• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

EDIT: Linky - Iraqi troops now armed with chemical weapon artillery shells

G

Grasshopper27

Banned
New EDIT:

Iraq Arming Troops With Chemical Weapons

Link now provided...

------------------------------

Yes, those same chemical weapons Saddam claims he doesn't have... US inteligence sources have said that the CIA has passed along target info to the US military about where the chemical weapons have been deployed in the field so they can target them in the first hours of the war.

They said the information was good enough that they now know that the shells have been armed (meaning loaded with chemical weapons) and have been deployed to forward positions.

Just saw this on Fox News about 5 minutes ago, couldn't find a web link yet.

: ) Hopper
 
In a way, this is good news; it vindicates the United States and is a "finger in the face" to all those countries that thought we were full of you-know-what when we kept trying to tell them that Iraq was holding out.

May God protect those in harms way.
 
Good that we have targeting data......those locations are perfect targets for using a fuel air explosive....don't have to worry about disposing of the chemicals or biological agents if you just burn it all.

Oh wait....I thought Iraq didn't have any chemical or biological weapons.
 
Originally posted by: MichaelD
In a way, this is good news; it vindicates the United States and is a "finger in the face" to all those countries that thought we were full of you-know-what when we kept trying to tell them that Iraq was holding out.

May God protect those in harms way.
Click to expand...

Well...I'm for this action but I'll believe the news once they show proof that those weapons are full of chemical agents.
 
Originally posted by: MichaelD
In a way, this is good news; it vindicates the United States and is a "finger in the face" to all those countries that thought we were full of you-know-what when we kept trying to tell them that Iraq was holding out.

May God protect those in harms way.
Click to expand...

Very True.

God Bless the troops..

And our president and allies under this incredibly tense time...
 
Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
Yes, those same chemical weapons Saddam claims he doesn't have... US inteligence sources have said that the CIA has passed along target info to the US military about where the chemical weapons have been deployed in the field so they can target them in the first hours of the war.

They said the information was good enough that they now know that the shells have been armed (meaning loaded with chemical weapons) and have been deployed to forward positions.

Just saw this on Fox News about 5 minutes ago, couldn't find a web link yet.

: ) Hopper
Click to expand...

You know what I'm going to say 😀 ...

Now we've had claims of:

Scuds moving west
chemical weapons shells being loaded
a lot more other stuff as well I guess

all from American officials. I'm a bit of a cynic. In order to believe such things in need a bit of help.

i.e. pictures

or

independant verification

or

results produced by announcing the evidence (i.e. - too late now I know - but the weapons inspectors being pointed towards it).

Basically I need more than words - however true they maybe - from the country leading the prosecution of war against Iraq. Please US government - I'm not too stupid - can I have some sort of verification?

Andy
 
Way to get our soldiers killed. So far we've convinced Saddam to dig his chemical weapons stores out of storage and load them into actual missles. How long till we get him to actual try and use them against us?

This is why I'm against a war in Iraq. Not because I care how many civilians will die, but because we're just pissing off a guy who's been perfectly passive for over a decade and getting him to start lobbing chemical weapons all over the place. American soldiers will die.
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Way to get our soldiers killed. So far we've convinced Saddam to dig his chemical weapons stores out of storage and load them into actual missles. How long till we get him to actual try and use them against us?

This is why I'm against a war in Iraq. Not because I care how many civilians will die, but because we're just pissing off a guy who's been perfectly passive for over a decade and getting him to start lobbing chemical weapons all over the place. American soldiers will die.
Click to expand...

Your against a war with a man who has Stayed passive for 10 years.

What is gonna keep him that way?

Oh we forced him to dig out the chemical weapons, OH THE ONES HE DIDNT HAVE.. .

What a joke.

he is going down Fred. 😀
 
Originally posted by: MichaelD
In a way, this is good news; it vindicates the United States and is a "finger in the face" to all those countries that thought we were full of you-know-what when we kept trying to tell them that Iraq was holding out.

May God protect those in harms way.
Click to expand...
Word

 
NOooooo WAyyyyyyyy Martin Sheen said they don't have that stuff..quick..send Sean Penn over there for the final word on this.
 
Originally posted by: The_good_guy
arent these teh same chemical weapons we gave them in teh 80's?
Click to expand...
LOL!

No, these would be loaded with VX and Sarin nerve agents... those were produced by Iraq as recently as last year...

: ) Hopper
 
I wonder if when our troops start coming back all screwed up by chem/bio weapons our government officials will be denying any were used a la our last episode over there.
 
Originally posted by: Fencer128
You know what I'm going to say 😀 ...
Click to expand...
Yes, and part of me agrees with you...

There is something to be said for this, if our info is so good, why can't we show it? If it is not so good, are we really right?

The answer of course is simple. It doesn't matter. It isn't our obligation to prove Saddam has WMD. It is Saddam's obligation to prove he doesn't.

That is what Resolution 1441 was supposed to force him to do.

Basically I need more than words - however true they maybe - from the country leading the prosecution of war against Iraq. Please US government - I'm not too stupid - can I have some sort of verification?
Click to expand...
I have a feeling we're going to see some verification in the next week from Iraq itself... They will either use them, or they won't and we'll find them...

: ) Hopper
 
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: notfred
Way to get our soldiers killed. So far we've convinced Saddam to dig his chemical weapons stores out of storage and load them into actual missles. How long till we get him to actual try and use them against us?

This is why I'm against a war in Iraq. Not because I care how many civilians will die, but because we're just pissing off a guy who's been perfectly passive for over a decade and getting him to start lobbing chemical weapons all over the place. American soldiers will die.
Click to expand...

You against a man who has Stayed passive for 10 years.

What is gonna keep him that way?

Oh we forced him to dig out the chemical weapons, OH THE ONES HE DIDNT HAVE.. .

What a joke.

he is going down Fred. 😀
Click to expand...

Who care sif he had them or not if they were buried in a hidden undergrgound bunker? They'd still be there if we weren't putting a massive army on his borders.

No one's going to keep anyone passive. We can kill saddam, and we won't have to watch him anymore to make sure he doesn't start attacking any other countries, but some new dictator will show up in some other country and do hte same thing. It's not like we can jsut deal with it and then be done. We're gonig to be watching people either way, so why not do it without having chemical weapons shot at our friends and family members?
 
I still have trouble believing the "chemical weapon deployment"

If its so easy to track these chemical weapons - why couldn't the CIA point the weapons inspectors towards them?

The only way I can figure it is if:

They knew where they were all along and kept this a secret (I don't know why that would be the case).

They've suddenly developed new intelligence allowing them to know this. (how?)

They're making it up. (why?)

This does not make sense to me. I could apply the same arguement to the "deployment of Scuds" thread from the other day. Anyone got any ideas how this is all getting reported now?

Andy
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Originally posted by: bjc112
Originally posted by: notfred
Way to get our soldiers killed. So far we've convinced Saddam to dig his chemical weapons stores out of storage and load them into actual missles. How long till we get him to actual try and use them against us?

This is why I'm against a war in Iraq. Not because I care how many civilians will die, but because we're just pissing off a guy who's been perfectly passive for over a decade and getting him to start lobbing chemical weapons all over the place. American soldiers will die.
Click to expand...

You against a man who has Stayed passive for 10 years.

What is gonna keep him that way?

Oh we forced him to dig out the chemical weapons, OH THE ONES HE DIDNT HAVE.. .

What a joke.

he is going down Fred. 😀
Click to expand...

Who care sif he had them or not if they were buried in a hidden undergrgound bunker? They'd still be there if we weren't putting a massive army on his borders.

No one's going to keep anyone passive. We can kill saddam, and we won't have to watch him anymore to make sure he doesn't start attacking any other countries, but some new dictator will show up in some other country and do hte same thing. It's not like we can jsut deal with it and then be done. We're gonig to be watching people either way, so why not do it without having chemical weapons shot at our friends and family members?
Click to expand...


I can't believe your even saying this. "they would still be there " the ones he agreed to not HAVE, or LIED ABOUT HAVING. That's total BS and you know it.

We can make sure they are not there, BOTH of them (weapons and sadaam)
 
Has it occured to you they could be saying this to justify total anhilation of iraqi troops though carpet bombing forward positions white flag or no white flag?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top