• 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.

Iraq cheats on missle destruction

C

charrison

Lifer
linkage


U.S. officials said the regime of President Saddam Hussein has not destroyed any Al Samoud missile deployed in forward bases in southern Iraq. Instead, they said, Iraq has brought out missiles from military warehouses and replaced the engines with those from the Soviet-origin SA-2 surface-to-air missile, developed in the 1950s.
Click to expand...

Surprise, surprise, surprise...
 
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Do you place more faith in Saddam?
Click to expand...

No. Both Saddam and Bush are liars who will say or do anything to get their way.
 
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

U.S. officials said he did not have sexual relations with that woman.
Do you need more proof?
 
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

Between the aluminum tubing thing, the groundless accusations of supporting Al Queda, and Bush's persistance in stating he wants to avoid war despite documentation to the contrary, "U.S. officals" have blown any credibility I once considered them to have.
 
Originally posted by: Electrode
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

Between the aluminum tubing thing, the groundless accusations of supporting Al Queda, and Bush's persistance in stating he wants to avoid war despite documentation to the contrary, "U.S. officals" have blown any credibility I once considered them to have.
Click to expand...

Has Iraq ever answered what is was using those tubes for? I dont think so. Until they do, It can only be speculated what they were used for.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
linkage


U.S. officials said the regime of President Saddam Hussein has not destroyed any Al Samoud missile deployed in forward bases in southern Iraq. Instead, they said, Iraq has brought out missiles from military warehouses and replaced the engines with those from the Soviet-origin SA-2 surface-to-air missile, developed in the 1950s.
Click to expand...

Surprise, surprise, surprise...
Click to expand...

Is the missile's range with the SA-2 engine under the limit allowed by UN?
 
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
linkage


U.S. officials said the regime of President Saddam Hussein has not destroyed any Al Samoud missile deployed in forward bases in southern Iraq. Instead, they said, Iraq has brought out missiles from military warehouses and replaced the engines with those from the Soviet-origin SA-2 surface-to-air missile, developed in the 1950s.
Click to expand...

Surprise, surprise, surprise...
Click to expand...

Is the missile's range with the SA-2 engine under the limit allowed by UN?
Click to expand...

THey would be protecting the stronger rocket motors by doing this.
 
The aluminim tubes that Iraq was not supposed to have no matter what they were using them for.

The tubes that were bought at higher than normal specifications than is done for missile use.

Those tubes?
 
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

Because Al-Baradei said the documents submitted to him wrt to the Iraq nuclear weapons links, were "not authentic," meaning forgeries.
Now if you submit outright forgeries to the AEIA, why should you be trusted ever again?
 
Originally posted by: Electrode
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Do you place more faith in Saddam?
Click to expand...

No. Both Saddam and Bush are liars who will say or do anything to get their way.
Click to expand...
Bull. It is ridiculous to lump Bush in with Saddam. You can't prove that Bush has lied about anything, while anyone can prove that Saddam lies about everything. You have to be pretty weak-minded to think that Bush simply wants a war and will lie to get it.
If you do think that, I feel sorry for you.

 
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

Because Al-Baradei said the documents submitted to him wrt to the Iraq nuclear weapons links, were "not authentic," meaning forgeries.
Now if you submit outright forgeries to the AEIA, why should you be trusted ever again?
Click to expand...

Fine, if you want to go that route, why aren't we at war with Saddam right now? You certainly can't trust him by your standards.
Oh, and if you trust Al-Baradei over the US, I feel sorry for you, too.
 
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: StattlichPassat
Originally posted by: Electrode
I do not consider anything beginning with the words "U.S. officials said" to be trustworthy information.
Click to expand...

Why the hell not?
Click to expand...

Because Al-Baradei said the documents submitted to him wrt to the Iraq nuclear weapons links, were "not authentic," meaning forgeries.
Now if you submit outright forgeries to the AEIA, why should you be trusted ever again?
Click to expand...

Fine, if you want to go that route, why aren't we at war with Saddam right now? You certainly can't trust him by your standards.
Oh, and if you trust Al-Baradei over the US, I feel sorry for you, too.
Click to expand...

What's Al-Baradei's horse in this race? Bush's horse is if he doesn't attack Iraq, he is done in 2004.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top