Former UN Inspector Scott Ritter: Iraq Will Crush U.S.

[Moonbeam]

X-man, I had no idea the war was over for you to know all these things.

 

[dahunan]

He also claimed that NK will not stop until they turn Tokyo into a sea of fire... in a perfect world somebody would have terminated this guy a long time ago.

 

[Red Dawn]

Ritter is an Idiot. One reason the Baghdad will not defeat us (one of a million) is that they haven't anyway to resupply their troops. No Soviet Union or China to sell or give them Arms like the Vietnamese had. If we just laid Seige to them they'd eventually have to give up because they'd run out of mkunitions. Granted it might take a year or so but once they've used them up that would be it.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I'm amazed he has time to speak to the media. I thought most of his time consisted of looking for 12 y/o in aol chat rooms.

Can't we just go ahead and kill him, for being a paid operative of Iraq as well as being a pedo?

Ah, another supporter of political murder.

 

[Jmman]

Wow, you guys have really persuaded me. Ritter may damn well be 100% right......Ritter Article

Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. UNSCOM lacks a full
declaration from Iraq concerning its prohibited capabilities, making any
absolute pronouncement about the extent of Iraq's retained proscribed
arsenal inherently tentative. But, based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like
anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient
quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as
well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq
probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well
as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery
shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains
significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to
rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.



Interesting how he changed his tune after he left the UN inspection team. I guess he has better intelligence now that he is a civilian......

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Jmman
Wow, you guys have really persuaded me. Ritter may damn well be 100% right......Ritter Article

Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. UNSCOM lacks a full
declaration from Iraq concerning its prohibited capabilities, making any
absolute pronouncement about the extent of Iraq's retained proscribed
arsenal inherently tentative. But, based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like
anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient
quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as
well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq
probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well
as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery
shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains
significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to
rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.



Interesting how he changed his tune after he left the UN inspection team. I guess he has better intelligence now that he is a civilian......

The New Republic December 21, 1998

 

[sandorski]

We shall see, I don't think the Coalition will lose, but it certainly won't have an easy time if they have to go into Bahgdad.

My earlier post was merely a response to the ease that some dismiss Ritter's claim. It's akin to calling Lenin a "Commie" when he yells out "Fire!" in a burning building.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I'm amazed he has time to speak to the media. I thought most of his time consisted of looking for 12 y/o in aol chat rooms.

Can't we just go ahead and kill him, for being a paid operative of Iraq as well as being a pedo?

Ah, another supporter of political murder.

You take him then. I call it cleansing the gene pool

 

[Judgement]

Originally posted by: Torghn
Just shows you how unreliable the weapon inspectors are.

This is exactly the same thing that came to my mind.

 

[seawolf21]

Iraq winning is not in the realm of the impossible. We have a political limit on how much we can bomb Baghdad. Beyond that and the Iraqi public will not only not rejoice at our presence but actually take up arms and engage us in urban warfare. The current support levels for the President will diminish over time. Support always go up when war starts, one, to support the troops and, two, not to appear unpatriotic. If the war lasts too long, the body count is too high, coupled with no evidence of WMDs, then the US public will demand we pull out.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: seawolf21
Iraq winning is not in the realm of the impossible. We have a political limit on how much we can bomb Baghdad. Beyond that and the Iraqi public will not only not rejoice at our presence but actually take up arms and engage us in urban warfare. The current support levels for the President will diminish over time. Support always go up when war starts, one, to support the troops and, two, not to appear unpatriotic. If the war lasts too long, the body count is too high, coupled with no evidence of WMDs, then the US public will demand we pull out.

I seriously doubt it. The war in Iraq can't go on as long as Viet Nam because the Wogs don't have the military support as far as war supplies like the Vietnamese did with the Soviets and the ChiComs.

 

[Stark]

Unless Russia keeps supplying the Iraqis...

and I thought the cold war was over.

 

[seawolf21]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: seawolf21
Iraq winning is not in the realm of the impossible. We have a political limit on how much we can bomb Baghdad. Beyond that and the Iraqi public will not only not rejoice at our presence but actually take up arms and engage us in urban warfare. The current support levels for the President will diminish over time. Support always go up when war starts, one, to support the troops and, two, not to appear unpatriotic. If the war lasts too long, the body count is too high, coupled with no evidence of WMDs, then the US public will demand we pull out.

I seriously doubt it. The war in Iraq can't go on as long as Viet Nam because the Wogs don't have the military support as far as war supplies like the Vietnamese did with the Soviets and the ChiComs.

That's true about the support (or rather the lack of). I don't see lasting anywhere near Vietnam but we might pull out a lot sooner than that if Bush doesn't win (genuinely this time) a second term in '04. Also, when is the next British election for PM?

 

[Marshallj]

Originally posted by: sandorski
What if he's right?

Frankly, we all know his weaknesses and can call him this and that until the cows come home, but he is certainly more knowledgeable in these matters than any of us here.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. While he was an inspector, he is obviously not in touch with reality, while most people here are. And to make a judgement of something, having your feet firmly on the ground is a big plus.

Also, he could believe one thing and say another... he may have a public bias against the US government for one reason or another. Money, power, and hatred has corrupted people who were otherwise in good standings.

 

[VicodiN]

I just want to know the name of the guy who wrote out the audio commentory for Rush Limbaugh... Cause we all know Rush didnt listen to it...

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Torghn
Just shows you how unreliable the weapon inspectors are.

I would think "Just shows how unreliable Scott Ritter is" is more accurate. No need to blame all the weapons-inspectors because of one bad apple. Fact is that those people did ALOT more to resolve this situation while you just sat on your fat ass.

 

[AndrewR]

Ritter has absolutely no idea what's going on as he hasn't been involved in anything other than propaganda and pandering to the media spotlight for the last five years. So for the simpleminded, drug-addled ultraliberals among us, let's spell it out -- Ritter no longer has access to classified sources to see what is and has been going on in Iraq. Therefore, Ritter does NOT have "more [knowledge] in these matters than any of us here".