OT- Did the Prez lie about WMD?

"Just, around, the corner, there's a rainbow in the sky. So let's have another cup of coffee, lets eat another piece of pie."

Jim

================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================

Reply to
jim rozen
Loading thread data ...

"Who", not "whom". :-)

We also have the testimony of former Iraqi officials that there was an enormous amount of skimming going on. Like most 2nd and 3rd world countries, Iraq has more than its share of corrupt government employees capable of dummying up paperwork to get paid for doing nothing.

There's no question that they had chemical weapons prior to 1991. However, there is no credible evidence that they did not destroy their stockpiles. In fact there is eyewitness testimony from former Iraqi servicemen that they did take stocks of chemical munitions out into the desert and detonate them. All the paperwork on that may not have been done to a bureaucrat's satisfaction, however, because few Iraqi enlisted personnel have a bureaucrat's fetish for doing paperwork.

Then there may be some forgotten chemical stocks in Iraq. I agree that's possible. As I said, they didn't keep very good records. If the paperwork crazy US Army can lose stockpiles, it is certainly possible that some of that could have happened in Iraq too. That's very different from what the Bush administration was claiming prior to the invasion, however.

Gary

Reply to
Gary Coffman

Eyewitness reports from former Iraqi servicemen say that they just took the munitions out into the desert and detonated them (I'm assuming from well upwind). They've got lots of desert, and most of the agents are non-persistent, so while that might not satisfy US enviroweenies, it was probably an adequate way of dealing with them.

Gary

Reply to
Gary Coffman

But very improbable.

Gary

Reply to
Gary Coffman

Sure they can, via tax and regulatory policy.

Gary

Reply to
Gary Coffman

Insight magazine is a Moonie publication. You're getting your information from a cult.

Reply to
ATP

Yep and the Dumbocrats are good at calling things like elections before all the votes are counted :o). They still have over 90% of the munitions dumps to inspect and 98% of the countryside. The evidence they were engaged in the programs is clear from what they found already. Only the stage of their progress is in doubt at this point. Greg Sefton

Reply to
Bray Haven

Recessions and economic "booms" are pendulous occurrences. The pendulum had started to swing a year before Clinton left office; just ast it had started the other way before he got there. A bunch of creative accounting, and no (expensive) wars made it easy for him to make it look like he was responsible. There are plenty of jobs in America, but many are spoiled into only accepting something at (or close to) their previous position. Greg Sefton

Reply to
Bray Haven

I wonder why :o) Gregt S.

Reply to
Bray Haven

To say nothing of the estimated 500,000 to 1 million Vietnamese kids born with birth defects as a probable consequence of the spraying of Agent Orange etc.

A quote from UNICEF (

formatting link
)

"An untold number of Vietnamese children suffer from disabilities attributable to Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant the United States military sprayed over vast areas of Viet Nam during the war. While a recent study funded by the Vietnamese government places the total number of Agent Orange victims at 30,000, the specific number of child victims identified in the study has not been disclosed. What is known with certainty is that some Vietnamese children continue to be exposed to this dangerous substance.

Studies conducted by the Canadian-based Hatfield Group reveal that there are still areas in Viet Nam with alarmingly high levels of dioxin (the toxic agent in Agent Orange), and indicate that in these areas dioxin is entering the food chain. The studies suggest a direct relationship between dioxin contamination and human health, a link that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently confirmed. In a tacit acknowledgement of the harmful effects Agent Orange can have on the children of persons exposed to the defoliant, the United States government provides benefits for U.S. veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange in Viet Nam, and whose children suffer from spina bifida, a debilitating spinal disease. However, the United States has not offered any such aid to disabled children in Viet Nam."

Of course there's also the minor problem of the use of depleted uranium shells in both Iraq and the former state of Yugoslavia and it's long term consequences for both vetrans and the civilian population. Ian

Reply to
Ian W

Generally agree, but it was more a matter of not *understanding* what was responsible, and jumping to many wrong conclusions. It will be another five years, at least, before the economy of the '90s is fully analyzed.

That's an interesting thought, but can you back it up? Do you have any idea what the average hourly wage is for those who are displaced and who find new jobs, versus what they were making before?

Ed Huntress

Reply to
Ed Huntress

The major risk of believing alarmist "science" is that it is often wrong.

In this case, dioxins are produced as a byproduct of the manufacture of chlorinated biphenols such as 245T (Agent Orange is a mixture of

24D, weed killer, and 245T, brush killer), transformer oils, etc. It is present in parts per billion concentrations in these products. It was once thought to be persistent in the environment, but better science has demonstrated that it rapidly breaks down in soil when exposed to sunlight (see follow up reports on Times Beach).

Depeleted uranium can be hazardous (heavy metal poison) if it is ingested. So eating depleted uranium is not recommended. (Eating lead, tungsten or any other heavy metal is also not recommended for the same reason.) But it is no more radioactive than granite. It is called depleted because the fissile U235 has been removed from it.

Gary

Reply to
Gary Coffman

:o) The point is old chap the US was supposed to have already disposed of the very weapons it has suddenly stumbled across , years ago, Can you not see the hypocracy of the US and Brit govts in the eyes of the rest of the world. The US as an example is the only nation to have used nukes in a conflict, it is the US that for whatever reason, just or not that has done most of the invading or attacking because of "" Percieved threats"", and again dear friend through shear bad luck or misfortune over the last fifty years. America has tended to kill far more than its fair share of innocent civilians. The US has now attacked , and invaded Iraq killing god knows how many people, for an unproven percieved threat, The assault happened after the US and Brit govt assured the world that saddam had shit loads of nasty weapons easily to hand and ready to use within 45 minutes all under the gaze of thwe Brit and Yank inteligence agencies, And not of it has come true. When this is combined with the fact that Britain and the US still has shit loads of nukes and massive forces of our own the utter hypocracy of trying to tell other nations who have not attacked us that they can not have the same qweapons as us???.

We can not honestly tell one nation it can not have or own NBC weapons so long as we have them ourselves, especially when it is our nations who have dont most of the interfering in other nations internal affairs, it does not take much to petrsuasde ill educated subsistance farmers in the middle east, asia or south america that we are just big bully boys who will not follows the laws we demand they live by, just being british or american does not make us any more less rersponsible or culpable than any other nation.

Reply to
The Rifleman

It is when mixed with detergent and dropped as napalm, I am sorry dear friend but you are simply wrong on this point ( though it is rare for you I will admit) , Phosgene was developed as a chem weapon after it was used as a dry cleaning agent, Chlorine was used for disinfection before it was used as a chemical weapon, and agent orage if sprayed from an aircraft onto a community living in a forested are is still a chemical warfar attack

Reply to
The Rifleman

There is no need to, old chap we brits open acknowlege just how shitty our behaviour has been even up to and including some of the more nasty things we did to the argies and in Gulf war 1, We know we are sneaky and underhand at warfare thats why we are so good at it, after all its the brits who created the first concentration camps, but we dont( apart from Blair and Co ) try to claim the moral highground when we know we are wrong. and in this war and in Afghasnistan both the Us and UK are simply in the wrong, we may have removed a few hundred Al Quaeda and Mujahadeen ( Who were equipped and trained by the brits and yanks) and got rid of Saddam ( who was Americas allie when the US fell out with Ian) But look at the cost in innocent lives?? 3000 innocent people were killed by terrs on 911, yet in revenge we are believed to have killed over ten times that number of people only getting a 1000 or so gun men in Afghanstan and destrying the socioal infrastructure of Iraq. This will go down in everyones history books as a bad bloody state of affairs for Britain and the US.

Reply to
The Rifleman

non-persistent,

So in that case their behaviour was no worse than the yanks setting off nukes in New Mexico and us Brits setting em off in Australia:o(

Reply to
The Rifleman

I'll take the word of an internationally respected organisation such as UNESCO, whom while not perfect is at least an in a position to speak with some degree of proved authority on such matters as the long term effects of exposure to the human body of likes of Dioxin and other highly toxic defoliants used by the US military in both Vietnam and Thailand.

Care to explain away the massive increase in cancer amongst Gulf War (Mk-

1) vetrans and amongst the iraqi population then?

This doesn't mean that I don't have a degree of agreeance with your statements, however at this point in time it's merely the word of someone who has not cited any references nor who has appended any professional qualifications that can form the basis for judging if your comments are valid or a waste of space.

Ian

Reply to
Ian W

No, I'm just going by those I know who are out of work (or have been) an continue the lifestyle and complain they can't find employment comensurate with their "ability & experience". Also, common sense. Truth is (IMO) that we are now in a world economy and becoming more entertwined each year. We can expect that to put downward pressure on the "wages" in this country. We (our standard of living) will equilibrate to some extent with other countries. The only alternative, isolationism, isn't really an option. The old days of forty bucks an hour, negotiated by the good old union, to stick a bolt in a hole on an assy. line, are long past. Like it or not. Greg Sefton

Reply to
Bray Haven

Er, Uh, no it was an incindiary agent, much like an explosive but never a chemical agent and it was mixed with a coagulant to gel it for better effect. Greg Sefton

Reply to
Bray Haven

Ok, what about the 'good old days' when management extracts a promise from the bad union, to give back benefits and wages. And then goes and votes itself a big bonus and raise?

Could those good old days be gone too?

Jim

================================================== please reply to: JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com ==================================================

Reply to
jim rozen

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.