Next question - DCC

See:

I was going to post something similar but the list does not include NZ. It's a strange list, really.

MBQ

"{R}" wrote

Hold on - I'm no fan of Blair but ...............

Everyone knows that Sadam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. He used gas (which is a WMD) on the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs, killings thousands of them.

Let's assume he had fifty oil size barrels full of gas when Bush & Blair were posturing before invading. How difficult do you think it would have been to hide those somewhere in the deserts of Iraq? I reckon IF they existed, and there's no reason to think they didn't, the entire armies of both the USA and the UK could search for a thousand years and not find them.

Blair a liar? No, an idiot maybe.

John.

We know he had WMDs before the Gulf War (1991) We know pretty well that he didn't have WMDs by 1998 and the UN inspectors would have confirmed that in 2003 if you had allowed them to stay. Obviously Saddam Hussein wasn't going to say "we have no WMDs" because oil ro\ich Iraq was surrounded by irritated neighbours and in saying that there were none he would have been admitting to countries he had previously attacked that his country was almost defenceless. Catch 22 forced on him by Bush and Blair.

There is no reason at all to make such an assumption.

If Saddam Hussein did have (50 barrels) of gas, why would he not have used them on your invading armies when it became obvious that he was going to lose??? The only possible answer to that would be that he wanted to make the defeat easier on the Iraqi population - he was always known for his concern for the well-being of his civilian population over his own interests.

WMDs in Iraq in 2003? - Blair is a total liar!

"gene" wrote

Absolutely, and I didn't suggest otherwise, but why having acquired gas and used on his own nationals, would he suddenly decide that it was something he shouldn't retain in his armoury? After all one of his most successful ways of keeping Iraqis under control was to use terror tactics, torture & murder, and the fear of chemical weapons would assist in that suppression.

I'm not saying he DID have such weapons, and the figure of 50 barrels was simply plucked out of the air, but the fact that chemical weapons were not found doesn't mean they were not there.

It seems to have become fashionable to call Blair a liar, but I suspect he's no more so than virtually every other politician this country has ever had.

John.

John, I understand that you were just putting forth a "what if".

Unfortunately, that's very true!

I agree fully.....thats why they are called "poli-tricksters" :o))

The problem is that once you get into any form of management, there are limits on what you can say. If you told the truth about every matter of management or government, then there would be absolute chaos.

Also the definition of 'liar' seems to be changing to 'someone who says something I don't agree with' :-)

Jim.

wrote

So branded by the media who disagree with anyone that is currently out of favour with them for whatever reason.

John.

You don't think the lies he told the British public to get you into invading Iraq might have anything to do with it?

Regards, Greg.P.

I suspect that people branding him a liar are also those people who had all this accurate knowledge of what was actually going on in Iraq at the time - and that includes a lot of our media outlets and politicians. I wonder why they didn't make their information known at the time?

JIm.

I do too - it was very obvious to the rest of the world that both Blair and Bush were working up their respective populations with nonsensical and unjustifable "evidence". This is _not_ just a situation involving Britain and the USa, you invaded a nation on jumped-up charges and have caused the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

"Greg Procter" wrote

I don't believe he lied. He was possibly mis-informed, but acting on, or passing on of duff information doesn't constitute lying in my book.

John.

"John Turner" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.supernews.com:

I wonder if this is the correct forum to discuss this considering that (a) it was known to all and sundry before the war that Saddam did not support terrorists - the most he did was provide living space for displaced palastinians, that (b) he had no weapons of mass destruction, that (c) the CIA strongly suspected the Iranians for gassing the Kurds and not Iraq, that (d) Iraq was teh only ME "muslim" country that not only permitted but ensured that all people - male and female - had a secular education, that (f) there was universal healthcare, that (g) women were permitted to take up professions and actually work for a living, that (h) the draining of the marshes was not as was later claimed a program against the "Marsh Arabs" but an irrigation and land reclemation project akin to that carried out in the Fenlands (UK) between the 16th and 20th C, that (i) those responsible for the bombings in America were Saudi and were supoprted by Saudi, that (j) the so called repression of the Kurds werre defensive measures in the same way was Britain had to fight the Kurds in the 20s and 30s and the way Turkey and Iran is still doing today, that (j) most Herion used to poison our children in the UK comes from the Kurds and Afghans and that Saddam spent much of his time buring the Poppy fields ...

The list goes on, what is clear beyond any doubt that if I and those who share my views were well aware of all of the above (and the rest) it follows that the liar bLiar also know of these things. Yet he chose to lie and lie repeatedly. He's not fit to lick my toilet bowl.

See how easily tempers may rise.

Well the decoders I have from 98 feature 14,28 and 128 speed steps including speed tables. Have acceleration and braking options. Have a multitude of lighting options, mainly suited for US locos I must admit. All support consisting but I tend to Universal consisting used in Digitrax which is all done on the control station anyway. The only thing I don't have is sound which was expensive then and has got cheaper now.

The things they don't have is the extensions to DCC proposed and implemented by Lenz and Digitrax for two way communication with decoders on the move.

So in short I have not had to upgrade system or decoders although the cost of sound starts to make that appealing but I did start in the late

Chris

OK, we're wandering from the subject line and model railways - obviously we're not going to agree and I'd have ignored the discussion other than for the fact of Blair's support of GWB has resulted in the deaths of circa 670,000 innocent people since your invasion and occupation of Iraq, something difficult to ignore.

Regards, Greg.P.

Absolutely not! I apologise unreservedly for allowing my feelings on the subject to get the better of me.

There is all that. You forgot to mention that oil dependant nations _needed_ Iraqi oil on the World market to avoid a World-wide shortage and the resulting massive energy price rise that would have gone with it and the ongoing theft of Iraq's resource.

Regards, Greg.P.

Sounds like you think you speak for the rest of the world - I somehow think you don't.

Jim.