Israelis Bomb Nuke Site???

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Roscoe

Here's why they have no homosexuals in Iran:



http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/0,4644,2396,00.html

Well, the article also states that they were abusing a minor. Not a good punishment for being gay, but certainly fitting for abusing a minor.

Steve

[REAL 1]

VRM. Nice try.

Is that the best you can do is cite sporadic limited acts of violence over 60 years by kooks, outlaws and out of print terrorist gangs which the Government of Israel condemns and will punish appropriately violators for such acts today. There are bad apples in every barrel. Never said there weren't. It must have taken you awhile to research those incidents. Now try doing a google on Arab terrorists, palestinian terrorits and compare. It won't take you nearly as long to amass a universe of information and attacks to long to list here unless you have days to do it.

But lets roll out the list or never ending scroll (more appropriately) of the terrorist acts the arabs and Palestinians are guilty of everyday on an on going basis and part of the official Palestinian infatada and Muslim Koran play book to erradicate jews and Israel.

More importantly, the policies, goals, ideologies of the two groups and government bodies are worlds apart. This is the real reason there is a good guy and a bad guy in this story. There is a right and wrong despite the sporadic missteps that you may point to on Israels side.

Simple question. Would you rather be an arab living in Israel or a jew living in a Muslim country? If you answer honestly, without any bullchit that says it all.

If a lesser man might be turned against the jews by my "rants" which cite fact and show whose on the side of right then let that lesser man be an antisemite as I would expect of lesser men who are ignorant.

[Jamo]

Shhhhhhhh...........!

[rdorman]

Interesting post Fred (392Cobra). One thing you said really caught my eye: "A third is it was a hit on the stockpile of Saddam's chemical/bio weapons snuck out of Iraq and into Syria for safekeeping before the US invasion of April 2003." I said a long, long time ago (here as I recall) that I have it on very good authority that the main reason that we never found WMD's in Iraq is because Sadam snuck them (and many other things including $$) into Syria before the invasion. Syria isn't talking because they don't want the world to know what was targeted. Suprised a bit that Israel doesn't speak up about it but they do tend to be 'covert'.

[bomelia]

Great post Fred!!!!

Can't wait to see the other shoe drop.

At least some in here are maintaining the original intent of the thread.

Mike

(VRM, Evan, nothing personal, but go start your own thread)

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Jamo

Shhhhhhhh...........!

Dang! Just as we were getting into some nice chewy history stuff!
Oh well... back to our regularly scheduled topic (sorry for the hijack Mike ).

I'm not so sure about Iraq having WMD and moving them to Syria. I think that if Hussein had them he would have used them against us in a last ditch effort to make our casualties so high that we would stop in our tracks.

The inspectors were there (before we kicked them out) and they found no evidence of any WMD in Iraq, and they had complete freedom to inspect anything they wanted.

Also, if it was actually Iraqs WMD then the current administration would be shouting it from the rooftops in vindication.

Steve

[rdorman]

Oh, they are there. As for not shouting it from the rooftops, think escalation of commitment and look at the timing of the discovery versus invasion. Also, take a look at who says the movement of stockpiles and technology did not occur and who says it did. Also, the involvement of the UN inspectors from Moscow. Not to mention the interesting involvement from Moscow in the days proceeding and their escalation with Damascus since the fall of Sadam. A 'shot gun wedding' if you will.

Imagine stating that we are invading because of WMD's, finding out as you are set that they are no longer there (almost after the fact) and then saying we are going to invade anyways. All of that happened, except the 'saying' part. Better to ask foregiveness rather then permission? What a tangled web we weave.

[bomelia]

Originally Posted by VRM

Dang! Just as we were getting into some nice chewy history stuff!
Oh well... back to our regularly scheduled topic (sorry for the hijack Mike ).

I'm not so sure about Iraq having WMD and moving them to Syria. I think that if Hussein had them he would have used them against us in a last ditch effort to make our casualties so high that we would stop in our tracks.

The inspectors were there (before we kicked them out) and they found no evidence of any WMD in Iraq, and they had complete freedom to inspect anything they wanted.

Also, if it was actually Iraqs WMD then the current administration would be shouting it from the rooftops in vindication.

Steve

Are you preparing your retractions? How about some humble pie?

Mike

[VRM]

Mike,
The Israel stuff is 100% true (and I didn't even get the part about Dr Ruth being a sniper ). No retractions there.

I would LOVE to be wrong about there being no WMD in Iraq! We look like idiots due to really bad planning, and the fact that nothing has shown up when we were 'certain' that they were there has made things worse. It would help our credibility (and thus our ability to get problems solved) to be able to prove that they are/were there.

No retraction now, but I have no problem making one should I be wrong.

BTW, any arguments I make are not done on an emotional level at all. I don't have an ego that needs to be right, nor does my ego get bruised if I am wrong. In this case, I think I am right based on what I know of the situation, and how the players have acted in the past. There are a couple of scenarios that could have happened that would make me wrong, but I think they are unlikely because it would mean a change in MO for a number of players.

We will see...

[rdorman]

It was known that there where movements in the days before the war. They had the satelite images to show it. The intelligence was probably not all that clear yet as to what was being moved but they could watch as missile installations and other 'sites of interest' where be systematically dismantled. I am not in the position to know secrets, just a 'rumor' I 'heard' VERY early on and with all the evidence that has come to light, the Syrian theory is now not only plausible, but likely.

Moscow thumbed its nose, albeit secretly, at the UN and was looking to cover its tracks.

But not just to Syria did they go. Also Lebanon and Iran. But, only so much we can deal with at a time...... on to the next.

More of current interest. While Iran and Ahmadinejad are putting up a cool and defiant front, I hear that interally, they are all completely freaking out. They are worried to death that the US will invade. They, like Saddam, know that they don't stand a chance in hell. They saw what we did to Sadam's military and his was more 'powerful'. They are pulling their hair out in Tehran.

The media propaganda campaign on both sides is in full swing. Ahmadinejad recent visit was most likely a version of his own trying to 'win the hearts and minds' of Americans by trying to show his 'softer side', trying to show that he is not the monster that western media is portraying. Wanting to visit the Trade Center site to pay his respects, brilliant. If I where them, I would be $hitting bullets too. Large forces of ships in the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf, air bases all over the place, over 200,000 trained and experienced troops on both flanks... completely surrounded.

[REAL 1]

VRM doesn't need to retract the "Israeli stuff" as its also historically and politically insignificant and really irrelevant to the real problems and current problems.

Iran, also just gave the world the "middle finger" at the UN with regard to their nuclear program. Trouble is a brewing for sure.

[bomelia]

Explosion Aborts CW Project Run By Iran and Syria

Robin Hughes Jane’s Defense Weekly 26 Sep 2007
A joint development program by Iran and Syria to weaponize Syrian’s 'Scud B', 'Scud C' and 'Scud D' short-range ballistic missiles with chemical warheads has been aborted following an explosion at a classified missile production laboratory in Aleppo, northern Syria, in July.
The program falls under a strategic co-operation accord signed between Syria and Iran in November 2005.
The agreement included provisions ranging from "the supply of weapons and ammunition, the training of Syrian personnel, co-operation and continuous transfer of technology and equipment in the areas of weapons of mass destruction [particularly the upgrade of Syrian missile and chemical warfare [CW] capabilities] to Iranian troops operating advanced weapon systems in Syria during a military confrontation [with the West]".
Syrian defense sources told Jane's that during a 26 July test to weaponize a 500 km 'Scud C' with a mustard gas warhead, an explosion occurred in a laboratory adjacent to a chemical agent storage facility located in a Syrian military camp in Aleppo. The explosion killed 15 Syrian military personnel and "dozens" of Iranian missile weaponization engineers.
According to the sources: "The explosion occurred when fuel caught alight in the missile production laboratory”.
"The blast dispersed chemical agents (including VX and Sarin nerve agents and mustard blister agent) across the storage facility and outside. Other Iranian engineers were seriously injured with chemical burns to exposed body parts not protected by safety overalls."
The cause of the fire is still under investigation by a unit attached to the Syrian foreign intelligence service.
In the interim, the regime in Damascus has moved to curtail media exposure of the blast and has destroyed all information to indicate that the site of the explosion included a missile fuel production laboratory and that Iranian experts had been injured in the explosion.

[BeanCounter]

Has anyone thought that if the Bush administration was really a bunch of crooked liars as Steve keeps telling us that they would have simply planted WMD's in Iraq so they didn't have to deal with the twits that complain about not finding them. I think the fact that we admitted we didn't find them speaks volumes of how truly forthright they've been.

[bomelia]

Admitting we did not find them (yet) and that they never existed are two different things. I do not believe anybody in the adminstration has said that they never existed...but when you get outsmarted, you have to say something. I think there is going to be quite a news bombshell dropped on us in the very near future. Saving a bottle of '82 Cabernet just for the event.

Mike

(ps: hoping politics does not play too big here, but if it hurts liberals, so much the better)

[VRM]

Bernie,
I think ALL politicians are crooked liars! I have no love for the DNC either. There may be one or two politicians worth saving, but I don't know who they are...
Bush lied about why we invaded Iraq. Nuclear material is very regulated. It would be tough to take any of ours and say it was theirs. Besides, that stuff is pretty easy to figure out the place of origin. We even have a group (created by Bush) whose purpose is to figure out who made nuclear material even after it has exploded (obviously a lot tougher, but apparently still possible). All it would take is one person to spill the beans about us planting evidence - or an independent investigation - and we would look even worse than we do now.

This is another reason why the invasion was a bad idea. When (if) Hussein had WMD, then we could be pretty certain that they would only be used under certain circumstances. Hussein was a very known and relatively easily predictable personality. If any WMD were transported out if Iraq they are now in the hands of people who are probably a lot less predictable. And, they will be a lot harder to find.

Steve

[Roscoe]

Wait a minute. Didn't Bill Clinton in 1996, as president, say the same thing about wmd's? So did Hillary and Kerry (who served in Vietnam) as senators? So did dozens of other Democrats.

So why are you just picking on President Bush?

[VRM]

Roscoe,

What did Clinton et al say about WMDs?

I picked on Clinton plenty when he was in office (and still do sometimes when he is out of office). Same with plenty of other Democrats. What I find pathetic in this forum is that while everyone is happy to beat up those evil liberals (and usually it is justified IMHFO), nobody is willing to even think about the possibility the the GOP is just as corrupt/stupid. Tom Delay once said that you can support the troops, but not the war. If any of you ever blasted Clinton for his mess in Bosnia, but questioned my patriotism because of my anti Iraq-invasion stance, then you are a hypocrite. Plain and simple.

Sometimes the GOP poo stinks worse than that of the DNC, sometimes it does not.

Steve

[Roscoe]

It was in 1998: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...s/clinton.html

Transcript: President Clinton explains Iraq strike
CLINTON: Good evening.

Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

[VRM]

Roscoe,
I thought that was what you were talking about. Hussein had chemical weapons (we supplied them), and he did use them against Iran. We all know that. Those types of weapons usually have a shelf life (according to an article I read on Janes a few years ago).
Hussein also did not allow weapons inspectors in during Clintons administration. This was because he was not afraid of Clinton actually invading, or doing anything other than dropping a few bombs.

However, the weapons inspectors did get access later and they did find some problems with rockets that were a bit too big (and Iraq responded by destroying around 20% of them in just a few days), but they did not find any recent activity of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.

Steve

[Roscoe]

Now that's just being naive (Evian spelled backwards). Do you actually think that if a government is manufacturing wmd's and inspectors came, they would actually show them the site where they are making them? c'mon....

OPERATION: IRAQI FREEDOM
Saddam's WMD
have been found
New evidence unveils chemical, biological, nuclear, ballistic arms


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=38213

Among Kay's revelations, which officials tell Insight have been amplified in subsequent inspections in recent weeks:


A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and "that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N." Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn't have a biological-weapons program?

"Reference strains" of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. "We thought it was a big deal," a senior administration official said. "But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of 'starter set.'"

New research on BW-applicable agents, brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin that were not declared to the United Nations.

A line of unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs, or drones, "not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 kilometers [311 miles], 350 kilometers [217 miles] beyond the permissible limit."

"Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited Scud-variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the U.N."

"Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] -- well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates]."
In addition, through interviews with Iraqi scientists, seized documents and other evidence, the ISG learned the Iraqi government had made "clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles -- probably the No Dong -- 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment," Kay reported.

In testimony before Congress on March 30, Duelfer, revealed the ISG had found evidence of a "crash program" to construct new plants capable of making chemical- and biological-warfare agents.

The ISG also found a previously undeclared program to build a "high-speed rail gun," a device apparently designed for testing nuclear-weapons materials. That came in addition to 500 tons of natural uranium stockpiled at Iraq's main declared nuclear site south of Baghdad, which International Atomic Energy Agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky acknowledged to Insight had been intended for "a clandestine nuclear-weapons program."