Blix: Iraq hasn't used banned weapons

[calbear2000]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030327/ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_un_iraq_blix_2

 

[NightTrain]

"I think everybody will be relieved that no prohibited weapons are being used," Blix said. "I didn't think they would do it because ... the world would say they were liars and ... the skepticism about the armed conflict would, I think, give way to one of greater understanding. ... But I may be wrong."

I hope he went about his job as an inspector *without* the 3 martini lunch. Sheesh.

 

[TMPadmin]

It's only a matter of time. Wait and see.

 

[calbear2000]

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
It's only a matter of time. Wait and see.

hope you're right...

 

[UltraQuiet]

I'm pretty sure that the CentCom briefing yesterday mentioned that some of the missiles that had been fired had gone as far as 190 km, which I think is a technical violation of the resolution.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
I'm pretty sure that the CentCom briefing yesterday mentioned that some of the missiles that had been fired had gone as far as 190 km, which I think is a technical violation of the resolution.

[sarcasm] Of course thats not true Dave! We didn't give them enough time to disarm!

[/sarcasm]

 

[Thraxen]

That's plain wrong. Iraq has launched 10 or scuds toward Kuwait and they have a longer range than Iraq is allowed to possess.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: calbear2000

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
It's only a matter of time. Wait and see.

hope you're right...

Why?

 

[NightTrain]

I was kinda wondering that myself

 

[Michael]

Thraxen - Although the media seems to like to call any missile a "scud", there has been no confirmation from the US or the UK that any SCUDs have been fired.

Michael

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: calbear2000

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
It's only a matter of time. Wait and see.

hope you're right...

Why?

Why not? Some people are on the fence and want justification for the war. Puhlease tell me you understand that.

 

[Thraxen]

Although the media seems to like to call any missile a "scud", there has been no confirmation from the US or the UK that any SCUDs have been fired.

Well, Patriots have been shooting down missles that have been coming from inside Iraq. Want to bet that they aren't scuds?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
I'm pretty sure that the CentCom briefing yesterday mentioned that some of the missiles that had been fired had gone as far as 190 km, which I think is a technical violation of the resolution.

[sarcasm] Of course thats not true Dave! We didn't give them enough time to disarm!

[/sarcasm]

Well, you didn't. Some 1xx missiles were found to be "illegal" and were in the process of being destroyed. At the rate they were being destroy, they'd have been destroyed in about 2 weeks more.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
I'm pretty sure that the CentCom briefing yesterday mentioned that some of the missiles that had been fired had gone as far as 190 km, which I think is a technical violation of the resolution.

[sarcasm] Of course thats not true Dave! We didn't give them enough time to disarm!

[/sarcasm]

Well, you didn't. Some 1xx missiles were found to be "illegal" and were in the process of being destroyed. At the rate they were being destroy, they'd have been destroyed in about 2 weeks more.

On what day will I graduate college? Since you seem to be such a good fcvking mind reader I figured you would know. How do you know the "rate" they were being destroyed at... how do you KNOW that was his only supplies. Please tell me who your information source is because they seem to be more informed than anyone else.

 

[rickn]

they'll hold out to the 11th hour. When it all comes to bear on Baghdad, the chemical weapons will be unleashed.

 

[Thraxen]

Well, you didn't. Some 1xx missiles were found to be "illegal" and were in the process of being destroyed. At the rate they were being destroy, they'd have been destroyed in about 2 weeks more.

LOL...spare me. They had more than a decade to do so, yet only if they had that last two weeks...right?

 

[Nyical]

I thinks it dosent matter if they use them or not, its just the factor that they have them.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Nyical
I thinks it dosent matter if they use them or not, its just the factor that they have them.

also the fact he never provided proof of their destruction as HE AGREED, why wouldnt he save the evidence, all it would have done was stop all inspections, lift all sanctions, and he would remain in power free from any type of oversight with the full reserves of Iraqi oil at his personal disposal, I guess it just made more sense to destroy the only evidence that would have stopped this war from even happening...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: DaveSohmer
I'm pretty sure that the CentCom briefing yesterday mentioned that some of the missiles that had been fired had gone as far as 190 km, which I think is a technical violation of the resolution.

[sarcasm] Of course thats not true Dave! We didn't give them enough time to disarm!

[/sarcasm]

Well, you didn't. Some 1xx missiles were found to be "illegal" and were in the process of being destroyed. At the rate they were being destroy, they'd have been destroyed in about 2 weeks more.

On what day will I graduate college? Since you seem to be such a good fcvking mind reader I figured you would know. How do you know the "rate" they were being destroyed at... how do you KNOW that was his only supplies. Please tell me who your information source is because they seem to be more informed than anyone else.

Evertime they destroyed some missiles, it was reported.

Mar 7

Mar 12

Mar 14

Ask and you shall receive.

 

[Thraxen]

Evertime they destroyed some missiles, it was reported.

Haha...it's called appeasement. Iraq had more than a decade to comply. They were just destroying a few here and there in the final days to try and buy more time and win support.

 

[drewshin]

i think it was such a lie concocted by bush when he said that it didnt matter that they were destroying their missiles, because they had "evidence" that the iraqis were producing more. of course, this "evidence" never surfaced. i can understand powell saying that they have mobile chemical labs that are hard to track, but come on, missile factories are not SMALL or MOBILE.

i havent heard the administration or the generals mention anything about out of range missiles, so i assume that they were "in" range.

 

[Thraxen]

havent heard the administration or the generals mention anything about out of range missiles, so i assume that they were "in" range

"Iraq developed the short range Al-Samoud ballistic missile, which was allowed under U.N. resolutions as long as its range did not extend beyond 93 miles (150 km). But a panel of experts commissioned by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix found that the range limit was violated during test firings and the diameter of the missiles' engines was 760 millimeters, exceeding the 600-millimeter limit. "

That's from CNN.com's information about the Al Samoud missles. Also, if they were "in range", why were they ordered to destroy them? Because they weren't "in range".

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

havent heard the administration or the generals mention anything about out of range missiles, so i assume that they were "in" range

"Iraq developed the short range Al-Samoud ballistic missile, which was allowed under U.N. resolutions as long as its range did not extend beyond 93 miles (150 km). But a panel of experts commissioned by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix found that the range limit was violated during test firings and the diameter of the missiles' engines was 760 millimeters, exceeding the 600-millimeter limit. "

That's from CNN.com's information about the Al Samoud missles. Also, if they were "in range", why were they ordered to destroy them? Because they weren't "in range".

He's talking(I assume) about the missiles actually fired so far, not necessarily Al Samoud 2s. I've heard the fired missiles as having exceeded the accepted range and as having been within the accepted range, so whether illegal Al Samoud 2s have been used yet or not is still up in the air. I heard of a recent report saying that the Coalition had found the missile launcher they suspected of firing into Kuwait. It would be interesting to know where they found it, could settle the missile range question.

 

[da loser]

as davesohmer already pointed out... centcom has already said 3 missiles have exceeded the 150km range. 180soemthing, 154, and 142. The 142km one was intercepted by a patriot missile, otherwise it would've exceeded 150km. What kinds of missiles and such whos knows and it doesn't really matter if it's a SCUD, Al-Samoud, etc.. Obviously the media is using SCUD as a generic term for surface to surface missiles.

 

[no0b]

Originally posted by: calbear2000

Originally posted by: TMPadmin
It's only a matter of time. Wait and see.

hope you're right...

I hope hes not...


well find them a month or so after the fighting has stopped... we better not find them in the battlefield