Why wouldn't Iraq not want nuclear weapons. North Korea has proved how valuable they are. It seems they make for negotiations, whereas if you don't have them you get attacked.
The president is set to address the nation next Tuesday. Let's see if he offers any evidence. If he has it I think it's high time he told us about it, I think. It's easy for us to sit here and say that, but we don't really know what they know, and we don't know if what they know needs to be kept secret for a while, for whatever reason.
The thing that kills me about all this bitching is that Bush has not done anything, yet. He has the UN on his side as well as Congress. Iraq has been in violation of the UN over and over yet no one seems to care about that.
You clearly demonstrate on a regular basis your inability to hold any line of thought for very long, or to communicate with others effectively. Honestly, by several of your rants, I first wondered if you were actually "all there", but, have since determined you are simply an eccentric type and without certain social skills.*sighs* you know what i mean, don't act like you are too dumb to get it...
And yes, i knew it...
"Yadda, Yadda, Yadda. I've seen more than my fair share of endgames, thus, the nick. Considering your usual jibber jabber, I wonder if you actually know what one is. You clearly demonstrate on a regular basis your inability to hold any line of thought for very long, or to communicate with others effectively. Honestly, by several of your rants, I first wondered if you were actually "all there", but, have since determined you are simply an eccentric type and without certain social skills."
------------------------------
In other words you made a fool of yourself and would like to change the subject. I know all about social skills. Hehe, and some about logical skills too. If I were etech I'd hound you unmercifully to get you to fess up to your boner.
------------------------------
In other words you made a fool of yourself and would like to change the subject.
I know all about social skills. Hehe, and some about logical skills too. If I were etech I'd hound you unmercifully to get you to fess up to your boner.So the cease-fire agreement has already been broken numerous times. You admit that you knew that. The reports by the inspectors from 1998 detailed numerous weapons still left in Iraq that were not in the report. Do you believe that Saddam destroyed all of those weapons out of the goodness of his heart?
Iraq?s Nuclear Weapons Program: Unresolved Issues May 12, 1998
Oh hell yeah, where does it end then? Perhaps "a warhead in every home" as a deterant against ones enemies?
North Korea has and is being dealt with, we've been through this with them on several occasions in the past and they have shown that they can and are willing to compromise and abide by those compromises, at least for a while. Clinton had a plan for pre-emptive strikes drawn up and ready to go back in '94, the NK buckled under, and behaved in fine fashion for several years afterward. Again now, they have raised concerns, and the same course is being taken.
Contrast Saddam, he was given a cease fire on certain terms which he agreed to, he has not abided by those almost from the word go and has made threats as well as violations to numerous to count since shortly after the cease fires inception. Bottom line, 12 years is enough, it is Saddams duty to prove he is in compliance and abide by the original treaty, he chooses not to and snubs the cease fire treaty. How long is this suppose to be acceptable?
Look at it this way, if a convict gets out of jail and is on parroll(sp?) and breaks it from day one, how long will he be allowed to stay out of jail and break his parroll?
Still don't get it huh?
You can continue to post old links, what really matters is if the UN considers the resolution broken (if Irak still has WMD's), if so, no arguments and plenty of support...
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
"Yadda, Yadda, Yadda. I've seen more than my fair share of endgames, thus, the nick. Considering your usual jibber jabber, I wonder if you actually know what one is. You clearly demonstrate on a regular basis your inability to hold any line of thought for very long, or to communicate with others effectively. Honestly, by several of your rants, I first wondered if you were actually "all there", but, have since determined you are simply an eccentric type and without certain social skills."
------------------------------
In other words you made a fool of yourself and would like to change the subject.
Yes, you are correct, you have once again made a complete moronic fool of yourself and now are attempting to weasal out.
I know you know about social skills, I'd just have thought someone in here would be on a level higher than 1st grade social skills. As far as logic, you have yet to prove you're logical about much of anything to anyone in here from what I've seen and read.Thing is, if you WERE etech, you would make a resemblence of sense, but, you're not.
Was there a time limit on non-compliance. Iraq gets ten years of lying and deceiving the world and it is only now that anything matters? Iraq gets since 1998 to develop and hide any weapons and now if nothing is found in 60 days why Uncle Saddam is now a Saint and clean?
Why not face it, we disagree here, we are discussing two different things, when you fail to show me that there are real evidence, you tell me that it doesn't matter anyway...
You know where i stand on this issue, if there are WMD's found, if the current resolution is broken, i am all for a war, if not, i'm against it...
We could review the facts, EndGame. I said that Iraq and the US lie. You replied that I said the US lies more. That was illogical and showed no deep thinking at all prompting me to say that you wouldn't make a very good chess player with such poor reasoning skills and would see few end games. You then replied, once again to emphasize your irrationality, right after my chess reference, that you doubt I know what an end game is. Hehe. You then procede to rant and rave about what a fool I am, how illogical I am and how lacking in social skills. You aren't much at debate obviously. You continue to blather on about how I'm this and that, but me, with all my lack of grace have demonstrated here two specifics of your lack of reasoning power. You go right on calling me the fool. It's quite acceptable comming from you. Kind of a compliment really. Good luck next time with your gambit. Try not to make it your king.
Good luck next time with your gambit. Try not to make it your king.Text1. The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the Security Council a report submitted by the Executive Chairman of the Special Commission established by the Secretary-General pursuant to paragraph 9 (b) (i) of Security Council resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991.
6 October 1998
D. Concealment, unilateral destruction and documents
36. The Commission's work designed to bring Iraq's prohibited weapons and related capabilities to final account has been significantly influenced by three Iraqi actions:
(a) The policy and practice of concealment;
(b) The actions collectively termed "unilateral destruction", by which Iraq secretly, and in contravention of resolution 687 (1991), destroyed weapons and related materials;
(c) The repeated denial of the existence of relevant documents on proscribed activities, with the exception of those Iraq unilaterally chooses to provide to the Commission.
37. Collectively, these three elements have made the verification of the series of declarations provided by Iraq far more difficult than should have been the case. This has seriously delayed the Commission's work. Over time, the Commission has achieved improvements in its understanding in each weapons area, largely through forensic methods, which may have been unnecessary had there been the full disclosure by Iraq required by the Security Council.
38. Iraq acknowledges concealment actions during the period 1991-1995. The goal was to satisfy the initial inspectors with limited amounts of missile and chemical weapons capabilities, which were duly destroyed in accordance with Security Council resolutions. However, as the Commission pursued the objectives of those resolutions, the Government of Iraq took further steps, including the secret unilateral destruction of retained weapons.
39. The pervasive extent of actions by Iraq to conceal proscribed weapons, production capability and documents and to limit knowledge about the degree of advancement of Iraq's weapons development efforts became obvious after the departure from Iraq of Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamal in August 1995. The Commission was then confronted with the fact that Iraq had successfully implemented concealment on a large scale.
40. Examples exist in all weapons areas. Programmes which were hidden include: indigenous missile production programme, the VX programme and the entire biological weapons programme. Over 150 boxes of documents preserving know-how of proscribed activities had been carefully selected and hidden from the Commission for years.
41. Given this background, the Commission has worked towards gaining an understanding of the full extent of Iraq's concealment efforts. These activities have been the source of much friction with Iraq during the last two years. The conduct of concealment inspections as well as other inspections designed to discover retained prohibited materials or documents has raised issues of access. It is fair to note that this would not have occurred had Iraq provided full and credible declarations after 1995. The Commission has been obliged to make extraordinary efforts to overcome these impediments. This has been very costly and time-consuming.
42. The Commission has raised the matter of concealment during high-level talks with Iraq. Iraq has been asked to provide evidence that such concealment has been terminated, but it has declined to discuss this issue.
43. Iraq's declarations on how it unilaterally destroyed its prohibited weapons have been wrong in some key ways. Because uncertainty remains with respect to some particular weapons, the inability to verify key parts of claimed weapons destruction is significant.
44. Understanding the full extent of Iraq's concealment actions is important to bolstering the credibility of the monitoring. Iraq successfully concealed a large portion of its proscribed capabilities even during the operation of the Commission's monitoring system. Understanding fully how this was done is elemental to being able to assure the Security Council that such actions may be detected in the future.
45. A clear resolution of these issues (concealment, unilateral destruction and documentation) would increase the level of confidence of any assessment by the Commission on the verification of Iraq's declarations of its proscribed weapons programmes, and their disposal.
What has changed since 1998 to make anyone believe that Saddam has changed his ways?
6 October 1998
D. Concealment, unilateral destruction and documents
36. The Commission's work designed to bring Iraq's prohibited weapons and related capabilities to final account has been significantly influenced by three Iraqi actions:
(a) The policy and practice of concealment;
(b) The actions collectively termed "unilateral destruction", by which Iraq secretly, and in contravention of resolution 687 (1991), destroyed weapons and related materials;
(c) The repeated denial of the existence of relevant documents on proscribed activities, with the exception of those Iraq unilaterally chooses to provide to the Commission.
37. Collectively, these three elements have made the verification of the series of declarations provided by Iraq far more difficult than should have been the case. This has seriously delayed the Commission's work. Over time, the Commission has achieved improvements in its understanding in each weapons area, largely through forensic methods, which may have been unnecessary had there been the full disclosure by Iraq required by the Security Council.
38. Iraq acknowledges concealment actions during the period 1991-1995. The goal was to satisfy the initial inspectors with limited amounts of missile and chemical weapons capabilities, which were duly destroyed in accordance with Security Council resolutions. However, as the Commission pursued the objectives of those resolutions, the Government of Iraq took further steps, including the secret unilateral destruction of retained weapons.
39. The pervasive extent of actions by Iraq to conceal proscribed weapons, production capability and documents and to limit knowledge about the degree of advancement of Iraq's weapons development efforts became obvious after the departure from Iraq of Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamal in August 1995. The Commission was then confronted with the fact that Iraq had successfully implemented concealment on a large scale.
40. Examples exist in all weapons areas. Programmes which were hidden include: indigenous missile production programme, the VX programme and the entire biological weapons programme. Over 150 boxes of documents preserving know-how of proscribed activities had been carefully selected and hidden from the Commission for years.
41. Given this background, the Commission has worked towards gaining an understanding of the full extent of Iraq's concealment efforts. These activities have been the source of much friction with Iraq during the last two years. The conduct of concealment inspections as well as other inspections designed to discover retained prohibited materials or documents has raised issues of access. It is fair to note that this would not have occurred had Iraq provided full and credible declarations after 1995. The Commission has been obliged to make extraordinary efforts to overcome these impediments. This has been very costly and time-consuming.
42. The Commission has raised the matter of concealment during high-level talks with Iraq. Iraq has been asked to provide evidence that such concealment has been terminated, but it has declined to discuss this issue.
43. Iraq's declarations on how it unilaterally destroyed its prohibited weapons have been wrong in some key ways. Because uncertainty remains with respect to some particular weapons, the inability to verify key parts of claimed weapons destruction is significant.
44. Understanding the full extent of Iraq's concealment actions is important to bolstering the credibility of the monitoring. Iraq successfully concealed a large portion of its proscribed capabilities even during the operation of the Commission's monitoring system. Understanding fully how this was done is elemental to being able to assure the Security Council that such actions may be detected in the future.
45. A clear resolution of these issues (concealment, unilateral destruction and documentation) would increase the level of confidence of any assessment by the Commission on the verification of Iraq's declarations of its proscribed weapons programmes, and their disposal.
What has changed since 1998 to make anyone believe that Saddam has changed his ways?
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
We could review the facts, EndGame. I said that Iraq and the US lie. You replied that I said the US lies more. That was illogical and showed no deep thinking at all prompting me to say that you wouldn't make a very good chess player with such poor reasoning skills and would see few end games. You then replied, once again to emphasize your irrationality, right after my chess reference, that you doubt I know what an end game is. Hehe. You then procede to rant and rave about what a fool I am, how illogical I am and how lacking in social skills. You aren't much at debate obviously. You continue to blather on about how I'm this and that, but me, with all my lack of grace have demonstrated here two specifics of your lack of reasoning power. You go right on calling me the fool. It's quite acceptable comming from you. Kind of a compliment really.
No, you lost from the word go. Why? Reference many of your posts in the past, well, lets just go back say a week. What you fail to understand is that the reference encompassed more than this last remark, which, was actually quite clear. Bottom line, you most certainly do imply with most post pertaining to the subject, that the US, the Bush administration especially, lies more than most, that you harbor great resentment for both, and that you have no answers or remedies, but simply choose to belittle and berate each as often as you possibly can. Checkmate.
BTW, for future reference, it's best not to lead off your chess match with the French strategy as you did in this instance.
Now now, EndGame, you simply manufacture all your support right out of the air. Your inability to make heads or tales of a simple statement like the US and Iraq both lie and your quick and factually incorrect assumption that I trust the US less shows you to be quite incapable of understanding anything I might have said during the last week. But since you like powerfully logical arguments, here's one that's iron clad:
I just looked over a number of your previous posts. You are a complete ignoramus. Sorry.
I just looked over a number of your previous posts. You are a complete ignoramus. Sorry.
Well then, having read most of yours, rest assured, you are a complete and utter moron!Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Now now, EndGame, you simply manufacture all your support right out of the air. Your inability to make heads or tales of a simple statement like the US and Iraq both lie and your quick and factually incorrect assumption that I trust the US less shows you to be quite incapable of understanding anything I might have said during the last week. But since you like powerfully logical arguments, here's one that's iron clad:
I just looked over a number of your previous posts. You are a complete ignoramus. Sorry.
No manufacturing needed, simply refer to the responses to your meaningless meanderings, it's quite obvious actually. My "support" is actually backed up quite solidly in almost every instance, but then what would you know about that I mean you're the one claiming to have been an Iraqi scientists.
Hehe, lets just take a look, EndGame:
No manufacturing needed, simply refer to the responses to your meaningless meanderings, it's quite obvious actually. My "support" is actually backed up quite solidly in almost every instance, but then what would you know about that I mean you're the one claiming to have been an Iraqi scientists. Oh sure, I know, it's all a joke, thing is, I wonder if you actually know that sometimes. Words are simple and easy to come by for you the way it seems, facts on the other hand, are clouded. Tell me, which and how much medication do they have you on at this point?
-------------------
Here you claim no need to manufacture and procede to call my posts meaningless meanderings. Perhaps at your level of comprehension that is true, but you are actually doing nothing more than manufacturing the ascertion. You give no proof. You simply state an opinion as fact. Totally weak and manufactured. And because you have no case and know it you back it up with this stunning piece of evidence: "it's quite obvious actually." Brilliant. I'm speechless. But you save the coup de grace for last: "My "support" is actually backed up quite solidly in almost every instance, but then what would you know about that I mean you're the one claiming to have been an Iraqi scientists." Wow! Your support is actually backed up by nothing but hot air in the form of an assertion that it's backed up. Yes, what would I know? Not much of course, but enough to know that your definitely backed up as far as constipation of the thinking process in concerned. Saying your backed up isn't back up. How pleased I am, however that you wonder if I know I'm joking. At least you don't have incontravertable proof in your own mind that I don't know when I am. That's a comfort. And as to easy words and cloudy facts, I have shown you two cases + where you err mentally. You've used a lot of words and shown nothing. Seems you're trying to put the shoe on the wrong foot. The doctors have me on laughing gas. Bye Bye.
No manufacturing needed, simply refer to the responses to your meaningless meanderings, it's quite obvious actually. My "support" is actually backed up quite solidly in almost every instance, but then what would you know about that I mean you're the one claiming to have been an Iraqi scientists. Oh sure, I know, it's all a joke, thing is, I wonder if you actually know that sometimes. Words are simple and easy to come by for you the way it seems, facts on the other hand, are clouded. Tell me, which and how much medication do they have you on at this point?
-------------------
Here you claim no need to manufacture and procede to call my posts meaningless meanderings. Perhaps at your level of comprehension that is true, but you are actually doing nothing more than manufacturing the ascertion. You give no proof. You simply state an opinion as fact. Totally weak and manufactured. And because you have no case and know it you back it up with this stunning piece of evidence: "it's quite obvious actually." Brilliant. I'm speechless.
But you save the coup de grace for last: "My "support" is actually backed up quite solidly in almost every instance, but then what would you know about that I mean you're the one claiming to have been an Iraqi scientists." Wow! Your support is actually backed up by nothing but hot air in the form of an assertion that it's backed up. Yes, what would I know? Not much of course, but enough to know that your definitely backed up as far as constipation of the thinking process in concerned. Saying your backed up isn't back up. How pleased I am, however that you wonder if I know I'm joking. At least you don't have incontravertable proof in your own mind that I don't know when I am. That's a comfort. And as to easy words and cloudy facts, I have shown you two cases + where you err mentally. You've used a lot of words and shown nothing. Seems you're trying to put the shoe on the wrong foot. The doctors have me on laughing gas. Bye Bye.TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter