US is the "better" one?
Chickend out when the c-130 left for Iraq and decided to pick on lefties?
Need to yell on others, to feel good about yourself?
A lack of self esteem?
What it is?


All of the above I think :D
Seriously it seems that way, quite sad but funny at the same time
Seriously. I wonder what he is doing on this board. Since he hasn't answered, but has read my post, I assume that yelling at lefties is his "brave" contribution to the war on terror.

He admits, that he is only saying what the US gov't is saying. He is a guy without an opinion. How can you debate without an opinion. It's not like we have missed out the opinion of FOX and the US gov't. "Freedom for those who support me and death for those with other toughts". [/b]
I didn't responded because your pathetic armchair-Freud attempt was trite pap and not worth responding to.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2004, 01:31 PM

Seriously. I wonder what he is doing on this board. Since he hasn't answered, but has read my post, I assume that yelling at lefties is his "brave" contribution to the war on terror.


Yes I wonder too. To me it seems that he considers himself a "brave" soldier for democracy. He just lacks the intellectual capacity to argue his points.
As I said: quite sad but funny at the same time...
LOL, please...

Get serious, dude.

I can out-intellectualize you any day of thee week, sir.

[Louis Pio]

Hmm I thought me and him were talking about lucid... I just reread the thread and saw it wasn't the case.
Yeh I know you posess the skill of argueing contrary to lucid. I don't really read your posts, only lucid's because they make me laugh so damn hard.

[Louis Pio]

But rereading it I can't really see what that 30 years comment is about.
The US government didn't mind supplied the crazy fucker with sarin so he could gas his own people. Because he was somehow the "the lesser of two evils". I think we all can agree that things like that have nothing to do with "democracy" (the most empty word in the world) and are actually a very stupid way to do politics.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Capitalist Imperial just answer, why are you on this board?

[Louis Pio]

Because he's bored. Most people in OI seems to be here because of that

[Capitalist Imperial]

Originally posted by Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 19 2004, 10:44 PM
Capitalist Imperial just answer, why are you on this board?
I keep my friends close.

And my enemies closer.

I am preparing for any possible communist resurgance and associated uprising. Only by knowing your enemy well can you maximize your cahances of defeating him.

Also, to be quite frank, I am impressed with the intellectual ability of many of you pukes, and thus enjoy applying practicing cognitive functions with you.

Lay off the amateur Freud though, sir. It is cliche, let alone inaccurate.

[STI]

We commies are lucky in that we don't have to look very far to find enemies. Looks like we get to take the easy road on that one. Wouldn't it be a much easier approach, CI? Why don't you come on over to the left. I'll buy you a beer if you do. ;)




C'mon. You know you want to.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Although the prospect of Canadian beer is tempting, I think i'll stay where I am, thanks.

[STI]

Fine, two beers, but that's my final offer!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Originally posted by Capitalist Imperial+May 19 2004, 11:51 PM--> (Capitalist Imperial @ May 19 2004, 11:51 PM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 19 2004, 10:44 PM
Capitalist Imperial just answer, why are you on this board?
I keep my friends close.

And my enemies closer.

I am preparing for any possible communist resurgance and associated uprising. Only by knowing your enemy well can you maximize your cahances of defeating him.

Also, to be quite frank, I am impressed with the intellectual ability of many of you pukes, and thus enjoy applying practicing cognitive functions with you.

Lay off the amateur Freud though, sir. It is cliche, let alone inaccurate. [/b]
If there would be a Communist uprising with populair support, the will of the people, will you "The Great Democracy Guy" support it then? Loyalty to the people or the Government?

Another one, out of curiousity. Yes, I am very curious lately. Why am I your enemy?

Edit: Hell, I would even give you 3 Dutch beers on rent :D if you join our side.

[Urban Rubble]

Also, to be quite frank, I am impressed with the intellectual ability of many of you pukes, and thus enjoy applying practicing cognitive functions with you.

Congratulations CI, you've just made my sig.

This is his way of telling us how much he loves us. Keep your hands to yourself tough guy. :wub:

[refuse_resist]

Originally posted by Capitalist Imperial+May 19 2004, 11:51 PM--> (Capitalist Imperial @ May 19 2004, 11:51 PM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 19 2004, 10:44 PM
Capitalist Imperial just answer, why are you on this board?
I keep my friends close.

And my enemies closer.

I am preparing for any possible communist resurgance and associated uprising. Only by knowing your enemy well can you maximize your cahances of defeating him.

Also, to be quite frank, I am impressed with the intellectual ability of many of you pukes, and thus enjoy applying practicing cognitive functions with you.

Lay off the amateur Freud though, sir. It is cliche, let alone inaccurate. [/b]
Hitler would have loved you among his chosen few

[DaCuBaN]

Originally posted by Capitalist Imperial+May 19 2004, 11:51 PM--> (Capitalist Imperial @ May 19 2004, 11:51 PM)
Non-Sectarian Bastard!@May 19 2004, 10:44 PM
Capitalist Imperial just answer, why are you on this board?
I keep my friends close.

And my enemies closer.

I am preparing for any possible communist resurgance and associated uprising. Only by knowing your enemy well can you maximize your cahances of defeating him.

Also, to be quite frank, I am impressed with the intellectual ability of many of you pukes, and thus enjoy applying practicing cognitive functions with you.

Lay off the amateur Freud though, sir. It is cliche, let alone inaccurate. [/b]
So you're not worried that under the 'Patriot Act' you may be viewed with suspicion by posting on an openly left and generally anti-war site?

Bear in mind how big that tarring brush is :)

In reponse though, again you deserve credit CI. Unlike the majority of the wankers on the OI you can actually have a civil conversation without the need to insert the words pink and commie. Even when you do it never seems quite as retarded as when Lucid does it...

Off topic... why pink? surely it would be purple - and then you can get onto jokes about bell-ends and the such ;)

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

I searched for my old thread about 11 september and came across this . This guy truely believes anything sputtering out of FOX. http://www.che-lives.comforumindex.phpshowtopic=7957&hl=

Just reread the complete 11-9 thread. My favourite thread, because it opend my eyes a little more. I want to thank IHP and American Kid for their participation in the thread. I don't know if I have the patience to debate to 7 pages long with the human wall that I was. Anyway. I enjoyed rereading it. I was even shocked a little by my even bigger ignorance of then. http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5171&hl=

I wasn't so closed as Capitalist Imperial. But still something like this gives hope that he can be changed.

Edit: I have to say tough. I find it remarkable how much my toughtprocess has changed and that I find my "final statement" even rubbish now.