BF2S Forums What next for Iraq?

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

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.

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 ?

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.

The satellite photos were used to show his ability to deliver said WMD's. Oh, and the Russians had those same satellite photos.

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

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 ?

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.

The satellite photos were used to show his ability to deliver said WMD's. Oh, and the Russians had those same satellite photos.

That article is from 2004 and back then it was still under investigation, no link to the conclusion of that ? ... you seem to dismiss the alternative that there might not have been any WMDs at all ? ... until all documents are declassified i guess we'll never know for sure and the chance of that is close to zero ... but one thing is sure, if found we would have known ...

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

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 ?

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.

The satellite photos were used to show his ability to deliver said WMD's. Oh, and the Russians had those same satellite photos.

That article is from 2004 and back then it was still under investigation, no link to the conclusion of that ? ... you seem to dismiss the alternative that there might not have been any WMDs at all ? ... until all documents are declassified i guess we'll never know for sure and the chance of that is close to zero ... but one thing is sure, if found we would have known ...

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

That article is from 2004 and back then it was still under investigation, no link to the conclusion of that ? ... you seem to dismiss the alternative that there might not have been any WMDs at all ? ... until all documents are declassified i guess we'll never know for sure and the chance of that is close to zero ... but one thing is sure, if found we would have known ...

Believe me, if there was conclusive evidence there would be some serious heat on Russia. I don't dismiss the alternative of there being no WMD's when the descion to invade was made. My point, which seems to have been lost, is that there was definitely at some point a fully functioning WMD program in Iraq. A program that was supported by various western nations. That is a widely accepted and documented fact. Something you seem to dismiss. You are playing down the rest of the worlds involvement in building his military. It's just simply not accurate. But hey, at least you prosecute them.

Well seeing as you just moved from WMDs to WMDs program i think we are closer to a mutual understanding, i never claimed he didn't have a program or urge to get WMDs but rather the opposite if you read my posts again ...

Concerning the last link you provided: I think it's great that atleast some people pay for their crimes in international arms and tech smugling, to bad to few gets nailed ...

God Save the Queen wrote:

found traces of biological weapons in the tigris river.  not enough to call CNN about.  Enough to mandate us to carry a promask everytime we had an operation near the river.

Kmarion wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Believe me, if there was conclusive evidence there would be some serious heat on Russia. I don't dismiss the alternative of there being no WMD's when the descion to invade was made. My point, which seems to have been lost, is that there was definitely at some point a fully functioning WMD program in Iraq. A program that was supported by various western nations. That is a widely accepted and documented fact. Something you seem to dismiss. You are playing down the rest of the worlds involvement in building his military. It's just simply not accurate. But hey, at least you prosecute them.

Well seeing as you just moved from WMDs to WMDs program i think we are closer to a mutual understanding, i never claimed he didn't have a program or urge to get WMDs but rather the opposite if you read my posts again ...

Concerning the last link you provided: I think it's great that atleast some people pay for their crimes in international arms and tech smugling, to bad to few gets nailed ...

I never moved. My point was clear at the start. WMD's are a component of a WMD's program aren't they?

Let's recap.

Varreg: US of A supplied weapons to Saddam
Kmarion: So didn't France, the UK, and Germany. (It's actually much more than that)
Varreg: Not to the same extent no
Kmarion: Not to the same extent? They (all of them) helped supply his WMD's. I call WMD's a big extent.
Varegg: And he just magically made them disappear just before the invasion? but i find it funny no traces of such have been found

I spend a few post trying to explain to you that having had and used is not the same as always having. I was not justifying military force. You were the one who began shifting as you drifted into another discussion.


I guess I'll just have to leave it here. I can't spell it out any clearer.

France agreed to help Israel build a nuclear reactor and reprocessing plant near Dimona which used natural uranium moderated by heavy water. Plutonium production started in about 1964. Top secret British documents obtained by BBC Newsnight show that Britain made hundreds of secret shipments of restricted materials to Israel in the 1950s and 1960s. These included specialist chemicals for reprocessing and samples of fissile material—uranium-235 in 1959, and plutonium in 1966, as well as highly enriched lithium-6 which is used to boost fission bombs and fuel hydrogen bombs. The investigation also showed that Britain shipped 20 tons of heavy water directly to Israel in 1959 and 1960 to start up the Dimona reactor. The transaction was made through a Norwegian front company called Noratom which took a 2% commission on the transaction. Britain was challenged about the heavy water deal at the International Atomic Energy Agency after it was exposed on Newsnight in 2005. British Foreign Minister Kim Howells hid behind the Noratom contract and claimed this was a sale to Norway. But a former British intelligence officer who investigated the deal at the time confirmed that this was really a sale to Israel and the Noratom contract was just a charade. The Foreign Office finally admitted in March 2006 that Britain knew the destination was Israel all along.

CameronPoe wrote:

What next for Iraq?

Dilbert_X wrote:

What next for Iraq?
Once the US is out part will cede to Iran, there will be bloody civil war to determine the border and many people will be displaced when they find themselves on the wrong side of the line.