# Post-Powell's Address: "Smoking Gun" Redux **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 5, 2003, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980 "2003-02-05T17:00:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/161 "2003-02-07T00:05:10Z")
> [@](#): > > _Mr. Svinlesha_To compare such a situation to Chamberlain-like ”appeasement” is nothing short of ludicrous. Or double-think, methinks. Especially since the major US equivalent, Lindbergh’s “[America First](http://www.charleslindbergh.com/americanfirst/index.asp)” was a right wing isolationist, anti-interventionist organization. Apparently _they_ got into trouble with charges of racism too :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![ElJeffe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/958977/32.png) [@ElJeffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElJeffe)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/162 "2003-02-07T00:12:27Z")
elucidator: > [@](#): > > Your analysis of the restrictions on the Securty Council are quite correct, of course, but more emphasize my point than rebut it. Of course, the Security Council cannot pass a resolution condemning the US’ action. You might ask yourself how this might be viewed by someone with the scurrilous opinion that the USA is not always the paragon of every thing that is right and virtuous. (I know, hard to accept…but stretch a bit). I can say that I’m more comfortable with the US possessing the power of veto than China. Or France or Russia, for that matter. As to the rest of your post, I see that you deftly evaded answering my hypothetical by claiming it would never happen. Touche. Alas, I can’t say I’m surprised. Do you really find it that difficult to simply say, “Yes, I would find it acceptable for Saddam to conquer the region”, or “No, we should act to prevent that, if the situation seemed likely”? Jeff ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/163 "2003-02-07T00:43:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Beagle \* > \*\*Especially the way you keep quoting some part of what I say, and leave out the parts relevant to your arguments. > > You seem to think that all military conflict is tied to a direct threat to US territorial integrity. I cannot think of a single military involvement since WWII - and it barely - which met that standard. \*\* If I have done an unfair cut and paste job on your posts I regret that and apologize. I don’t think that I have however. Territorial integrity of the United States? Where did that come from? Surely the United States has vital national interests that are threatened without a threat to the nation’s territorial integrity. The Gulf Campaign of 1991 certainly was a response to an attack on the nation’s vital interests. Arguably the Cuban airfield in Grenada was a sufficent threat, too. I don’t require that Saddam demonstrate an intention and capability to blow up Perth-Amboy. Right now the only thing I see at stake is the US’s possible loss of face. We have put our selves in a position where we either back down or we fight. That may be the vital interest. I hate to think that we have allowed our elected leadership to write a check with its mouth that the rest of us will have to honor. This is, after all, the real world where ill considered running off at the mouth has real costs. It is not a John Wayne movie where you get to wear a neat hat, play with guns, strut around in front of the camera and then go home for dinner. “Well, Pilgrim, a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do” may have just become the new national motto. That makes a little more sense than"It morning in America." ---
**Author:** ![ElJeffe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/958977/32.png) [@ElJeffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElJeffe)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/164 "2003-02-07T01:18:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Right now the only thing I see at stake is the US’s possible loss of face. We have put our selves in a position where we either back down or we fight. That may be the vital interest. I hate to think that we have allowed our elected leadership to write a check with its mouth that the rest of us will have to honor. If that were the case, it would be the UN that wrote that check, about 10 years ago. Cease-fire agreement, remember? Jeff ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/165 "2003-02-07T01:20:28Z")
**Jeff** C’mon, your pretending your loaded question is a hyptothetical question. Yoiu gotta do better than that,we’re grownups here. Would you rather your sister was raped by Kang or Kodos? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/166 "2003-02-07T01:25:33Z")
As to America defending its territorial integrity…sure, no sweat.] 1812, England invaded the USA, kicked our butts up and down the street, burned the White House, and just generally bitch-slapped us silly. Also invaded New Orleans, but thats a technicality, because the peace treaty was alread signed. We also protected our territorial integrity in the War with Mexico, when they were occupying territory they regarded as thiers. We disabused them of _that_ fantasy, and toot sweet. To be nice, we didn’t change the names much. San Diego didn’t become Gus Johnson (stolen from Chris Rock) ---
**Author:** ![Halo13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Halo13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Halo13)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/167 "2003-02-07T01:55:57Z")
I too am sick of George Bush’s war and the inundation of Australian Media with pro-war propaganda. Our Prime Minister knows most Australians are opposed to America’s evil warmongering, but he doesn’t care what normal, working people think. Howard serves the wealthy who will benefit the most out of this war, and they are in the minority. Think about it, while the taxpayer is paying for the war, it is the capitalists who produce the instruments of war that are sold to governments, thus the money we waste invading Iraq in large part goes to the rich. Howard’s pals just happen to own the bulk of Australian TV and Newspaper media and so it is no surprise that these outlets are in overdrive trying to engineer public opinion, and they might succeed. Consider Murdoch, a want-to-be yank and capitalist parasite owns near half of Australia’s media. I’m not just sick of the war, I’m sick of the attitude of the worlds most aggressive and economically expansionist regime, The united States of America, home WMDs and the voluntarily ignorant. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/168 "2003-02-07T02:54:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElJeffe \* > \*\*If that were the case, it would be the UN that wrote that check, about 10 years ago. Cease-fire agreement, remember? > \*\* It is my recollection that the guy who called the war off at the 100-hour line was Bush the Elder, with Mr. Cheney in the role of Secretary of Defense standing by his side, and both of them looking pleased as punch. I’m not sure how you foist that one off on the UN. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Svinlesha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@Mr.Svinlesha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Svinlesha)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/169 "2003-02-07T07:43:55Z")
**Doghouse** : > [@](#): > > - Aww, anthrax and VX aren’t that bad, guys . . . true, a teaspoonful can kill everyone in lower Manhattan, but that’s not what I personally evision as “truly horrifying” . . .\* This is precisely the sort of propagandistic reasoning that I was referring to earlier – that of creating in the mind of the public the image of a larger-than-life threat to the US. I don’t know exactly how many people live in lower Manhattan, but I sincerely doubt that a ”teaspoonful” of anthrax could kill all of them. What do you think? And VX? How many people can a ”teaspoonful” of VX nerve agent actually kill? Then, of course, we invoke an image of a threat to lower Manhattan, rather than to a backward Kurdish village – not that it’s okay to gas Kurdish villages mind you, but just so we can bring the issue home. The question of how such an agent would be delivered to and released in lower Manhattan is, of course, is glossed over; best not asked at all, if you don’t mind. An evil Iraqi undercover agent, no doubt. Finally, we can ask ourselves why any nation on earth would undertake to release VX in lower Manhattan, knowing full well that it risks the unholy (and, in this scenario, _internationally legitimate_) wrath of the world’s last remaining nuclear superpower. But naturally, we would prefer not to, because such a question might reveal our scenario is not that of a hard-headed realist, but rather that of a raving paranoid wack-job. You may wish to pause and peruse some of the letters posted by **light strand** on the previous page; if you do so, you may note that **none** of the reasons for direct military action against Saddam cited in these letters, written and endorsed by influential US policy makers, refers in any way to a threat to US territorial integrity (or even a threat to lower Manhattan, for that matter). Rather, at worst, they suggest that Saddam represents a threat to what they euphemistically term ”vital US interests.” What might these interest be, do you think? In this discussion, let’s not forget as well that our original argument with Saddam stems from his decision to ”preemptively” strike a neighboring state, Kuwait, because he perceived it as a threat to his ”vital interests.” It strikes me as comically ironic to condemn him for such an act, while simultaneously reserving for ourselves the right to act in a similar manner, should we choose to. St. Augustine tells a story about a pirate once captured by Alexander the Great. ”How dare you molest the sea?” Alexander asked. ”How dare you molest the world?” the pirate replied. ”Because I do it with a little ship only, I am called a thief; you, doing it with a great navy, are called an emperor.” Augustine thought the pirate’s response ”excellent and eloquent,” and so do I. > [@](#): > > - . . . so, the argument has progressed from (1) You can’t prove that Saddam has WMDs!\* Are you responding to me? Where have I made that argument, I wonder? And again, this ever-so-useful invocation of the sacred letters, WMD, in reference now to a teaspoon of the deadly anthrax! Can’t we at least call it for what it is? > [@](#): > > - (2) OK, maybe they do have WMDs, but who are you to question the efficacy of the UN inspectors?\* I really am at a loss here. Did I write this somewhere? Or do you simply enjoy putting words in my mouth? > [@](#): > > - well, OK, maybe Iraq has WMDs and Saddam’s making a fool of the inspectors, but c’mon, WMDs aren’t really all that bad, are they? At least we can be sure that Saddam will only slaughter defenseless Kurds with them–oh, yeah, and maybe a few million. Big deal.\* I wrote this? I shrugged off the death of defenseless Kurds? May I ask politely: ARE YOU READING WHAT I’M WRITING, OR ARE YOU JUST MAKING IT UP AS YOU GO ALONG? > [@](#): > > - This is the moral abyss you all put yourselves in defending Saddam.\* Paint with a broad brush much, **Doghouse**? At the very least, understand that I am not ”defending Saddam.” P.S. On the other hand, I second **Beagle’s** nomination. 🆒 **El Jeffe** : Sorry. ’Gainst regulations for me to argue with walls, y’know. **Halo13** : Well, I would apologize to you, if not for the fact that I have grown weary from years of apologizing for US idiocies that I am in no sense responsible for, up here in the Great White North. But I sympathize with your sentiments. ---
**Author:** ![Beagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/85f322/32.png) [@Beagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beagle)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/170 "2003-02-07T08:13:45Z")
You can argue about the ‘vital’ importance of the cease fire and the inspectors, but I was for attacking Iraq in 1998. Of course, we were all reading about blowjobs. I’m not sure Bush really cares about the sanctity of international law or the UN - but his actions _might_\* still be justified thereby. Which brings us to the whole question of the ‘smoking gun.’ That has everything to do with Iraq’s weapons, and nothing to do with vital national interests in a broad sense. \*Then we have the second resolution debate and so on. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/171 "2003-02-07T11:00:54Z")
Powell’s evidence is in no way comparable to Stevenson’s. All I see from Powell is a few ambiguous photo’s with labels on and to my eye the bunker ones are two different locations. Stevenson showed rockets. And okay, you’re happy the USSR backed down and averted war. So am I, but it was a close run thing and I don’t see Bush or Saddam as balanced individuals able to walk that tightrope. And it doesn’t change my view that Cuba, as a sovereign nation was free to do what it wanted without the say so of the USA. If the USA can encircle it’s perceived enemies with nukes or launch pre-emptive strikes then so can everyone else, as North Korea is demonstrating. And, if the USA can continue to support the Cuban terrorists in Florida it’s in no moral position to condemn anyone else. I want Iraq disarmed and Saddam overthrown but by the UN, in a manner and context that minimises the risk that such weapons will be either used or palmed off onto those who will use them for revenge after an attack. I do not see that attacking Iraq now will achieve this. Sure, it’ll be a cakewalk and the Iraqis will be dancing in the street, but the WMD’s will end up in terrorist hands and another 10,000 terrorists born throuout the ME. As the USA is unwilling to tackle Israel and it’s WMD’s and continued defiance of UN resolutions to show some even-handedness that might mitigate the development of more terrorists I am damned if I’m going to support a war when the major protagonist lies to me at every turn and behaves with rank hypocrisy. I just don’t see that the proposed war is the best way to achieve greater world security. Quite the opposite. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/172 "2003-02-07T12:46:00Z")
Well, ain’t that just damn typical of a Yurpeen. An Old Yurpeen, can’t grasp the fundamental distinctions, the defining essence of the thing. We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the Americans. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/173 "2003-02-07T13:57:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*Well, ain’t that just damn typical of a Yurpeen. An Old Yurpeen, can’t grasp the fundamental distinctions, the defining essence of the thing. > > We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the Americans. \*\* Or, apparently, talk facile gibberish. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/174 "2003-02-07T14:19:15Z")
> [@](#): > > We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the Americans. If that is the case, what the hell was Powell doing before the UN, presenting the case against Iraq you want to ignore? This is like arguing with creationists. Evidence doesn’t count - _because I don’t want it to._ ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/175 "2003-02-07T14:41:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tagos \* > \*\*Powell’s evidence is in no way comparable to Stevenson’s. All I see from Powell is a few ambiguous photo’s with labels on and to my eye the bunker ones are two different locations. Stevenson showed rockets. \*\* Uh-uh, Sparky. [Here are Stevenson’s photos](http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/photos1.htm). They are fuzzy and ambiguous and clearly require expert interpretation. ---
**Author:** ![light\_strand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a6a055/32.png) [@light\_strand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/light_strand)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/176 "2003-02-07T14:42:31Z")
Oh hey Shoden you’re here. Do you care to address my last post to you? It’s the last post on the previous page. So do you still believe that this has anything to do with al queda and terrorism, or will you concur with me, and the overwhelming evidence that this was a forgone conclusion and was going to happen with or without 9/11, and that the terrorist attacks just made it a whole hell of a lot easier. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/177 "2003-02-07T14:51:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dewey Cheatem Undhow \* > \*\*Uh-uh, Sparky. [Here are Stevenson’s photos](http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/photos1.htm). They are fuzzy and ambiguous and clearly require expert interpretation. \*\* As you are resorting to name calling I’ll take it my point is conceded. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/178 "2003-02-07T14:56:52Z")
Of course evidence counts. So do sources of said evidence. We are, for instance, given transcripts and recordings that we are assured are authentic and damning. On what basis are we to accept such assurances? Mr. Powell said so. Vague mention is made of intelligence provided by “defectors”. Well, that should certainly settle the matter! After all, what possible motive could a defector have in providing “information” that happens, by an extraordinary coincidence, to be music to the ears of his newfound friends! And the interrogations of prisoners might be better adjudged if the circumstances of those interrogations were to be clarified. They are not. This becomes more disturbing in the light of recent revelations of US willingness to accept intelligence from interrogations from third parties, parties we have reason to believe are not hampered by restrictions on methods. As certain evidence of unpiloted aircraft designed to disperse chemical and biological weapons,we are offered damning proof indeed: a film-clip of a jet aircraft with some unknown vapor trailing from it. Well, what else could it be but a combination of VX and anthrax. Who but a scurrilous lefty could deny such unequivocal proof? After all, Mr. Powell says so. As an unimpeachable source, he ranks right up there with Mr. Bush, who record for utter candor is unsullied. Well, sort of unsulled. Not _really_ sullied, just a few spots here and there. And the legendary aluminum tubes, trotted out for one more hobble about the course. Mr. Powell honors our intelligence by confirming that there is some “controversy” in this regard, and we should be grateful for this acknowledgement of our presumed intelligence. Then, based on his common sense wisdom, the solid instincts of the “old trooper”, he offers himself as an alternative to the stated opinions of recognized experts. Because he says so. Yes, friend **Shodan** , evidence does indeed count. We should all very much like to see some. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/179 "2003-02-07T15:10:50Z")
It’s worse than you think, **elucidator**. Colin Powell was too honorable to fake the evidence. So the Bush people kidnapped him and replaced him with a double, who had been groomed for the purpose. It was Colin Powell’s stand-in who told all those lies to the Security Council. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/13edae/32.png) [@Dewey\_Cheatem\_Undhow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Cheatem_Undhow)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2003, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980/180 "2003-02-07T15:44:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tagos \* > \*\*As you are resorting to name calling I’ll take it my point is conceded. Thanks. \*\* What, did you stop reading after “Sparky” (hardly a vicious slander on you, BTW) and fail to notice that I linked _to the actual photos Stevenson relied on_? You know, the _very photos you said were more dispositive than Powell’s_? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/post-powells-address-smoking-gun-redux/152980.md?page=10)