Kerrys Biggest Lie Yet

[Trooth]

Are you sure? The topic, and story, I recall was posted by you... Here it is: http://www.militaryaffairsboard.com/...ead.php?t=2048 there are other stories linked from here that include mustard gas finds, production equipment, and precursors.

The statements above were the cold hard facts, the WMD info, except for what Saddam admitted to, was labled intelligence and not fact. All of those statements I posted were pre-war. Now you can believe what you wish, but while you heard WMD, I heard the statements I quoted, and they are just a few. You say there was nothing other than incorrect intel to provide cause, I see incorrect intel as frosting. We all see what we want to see.

That was one shell that came from unknown sources, and was described as carrying a small amount. I agree it isn't nothing. But i don't remember Mr Powell's presentation to the UN highlighting that Iraq possed one very old shell containing a small amount of Sarin, one unweaponisable vial of Anthrax stored in a researchers fridge, half a dzen clean but empty chemicals shells and some missles that were a bit too efficient. I seem to remember presenting lots of hard and cold facts about what Iraq had.

I don't deny that politicos mentioned the things you say and i don't deny that they mentionew them before the war. However the timeline is the issue. They were trying to manage the agenda by keeping the debate on one topic and moving to another as that topic was brought into question.

I'd still like to see evidence that Iraq possessed WMD that could kill 500,000 people.

[Confed999]

That was one shell

You said "no" WMD, I was simply showing you were wrong. ;)

I seem to remember presenting lots of hard and cold facts about what Iraq had.

The only ones I remeber being listed without the "intel" qualifier were the ones Saddam admited to having reported by the UN. Like I said before, we may just be hearing what we want to hear.

They were trying to manage the agenda by keeping the debate on one topic and moving to another as that topic was brought into question.

The decade leading up to the liberation was rarely about WMD, unless it was to justify a military action. It was virtually all about the humanitarian situation, wasn't it? At least that's the timeline I remember.

I'd still like to see evidence that Iraq possessed WMD that could kill 500,000 people.

Now see, that's a qualifier. Had you said WMD able to kill 500,000 wasn't found, you would probably be right. I don't remember that being presented without the Saddam claim, and without the intel qualifier, though.

[Trooth]

The decade leading up to the liberation was rarely about WMD, unless it was to justify a military action. It was virtually all about the humanitarian situation, wasn't it? At least that's the timeline I remember.

But the debacle within the UN was all about WMD.

Now see, that's a qualifier. Had you said WMD able to kill 500,000 wasn't found, you would probably be right. I don't remember that being presented without the Saddam claim, and without the intel qualifier, though.

My personal view is that Weapons of Mass Destruction have to be pretty much capable of mass destruction. Don't get me wrong, if we hadn't found a single active, filled, ready to go shell (and we are close to that number!) but we had indeed found mobile anthrax labs, or just huge vasts of the stuff and so on, that would be "Mass Destruction" because even if they didn't have the delivery mechanism, they could dump it in rivers etc.

However we didn't. And we didn't find the delivery mechanism. There is no mass. Certainly Saddam had weapons of destruction and some of them were illegal. But they in now way were mass, nor could they have been mass.

I still think Iraq was a purely military strategic move to position for Iran, Syria et al, put pressure on SA (a friend too good to actually put real military pressure on) and to reduce dependancy upon Israel and Turkey.
I think the oil did come into it, but as a bonus along with liberation for the Iraqis from an oppressive regime.

[Officer of Engineers]

But the debacle within the UN was all about WMD.

I ain't a politician but I know the military has admitted we were wrong. Wonder why the military don't get the press about admitting we were wrong.

My personal view is that Weapons of Mass Destruction have to be pretty much capable of mass destruction. Don't get me wrong, if we hadn't found a single active, filled, ready to go shell (and we are close to that number!) but we had indeed found mobile anthrax labs, or just huge vasts of the stuff and so on, that would be "Mass Destruction" because even if they didn't have the delivery mechanism, they could dump it in rivers etc.

Hold on a second. I can find exactly that for you right now. It's called pesticide and the Iraqis have tons of it and is still manufacturing them. Any agricultural nation do that and it's a very small step to actually produce chem warfare agents from that point.

What we, the military, have always been harping on is the tons of VX and mustard that was not and is still not accounted for.

And we didn't find the delivery mechanism.

Yes, we did and there was a few surprises for me also. I didn't know they had weaponized sarin.

I still think Iraq was a purely military strategic move to position for Iran, Syria et al, put pressure on SA (a friend too good to actually put real military pressure on) and to reduce dependancy upon Israel and Turkey.
I think the oil did come into it, but as a bonus along with liberation for the Iraqis from an oppressive regime.

At this point, I think that's the political REMFs trying to save their collective ass from political lynching.

[Trooth]

[QUOTE=Officer of Engineers]Hold on a second. I can find exactly that for you right now. It's called pesticide and the Iraqis have tons of it and is still manufacturing them. Any agricultural nation do that and it's a very small step to actually produce chem warfare agents from that point.
[quote]
You can make bombs from fertilizers and so on. But what would make Iraq any different from any other nation in the "could" department.

What we, the military, have always been harping on is the tons of VX and mustard that was not and is still not accounted for.

I agree it is somewhat perplexing. My theory has been that the Iraqi beaucracry was not up to the task of dcoumenting the activites of the Iraqi military (especially as they were being deliberately vague anyway. Perhaps is simply wasn't accounted for when it was destroyed? Or perhaps it is still there to be found, but i think the latter is looking remote now.

Yes, we did and there was a few surprises for me also. I didn't know they had weaponized sarin.

Sorry, i meant the mechanism to turn them from weapons to mass weapons.

At this point, I think that's the political REMFs trying to save their collective ass from political lynching.

Forgive my ignorance, what is a REMF?

[Officer of Engineers]

You can make bombs from fertilizers and so on. But what would make Iraq any different from any other nation in the "could" department.

None but my point was that I, and the military, were very specific what we were looking for, specifically, those mustard and VX.

I agree it is somewhat perplexing. My theory has been that the Iraqi beaucracry was not up to the task of dcoumenting the activites of the Iraqi military (especially as they were being deliberately vague anyway. Perhaps is simply wasn't accounted for when it was destroyed? Or perhaps it is still there to be found, but i think the latter is looking remote now.

Destroying VX and mustard is a very tedious and very labour intensive event. You need to burn the materials in very superhot, concealed ovens. The Iraqis said they just dumped it and the site they said they dumped it was clean (ie there were some pretty birds flying around instead of skeletons everywhere). I imagine they dumped it in which case, finding them is even more paramount. This is now an ecological timebomb.

Forgive my ignorance, what is a REMF?

Rear Echelon Mother Fucks.

[Trooth]

Rear Echelon Mother Fucks.

LOL - not your favourite branch then?

Would they be the ones (to quote Black Adder Goes Forth - British sitcom based around WWI) "whose entire role is to work out how many deaths are needed to move the drinks cabinet 6 feet closer to Berlin"

[Officer of Engineers]

LOL - not your favourite branch then?

Would they be the ones (to quote Black Adder Goes Forth - British sitcom based around WWI) "whose entire role is to work out how many deaths are needed to move the drinks cabinet 6 feet closer to Berlin"

Loved that series. Actually, I'm thinking more of Monty Python's skits.