Iraq submits weapon report.........

[markuskidd]

Consider this:

If he has the ability to hide the weapons so that they can't be found, why would he wait until we disclosed the evidence? He would already be doing it or probably even have it done.

 

[etech]

Damn, I feel like I'm discussing this with three year olds. I'll try to use small and simple words.

We know where they are now. If we tell them we know where they are, they will move them. They will move them to a place where we don't know where they are.

Couldn't we go to the UN and tell them what evidence we have so that they could destroy them?

Dang, Gaard, you must have been reading the news reports. That's what is in them.

The point to be made also of course is- Saddam promised to rid his country of that type of weapons to the U.N as one of the conditions of the cease fire of the Gulf War. If he breaks that agreement than the ceasefire is also null and void. The Gulf War is then still on. This is not the start of a new war. I'm going to repeat that because so many seem to fail to understand that simple little fact. This is not the start of a new war. This is about Saddam not complying with the terms of the Gulf war cease fire.

 

[markuskidd]

I say again, why not just move them right now anyway if it's so easy for SH?

I'm sure it's important enough to warrent the expense, and laziness wouldn't be a valid reason either. So if he posses the ability to hide/move them without tipping off these ultra-secret sources, why wait?

That he can do this is the basis of your speculations..

 

[Orsorum]

I think I understand his question...

If we know where they are, why don't we tell the UN weapons inspectors? Or monitor the sites and watch for any activity?

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: markuskidd
I say again, why not just move them right now anyway if it's so easy for SH?

I'm sure it's important enough to warrent the expense, and laziness wouldn't be a valid reason either. So if he posses the ability to hide/move them without tipping off these ultra-secret sources, why wait?

That he can do this is the basis of your arguments..

sigh,

We know where some of them are. We don't know where all of them are. If SH starts moving them all around it is very possible that we could detect that movement and know where more of them are. He doesn't know which of his little goodies we know of.

Zak, We are going to tell the U.N. inspectors. Part of the program was to see if he was willing to come clean and declare all of his contraband as defined by the U.N. ceasefire agreement. If he didn't than he has broken the ceasefire agreement. The document is 12,000 pages long and in two languages. It will take some time. The U.S. only received their copy yesterday. Paitence grasshopper, paitence.

 

[markuskidd]

We know where some of them are. We don't know where all of them are. If SH starts moving them all around it is very possible that we could detect that movement and know where more of them are. He doesn't know which of his little goodies we know of.

So why not go ahead and disclose their locations now (or last month, etc)?
If the document says they have them, it's not a bad thing for the UN inspectors to get over to the weapons right now. If the document says they don't, it's also not a bad thing to go to the weapons now.

 

[Hoeboy]

Originally posted by: markuskidd

We know where some of them are. We don't know where all of them are. If SH starts moving them all around it is very possible that we could detect that movement and know where more of them are. He doesn't know which of his little goodies we know of.

So why not go ahead and disclose their locations now (or last month, etc)?
If the document says they have them, it's not a bad thing for the UN inspectors to get over to the weapons right now. If the document says they don't, it's also not a bad thing to go to the weapons now.

Because if it turns out that he lied once again, we can then finally laugh at the UN and all the anti-Bush idiots while yelling "I told you so!!!" It doesn't seem like that moment is far off.

 

[markuskidd]

Because if it turns out that he lied once again, we can then finally laugh at the UN and all the anti-Bush idiots while yelling "I told you so!!!" It doesn't seem like that moment is far off.

But it's in writing, and the copies are distributed. The CDs with the text aren't going to change now that they're in our hands. We don't need to wait until 12,000 pages of arabic are decoded to lock down the weapons if they exist. Our ability to say "I told you so!!!" is not affected in the least.

Besides, when turning over this document, the Iraqi government summed it up by saying: "We have no WMD." It's not a mystery as to what the full text will say.

 

[etech]

What weapons?, Saddam said he didn't have any. Don't you believe him?

 

[markuskidd]

Originally posted by: etech
What weapons?, Saddam said he didn't have any. Don't you believe him?

What?
Care to address my questions? I'm saying that if he has them, we need to lock them down, and I haven't been convinced by your arguments for why this hasn't been and isn't being done yet.

 

[etech]

markuskidd

How many days has the U.S. had Saddam's report?

 

[markuskidd]

How many days has the U.S. had Saddam's report?

My posts contain decent arguments (IMO) as to why the amount of time that has passed since we have received the report has nothing to do with it.

Do me a favor, take a look at my four or five posts, hit the reply button, paste them in, and just hit my questions specifically instead of replying with a generalized rhetorical question each time that doesn't really relate to what I'm saying.

 

[etech]

I will, if you will stop asking question that I have already addressed.

touche'

 

[markuskidd]

Originally posted by: etech
I will, if you will stop asking question that I have already addressed.

touche'

It's a deal. I'm interested in seeing what you have to say to my points.

 

[etech]

Tell me what "points" you have that this did not cover.

Zak, We are going to tell the U.N. inspectors. Part of the program was to see if he was willing to come clean and declare all of his contraband as defined by the U.N. ceasefire agreement. If he didn't than he has broken the ceasefire agreement. The document is 12,000 pages long and in two languages. It will take some time. The U.S. only received their copy yesterday. Paitence grasshopper, paitence.

 

[Czar]

There are ofcorse two options,

One the one etech has stated, that the US knows of the weapons and doesnt want to tell because then Iraq will most probably move them so they cant be found.
Two, the US doesnt know for a fact that Iraq has the weapons and is trying to bluff Iraq of giving up the weapons they have or might have.

Neither can be viewed as facts untill more turns up.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: MinorityReport

Originally posted by: SherEPunjab

Originally posted by: HendrixFan
Iraq is making the claim that they dont. It is then up to the weapons inspectors to prove them wrong. The US says they have the proof, but for some "strange" reason, they sit on it. The inspectors have already requested the US hand over information that would make their efforts move more quickly.

we dont' sit idle on ANYTHING, heck we started bombing AF a month or so after 9/11. There is some reason we are sitting idle.

G W lost his balls now ... too much campaign stir and up=downs.

Need Regan .. he will bomb just about anyone on planet earth including Tele tubbies.

Donald?

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: etech
Tell me what "points" you have that this did not cover.

Zak, We are going to tell the U.N. inspectors. Part of the program was to see if he was willing to come clean and declare all of his contraband as defined by the U.N. ceasefire agreement. If he didn't than he has broken the ceasefire agreement. The document is 12,000 pages long and in two languages. It will take some time. The U.S. only received their copy yesterday. Paitence grasshopper, paitence.

We all anxiously await the "smoking gun". Now, does that mean that the US will back off if not found, or that the US will pre-emptively strike so they can say they did?

 

[markuskidd]

Well, my biggest point is why wait to decode the document before locking down the weapons? Now that we have it, if we show the UN where the weapons are it isn't as if the Iraqis can later change what's in the document. What it contains is important but I don't see how that should cause us not to go in now to document these weapons now that their report is in our possession.

My second biggest point is that if the Iraqis can move their weapons to where we can't find them, the would already have done that. If they can't do that, then again there's no reason not to tell the UN where the weapons are.

 

[JellyBaby]

The U.S. is examining the report to see if the ultra secret weapons are listed. If they're listed, it's back to square one unless perhaps they're of the most naughty type. If so perhaps they'll play the "material breach" card anyway. If they're not listed, they'll play the card by either carefully advising the inspectors and having them check it out or via some other means.

The U.S. should be careful in manipulating the inspection process as they did last time with the CIA operatives/spy controvery. In the end it serves no purpose if they get caught.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: markuskidd
Well, my biggest point is why wait to decode the document before locking down the weapons? Now that we have it, if we show the UN where the weapons are it isn't as if the Iraqis can later change what's in the document. What it contains is important but I don't see how that should cause us not to go in now to document these weapons now that their report is in our possession.

My second biggest point is that if the Iraqis can move their weapons to where we can't find them, the would already have done that. If they can't do that, then again there's no reason not to tell the UN where the weapons are.

Didn't you know markuskidd, the Iraqis have James Bond working for them. He can hide anything.

 

[Moonbeam]

The weapons have been cleaverly hidden and will take years and years to find. It will take the combined efforts of Chevron Unocal and Exon probing the desert sands with drilling equipment to find them all.

 

[markuskidd]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The weapons have been cleaverly hidden and will take years and years to find. It will take the combined efforts of Chevron Unocal and Exon probing the desert sands with drilling equipment to find them all.

rofl
i think we have a winner!

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
The weapons have been cleaverly hidden and will take years and years to find. It will take the combined efforts of Chevron Unocal and Exon probing the desert sands with drilling equipment to find them all.

Of course, the US will have to get some of those buildings and people out of the way to get those Exxon inspectors in. Maybe something like this might help:

Urban renewal

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: markuskidd
Well, my biggest point is why wait to decode the document before locking down the weapons? Now that we have it, if we show the UN where the weapons are it isn't as if the Iraqis can later change what's in the document. What it contains is important but I don't see how that should cause us not to go in now to document these weapons now that their report is in our possession.

My second biggest point is that if the Iraqis can move their weapons to where we can't find them, the would already have done that. If they can't do that, then again there's no reason not to tell the UN where the weapons are.

markuskidd
The U.S. was not going to tell anyone what their information was until the Iraqis released their report. The U.S. go the report yesterday. How many times do you have to be reminded of that simple little fact? You remind me of kids on a trip sitting in the back seat whining "when are we going to get there". This is a trip that must follow a certain route. Your whining will not make the trip go any faster.

Your second "biggest point" has also been addressed and answered.

For all of the other 'oh so clever' pundits.
I repeat.
The point to be made also of course is- Saddam promised to rid his country of that type of weapons to the U.N as one of the conditions of the cease fire of the Gulf War. If he breaks that agreement than the ceasefire is also null and void. The Gulf War is then still on. This is not the start of a new war. I'm going to repeat that because so many seem to fail to understand that simple little fact. This is not the start of a new war. This is about Saddam not complying with the terms of the Gulf war cease fire.