How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 SADDAM AND WMDS
 1 2 3 4 5 6
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

SADDAM AND WMDS

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


0 posted 09-14-2011 10:54 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.
“SADDAM AND WMDS

When American tanks smashed into Baghdad, Saddam had already completed construction of an anthrax production facility, which was a week away from going live. If it had been permitted to go into production, this one facility could have produced ten tons of weaponized anthrax a year. Experts estimate that anthrax spores that infect the skin will kill 50 percent of untreated victims. Inhaled anthrax will kill 100 percent of untreated victims and 50 percent of those receiving immediate treatment. That means that a mere 1 percent of Saddam’s annual production (200 pounds) sprayed by crop-duster over New York City would have killed upwards of three million people.

Anthrax, however, was far from the only WMD Saddam was actively researching and working assiduously to acquire. He also had teams working overtime to create a stockpile of some of the most deadly biological weapons possible. Several years ago, the press had a field day when two suspected mobile bio-labs, presented at the U.N. as evidence of Saddam’s continuing WMD development programs, actually turned out to be weather-balloon stations. That same press, however, then ignored the fact that postwar investigators found five actual mobile bio-labs in and around Baghdad. One of these labs was discovered in a mosque, which had been placed off-limits to prewar U.N. inspectors. Another was found in Baghdad’s Central Public Health Laboratory. One can imagine the anguished cries from the Left if we had bombed what the Iraqis claimed was a public-health facility. Saddam even had a huge bio-warfare production facility masquerading as the Samarra Drug Company. This facility would have been capable of producing up to 10,000 liters of deadly pathogens a year. It was less than a month from going into production when the invasion of Iraq began. If this plant had turned its attention to botulinum toxin, it could have produced enough in a few months to wipe out the world.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277115/saddam-what-we-now-know-jim-lacey?page=1


The article goes on . . .


.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


1 posted 09-15-2011 01:00 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

I haven't clicked the link, John, and doubt I'll find time to do so any time soon. Just one question, though: Was the article written by Bush? Or did he, again, just cherry pick the data that would promote his cause? LOL.

It's been almost ten years since we stormed into Iraq in fear of WMD. It's nearly that long since no WMD were found. None, nada, zilch. And it's been almost that long, again, since the Bush administration admitted none were to be found.

Bush got what he wanted. What purpose do the lies serve ten years later?

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


2 posted 09-15-2011 08:43 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“It's been almost ten years since we stormed into Iraq in fear of WMD. It's nearly that long since no WMD were found. None, nada, zilch. And it's been almost that long, again, since the Bush administration admitted none were to be found. “

“When American tanks smashed into Baghdad, Saddam had already completed construction of an anthrax production facility, which was a week away from going live. If it had been permitted to go into production, this one facility could have produced ten tons of weaponized anthrax a year. Experts estimate that anthrax spores that infect the skin will kill 50 percent of untreated victims. Inhaled anthrax will kill 100 percent of untreated victims and 50 percent of those receiving immediate treatment. That means that a mere 1 percent of Saddam’s annual production (200 pounds) sprayed by crop-duster over New York City would have killed upwards of three million people. . .”

Is the difference here a matter of timing; a week,  a month?   Or are you saying the author is lying?


"Given the evidence, it appears that we removed Saddam’s regime not a moment too soon."


.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


3 posted 09-15-2011 12:00 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Or are you saying the author is lying?

I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt, John, and we all know how well that turned out. Of course, the author is lying. Just like Bush did. Not directly, perhaps, not blatantly, but lying nonetheless. Saddam Hussein was no more a threat to the United States then than he is today.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


4 posted 09-15-2011 01:12 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


     I'm willing to say I'm outraged; permit me to express doubt that The National; Review or its faithful readers would join me in that position, however, in the same way that they would fail, or most of them at any rate, to agree with my stance against against torture  Perhaps I'm merely being narrow minded here, though, and would appreciate anybody who disagrees to feel free to speak up.

     Politicians lie.  Nation states lie.  Some lie more openly and less skillfully than others.  "I have never had sex with that woman," would count as a low point for bald and barefaced lying to my mind.  The whole weapons of mass destruction business, if anything, was worse because we have so much evidence that it was false, including statements from the Former President who made many of the statements in the first place.  His VP, whose memoir has recently emerged, has apparently been seeking help in bolstering sales.  

     It still seems fairly clear to me that there we no weapons of mass destruction.  If the excuses the National Review finds suitable for going to war in Iraq were in fact sufficient, then the argument they've been making about the war  we've been supporting in Libya is spurious as well, and, alas, I believe they are correct in that case.  Murdering people in your own country and threatening to construct weapons of mass destruction is not necessarily enough cause for the United States to declare war on you.  Not on China, not on North Korea, not or Iran and not on the other places throughout the world where the situation is playing itself out.  The conditions may be necessary but they may or may not be sufficient.  In the Case of Iraq, they were downright stupid at the time.  George Bush the Elder appeared to have had a pretty good idea that was the case, and seemed to have had a pretty good notion of what would have happened had he pursued the course he son decided to follow.  He seemed to understand that deposing the government was not in the best interests of These United States, nor of the Iraqi people, nor of the middle east as a whole, though it might have delighted the extreme right of his party.

     Fortunately for the extreme right of The Republican party and unfortunately for the rest of the country, The extreme Right prevailed, and now we have their revisionists at The National Review busy trying to wite-out history and rewrite it.  

     I'd rather simply keep to the facts.  They're so much lower on sugar and bulky fillers and higher on nourishing  protein.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


5 posted 09-15-2011 05:18 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“Jim Lacey
: 09/15/11 16:45

DOCUMENTATION:
FOR ALL WHO HAVE ASKED
All of the WMD Information comes out of the Duelfer Commission Report -- Volumes II and particularly III
Link here: External Link  

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/duelfer/index.html


This is the report that the left said proved there were no WMDs --- Of course, they only read the executive summary.
The Commission was put together to look into what went wrong with pre-war intelligence and that is what they reported out on. However, in the two volumes no one bothered to read they list all of the stuff they did find. Of course you have to read almost to the end of Volume III to learn about the real bio labs

AS FOR THE TERRORIST STUFF
This is a short version of a report I co-wrote. All of the information comes from captured Iraqi documents, which have been reproduced in four supporting volumes.
LINK HERE: External Link

http://www.archive.org/details/IraqiPerspectivesReportSaddamAndTerrorismEm  ergingInsightsFromCaptured

And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg
Facts are hard to argue with!

Best to all,
Jim”

[URL=http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277115/saddam-what-we-now-know-jim-lacey?page=0]http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277115/saddam-what-we-now-know-jim-lacey?page=0[/   URL]


Somebody better at it than I  could
probably find the relevant sections . . .

.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


6 posted 09-15-2011 07:48 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I am not generally a fan of right wing sites.  This article, however, from the Cato Institute, originally published in 1998 seemed to make some solid points.  It also appears prophetic, something I can point out with a certain amo8unt of happiness because it echoes some of the points I made above in my coimments, which seem reasonable now and seemed reasonable in 1998.  

     This would be in contradistinction to the point of view  mentioned in the Article in The National Review, which was foolish then and which appears even more foolish now, given the events that have taken place since.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5884


     My comments about the article John has commended to us were made in my initial comments about the consequences of giving dictators information they do not wish to receive and the often terminal folly of such courses of action.  Reports to S.H. were most likely to confirm information he expected to hear confirmed.  Failure to do so would not be in the author's long term survival interests.

     Just as, might I hasten to add, disconfirming the answers a torturer wishes to receive does not seem to be a good way of stopping the pain, even if you are telling the absolute truth.  The best way of stopping the pain is by telling the torturer exactly what he wants to hear about, say, weapons of mass destruction.

     Ours sources for much of this information are hopelessly compromised, and biased in favor of the  conclusions the people asking questions about WMD want to hear.  

    Aren't they?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> SADDAM AND WMDS Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors