If Hussein is smart

[Muse]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

The Israeli astronaut who died today once participated in a raid on an Iraqi nuclear reactor/processing utility - exactly to prevent Iraq developing nuclear weapons. Some countries are more trustworthy than others in terms of what they are apt to do with nuclear weapons. Isreal has some, England, Russia of course, the Chinese, India and a few others I forget, but the prospect of Hussein having nuclear weapons makes people more nervous than usual. He supports terrorism. It's not impossible to imagine him supplying a weapon or nuclear materials to terrorists, at least under certain circumstances. He's not very secure, and he's apt to do something desperate if in precarious circumstances, and precarious circumstances is just what some powerful people envision for him.

"He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today. "

It's not a question of how "smart" SH is, in this context. Developing nuclear weapons is not easy - it's hard. And besides that, it's politically very charged and dangerous.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Bunker busters are nothing new. We would not create any new nuke warheads in the process. We are just using a nuke warhead in a different manner.

The US is not going to invade anyone unless there is good reason too.

 

[etech]

Hagbard

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .


Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Not, "it appears he didn't", he didn't period.


From your link,
"In 1997, US nuclear weapons laboratories succeeded in obtaining funds for the development of the B61-11, a modified nuclear weapon for use against HDBTs and the first new nuclear capability added to the US arsenal since 1989."

Who was president in 1997?

Do you seriously think that N.Korea possibly having one or two nuclear weapons is the main reason why the US is letting the countries next to it handle the situation. It isn't.

 

[Transition]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: 911paramedic

Originally posted by: Comp625

Originally posted by: GoodToGo

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Atlantean

Originally posted by: Gobadgrs

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or any else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

Well said

I agree

Definitely.

yup.

I agree to agree.

I concur.

Ditto.

yuppers

Thumbs-up

I think that's about right...

 

[CrazyDe1]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Bunker busters are nothing new. We would not create any new nuke warheads in the process. We are just using a nuke warhead in a different manner.

The US is not going to invade anyone unless there is good reason too.

Just because he has WMD isn't a good reason to invade anyone...

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: etech
Hagbard

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .


Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Not, "it appears he didn't", he didn't period.


From your link,
"In 1997, US nuclear weapons laboratories succeeded in obtaining funds for the development of the B61-11, a modified nuclear weapon for use against HDBTs and the first new nuclear capability added to the US arsenal since 1989."

Who was president in 1997?

I believe it was that horny fat guy.

Do you seriously think that N.Korea possibly having one or two nuclear weapons is the main reason why the US is letting the countries next to it handle the situation. It isn't.

Explain then.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Bunker busters are nothing new. We would not create any new nuke warheads in the process. We are just using a nuke warhead in a different manner.

The US is not going to invade anyone unless there is good reason too.

I read recently that Bush was looking to develop entirely new nuclear devices, more compact devices. And no, I can't find where I read that.

 

[EndGame]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Bunker busters are nothing new. We would not create any new nuke warheads in the process. We are just using a nuke warhead in a different manner.

The US is not going to invade anyone unless there is good reason too.

I read recently that Bush was looking to develop entirely new nuclear devices, more compact devices. And no, I can't find where I read that.

I recently read Hagbard was full of BS and couldn't substanciate any of the BS he spreads. And no, I can't find where I read that!

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: EndGame

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or anyone else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

He obviously isn't smart or he would have developed nukes before 1991, and the US wouldn't be messing with him today.

Any country that doesn't pursue their own nuclear weapons program is not doing their job as a government. The primary responsibility of any state is to protect its people against foreign aggression and protect national sovereignty. In a world in which one country can place you on an "evil" list and pre-emptively attack and kill tens of thousands (or more) of your people, it is your responsibility to act to prevent such an occurance. The only thing that seems to provide any defense in this situation is to possess and be prepared to us nuclear weapons.

Not when there is a non proliferation treaty in place.

Even Bush has spoken against the treaty. Screw it. That's what NK is doing and that's what every other country ought to do (and I believe, will do) given the current reality.

Prove it Hagbard. Find a link where Pres. Bush is speaking out against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]. I would really like to see you back that statement up with some evidence.

Okay, let me put it this way...he's actions speak much louder than his words. Okay, you got me...it appears he didn't speak against a treaty that prevents others from developing nuclear weapons, he spoke against agreements that limit the US's ability to futher develop their nuclear program. Text .

Other countries are soon going to learn that the only way to defend themselves against US aggression is by possessing nuclear weapons and are going to reject such treaties, as well they should.

Bunker busters are nothing new. We would not create any new nuke warheads in the process. We are just using a nuke warhead in a different manner.

The US is not going to invade anyone unless there is good reason too.

I read recently that Bush was looking to develop entirely new nuclear devices, more compact devices. And no, I can't find where I read that.

I recently read Hagbard was full of BS and couldn't substanciate any of the BS he spreads. And no, I can't find where I read that!

If you check my posts, you'll find I often link to supporting material, which is more than what you or most here do. Not that linking does much good, since no one reads the links anyway.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: EndGame

I recently read Hagbard was full of BS and couldn't substanciate any of the BS he spreads. And no, I can't find where I read that!

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
Link 4

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: EndGame

I recently read Hagbard was full of BS and couldn't substanciate any of the BS he spreads. And no, I can't find where I read that!

Link 1
Link 2
Link 3
Link 4

Thanks.

 

[shiner]

So we are developing new styles of low yield, specific purpose nuclear weapons. Good. You see unlike Iraq and the other rogue nations of the world we are responsible with our weapons. If we really wanted to we could have destroyed the entire world many times over a long, long time ago.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: shinerburke
So we are developing new styles of low yield, specific purpose nuclear weapons. Good. You see unlike Iraq and the other rogue nations of the world we are responsible with our weapons. If we really wanted to we could have destroyed the entire world many times over a long, long time ago.

And I'm sure that Hussein wants to do that, too.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke
So we are developing new styles of low yield, specific purpose nuclear weapons. Good. You see unlike Iraq and the other rogue nations of the world we are responsible with our weapons. If we really wanted to we could have destroyed the entire world many times over a long, long time ago.

And I'm sure that Hussein wants to do that, too.

I'm sure he does. Point being that he, much like other dictators, would not be responsiblewith the weapons. He sure as heck wasn't with his chemical weapons.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke
So we are developing new styles of low yield, specific purpose nuclear weapons. Good. You see unlike Iraq and the other rogue nations of the world we are responsible with our weapons. If we really wanted to we could have destroyed the entire world many times over a long, long time ago.

And I'm sure that Hussein wants to do that, too.

I'm sure he does. Point being that he, much like other dictators, would not be responsiblewith the weapons. He sure as heck wasn't with his chemical weapons.

We weren't all that responsible with ours, either. Who sold those chemical and biological weapons to him in the first place?

We have learned, mind you, and we're responsible now. But our hands are not free of blood in that sense.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke
So we are developing new styles of low yield, specific purpose nuclear weapons. Good. You see unlike Iraq and the other rogue nations of the world we are responsible with our weapons. If we really wanted to we could have destroyed the entire world many times over a long, long time ago.

And I'm sure that Hussein wants to do that, too.

I'm sure he does. Point being that he, much like other dictators, would not be responsiblewith the weapons. He sure as heck wasn't with his chemical weapons.

We weren't all that responsible with ours, either. Who sold those chemical and biological weapons to him in the first place?

Mostly the Germans and the French.

Some U.S. companies sold biological agents to Iraq that were supposed to be used to vaccine research.

 

[chiwawa626]

well mabey he really has his weapons, and he really wants a chance to use them on evil america, we are giving him just what he wants. If our intellegence says he has the weapons, whats gonna stop him from using them on our troops? Mabey war isnt a great idea.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Mostly the Germans and the French.

Some U.S. companies sold biological agents to Iraq that were supposed to be used to vaccine research.

Link 1
Link 2
Riegle Report

Still looking for others.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: Viper0329

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: 911paramedic

Originally posted by: Comp625

Originally posted by: GoodToGo

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Atlantean

Originally posted by: Gobadgrs

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or any else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

Well said

I agree

yup.

I agree to agree.

I concur.

Ditto.

yuppers

I accede

Word

fo sheezy my neezy.

 

[StattlichPassat]

Originally posted by: Gobadgrs

Originally posted by: shinerburke
He will STFU up for a while and ease off the inspectors. The U.S. public is going to be in no mood after today to put up with his or any else's antics. If we see anyone dancing in the streets after this you better bet the general public will be all for lobbing bombs, cruise missiles, etc... in their direction. A sad America is not a very tolerant America.

Well said

Agreed.

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Mostly the Germans and the French.

Some U.S. companies sold biological agents to Iraq that were supposed to be used to vaccine research.

Link 1
Link 2
Riegle Report

Still looking for others.

I can't take the guy in link 1 seriously after reading this:

Sarkis. Iraqi troops will never surrender to foreign troops. If they use Egyptians on a front line, you know, for psychological reason, maybe Iraqi soldier will say, I am surrendering to another brother, but to surrender to a foreign troop like Germans or French or American, they don't . . . they will fight to their last bullet.

The key words from link 2 are:

"United States Dual-Use Exports To Iraq "

Just as I was saying. Biological agents were sold to Iraq for the purpose of creating vaccines. They turned around and used them to make weapons instead.

Same thing in Link3. They were sold agents that were to be used to medical purposes and used them to make weapons. That's the problem with dual use technology. You can sell it to someone who claims they will use it for medical reasons and then they turn around and use it to develop weapons.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: Zakath15

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Mostly the Germans and the French.

Some U.S. companies sold biological agents to Iraq that were supposed to be used to vaccine research.

Link 1
Link 2
Riegle Report

Still looking for others.

I can't take the guy in link 1 seriously after reading this:

Sarkis. Iraqi troops will never surrender to foreign troops. If they use Egyptians on a front line, you know, for psychological reason, maybe Iraqi soldier will say, I am surrendering to another brother, but to surrender to a foreign troop like Germans or French or American, they don't . . . they will fight to their last bullet.

Yeah, neither could I. The guy was a nut.

Still thought it was an interesting article.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: chiwawa626
well mabey he really has his weapons, and he really wants a chance to use them on evil america, we are giving him just what he wants. If our intellegence says he has the weapons, whats gonna stop him from using them on our troops? Mabey war isnt a great idea.

That's why they're vaccinating the troops and giving them gas masks, antidotes, etc. Sure, they fully expect he will fight dirty. However, we plan to fight dirty too, IMO. Depleted uranium, as far as I'm concerned, is dirty war, and they use it for penetrating ballistics and for tank armor. That stuff is low level radioactive and the consequences are very nasty.