Tic Toc

Jaxomer · Post by **Jaxomer** » March 19, 2003, 1:46 pm

8 hours and 15 minutes to go before the deadline is reached. The Iraqi governemnt and its army seem resolved to fight to the death. What are the chances of Saddam using bio/chemical weapons once he realizes he will lose the war? Chiraq is trying to save political face by saying they will help out if Saddam does use WoMD.

I had also read somewhere that some Iraqi troops have been crossing the borders to try and surrender, but were told to come back in 24 hours because the war hadn't started yet. Strictly hear-say until I can find some linkage to the story.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » March 19, 2003, 1:48 pm

Actually all along they have said that if he were to use a wmd they would join in, but until their was proof of a wmd there was no justification. try to keep it real in this time of disinformation.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » March 19, 2003, 1:49 pm

There's, like, 6 or 8 time zones seperating the 2 countries. He has until Thursday mourning, EST until his time is officially up.

miir · Post by **miir** » March 19, 2003, 1:52 pm

Here's my Sirton-ized response to you, sir.

Well obviously if Saddam uses WMDs or Bio/Chem weapons the reason for France, Germany, China etc to not support military action would be void.
It's not 'saving face', it's being true to your convictions and not giving in to bully tactics. France and all the other nations that opposed military action without UN backing have maintained that if WMD or bio/chem weapons were found or used, they would support whatever action was necessary to disarm Saddam.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » March 19, 2003, 1:55 pm

It's a shame that the only way to prove that they have them is to witness them using them on our troops.

Gurugurumaki · Post by **Gurugurumaki** » March 19, 2003, 1:56 pm

Tic Toc get up STOP~

miir · Post by **miir** » March 19, 2003, 1:59 pm

Bubba Grizz wrote:It's a shame that the only way to prove that they have them is to witness them using them on our troops.

Weapons inspectors might have been able to proove the existence of WMD or Bio/Chem weapons.... I guess Dubya thinks this way is more efficient.

The contries that are currently opposing military action are the same countries that favoured increasing weapons inspections.

You can't have it both ways, bubba.

Ajran · Post by **Ajran** » March 19, 2003, 2:02 pm

he has until 8pm est TONIGHT.. 4am in Iraq.

The speech where he was given 48 hours was Monday* night at 8pmish EST.. if i'm not mistaken there are still 24 hours in a day..

-Ajran

*edit* meant monday not tuesday.. been a long week already

Post by **Sylvus** » March 19, 2003, 2:06 pm

It's not 'saving face', it's being true to your convictions and not giving in to bully tactics. France and all the other nations that opposed military action without UN backing have maintained that if WMD or bio/chem weapons were found or used, they would support whatever action was necessary to disarm Saddam

I still don't know if I believe that France is being all that altruistic and sticking to their convictions rather than trying to keep a nice cash cow in the pasture. A lot of people say that we're going to war because of oil, I think it's also likely that France is trying to avoid war because of oil.

I'm not saying we're right and they're wrong or vice versa, I'd really rather we didn't go to war. Hopefully it'll be a short conflict with minimal casualties.

And Fairweather, is it Thursday Morning that is the deadline? Bush's speech was at like 8pm est on Monday night... I'd think Saddam only had until 8pm est tonight. I wouldn't be surprised if the fighting starts before I go to sleep tonight.[/quote]

miir · Post by **miir** » March 19, 2003, 2:17 pm

SIRTON-IZED!

I still don't know if I believe that France is being all that altruistic and sticking to their convictions rather than trying to keep a nice cash cow in the pasture. A lot of people say that we're going to war because of oil, I think it's also likely that France is trying to avoid war because of oil.

I'm not saying we're right and they're wrong or vice versa, I'd really rather we didn't go to war. Hopefully it'll be a short conflict with minimal casualties.

And Fairweather, is it Thursday Morning that is the deadline? Bush's speech was at like 8pm est on Monday night... I'd think Saddam only had until 8pm est tonight. I wouldn't be surprised if the fighting starts before I go to sleep tonight.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 19, 2003, 2:21 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:There's, like, 6 or 8 time zones seperating the 2 countries. He has until Thursday mourning, EST until his time is officially up.

no he has until 8pm Eastern time on Wednesday. which is thursday morning Baghdad time.

8pm Eastern = 4am Baghdad next day = 8 am Hong Kong next day = 5pm Pacific same day

Thursday morning Eastern time is Thursday afternoon Baghdad time. and 56 hours of deadline, not 48.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 19, 2003, 2:24 pm

Or "7.5 hours from now" if you like

Post by **Sylvus** » March 19, 2003, 2:26 pm

We all know that the fighting won't start until CNN's producers give the nod that they are ready to begin live, commercial-free broadcasting. So what time is it really going down, Voro?

And is Wolf Blitzer his real name?

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » March 19, 2003, 3:18 pm

We all know that the fighting won't start until CNN's producers give the nod that they are ready to begin live, commercial-free broadcasting.

Commercial free??? wtf??? who is gonna pay for all that air-time???

Who is the war brought to us by this time, Voro? Thought Coke and General Motors brought us Desert Storm, didn't they?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 19, 2003, 3:32 pm

CNN (domestic - in the US) will probably not break for commercial for 2-7 days after the war starts.

CNN International will basically broadcast CNN Domestic for the first 4-5 hours, then go to their anchors in the Atlanta/London/Hong Kong studios. Basically, part of it is a fly by the seat of your pants process, and decisions on when to break and for how long will be made by people more or less in real time.

typically we operate 1-2 days out as far as planning our commercial breaks. I can tell you that very few advertisers have pulled their commercials from CNNInternational, but that can all change at a split second.

It is a dicey situation for advertisers, because you want to be in front of a wider audience, but you also don't want your product placed near controversial/unpleasant footage. Another big benefit to advertisers is that you don't have to pay more for the spots now that the "war is on" than you would have previously. So, to use a bad expression, you get more "bang for your buck".

The way we are scheduling the commercial breaks for the weekend is basically filling them with spots that could be described as sort of "vanilla". these are not sold spots either, they are promos for our shows/networks/services (cnn.com for example).

basically i don't expect any of the breaks we have scheduled to run, but they exist to give the master control operators something to have in front of them if they are hit with a commercial break out of the blue.

to make a long answer short: CNN (or any network) takes a loss on the airtime they dont break on. But the point is you are trying to establish long term viewer loyalty. You want them to continue to come to you in the future to find out information, and in the future you will be running commercials again, sold with that in mind. Any network that is going to commercial break is going to see tons of viewers go to other networks.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » March 19, 2003, 3:36 pm

OMG! CNN IS TEH TRUE CAUSE OF TEH WAR!!! IT'S NOT ABOUT OIL, IT'S ABOUT VIEWER LOYALTY!!!

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 19, 2003, 3:45 pm

Sylvus wrote:
I still don't know if I believe that France is being all that altruistic and sticking to their convictions rather than trying to keep a nice cash cow in the pasture. A lot of people say that we're going to war because of oil, I think it's also likely that France is trying to avoid war because of oil.
.

Very very true. Funny how one country gets shit for it and another is held in high regard. But, some of us here are smart enough to realize that the anti-American comments are 99% unabashed hatred and 1% actually hate because of their stated reason.

miir · Post by **miir** » March 19, 2003, 3:55 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote: Very very true. Funny how one country gets shit for it and another is held in high regard. But, some of us here are smart enough to realize that the anti-American comments are 99% unabashed hatred and 1% actually hate because of their stated reason.

Maybe because France, Germany and Russia aren't declaring war for thier 'business interests'. It's one thing to assist a country within the framework of UN sactions and another to amass a quarter million troops at their border and make demands.
Not many people are fans of strong-arm 'diplomacy'.

Midnyte, you have to get it through your thick head that people can disagree with the policies of George W Bush and not be 'anti-american'.

Get out of the mindset of "if you're not with us, you're against us".

Your fucking country is based on free thinking and free speech. You can't condemn someone as an enemy because they disagree with you on one issue.
Attitudes like that sicken me.

I believe that countries like France, Germany, Russia and China agree with the principle of ousting Saddam but the method and timetable that Bush has chosen has left a bad taste in the mouth of diplomats worldwide.