1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Report: Us has found over 500+ chemical munitions in IRAQ

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by windstrings, Jun 21, 2006.

  1. windstrings

    windstrings Certified Prius Breeder

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2005
    6,280
    378
    0
    Location:
    Central Texas
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    IV
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mirza @ Jun 27 2006, 07:18 AM) [snapback]277336[/snapback]</div>

    What?... We took way too long to go to Iraq!.. we gave all the bad guys time to hide, burrow, and get away...
    not only that, Saddam had all kind of warning and planning to hide and cover his tracks too.
    Our wonderful newspapers told them our moves in advance and our reactions to thier threats.

    Why, because we can't be happy letting the chiefs of war run the war, but we have to know every move and approve it before we will bless it.

    Just how long were we supposed to lay stunned after being attacked?... what would you have done with pearl harbor?....

    We cooaborated and counselled way too long with the united nation idiots in bed with Saddam....

    I see nothing wrong with swift retaliation, I do see a problem with rebuilding every nation that wants to attack us for the sake of the innocents who lived there not calling the shots...

    I'm not so loving and goodhearted as the US tries to be.

    In the day of Pearl Harbor, I don't think I would have voted for rebuilding a nation that surprised attacked us, and then was so persistent to finish us off that we had to drop the bomb.
    The japenese were a worthy foe and the quite possibly would have destroyed us without the bomb.
    They know that when you attack, you don't let up until your done.

    We need to learn that rule a bit more... we are pussyfooting a bit too much in Iraq and romancing and playing cat and mouse with our enemy too much over there.

    I think the only reason we rebuilt Japan was because we too we blown away at the devestation the Bomb brought and we didn't mean to deliver such a damaging blow.

    The US has never been a nation that delights in attacking or invading another country.
    We only do because we think its best in the name of self presevation and world humanity.

    We haver NEVER attacked for money or oil, are we really so desperate for thier oil that we are willing to pay such a price and stay over there?.

    By all rights, Iraq should be paying for thier own expenses, we are giving the blood, expertise, and equipment.... they should give the money..

    But because the liberals would scream that we are only wanting thier oil, we are paying for the war out of our school and food money instead.... meanwhile the Iraqs are rolling in the oil and we are helping them fix that too?... We are way too nice!.. and even while we are, the liberals say we are taking advantage.

    The liberal mentality is going to destroy this country if left unchecked.

    But we are not angels either, nor do we have the resources to stamp out terrorism and injustice in all the world.... every God fearing country or at least those who respect humanity, need to join in.
    It has gone far enough that they are afraid they cannot pay the price to win so the give in.....
    The liberals are trying to give in here too!

    If you drag your feet against your attacker, your only asking for it again.....
    A smart enemy does not make the same mistake you are trying to get the US to make, Once you hit your opponent in the boxing ring, the stupidest thing you can do is to back off.

    And if your the one who got hit, the stupidest thing you can do is to sit and think about it while he finishes you off.

    True, we do not want to attack the wrong party, but we don't want to be a fool either.

    Its the same problem here in the states..... some do not want to kill a murderer in the courts.. because there is a fraction of a sliver of a chance they may be innocent... so we let them go free.

    Left to the vices of the liberals, we would get attacked and when our attacker goes and hides, we would just sit there until we got hit again, and again, and again.... typical gorrilla warfare against suckers!.

    At least now Bin Ladin has his little pointy tail between his butt cheeks and is hiding like a scared little mouse in a hole, rather than sitting high in a palace somewhere boasting and planning how to "finish" us off.

    If you smite an evil man who deserves it, his brothers will beware.

    Is there no wisdom in this country?


    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mirza @ Jun 27 2006, 08:34 AM) [snapback]277373[/snapback]</div>
    If we were lied to, why did it take this long to find out anything?

    By the same token, how do you know you are not being lied to?.. it "is" an election year! :lol:

    Who is defining what is "significant" and "credible"....... and who is defining what is a "link"?

    Its all in the wording.... the game of politics my dear!
     
  2. 240sxer

    240sxer New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    154
    8
    0
    The US tanks used DU shells, which are consitered WMD. So the US technically used WMD against Iraq. They are consitered WMD because they are radioactive and cause a health and safety issue after they have been fired.
     
  3. windstrings

    windstrings Certified Prius Breeder

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2005
    6,280
    378
    0
    Location:
    Central Texas
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    IV
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(240sxer @ Jun 27 2006, 10:14 AM) [snapback]277435[/snapback]</div>

    I've always stuggled over what the definition of what is considered WMD's.

    Its not the gun, or the bomb, or the rarely the hardware weapon itself that does the damage, its the payload!

    You can put deadly virus toxin in the head of a 22 bullet, but that doesn't make all 22's WMD's.

    giving someone a tank or a missle, is not giving the a WMD.... its the payload that makes it a WMD!

    And the term "mass" I consider more than 10 guys at a time... more like 100's or 1000's or 10000's.

    The A-Bomb was considered a WMD because of its payload.

    A glass of Iced tea could be a WMD is the right ingredients were added and sprayed in the air.
     
  4. gschoen

    gschoen Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    343
    3
    0
    Location:
    Chicago/Wrigleyville
    Vehicle:
    2014 Prius Plug-in
    Model:
    Plug-in Base
    Windy, the A-Bomb was used against Japan solely to prevent an amphibious attack on the well fortified & defended island. Plans were made for that possibility, with huge casualties projected. At the time the bomb was used there was no possibility of Japan launching another attack, and certainly weren't about to destroy us.

    Also, the rebuilding of Japan (and Western Europe) was PRIMARILY to prevent the spread of communism to countries weakened by the war. Restoring the global economy helped create boom years for the US economy as well.
     
  5. 240sxer

    240sxer New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    154
    8
    0
    Yeah, and a Uranium Tipped Shell is consitered a WMD

    "That "tank-busting," "armor-piercing" artillery carried by "A-10 Warthogs" in Iraq and Yugoslavia was made of Depleted Uranium. It leaves radioactive particles in the air, water, soil, and food chain. These tasteless, invisible particles, if ingested and absorbed into your body's tissues, quietly kill."

    "Weapons of mass destruction are all over Iraq. Iraqi children are playing among them every day. According to Iraqi doctors, many are developing cancer as a result. The WMD in question is depleted uranium (DU). Left over after natural uranium has been processed, DU is 1.7 times denser than lead - effective in penetrating armored vehicles such as tanks. After a DU shell strikes, it penetrates before exploding into a burning vapor that turns to dust. "


    DEPLEATED URANIUM SHELLS ARE WMD AND THEY WERE/ARE USED IN BOTH IRAQ WARS BY THE UNITED STATES.


    Inform yourself:

    http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5Vh4c6FEkwYB...shetterly3.html

    http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0Je5Vh4c6FEkwYB...pth/2860759.stm

    http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/...?articleID=8218


    Personally I’m an donkey and I can give a rat’s nice person about the kids in Iraq dying. And I can give a rat’s nice person about the health effects. But if something is considered a WMD, I don't think it's cool to have a double standard. They are WMD and we are using them. They keep killing and causing cancer. It's similar to using a low yield Nuke instead of a larger conventional explosive. One is a WMD the other is not; we are using the type that is. People are getting radiation sickness, cancer, etc. How is that cool? Isn’t this what we are supposed to be protecting against? Again, I don't care. I just love the controversy. I can argue any point, even if I don’t agree with it.