Report: Syria hiding Iraqi WMD - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#72542
especially coming after the UN inspector said that Iraq had gotten rid of all of their WMD after the first Gulf War
Thats what they thought, they just didnt know how, when, where, what or why. So even though so much was unaccounted for, because they could not find them, they're so sure they dont exist. Even though UN inspectors repeated acknowledged Iraqs continued secrecy, deception, lying, and witholding information.
By SpiderMonkey
#72547
JT123 wrote:Thats what they thought, they just didnt know how, when, where, what or why. So even though so much was unaccounted for, because they could not find them, they're so sure they dont exist. Even though UN inspectors repeated acknowledged Iraqs continued secrecy, deception, lying, and witholding information.


So you think these WMD are in Syria, based on the statement of a group that wants the US to invade Syria and instal them as its leaders.

Nothing like a bit of conservative logic to cheer you up :muha1:
By CrazyPete
#72550
I thought *forgets the guys name* said that he was sure they were all destroyed and dismantled after the gulf war recently, I could be remembering wrong of course and am not speaking authoritatively on this.

Of course we must keep in mind that the Syrian Ba'ath party and the Iraqi Ba'ath party do not/did not get along ever since Saddam's rise, and that can be accounted why the two nations are still separate (failure of panarabism).
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#72556
Thats what they thought, they just didnt know how, when, where, what or why. So even though so much was unaccounted for, because they could not find them, they're so sure they dont exist. Even though UN inspectors repeated acknowledged Iraqs continued secrecy, deception, lying, and witholding information.


I'm not going to tell you to be quiet like SpiderMonkey...I'm gona tell you to shut your fucking trap!!

You were proven wrong...you LIED...and the whole world knows you lied.

There are no WMD in Iraq...and if you don't understand that...than you are an idiot.

I'm tired of arguing such a mute point with rednecks. Its like claiming there are little green men on Mars. Well...show them to me...until then...shut your fucking trap...and don't kill tens of thousands of people over your LIES.
By Nox
#72725
SpiderMonkey wrote:O well, maybe you can edit it later.


If you quit your cranial rectalitis, then I wouldn't have to mention it or edit ... as you call it.

It can't be too difficult a concept for you to get ... quit telling people the shut up/be quiet etc.

I'm sure you noticed that I have ignored the same from another. Reason being ... English isn't his first language ... and common sense goes the other way whenever he approaches.

By the way ... I did get the other points. Did you happen to notice that I did not comment? When was the last time I didn't comment when I had something to say?

For this, you deserve an:

O WELL!

Nox
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#72743
Tovarish Spetsnaz wrote:
Thats what they thought, they just didnt know how, when, where, what or why. So even though so much was unaccounted for, because they could not find them, they're so sure they dont exist. Even though UN inspectors repeated acknowledged Iraqs continued secrecy, deception, lying, and witholding information.


I'm not going to tell you to be quiet like SpiderMonkey...I'm gona tell you to shut your fucking trap!!

You were proven wrong...you LIED...and the whole world knows you lied.

There are no WMD in Iraq...and if you don't understand that...than you are an idiot.

I'm tired of arguing such a mute point with rednecks. Its like claiming there are little green men on Mars. Well...show them to me...until then...shut your fucking trap...and don't kill tens of thousands of people over your LIES.



And you wonder why America doesn't take you seriously?
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#72770
And you wonder why America doesn't take you seriously?


You should see how seriously the rest of the world takes you...especially with a monkey for a president.
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#72771
Yes, but that's the really amazing part.

You are powerless before an ignorant monkey man.

So what does that make you?
By Disenfranchised
#73080
TRP which United States administration has a majority of Straussians in it's upper levels? Kamel told UNSCOM in 1991 that Saddam's weapons were destroyed. Powell of course did not reveal this information while quoting (out of context) from this very same document. Syria has been on the PNAC's hit list as and target since 1998. Sharon is provoking Syria via settlements in the Golan Heights. That fool Bush in the whitehouse scares the crap out of me. Anybody else (except Lieberman) in 2004. :eek:
By Enigmatic
#73162
In order to stop the barrage of ad hominem, here's what Mr Assad has to say about WMDs:

Syria is entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own chemical and biological deterrent, President Bashar Assad said last night as he rejected American and British demands for concessions on weapons of mass destruction.

In his first major statement since Libya's decision last month to scrap its nuclear and chemical programmes, he came closer than ever before to admitting that his country possessed stockpiles of WMD.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Mr Assad said that any deal to destroy Syria's chemical and biological capability would come about only if Israel agreed to abandon its undeclared nuclear arsenal.

Since the capture of Saddam Hussein and Col Muammar Gaddafi's decision to dismantle his WMD programme, Mr Assad has risen towards the top of America's target list.

The White House and Downing Street have been waiting for his response to Col Gaddafi's appeal for other Arab leaders to follow his example or risk inflicting a "tragedy" on their people.

President Assad spoke for more than 90 minutes at his discreet villa, which he prefers to the grand palace overlooking Damascus built by his father, the late Hafez Assad.

Asked about American and British claims that Syria had a WMD capability, he stopped short of the categorical denial that has been his government's stock response until now.

Instead, he pointed to the Israelis' recent attack on alleged Palestinian bases in Syria and the occupation of the Golan Heights as evidence that Syria needed a deterrent. "We are a country which is [partly] occupied and from time to time we are exposed to Israeli aggression," he said. "It is natural for us to look for means to defend ourselves. It is not difficult to get most of these weapons anywhere in the world and they can be obtained at any time."

Mr Assad said that Col Gaddafi's surprise decision to allow international inspectors to supervise the dismantling of WMD programmes was a "correct step".

He called on the international community to support the proposal that Syria presented to the United Nations last year for removing all WMD from the Middle East, including Israel's nuclear stockpile.

"Unless this applies to all countries, we are wasting our time."

It is the worst kept secret in the Middle East that Damascus has one of the largest stockpiles of chemical agents in the region.

The latest CIA report on weapons of mass destruction says: "Syria continued to seek CW-related expertise from foreign sources [this year]. Damascus already held a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin but apparently tried to develop more toxic and persistent nerve agents. It is highly probable that Syria also continued to develop an offensive BW [biological weapon] capability."

Mr Assad tempered his refusal to compromise on WMD by holding out the prospect of joint patrols with America along the Syria-Iraq border to prevent the passage of arms and fighters.

Acknowledging pressure from the US and Britain to crack down on Palestinian extremists based in Syria, he claimed that their offices had been closed and their activities curtailed. The groups could no longer "do anything military from these places. They are closed".

But he risked infuriating the West by stepping up his defence of Palestinian suicide bombers. He said the attacks had become "a reality we cannot control" and blamed them on "the Israeli killings, the Israeli occupations".

Despite his passionate advocacy of the Palestinian cause and his use in the past of inflammatory language about Israel and Jews, he denied hating them. "If you hate, you cannot talk about peace," he said.

Mr Assad repeated Syria's offer to resume negotiations with Israel over the occupation of the Golan Heights which were interrupted when a deal was in sight nearly a decade ago. But he said that an agreement was impossible as long as Israel insisted on starting negotiations from scratch rather than picking up where they left off.

Tony Blair, speaking on a flight back from Iraq before news emerged of the Assad interview, repeated his hope that Syria would follow Libya's example.

He said: "We offer Syria the possibility of a partnership for the future. But it is important that they realise that the terms are very clear and have been set out by ourselves and the Americans many times.

"You can see very clearly with what happened just before Christmas in respect of Libya that it is important to say to countries that may have engaged in such programmes: 'Look, there is a different way of dealing with this.'

"It can be dealt with diplomatically if people are prepared to do so, but it does have to be dealt with."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XRGHX4XG4JJ2HQFIQMFCFFOAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2004/01/06/wsyria06.xml

and in related news:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... ria106.xml
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#73165
If the UN knew saddam destroyed all his weapons, why the fuck did they stay in his country for 8 years looking for them only to be forcefully booted out on their asses before they wanted to leave? Were they just twiddling their thumbs all these years? Was little ole Hans just riding the clock?
By SpiderMonkey
#73436
JT123 wrote:If the UN knew saddam destroyed all his weapons, why the fuck did they stay in his country for 8 years looking for them only to be forcefully booted out on their asses before they wanted to leave? Were they just twiddling their thumbs all these years? Was little ole Hans just riding the clock?


I would assume they were doing their job properly.

What I want to know, is if saddam had WMD, why didn't he use them to defend his capital?

I mean, didn't all those nice Iraqi exiles tell Fox that US troops were going to be nerve gassed when they tried to enter baghdad?
By Disenfranchised
#73612
JT123 wrote:If the UN knew saddam destroyed all his weapons, why the fuck did they stay in his country for 8 years looking for them only to be forcefully booted out on their asses before they wanted to leave? Were they just twiddling their thumbs all these years? Was little ole Hans just riding the clock?
Board fucked up yesterday when I attempted to respond. The report was original leak to the public by Time Magazine (I think you can still download a copy from Findlaw site). Why wasn't this report was not made mention of by Blix has been asked frequently in non traditional mainstream press (CNN ect. the source of news for the ill informed) where it's coverage has been absolutely zip. I've yet to hear why this document remained classified for the nine years that sanctions ravaged Iraq. I managed to ask a personal acquaintance who was a member of UNSCOM investigative forces. He just laughed and told be it was because "Hans is a whore."

You've distorted the exit of UN investigators from Iraq. They were not expelled by Saddam. They had to leave because the United States announced renewed bombing to begin shortly. Maybe you expected my buddy to stand around and catch the incoming? :lol:
User avatar
By naked_turk
#73689
SpiderMonkey wrote:I mean, didn't all those nice Iraqi exiles tell Fox that US troops were going to be nerve gassed when they tried to enter baghdad?


A better question to ask would be why American troops were not in full NBC suits when marching on Baghdad, if they truly believed what they were accusing Saddam of?
User avatar
By Monkey Angst
#73701
naked_turk wrote:A better question to ask would be why American troops were not in full NBC suits when marching on Baghdad, if they truly believed what they were accusing Saddam of?

I hate NBC suits! They cancelled "Boomtown!"

Anyway, not a bad question, unfortunately given the way things are done in the military, some possible answers would be "We forgot," "We determined that our NBC suits were ineffective," or "We accidentally brought along 200,000 staplers instead."
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#73718
Or an easier answer could be the presumed offending units of the Elite Rep Gaurd had already been neutralized!?! You forget they didnt do an airbourne drop into baghdad, they did drive there.

Another interesting question might be why so many masks, suits, and atropine injections were found on the road to baghdad? I'v still never heard an explanation for that one yet.
User avatar
By naked_turk
#73729
Deny, deny, deny...
The fact that they drove there and didn't do an airborne operation straight into the middle of the city means they SHOULD have been prepared for a chemical attack... I never understand the twisted logic you always employ.

As for Iraqi chemical weapons suits, why the fuck not? Don't they have the right to... 'not die' in the event of an attack?
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#73738
As for Iraqi chemical weapons suits, why the fuck not? Don't they have the right to... 'not die' in the event of an attack?
The last time I checked, chem suits dont provide much in the way of protection against JDAM's or Cluster munitions.
By Nox
#73739
naked_turk wrote:A better question to ask would be why American troops were not in full NBC suits when marching on Baghdad, if they truly believed what they were accusing Saddam of?


Turk,

The answer quite simply is ... because those suits are:

1. HOT!

2. CUMBERSOME ... especially in battle.

Don't think for one second that each and every grunt was ready at a moments notice to put those suits on.

You are trying to make a point that isn't there. Had there been the slightest hint of B or C ... they would have donned the suits.

Nox
User avatar
By naked_turk
#73742
The last time I checked, chem suits dont provide much in the way of protection against JDAM's or Cluster munitions.

That doesn't matter. They said Saddam was prepared to use NBC... yet they took no precautions for the 'worst case scenario.' (While telling us that Saddam WILL use them, no doubt)
Turk,

The answer quite simply is ... because those suits are:

1. HOT!

2. CUMBERSOME ... especially in battle.

So you're telling me that they were more concerned with comfort than their lives? Its either that, or there was no weapons...
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

I have yet to see any disavowal of these people..[…]

Accusations of antisemitism have been weaponized.[…]

Would be boring without it though. Yes, the oth[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Do you think US soldiers would conduct such suici[…]