gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
Wrong...Here is what the IAEA actually does...Do not forget to ask the UN about that since the initials 'WMD' involves much more than functional nuclear warheads. Most people do not realize it but every UN inspection team chiefs have been non-Americans. That is by design: Butler (Aus), Ekeus (Swiss) and Blix (Swiss). If the initials 'WMD' does not include far more than just functional nuclear warheads, then what are the legal justifications for UN inspections in the first place? Why did none of these men spoke up about the flawed reasonings but instead all of them prosecuted the inspection regimes to the fullest? Butler in his book The Greatest Threat recalled how Iraq security forces attempted murders on his teams as they went about their duties.they werent working on a nuclear weapon, there is absolutely no evidence that they were. in fact the only reactor they had was heavly damage by the Israelis and was never repairs, that reactor couldnt product nuclear weapons anyways(according to the french who sold it to iraq). i agree on the part about overthrowing the Saddam Hussein regime. this is about the only part that i agreed with as he was a terrible dictator
the un ispections are to make sure ur not making WMDs and that the materials are accounted for. anyways the case for war specifically linked iraq to nuclear weapons
Publications: IAEA Factsheets and FAQs
Under Tools for Nuclear Inspections are important information regarding nuclear technologies and nuclear WEAPONS technologies, distinct categories, that you as a layman should know before making this kind of statement. UN nuclear inspections were to ensure that the current nuclear technologies a country possess does not cross the threshold into nuclear weapons technology capabilities. Iraq does not need to have a functional nuclear reactor in order to have a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Refined uranium can be purchased on the black market. The tools that UNMOVIC and UNSCOM used do not look for clearly obvious items like triggers or shaped charges that are used to compress fissionable materials. Those tools, like Swipe Sampling or Multi-channel analyzers, checks for evidences that certain nuclear technologies are being pushed beyond what is necessary to produce electricity. When Saddam ordered his thugs to harass inspectors, even to the point of endangering the inspectors' lives, there are no doubts as to what Saddam was hiding, which is the CAPABILITY to produce nuclear weapons.
It would be better for YOU if you had actually read the report, not merely the title, for here is what YOUR source read...Did we claimed such links exists? No...But in being prudent after a decade of Saddam's hatred towards US and on the Sept. 11, 2001 attack, we would be foolish not to explore such a possbility. Are you telling all here that no other governments would have done the same?Oh really? --> Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship (washingtonpost.com)
the title is very clear read it urself
Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says - CNN.com
read the 4th paragraph
The Bush Administration never claimed that Saddam Hussein had any direct involvement with the attack on US on Sept. 11, 2001. But it is only a prudent response that ANY leader in our shoes would look for such a link."This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al Qaeda," Bush said. "We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda."
You questioned as to why there were no rejoicing among the Iraqis once Saddam Hussein was removed. There are plenty of evidences that ordinary Iraqis were glad, except that out of fear for their lives they could not express it.This has nothing to do with WMD. Frankly, we do not really care if any Iraqi cheered US on. But you might want to read some books by journalists who left The Green Zone and interact with ordinary Iraqis. They cannot afford to be openly glad that the US overthrew Saddam Hussein lest they and their families be killed."never said it did just mentioning the terrible preplanned and the fiasco that came out of it
Amazon.com: In the Red Zone: A Journey into the Soul of Iraq: Steven Vincent: Books
That book was one of the many journalists who dared to venture beyond the safety of the Green Zone and talked to numerous ordinary Iraqis. I can cite the author from any chapter. As far as we are concern, the silencing of ordinary Iraqis because of sectarian violence says far more about Iraqi society than it is about post invasion occupation by US. Finally, Steven Vincent was killed in Iraq while investigating Iraqi police corruption.
Are you implying that we gave arms to Israel strictly for the purpose of Palestinians oppression?We are obligated to fund any war against any enemy who threatened US. We are not obligated to be charitable."never said the us was obligated to be charitable, i was repling the mention and the US give aid to the Muslim world i was making the contrast that it is also arming those who the majority of the Muslim world considers an enemy
That the Arabs would not know what to do with the oil.again i was only making a contrast, but what does "their oil came from foreign minds" mean?