Weapons of Mass destruction found.

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: conjur
Let's not forget this part of the news:

Two former weapons inspectors ? Hans Blix and David Kay ? said the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons.

scavanged from where? couldnt be from iraq right? i mean, iraq had no WMD's...:roll:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: etech
You made the bet that it wasn't Conjur. Can't back up what you say?

It kinda makes you wonder how many of your other posts would be "tongue in cheek" if someone challenged you on them.

LOL! You're trying to weasel out of proving me wrong. You're such a tool.


I'll bet you $20 the earth is flat, too.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: etech
You made the bet that it wasn't Conjur. Can't back up what you say?

It kinda makes you wonder how many of your other posts would be "tongue in cheek" if someone challenged you on them.

LOL! You're trying to weasel out of proving me wrong. You're such a tool.


I'll bet you $20 the earth is flat, too.

yer' on.


now pay up.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: conjur
Let's not forget this part of the news:

Two former weapons inspectors ? Hans Blix and David Kay ? said the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons.

scavanged from where? couldnt be from iraq right? i mean, iraq had no WMD's...:roll:

As I posted before, and others have proposed, it could be a leftover shell from pre-1991. Something that just happened to be missed being destroyed.

WE DON'T KNOW.

But, it's obvious the people who placed it on the road were not aware of its contents.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: etech
You made the bet that it wasn't Conjur. Can't back up what you say?

It kinda makes you wonder how many of your other posts would be "tongue in cheek" if someone challenged you on them.

LOL! You're trying to weasel out of proving me wrong. You're such a tool.


I'll bet you $20 the earth is flat, too.

Conjur, I never thought you would be such a low-life as to make a bet and than weasel out of it.

Your word apparently means nothing. You are not worth discussing anything with if you won't stand behind what YOU SAID.

You made the bet, you can't prove it. You are the weasel.

It wasn't even a good try on your part to try to put the burden of proof on me. It was your bet son.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: conjur
C'mon, etech. I will pay you $20...I'll hold true to the bet that everyone else up here knows was tongue-in-cheek if you can PROVE that that shell that exploded today was part of Saddam's WMD cache.

What part of that do you not understand, etech?

Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and $20 is yours.


Hey, I'll bet ya $50 that 1 = 0.999...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

This sure is an interesting thread.

CkG

 

[Gaard]

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

excuse me a sec...

doesn't "we'll find" represent future tense?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: conjur
C'mon, etech. I will pay you $20...I'll hold true to the bet that everyone else up here knows was tongue-in-cheek if you can PROVE that that shell that exploded today was part of Saddam's WMD cache.

What part of that do you not understand, etech?

Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and $20 is yours.


Hey, I'll bet ya $50 that 1 = 0.999...

Once the labs verify it as such, how will you be paying him? Can I bet you $20 as well? Care to make it a $100 that it belonged to Hussein's arsenal?

EDIT: However he got this sarin, whether created in Iraq or from a foreign source, so long as Hussein accepted it as such, then it belonged to his arsenal. Don't try to weasel out at a later date.

 

[Jhhnn]

Apparently, Bush supporters are getting pretty desperate.

Given that the provenance of this particular artillery shell is completely unknown, it's a little early to claim it as justification for the invasion.

1. Its country of origin is unknown.

2. Quite how it fell into the hands of Iraqi insurgents is also unknown. Obviously, as David Kay pointed out, had they known what it was they wouldn't have used it for the purpose they did... it was completely ineffective for their purpose. Somebody's cousin could have found it while plowing their fields in the former warzone, or it could have been inadvertently mixed in with the usual HE stuff as the war with Iran ended... not a tough thing to accomplish with conscript labor... very difficult to say.

So far, about all that can be determined is that it's a stray, whose possession by anybody other than the former govt of Iraq was brought on by the chaos of Invasion by the US...

Let us know, however, when and if sufficient stocks are located to justify the claims of Iraqi deception and non-compliance. Nobody's going to be holding their breath... The one thing that none of the Bush-fans even consider in this whole scenario is the rat factor- sucking up to the conquerors is as old as war itself. Anybody who could lead US forces to caches of CBW agents would be very well rewarded, very well indeed. And yet nobody has come forward. There's really only one very obvious reason, and that's because those stockpiles don't exist.

Israel is a Democracy? Funny, somebody needs to tell the native Israelis of Christian and Muslim descent that- they only get 3/5 of a vote, and those in the territories occupied since 1967 get no vote at all. Israel is an ethnic theocracy with democratic features, at best... about as democratic as the pre- civil rights South in the US...

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: conjur
C'mon, etech. I will pay you $20...I'll hold true to the bet that everyone else up here knows was tongue-in-cheek if you can PROVE that that shell that exploded today was part of Saddam's WMD cache.

What part of that do you not understand, etech?

Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and $20 is yours.


Hey, I'll bet ya $50 that 1 = 0.999...

I understand, you aren't willing to stand up to bets that you make. I took your first wager.

You are trying to change that wager and weasel out of it. Repeating it only make you look worse.

Now can you prove that the shell was not from Iraq or that it was from the US. That was the bet that I took and you bet $20 on.

 

[conjur]

No, I'm not changing it at all. Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and the $20 is yours.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Gaard

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

excuse me a sec...

doesn't "we'll find" represent future tense?

Dang it, Gaard...you blew the fun.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur
No, I'm not changing it at all. Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and the $20 is yours.

You made the bet, it is up to you to prove.

Why do I even have to explain that to you?

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: conjur
No, I'm not changing it at all. Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and the $20 is yours.

You made the bet, it is up to you to prove.

Why do I even have to explain that to you?

Troll troll troll your boat.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Apparently, Bush supporters are getting pretty desperate.

Given that the provenance of this particular artillery shell is completely unknown, it's a little early to claim it as justification for the invasion.

1. Its country of origin is unknown.

2. Quite how it fell into the hands of Iraqi insurgents is also unknown. Obviously, as David Kay pointed out, had they known what it was they wouldn't have used it for the purpose they did... it was completely ineffective for their purpose. Somebody's cousin could have found it while plowing their fields in the former warzone, or it could have been inadvertently mixed in with the usual HE stuff as the war with Iran ended... not a tough thing to accomplish with conscript labor... very difficult to say.

So far, about all that can be determined is that it's a stray, whose possession by anybody other than the former govt of Iraq was brought on by the chaos of Invasion by the US...

Let us know, however, when and if sufficient stocks are located to justify the claims of Iraqi deception and non-compliance. Nobody's going to be holding their breath... The one thing that none of the Bush-fans even consider in this whole scenario is the rat factor- sucking up to the conquerors is as old as war itself. Anybody who could lead US forces to caches of CBW agents would be very well rewarded, very well indeed. And yet nobody has come forward. There's really only one very obvious reason, and that's because those stockpiles don't exist.

Israel is a Democracy? Funny, somebody needs to tell the native Israelis of Christian and Muslim descent that- they only get 3/5 of a vote, and those in the territories occupied since 1967 get no vote at all. Israel is an ethnic theocracy with democratic features, at best... about as democratic as the pre- civil rights South in the US...

Perhaps they're waiting for November 2nd to get closer to find the WMDs.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Gaard

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

excuse me a sec...

doesn't "we'll find" represent future tense?

Dang it, Gaard...you blew the fun.

No, he didn't. Want to set a time limit. What's acceptable to you. One week, one month. How long will it take you to prove that the US supplied Saddam with Sarin? I don't think you can given any length of time but if you need a month, that would be fine with me. It's up to you to prove it so I can be generous with a time limit.

 

[onelove]

Irrespective of what significance this binary shell has in the will-never-end dispute between the fors and againsts, I really do hope that our soldiers don't have to deal with chemical threats in addition to their other (not insignificant) day-to-day concerns.

incidentally, there are some posters here who look like they are up past their bedtimes...

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: conjur
No, I'm not changing it at all. Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and the $20 is yours.

You made the bet, it is up to you to prove.

Why do I even have to explain that to you?

Well, since Gaard caught the key to the bet, I'll stop toying with you.

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

You see, I wrote that under the premise that sometime in the future, after forensics or whoever, examines the shell, we'll find it came from outside of Iraq or to be a remnant of the Iran/Iraq war.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: conjur
No, I'm not changing it at all. Prove the shell was part of Saddam's cache of WMDs and the $20 is yours.

You made the bet, it is up to you to prove.

Why do I even have to explain that to you?

Well, since Gaard caught the key to the bet, I'll stop toying with you.

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

You see, I wrote that under the premise that sometime in the future, after forensics or whoever, examines the shell, we'll find it came from outside of Iraq or to be a remnant of the Iran/Iraq war.

No, you bet was that it came from outside of Iraq or that the US supplied it. Please don't try to change it now. It would, or should be, too embarrasing for you.

So how long do you think it will take you to find the source of that shell? If not, you made the bet and the statement, do you stand behind what you post on this board?

If it is found to be Iranian or from the US, I'll pay you $20. What's your time limit son?

 

[Gaard]

If conjur has said...$20 I can prove this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago...you might have a legitimate argument etech.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: etech
Origin of WMD


"This term for a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon is older than you might think. It actually dates to 1937, before the existence of nuclear or biological weapons. It was first used by the London Times on 28 December of that year, "Who can think without horror of what another widespread war would mean, waged as it would be with all the new weapons of mass destruction?" The original reference is to aerial bombing of cities, which had become a reality that year in the Spanish Civil War, chemicals, and other modern weaponry.
...."

Thanks, I stand corrected. They didn't coin the term. They just dusted it off for their purposes.

Are you saying that Iraq never had any WMD.

With all due respect, how in the hell do you get that out of anything I said?

I actually am amazed at the people that believe that the sole reason to remove Saddam was WMD. Oh well, ignorance abounds.

WMD was never the reason Bush invaded Iraq. It was merely the excuse George used to sell the invasion to a spooked public. The real reasons may never be known, but I think it's some combination of PNAC, a psychological compulsion to one-up his Dad, irritation at Hussein's defiance, oil, and delusions of grandeur and/or being on a mission from God.

IMO, of course.

Etech? Care to explain where I suggested Iraq never had any WMDs? You'll note I'm not the only one who thought that little straw man was absurd.

Care to remind us all who said, "You are not worth discussing anything with if you won't stand behind what YOU SAID."?

Still waiting.

 

[conjur]

LOL! FOX news just showed a clip of the earlier news. The reports of sarin were that "very, very, small traces" were found.

 

[Gaard]

...do you stand behind what you post on this board?

You gotta know I'm going to say something about this. You're just playing with me, aintcha?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Gaard

$20 we'll find this to have been brought in from outside of Iraq or to be some leftover shell that the U.S. supplied Saddam with 20 years ago.

excuse me a sec...

doesn't "we'll find" represent future tense?

Dang it, Gaard...you blew the fun.

No, he didn't. Want to set a time limit. What's acceptable to you. One week, one month. How long will it take you to prove that the US supplied Saddam with Sarin? I don't think you can given any length of time but if you need a month, that would be fine with me. It's up to you to prove it so I can be generous with a time limit.

Oh, you just want proof about the Sarin?

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/globalissue/usforeignpolicy/iraq1980scontent.html

Western companies that helped build Iraq's weapons arsenal .
a U.S.

i Biological.

(A) American Type Culture Collection

(1) Several biological precursor agents for diseases like anthrax, gangrene, and the West Nile virus. [Associated Press 12/21/02]


ii Chemical.

(A) Alcolac International

(1) Thiodiglycol, the mustard gas precursor. [New York Times 12/21/02b]


(B) Al Haddad

(1) 60 tons of a chemical that could be used to make sarin. [New York Times 12/21/02b]

Abstract of NY Times article:

By PHILIP SHENON (NYT) 926 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 11 , Column 1
ABSTRACT - American officials and private weapons specialists say 12,000-page weapons declaration that Iraq delivered to UN on December 7 lists 31 major foreign companies that sold chemicals and equipment needed for Iraq's chemical weapons program before 1991; list reportedly includes Alcolac International of Maryland and Al Haddad trading company of Tennessee, both now defunct, 14 German companies, three each from Netherlands and Switzerland and two each from France and Austria; list, obtained by lawyers for ailing Gulf War veterans, could be important as veterans pursuit lawsuits against some companies over their health problems (M)

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2003/02/18/World/Eurobiz.Is.Caught.Arming.Saddam-357431.shtml

Until 1984, when the United States interdicted a small shipment of nerve-gas precursors from Al Haddad Trading in Nashville, there were no regulations banning commerce in chemical- weapons precursors or production equipment. But after that, at U.S. insistence, the major chemical-producing nations in the West agreed to require export licenses for a list of chemical-weapons (CW) precursors that gradually was expanded as evidence of Iraq's battlefield use against Iran and Iraqi Kurds became available.

http://www.mideastfacts.com/cmpnies_soldchmcals2iraq.html

Alcolac, the Baltimore company, pleaded guilty in 1989 to federal export violations involving shipments of chemicals that could be used by Iraq to make mustard gas.

According to the Iraqi declaration, officials said, Alcolac provided thiodiglycol, the mustard gas precursor, while Al Haddad, the other American company, was the source of 60 tons of a chemical that could be used to make sarin.