I'm currently listening to the weapons inspectors reporting
Moderator: TheMachine
- Krimson Klaw
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: July 22, 2002, 1:00 pm
I'm currently listening to the weapons inspectors reporting
To the UN, and damn is this guy loquacious. Get to the point already.
Sounds like they only found the empty shells, looks like it's time for us to piss eveyone off and go after Iraq alone. What a crock this entire process was. Like I said earlier, this was just a ploy for a troop massing.
-edit- Now Blix is saying Iraq is not being cooperative as promised, and the weapons report was mostly reprints of old documents as well as untruthful. Hmm
Sounds like they only found the empty shells, looks like it's time for us to piss eveyone off and go after Iraq alone. What a crock this entire process was. Like I said earlier, this was just a ploy for a troop massing.
-edit- Now Blix is saying Iraq is not being cooperative as promised, and the weapons report was mostly reprints of old documents as well as untruthful. Hmm
-
- Almost 1337
- Posts: 903
- Joined: July 4, 2002, 10:13 pm
- Location: Vancouver BC
- Contact:
- Krimson Klaw
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: July 22, 2002, 1:00 pm
- Tinkin Tankem
- Gets Around
- Posts: 210
- Joined: December 12, 2002, 10:16 pm
- Location: Iowa City
- Fallanthas
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1525
- Joined: July 17, 2002, 1:11 pm
Looks like the inspection team hasn't found anything.
Blix indicated that they have some serious concerns in the area of biologicals, because the numbers provided by Iraq on amount of material used versus what they were known to have is way, way off. He specifically spoke of the possibility of 6,500 pounds of missing anthrax.
The IAEA is having his turn now.
A common thread to both is that everyone of the scientists is refusing to be interviewed without an Iraqui official present.
So, there are definitely material breaches of the resolutions in the areas of biologicals and missile development. There is currently a technichal violation on the point of interviews.
That's about it.
Blix indicated that they have some serious concerns in the area of biologicals, because the numbers provided by Iraq on amount of material used versus what they were known to have is way, way off. He specifically spoke of the possibility of 6,500 pounds of missing anthrax.
The IAEA is having his turn now.
A common thread to both is that everyone of the scientists is refusing to be interviewed without an Iraqui official present.
So, there are definitely material breaches of the resolutions in the areas of biologicals and missile development. There is currently a technichal violation on the point of interviews.
That's about it.
- Midnyte_Ragebringer
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 7062
- Joined: July 4, 2002, 1:59 pm
- Gender: Male
- XBL Gamertag: Daellyn
- Location: Northeast Pennsylvania
- Fallanthas
- Way too much time!
- Posts: 1525
- Joined: July 17, 2002, 1:11 pm
More than enough given that the US (and Britain, sigh) have said they'll do what they damn like and screw the UN, and the inpectors are UN.Question is, is that enough to go to war on?
I still think the decision was taken months ago and we're gonna get a war as soon as spin-control gives them the good-to-go.
- noel
- Super Poster!
- Posts: 10003
- Joined: August 22, 2002, 1:34 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Calabasas, CA
Tanc,
Do you realize who John Edmonds is calling into question in that article ?
It's not the US. It's the UK's Institute of Directors (IOD). He's basically making a moral argument to say that it's wrong to look at the economic affects of war. That's his opinion, not fact. Like it or not, war will have an affect on the US economy, the Iraqi economy, and the world economy. Personally I don't see it as immoral to study that ahead of time and be prepared for it.
I really hope you didn't read that article and think it said the reason the US is in Iraq is because of a short term economic gain.
Do you realize who John Edmonds is calling into question in that article ?
It's not the US. It's the UK's Institute of Directors (IOD). He's basically making a moral argument to say that it's wrong to look at the economic affects of war. That's his opinion, not fact. Like it or not, war will have an affect on the US economy, the Iraqi economy, and the world economy. Personally I don't see it as immoral to study that ahead of time and be prepared for it.
I really hope you didn't read that article and think it said the reason the US is in Iraq is because of a short term economic gain.
Oh, my God; I care so little, I almost passed out.
..
Heard an interesting comparison, the dead line they gave Iraq was like half the amount of time they give GWB to come up with a budget plan for the US. Something like that anyway.
Give it more time, send more inspectors! Send many many more, and and keep them crawling over every inch of sand for the next year. Paying 6000 UN inspectors has to be cheaper than war, and its giving people jobs....
Anything to keep from going to war. And most importantly send women.
Men cant find even their balled up socks under the couch.
Give it more time, send more inspectors! Send many many more, and and keep them crawling over every inch of sand for the next year. Paying 6000 UN inspectors has to be cheaper than war, and its giving people jobs....

Anything to keep from going to war. And most importantly send women.
Men cant find even their balled up socks under the couch.
Yes being a UK citizen I'm well aware of who they areTanc,
Do you realize who John Edmonds is calling into question in that article ?

I'm just astounded that any organisation can talk so casually about what kind of war they want because it would be best for 'the market'.
Rest assured I don't believe the US has a monopoly on Culpable Inhuman Stupidity.