|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: d33p]
#1710530 - 07/13/03 12:56 AM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The UN and Americans looked for these weapons and could not find them. It was not untill Saddam told the AMericans where to find barrels upon barrels of anthrax that we found them. Do you have anymore details of this story? Saddam told the americans? Wouldn't he have told the UN inspectors? They found "barrels upon barrels"? Where did you hear this? How easy is it to find possibly undetectible barrels filled with a chemical or biological agent which could be burried deep under the sand in a random location. To make chemical and biological weapons you need large scale industrial plant. Along with hundreds of workers. Now Saddam is no longer in power why wouldn't SOMEONE involved have told the americans "Give me 25 million bucks and I'll show you where the weapons are?"? I wouldnt be susprised if in 2040 some poor fool kills himself when he unintionlly opens a barrel of nerve gas with a pick axe while building another McDonalds in central iraq. Chemical and biological weapons have very short shelf-lives. After a couple of years (at most) they are useless.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 11 years, 3 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: Xlea321]
#1710571 - 07/13/03 01:13 AM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
It was years back when it happened. Im i woundnt be sure if it was that he told the americans or UN but he was the one who spoke out. No one had found it. And who is to say he hadnt already made all the chem and bio weapons he needed and that we jsut didnt get them all after the guld war. And if you think a bio weapon such as anthrx has a short shelf life you are mistaken. Anthrax thrives very easily. If an area was exposed and nothing was down to clean it up it would take at least 50 years to disapate. The brits exposed some island while testing anthrax and it took them 50 yrs to clean it all up. but thats just my opinon i could be wrong. sorry for spelling and grammer mistakes im typeing fast.
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: d33p]
#1710668 - 07/13/03 01:47 AM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Can you find reference to the story anywhere on the web? No one had found it. And who is to say he hadnt already made all the chem and bio weapons he needed and that we jsut didnt get them all after the guld war. If he did so what? They would have degraded and been useless a decade ago. And if you think a bio weapon such as anthrx has a short shelf life you are mistaken I think you're confusing anthrax with the kind of anthrax that would be in any way effective as a weapon. Anthrax is not contagious. 95% of all anthrax cases are of the less lethal skin anthrax type; 80% recover completely with NO treatment. It really isn't that terrifying a threat. Here's a good read about "weapons of mass destruction": http://www.conservativetruth.org/attack/therealdeal.shtml Lesson number one: In the mid 1990s there were a series of nerve gas attacks on crowded Japanese subway stations. Given perfect conditions for an attack, less than 10% of the people there were injured (the injured were better in a few hours) and only one percent of the injured died. 60 Minutes once had a fellow telling us that one drop of nerve gas could kill a thousand people. What he didn't tell us is that the thousand dead people per drop was theoretical. Drill Sergeants exaggerate how terrible this stuff is to keep the recruits awake in class (I know this because I was a Drill Sergeant too). Forget everything you've ever seen on TV, in the movies, or read in a novel about this stuff, it was all a lie (read this sentence again out loud!)! These weapons are about terror. If you remain calm, you probably will not die. This is far less scary than the media and their "experts," make it sound. These are not gases, they are vapors or air borne particles. The agent must be delivered in sufficient quantity to kill or injure, and that defines when and how it's used. Every day we have a morning and evening inversion where "stuff," suspended in the air gets pushed down. This inversion is why allergies (pollen) and air pollution are worst at these times of the day. So a chemical attack will have it's best effect an hour of so either side of sunrise or sunset. Also, being vapors and airborne particles they are heavier than air so they will seek low places like ditches, basements and underground garages. This stuff won't work when it's freezing, it doesn't last when it's hot, and wind spreads it too thin too fast. They've got to get this stuff on you, or get you to inhale it for it to work. They also have to get the concentration of chemicals high enough to kill or wound you. Too little and it's nothing, too much and it's wasted. What I hope you've gathered by this point is that a chemical weapons attack that kills a lot of people is incredibly hard to accomplish with military grade agents and equipment, so you can imagine how hard it will be for terrorists. The more you know about this stuff the more you realize how hard it is to use.
-------------------- Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 11 years, 3 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: Xlea321]
#1710763 - 07/13/03 02:44 AM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Whether how great or small the threat beaing posed is, it still needs to be dealt with. I got really tired a while ago. I think i stopped making sense a couple hrs ago
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
SlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 14 years, 9 months
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: d33p]
#1711572 - 07/13/03 01:50 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Agreed.
I don't agree, however, d33p, that 5,000+ innocents should be killed, many more lives destroyed, to fight a single 'threat' who has a military 1/3 as powerful as the weak military it had in 91. Use some logic, people, even if Iraq had nukes, would they use them? Everybody knows Saddam is an egomaniac and the most important thing to him was to stay in power. He KNOWS that at the idea of him even using a nuke he'd have dozens of nukes pointed at him from Israel. Bring the US into the equation and his country is destroyed in about an hour.
d33p, I think your oath violation you point out on Dean was the situation that he talked about to explain why he doesn't agree with parental consent. I don't remember what came of it, but a teenage pregnant girl came to him once that not only convinced him that the baby was her father's, but that she would LITERALLY be physically harmed if her parents found out. It ended up that the baby wasn't her father's, and Dean ADMITTED that. What a concept. Before you start pointing out lies from Dean show me some evidence. He's the kind of guy who will admit when he's wrong.
I have an idea... why don't we play a game? You post specific proof of Dean telling a lie, then I'll do the same for Bush.
We'll see who runs out first.
Better yet, we'll see if you can even start the game.
-------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
|
shakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 20 years, 2 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: SlapnutRob]
#1711598 - 07/13/03 02:05 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I don't want to trust a person who has no problem murdering large amounts of his own people, with any level of WMDs, especially when he hates everyone that lives in my country.
|
Crobih
rap-cord
Registered: 11/03/98
Posts: 2,015
Loc: cave
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: shakta]
#1712152 - 07/13/03 05:52 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
shakta, you are an idiot. Nevertheless, you should ask yourself several quiestions.
First: Do you have a problem with the fact that the president of your country does not mind killing large amounts of people, with no true reason? Second: Do you know that the only person who hates is you? Not Saddam, nor Bush. Third: What do you think, why somebody hates everbody in your country? Fourth: Can you kill all the people who hate your country? Fifth: If you can not kill all the people, what will happen to their own hate toward you? Sixth: Have you ever thought about the solution for existing problem?
|
Anonymous
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: Crobih]
#1712247 - 07/13/03 06:32 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shakta, you are an idiot.
No flames please, even when it's as obviously true as that.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?



Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: ]
#1712286 - 07/13/03 06:48 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Fiend said:
Quote:
shakta, you are an idiot.
No flames please, even when it's as obviously true as that.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
As soon as you added the line.. even when it's as obviously true as that.
That in itself is a flame.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
monoamine
umask 077(nonefor you)

Registered: 09/06/02
Posts: 3,095
Loc: Jacksonville,FL
Last seen: 18 years, 7 months
|
|
You guys are a bunch of flamers (me giggles).
-------------------- People think that if you just say the word "hallucinations" it explains everything you want it to explain and eventually whatever it is you can't explain will just go away.It's just a word,it doesn't explain anything... Douglas Adams
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 11 years, 3 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: SlapnutRob]
#1712629 - 07/13/03 08:39 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
slapnutrob said "Before you start pointing out lies from Dean show me some evidence. He's the kind of guy who will admit when he's wrong."
If he is the kind of guy to admit when he is wrong why did he seal all of his past records twice as long as people normally do just so anything cant come back to haunt him. And ill get the evidence. m'kay
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 11 years, 3 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: SlapnutRob]
#1712675 - 07/13/03 08:59 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
dean lies Abortions preformed by non-doctors, trying to seal all of his past records for 20 years, and lied about state funded free health care. Dean is no saint, although neither is bush dont get me wrong. And if 5,000 innocent lives is what it is going to take to deal with such a threat as iraq and other similar threats than so be it. If you just use the numbers of the dead innocents to say why a war is bad, thats wrong. Their is no doubt in my mind that if Saddam stayed in power many more than 5,000 innocent people would have died to his rule. In north korea millions of people are dieing due to their dictator. So if 20,000 innocents died to stop that regime do you think it would justify saving the millions. Not that America should be the police of the world i still believe their actions in Iraq were well worth it.
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
SlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 14 years, 9 months
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: d33p]
#1712798 - 07/13/03 09:42 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I read that article and don't see how it proves Dean has lied. It points out as you do that Dean sealed his records. Well that's not very admirable, but apparently they're not sealed anymore (correct me if I'm wrong) and I don't hear any major scandals coming of it.
Quote:
Having supported Vermont's divisive civil union law, which confers the legal rights of husbands and wives onto homosexual couples -- he signed the controversial legislation behind closed doors.
What the hell is the author trying to get at with this? She's implying it was something that he wanted to hide by signing behind closed doors, but it obviously isn't because he's proud of signing it. Maybe that's where the bill was presented to him? What if he signed it on the toilet? He signed it and he stands by it. What a pointless point.
Quote:
"While he has never performed an abortion himself, he is strongly pro-choice and certainly understands the medical procedures involved." Which must rate as the medical equivalent of not inhaling."
Is it required that he must have performed an abortion because he supports it? Is he supposed to seek out pregnant girls because he's pro-choice? The not-inhaling comparison here is laughable. What does his never having performed an abortion have to do with another Clinton lie? Maybe if he turned an abortion down, then she'll have an argument.
Quote:
Vermont's status as one of a handful of states in which abortions may be performed by non-doctors? In 1998 -- the last year the state released data -- 183 girls under the age of 18 had abortions, more than half of them performed by non-doctors: Morality aside, is this even a healthy option?
Maybe this one could be explained to me a little better. Abortions are held everywhere each year by non-doctors. That's why it has to be legal, so girls have a safe alternative. Just because statistics were kept in this state of girls who were too embarrassed to go see a doctor, the author credits this problem to Dean's morality. How can Dean be blamed for girls not going to the doctor?
Quote:
With lower-than-average incomes, a heavier-than-average tax burden, and some of the highest health insurance premiums in the country, Vermont is hardly paradise for working people
The author concludes with a bunch of general, unsupported statements. I've heard statements like this used to back up globalization in foreign countries, with further inspection showing the facts the right-winger was stating came from the years of socialism. However, the heavier-than-average tax burden goes without saying when things are more socialized, and is the common conservative argument against socialism. However, with higher taxes, life becomes much more bearable when a poor man doesn't have to worry about things like health care, and gets paid higher wages.
Quote:
As governor, Dean raided special funds to even out budget shortfalls
Here, the author fails to support her claim with fact, and doesn't even tell us what these "special funds" are. A balanced budget is a balanced budget... I dare someone to find one Republican executive adept at producing one. At the bottom of the page is an advertisement for the latest book by Ann Coulter. How appropriate. Ann Coulter's book is full of numbers out of context, outright fabrications, and lacking in citations. How can anyone defend McCarthyism? Everybody knows it was a bullshit political campaign. They didn't find one Communist spy. And back onto the subject of Iraq, don't look at my 5,000 deaths fact. Look at the 1/3 one... can you seriously believe that such a feeble military was a threat to anyone? Ask a citizen from any neighboring country if they saw Saddam as a bigger threat than Bush, and I'm sure 9 out of 10 times you'll get a negative answer. The fact that members of the Bush admin. have been pushing for an Iraq war for about 7 years (go to newamericancentury.org) displays that this was a political war. It wasn't about liberating people or finding WMDs. It was about establishing Mid-East hegemony and for giving us a reliable oil source. You bring up North Korea. You won't see us invading them anytime soon. North Korea actually has a military. That would be a WAR, not the massacre we saw with Iraq. Also, there's no political advantage with that war. If you think the US goes to war to save lives, you have a bullet in your head, my friend.
-------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
|
d33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 11 years, 3 days
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: SlapnutRob]
#1712845 - 07/13/03 10:01 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
slapnut look at this scenerio: would you rather fight with lenox lewis or gary coleman. But gary coleman is in a bio chem suit and has a canister of nerve gas. Size of a military means little with the types of weapons today. Many lives can still be lost from any small groups of people. And you say "[the war] wasn't about liberating people or finding WMDs. It was about establishing Mid-East hegemony and for giving us a reliable oil source." Where is your secret tape record backing this up. There is no actaul proof that that is what the war was soley about. And you brought up the case of 5,000 innocents dead and how that makes the war wrong. So just when i provide an opposition to that dont say i have a bullet in my head.
and about howard dean. He has said if not bragged numerous times of how he "balanced" his states budget and had made free healthcare. It has been shown the bulk of this free health care is paid by federal tax payers. How is that not a lie?
And you disect every aspect of that article by asking wheres the proof. I have yet to see any real reliable proof against most of bush's actions other than pasteings off cnn.com here. It seems to me the tiniest shred of evidence against something bush did wrong is accepted whereas dean is soem untouchable saint. That was a news article if the author cited and back up everything that was said it would have been incredibly long. No one would read that, thus making it worthless to post. You asked for some lies from howard dean i showed you some of them. Although you say there is not sufficent proof i am certinly not gonna spend any of my time hunting down any missing doing's of dean along with an essay of evidence backing it up. And his records are still sealed. And i see why if there is nothing about him to cause scandal he would seal them twice as long as normal.
-------------------- I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends. bang bang
|
SlapnutRob
Toolhead

Registered: 03/31/03
Posts: 520
Loc: Michigan
Last seen: 14 years, 9 months
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: d33p]
#1712912 - 07/13/03 10:22 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
d33p said: slapnut look at this scenerio: would you rather fight with lenox lewis or gary coleman. But gary coleman is in a bio chem suit and has a canister of nerve gas. Size of a military means little with the types of weapons today. Many lives can still be lost from any small groups of people. And you say "[the war] wasn't about liberating people or finding WMDs. It was about establishing Mid-East hegemony and for giving us a reliable oil source." Where is your secret tape record backing this up. There is no actaul proof that that is what the war was soley about. And you brought up the case of 5,000 innocents dead and how that makes the war wrong. So just when i provide an opposition to that dont say i have a bullet in my head.
d33p, it's just a fact that this was was in the works since the mid-nineties. Go to that webpage I provided and see how Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz signed a letter to Clinton telling him to invade Iraq. Iraq wasn't a threat then, and they're not a threat now... the difference is that the neo-cons got a guy in office that they could not only influence, but get in the cabinet of. Isn't it strange that Iraq was never presented as a threat until after 9/11? 9/11 in conjunction with badgering by neo-cons convinced Bush he needed to invade Iraq. I don't see how anyone taking an objective look at these facts could rationally decide this wasn't a politcal war. I told you you have a bullet in your head because you refuse to believe the US would go to war solely on political reasons.
BTW, sure size of military doesn't make a big difference when you have massive technology, but Iraq had feeble outdated weapons. Last year the US spent 50% of the world's defense spending while Iraq spent less than half a percent. Their military was 3 times as powerful in 91 and they couldn't successfully take over Kuwait then, which is the size of Vermont compared to their California.
Quote:
and about howard dean. He has said if not bragged numerous times of how he "balanced" his states budget and had made free healthcare. It has been shown the bulk of this free health care is paid by federal tax payers. How is that not a lie?
That's not a lie, that's an exclusion. If I tell you I made a birdhouse, but exclude the fact that the wood and tools were my friend Jerry's, I'm not lying when I tell you I made a birdhouse.
Quote:
And you disect every aspect of that article by asking wheres the proof. I have yet to see any real reliable proof against most of bush's actions other than pasteings off cnn.com here. It seems to me the tiniest shred of evidence against something bush did wrong is accepted whereas dean is soem untouchable saint. That was a news article if the author cited and back up everything that was said it would have been incredibly long. No one would read that, thus making it worthless to post. You asked for some lies from howard dean i showed you some of them.
Don't even start defending Bush. There's no way a rational person can look in the mirror and say they believe he hasn't told a bulk of lies and isn't corrupt. Dean is "some untouchable saint" because the shit the righties have on him is mostly unimportant, as that article showed. Bush has had a few years as president, there's just a lot more to talk about.
BTW, you didn't present one lie.
Quote:
Although you say there is not sufficent proof i am certinly not gonna spend any of my time hunting down any missing doing's of dean along with an essay of evidence backing it up.
That's not much of an "essay of evidence" if after my dissection you can only defend the part about his balanced budget, which wasn't a lie at all.
-------------------- Anything stated above is fictional roleplay dialog by the character that is Slapnut Rob, in no way representing the actions or beliefs of the man behind the keys.
|
Cornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 20 years, 6 months
|
Re: US losses in Iraq [Re: SlapnutRob]
#1712940 - 07/13/03 10:30 PM (20 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Damn slapnut, those are some of the best arguments I've seen on these boards. Nice job! 
--------------------
|
|