How long did it take Europe to rebuild after World War 2?usmarine wrote:
i will let you know in a few years ok? i know we our a society of instant results, but how about you wait and see. i bet the marshall plan seemed very stupid at the time, but it turned out fairly well for the euros.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
One last question, I will never bring up Iraq with you again.
Was it worth it?
we didnt supply his whole arsenal. that is ridiculous at best to say. and so what if we did? i fail to see the arguement or logic.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran
So didn't France, the UK, and Germany.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran after the dictator that was in Iran got booted by his own people, and who helped that and many other dictators into power i wonder ... only for them to get overthrown or turn on the puppet master ...
That's correct, Russia took over when the US quit ...usmarine wrote:
we didnt supply his whole arsenal. that is ridiculous at best to say. and so what if we did? i fail to see the arguement or logic.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran
okusmarine wrote:
i will let you know in a few years ok? i know we our a society of instant results, but how about you wait and see. i bet the marshall plan seemed very stupid at the time, but it turned out fairly well for the euros.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
One last question, I will never bring up Iraq with you again.
Was it worth it?
Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2008-10-18 11:24:55)
i have no idea really. maybe a euro can answer that.S3v3N wrote:
How long did it take Europe to rebuild after World War 2?usmarine wrote:
i will let you know in a few years ok? i know we our a society of instant results, but how about you wait and see. i bet the marshall plan seemed very stupid at the time, but it turned out fairly well for the euros.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
One last question, I will never bring up Iraq with you again.
Was it worth it?
Not to the same extent no, France have been in the spotlight way after the US pulled out and have gotten reprimanded more than once for irresponsible weapon export to Iraq ...Kmarion wrote:
So didn't France, the UK, and Germany.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran after the dictator that was in Iran got booted by his own people, and who helped that and many other dictators into power i wonder ... only for them to get overthrown or turn on the puppet master ...
The Marshall plan ended officially in 1953 but aid from US sources continued for many years after that ... i would estimate Europe was pretty much back to normal in the late 50's ...usmarine wrote:
i have no idea really. maybe a euro can answer that.S3v3N wrote:
How long did it take Europe to rebuild after World War 2?usmarine wrote:
i will let you know in a few years ok? i know we our a society of instant results, but how about you wait and see. i bet the marshall plan seemed very stupid at the time, but it turned out fairly well for the euros.
That does not make it any less inexcusable, thousands of Iraqis and Iranians died thanks to chemical weapons technology share.Kmarion wrote:
So didn't France, the UK, and Germany.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran after the dictator that was in Iran got booted by his own people, and who helped that and many other dictators into power i wonder ... only for them to get overthrown or turn on the puppet master ...
And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion ? ... i think we can agree on he wanted WMD and sought and got some tech but i find it funny no traces of such have been found ...Kmarion wrote:
Not to the same extent? They (all of them) helped supply his WMD's, which despite popular belief he did have them at one time.
And what in the world would give you the idea that I was saying that it was?mikeyb118 wrote:
That does not make it any less inexcusable, thousands of Iraqis and Iranians died thanks to chemical weapons technology share.Kmarion wrote:
So didn't France, the UK, and Germany.Varegg wrote:
US of A supplied weapons to Saddam to fight Iran after the dictator that was in Iran got booted by his own people, and who helped that and many other dictators into power i wonder ... only for them to get overthrown or turn on the puppet master ...
Ok, thanks for clearing that up. I believe it is healthy to understand both the good and bad actions of one’s nation. I can’t stand excuse making.Kmarion wrote:
And what in the world would give you the idea that I was saying that it was?
Last edited by mikeyb118 (2008-10-18 11:41:38)
He did have and use WMD's. They were supplied by a variety of western nations. Maybe you got confused into thinking I was saying he had them just prior to the war. I thought saying "at one time" would have prevented that.Varegg wrote:
And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion ? ... i think we can agree on he wanted WMD and sought and got some tech but i find it funny no traces of such have been found ...Kmarion wrote:
Not to the same extent? They (all of them) helped supply his WMD's, which despite popular belief he did have them at one time.
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?Kmarion wrote:
He did have and use WMD's. They were supplied by a variety of western nations. Maybe you got confused into thinking I was saying he had them just prior to the war. I thought saying "at one time" would have prevented that.Varegg wrote:
And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion ? ... i think we can agree on he wanted WMD and sought and got some tech but i find it funny no traces of such have been found ...Kmarion wrote:
Not to the same extent? They (all of them) helped supply his WMD's, which despite popular belief he did have them at one time.
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.Varegg wrote:
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?Kmarion wrote:
He did have and use WMD's. They were supplied by a variety of western nations. Maybe you got confused into thinking I was saying he had them just prior to the war. I thought saying "at one time" would have prevented that.Varegg wrote:
And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion ? ... i think we can agree on he wanted WMD and sought and got some tech but i find it funny no traces of such have been found ...
Why didn't the scuds he launched at Israel contain chemicals, why did he never use WMDs on Iran to any extent ... relatively few deployments of chemicals are documented ... where did all the WMDs disappear when they where right there on the satellite photos just infront of the invasion ?
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?M.O.A.B wrote:
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.Varegg wrote:
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?Kmarion wrote:
He did have and use WMD's. They were supplied by a variety of western nations. Maybe you got confused into thinking I was saying he had them just prior to the war. I thought saying "at one time" would have prevented that.
Why didn't the scuds he launched at Israel contain chemicals, why did he never use WMDs on Iran to any extent ... relatively few deployments of chemicals are documented ... where did all the WMDs disappear when they where right there on the satellite photos just infront of the invasion ?
What are you talking about? I'm talking about the ones we knew he had previously. You decided to talk about Iraqs weapons suppliers. I was keeping you in check and making sure you were all inclusive. You then attempted to downplay everyone else's role even though those mutually supplied chemical weapons were used to kill thousands of civilians. How this turned into a validation for war argument I don't know. But if you want another possibility here ya go.Varegg wrote:
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?Kmarion wrote:
He did have and use WMD's. They were supplied by a variety of western nations. Maybe you got confused into thinking I was saying he had them just prior to the war. I thought saying "at one time" would have prevented that.Varegg wrote:
And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion ? ... i think we can agree on he wanted WMD and sought and got some tech but i find it funny no traces of such have been found ...
Why didn't the scuds he launched at Israel contain chemicals, why did he never use WMDs on Iran to any extent ... relatively few deployments of chemicals are documented ... where did all the WMDs disappear when they where right there on the satellite photos just infront of the invasion ?
Satellites can't remain in the same spot forever and its hard to watch every inch of a country all the time. Weapons could be disguised as regular cargo, taken into the desert on a civilian flatbed and then buried by a bunch of guys who look like civilians.Varegg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?M.O.A.B wrote:
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.Varegg wrote:
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?
Why didn't the scuds he launched at Israel contain chemicals, why did he never use WMDs on Iran to any extent ... relatively few deployments of chemicals are documented ... where did all the WMDs disappear when they where right there on the satellite photos just infront of the invasion ?
U.N.: Weapons equipment missing in IraqM.O.A.B wrote:
Satellites can't remain in the same spot forever and its hard to watch every inch of a country all the time. Weapons could be disguised as regular cargo, taken into the desert on a civilian flatbed and then buried by a bunch of guys who look like civilians.Varegg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?M.O.A.B wrote:
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.
Imagery analysts have identified 109 sites that have been emptied of equipment to varying degrees, up from 90 reported in March.
The report also provided much more detail about the percentage of items no longer at the places where U.N. inspectors monitored them.
From the imagery analysis, Perricos said analysts at the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission which he heads have concluded that biological sites were less damaged than chemical and missile sites.
The commission, known as UNMOVIC, previously reported the discovery of some equipment and material from the sites in scrapyards in Jordan and the Dutch port of Rotterdam.
Perricos said analysts found, for example, that 53 of the 98 vessels that could be used for a wide range of chemical reactions had disappeared. “Due to its characteristics, this equipment can be used for the production of both commercial chemicals and chemical warfare agents,” he said.
The report said 3,380 valves, 107 pumps, and more than 7.8 miles of pipes were known to have been located at the 39 chemical sites.
Unknown fate
A third of the chemical items removed came from the Qaa Qaa industrial complex south of Baghdad which the report said “was among the sites possessing the highest number of dual-use production equipment,” whose fate is now unknown. Significant quantities of missing material were also located at the Fallujah II and Fallujah III facilities north of the city, which was besieged last year.
Before the first Gulf War in 1991, those facilities played a major part in the production of precursors for Iraq’s chemical warfare program.
we dont even do that now for IEDs getting planted in the roadVaregg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?M.O.A.B wrote:
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.Varegg wrote:
Right ... so where did the WMDs go then, yes he used chemicals on the kurd populace but hardly enough to drain the arsenal you claim was there ... where did it go ?
Why didn't the scuds he launched at Israel contain chemicals, why did he never use WMDs on Iran to any extent ... relatively few deployments of chemicals are documented ... where did all the WMDs disappear when they where right there on the satellite photos just infront of the invasion ?
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-18 12:08:39)
I thought we had mass amounts of CIA agents that stare at their computers and watch the desert for shady people doing shady things all over the world'n'shit.God Save the Queen wrote:
we dont even do that now for IEDs getting planted in the roadVaregg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?M.O.A.B wrote:
Tbh the amount of media that goes around these days, planning an invasion is hardly going to be very secretive unless say China pulls one off where their media is state controlled. Saddam could have gotten wind of the incoming inspections and searches and simply buried them out in the desert for safe keeping, wouldn't have been the first time either.
Reminds me of this:S3v3N wrote:
I thought we had mass amounts of CIA agents that stare at their computers and watch the desert for shady people doing shady things all over the world'n'shit.God Save the Queen wrote:
we dont even do that now for IEDs getting planted in the roadVaregg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?
Enemy of the State was NOT a documentary.S3v3N wrote:
I thought we had mass amounts of CIA agents that stare at their computers and watch the desert for shady people doing shady things all over the world'n'shit.God Save the Queen wrote:
we dont even do that now for IEDs getting planted in the roadVaregg wrote:
Without 24/7 satellite surveillance noticing it ?