AGuSTiN wrote:Yack yack yack, again, nothing to support your ranting after constantly getting beaten down by links that prove you wrong.
Ahhh the reply of the defeated. Whats that you say about links? Did you not read what a WMD is? Here I'll re-link it for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wmd I hope you can grasp what its saying you seem to be having a reading comprehension issue today. Or does its definition of what a WMD really is hurt your attempts at an argument? Hmmm I wonder.
Heres a link to MWD's in Iraq I bet you never read.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
And like they said in the link old doesn't make it less deadly. Let me know if you need more links.
Um, so who is it thats beaten down exactly? Doesn't look like its me. maybe you should do a little more research before you go on ranting.
Oh and just for fun I'll throw this one in too.
http://www.nysun.com/article/26514
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jack, please do us a favor and re-read my post. As sarcastic as it is, it makes 2 very salient points:
Chlorine gas's sole use is not just as a WoMD. It's also big in water purification and wastewater treatment (I work in the industry, so i believe i do have firsthand knowledge of this). Poorer countries, like Iraq, likely won't use Reverse Osmosis, UV treatment, Onsite Hypochlorite generation, or other expensive methods of treatment when they can get chlorine gas cheap that can purify water and treat their wastewater--and that's just one use of it. Hell, by that same logic, if Iraq was guilty for possesing Chlorine, which could be a WoMD if used, then We all here must be guilty of arson because we're in posession of gasoline.
ANYTHING could be a WoMD if you deploy it right. Hell, I could use poultry as a WoMD if so inclined...or a sausage on a stick...or a rabid bull who has be unwillingly subjected to a catheter rubbed in habańero juice...or a can of baked beans and a cork.
Really, as an american, you may be very used to a comfortable, posh lifestyle where you don't have to get your hands dirty and you expect the government to do everything for you, but that doesn't mean that you have to panic about the security of the American way when Vanuatu discovers black powder.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Jackalope wrote:AGuSTiN wrote:Yack yack yack, again, nothing to support your ranting after constantly getting beaten down by links that prove you wrong.
Ahhh the reply of the defeated. Whats that you say about links? Did you not read what a WMD is? Here I'll re-link it for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wmd I hope you can grasp what its saying you seem to be having a reading comprehension issue today. Or does its definition of what a WMD really is hurt your attempts at an argument? Hmmm I wonder.
I know what WMD's are. What you're trying in vain to tell you is that there is no proof that the chlorine has BEEN there, or is a new arrival.
Quote:
Heres a link to MWD's in Iraq I bet you never read.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html
Everbody has seen that. Everybody also knows Santorum is an idiot (that's why he didn't get reelected) and he took more than a few liberities with intelligence when he made that claim. So much so the the DoD rebutted him THEMSELVES
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/21/dod-disavows-santorum/
And here's a buttload more
http://www.google.com/search?q=rick+santorum+claiming+wmd+were+found&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Quote:
And like they said in the link old doesn't make it less deadly. Let me know if you need more links.
Um, so who is it thats beaten down exactly? Doesn't look like its me. maybe you should do a little more research before you go on ranting.
Oh and just for fun I'll throw this one in too. http://www.nysun.com/article/26514
Yeah, that article has this quote from Bush..
"And President Bush himself has conceded much of the point; in a televised prime-time address to Americans last month, he said, "It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong."
Said Mr. Bush, "We did not find those weapons."
So all we have that they moved the weapons is the word of a guy who signed a book deal.
Seriously Jack, this is what happens when you get your news from biased sources. It's clear you don't do any independent thought because you don't do any independent research. This information I'm giving is common knowledge to those who like to develop their OWN opinion.
I mean the Rick Santorum thing. COME ON!!
---
WOW AGuSTiN I got you 2 out of 3 so far tonight and now I'm going for the trifecta! I never said the Chlorine had been there all along but its there now. And no we haven't found huge stock piles of WMD's but we have found some and as I said in all my previous posts. I never remebered anyone giving an exact # and production date of what we'd find only that we would and have found some. You seem to read between the lines too much rather then read what is actualy in front of you. I've been saying all along that we've found WMD's and you and GAM keep insisting we haven't, so far I count 3 different types we've found, SERIN GAS, MUSTARD GAS, and now CHLORINE GAS. So you see I have not been wrong we have found some nasty stuff, I never said how much did I? Ohhhh feel the burn! LOL!
And Keeper I'm all to awair the proper uses of Chlorine as I'm the one who delivers hundreds of thousands of gallons of it on a weekly basis. I now work for Norfolk Southern the rail road and thanks to my fresh training provided by them and the FRA I know exactly how deadly Chlorine gas really is. But I guess its possible the Chlorine they found was intended for the use of pool boys to purify swimming pools.......but I doubt it.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
You fail to understand the point. If there are WMD's there NOW that weren't there BEFORE than that STILL means we went to war with Iraq for the wrong reasons. It ALSO means that the area is now MORE dangerous because of our war, and that we did MORE damage than good.
Do you see what I'm saying? Chronological order matters.
---
Jack:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2004/isg-final-report/
Read please.
It's the Iraq Survey Group's report to Congress.
There's a difference in what you (and all-knowing FOX) are talking about and the premise that the invasion was talking about.
Besides: Chlorine is a dual use chemical... You can't have potable water from the Tibres without it. The US specified sanctions against dual use technology forbade them getting Swedish/Canadian volume filters, and the activated carbon filtering technologies, so they had to use extra chlorination to kill germs and viruses, and use coarse sand and metal screens to remove most of the particulates.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
A lot of things have more then one purpose. Chlorine can be used for cleaning your pool as well as ethnic cleaning. (Tried to just tie the word cleaning together) It is on my list of CHEM weapons.
The point of this post was to bring attention to the now, not the then. I was not trying to discuss the "were there or were there not WMD's with Saddam". Frankly, that discussion is old and worn out. Please try to get this topic back in line, ok?
I wanted to know what everyone thought of the story on them finding IED's that were now laced with CHEM weapons.
Team GREEN
Suspension Division - "Handling Before Horsepower"
Making the turns since 1999
1998 EK Civic Hatch - Yes, it's a Honda.
Well, frankly, I don't like it.
Even if the Chlorine isn't in deadly amounts, having to gag, choke, cough, spit and getting teary eyed makes it a helluva harder to fight. I can see the strategy now, our guys get hit with one of these, then insurgents come out of the woodwork and start blasting. It'd give them the upper hand for sure.
If I were president, if the enemy opens the pandoras box on a chemical, then I'd start using it, too. Screw the moral high road, this is war. We never pretended we'd take the moral high road when threatened with nukes. They use it, we use it. It's the only real deterrence to make sure they don't.
---
The problem is that Chem weapons aren't really all that selective. If you dispense them in an urban area, you're going to kill people other than the bad guys.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Well, AGuSTiN, that is basically our policy on CHEM weapons. We will only use them in retaliation (I.E. the enemy uses them first). The kind of warfare we are dealing with in Iraq and Afganistan doesn't serve as an effective stage to use such weapons effectivly. Only on large forces in open areas are such weapons useful to us.
On the other hand, terrorists can use these very effectivly, as they do not put collateral damage high on their importance list. Not only will it create a psyhological effect on US troops, it will also reduce combat effectivness by burdening down the soldiers with cumbersome JSLIST gear. 130 degrees feels like 150 in JSLIST. Not to mention the weight and loss of senses such as hearing, speach, sight, smell, ect. All of these are extreamly limited when you don protective gear.
I just wish we would have; A. never gone over there in the first place and had more of an isolationist approch on the world's goings on, or B. Went out and won this war the way a war is supposed to be won instead of dealing with all this PC crap every day.
Team GREEN
Suspension Division - "Handling Before Horsepower"
Making the turns since 1999
1998 EK Civic Hatch - Yes, it's a Honda.
^^^keep in mind, that we did become a world power by being isolationists. every since we did away with that our position grows more shaky.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
