War with IRAQ... WHAT IF...

[busmaster11]

By the miracle of miracles, IRAQ was telling the truth? Not that I believe it, but the way I see it, Iraq was supposed to destroy all their WMDs. So now comes word from the Blix report going on as we speak, that no WMDs have been found, but some were unaccounted for.

How do you reliably account for destroyed weapons?

 

[Orsorum]

Lists or accounts of them being destroyed, pictures, waste left from the process, I suppose.

 

[dullard]

A much scarier question is: What if Iraq already gave the WMD to terrorist groups, and then we attack Iraq who no longer has them?

Note: if Iraq has done that, then it would justify the war, but boy I fear the consequences of that war.

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
Lists or accounts of them being destroyed, pictures, waste left from the process, I suppose.

Pics, docs, you can pull them off the internet. Waste? I'm sure IRAQ has piles of them or they can buy it off the black market or something like that.

I don't even know why I play devil's advocate here, I know Saddam is too slimy to actually destroy his weapons and I'm sure his moral ethics won't prevent him from selling them out to Al Qaeda.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
Lists or accounts of them being destroyed, pictures, waste left from the process, I suppose.

It wouldn't suprise me if Saddam just said, right after the Gulf War when he was instructed to destroy the weapons "Get rid of them now", and his half-wits just torched them and buried it without any records at all.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: Zakath15
Lists or accounts of them being destroyed, pictures, waste left from the process, I suppose.

Pics, docs, you can pull them off the internet. Waste? I'm sure IRAQ has piles of them or they can buy it off the black market or something like that.

I don't even know why I play devil's advocate here, I know Saddam is too slimy to actually destroy his weapons and I'm sure his moral ethics won't prevent him from selling them out to Al Qaeda.

Tell me something, what about the "ethics" of those who sold them the weapons in the first place? That would be...let's see...the Reagan administration.

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: Zakath15
Lists or accounts of them being destroyed, pictures, waste left from the process, I suppose.

Pics, docs, you can pull them off the internet. Waste? I'm sure IRAQ has piles of them or they can buy it off the black market or something like that.

I don't even know why I play devil's advocate here, I know Saddam is too slimy to actually destroy his weapons and I'm sure his moral ethics won't prevent him from selling them out to Al Qaeda.

Tell me something, what about the "ethics" of those who sold them the weapons in the first place? That would be...let's see...the Reagan administration.

Uh, you'll never see me defending the Reagan administration... Except maybe to say that hindsight is 20/20.

 

[ConclamoLudus]

This is all a very frightening possibility. I support the use of force if Saddam has the weapons and his hiding them, or if Saddam has sold them to terrorists, but if he is telling the truth we are in for some trouble. The only bonus albeit a big one is that Saddam will be out of power, but at the expense of our resolve that he has weapons. We are in a tight bind now too because Blix's report was mixed. This is just not enough. We need confirmation of some kind and maybe only time will give us that. From their last meeting's assessment I would say go in there, but it genuinely sounds like the inspectors are making some headway. I wish the UN could just send in enough people to scour that entire country from head to toe, but its likely that more time and more time is just going to turn up empty with the amount of inspectors we have. I'm pretty divided by all of it now...I think he's got them, but we need to get more eyes on them before we go in.