Opps, my mistake, not quite 800 yet…780-790 soldiers as of now, I believe. Still doesn’t seem like a good trade to me, though.
You say conservative, I say the search has been so bone dry, that there isn’t even one tiny little scrap to play up in the media. This shell is now the tiny little scrap they’ll use, at least if my suspicions are correct.
Again, you say wait and see, I say they’ve de-emphasized the issue as nothing has come up. Seems like they gambled that there wouldn’t be much outrage if the overall situation improved.
They got other things wrong such as…(from Powell’s UN presentation)
Still waiting boys.
They went beyond that,
(Powell quoted again from above)
it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and, in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that I’m disappointed, and I regret it.
Not at all, I’m saying this administration has grossly exaggerated things in the past, and I bet they’re going to do it again.
Well, forming an opinion from several different sources, reading between the lines, and having a little skeptacism is a good place to start. Not watching Foxnews 24/7 is another.
Anyone at this point in the game that believes AQ and SH were in cahoots, is gullible/and or ignorant. There are a lot of people that believe this, and I don’t. These are the same people that think SH had droves of WMD, which he doesn’t. So far my batting average is better then theirs.
How long do we wait to see what happens?
Opinion, reading between the lines, skeptacism (sic). All good words, but, still, only opinion, reading between the lines, skeptisism.
You linked your OP to cnn.com (Fox’s suitable substitute…IMHO).
If batting average is equivilent to an estimation or a feeling or a reasonable guess, or reasonable knowledge, yes, you are way ahead. But they have men on base right now.
I was referring to the shell reportedly found in iraq, last Saturday, which seemingly prompted your post, to which, I am responding, and in which, you allege the find will snowball speculation of WMD’s. Let’s at least wait an unscientific 72 hours.
According to the news items I have seen the shell was a 155 mm. That is a big sucker, slightly more than six inches in diameter and maybe as much as 75 lbs in weight. If an artillery shell, as opposed to a tank round, it was not a fixed cartridge. It was not the shell sticking out of a metal cartridge case like a really big .22 cartridge. It was just the shell, the bullet, if you would. It is fired by cramming the shell into the back end of a cannon (pointed end first, if you please) followed by one or more bags of explosive propellant. If it was a chemical shell containing nerve gas there were two, maybe more, compartments inside the shell to keep the components separated until the shell was fired or burst by an internal detonating charge. Once the internal compartments broke open the components would mix with nerve gas being the result.
The nerve gas that has been suspected is highly toxic stuff and highly volatile. A minute quantity inhaled or on the skin will set off fatal convulsions within minutes. Remember the video of the dog?
That the thing went off in the face of two soldiers, even if experts in explosive ordinance, without doing them any serious harm, let alone flat killing them and everybody down wind for a hundred yards or so, it is a pretty solid indication that the shell was very old, had been improperly stored, and had degraded to the point that at least one of the components was inert. Had it been a high explosive shell there would not be enough of the two soldiers left to identify. That there was a very small detonation is a pretty good indication that it was a chemical shell.
I’m not sure what all this demonstrates except that better than a year post invasion a single chemical shell has been discovered in Iraq. So far nobody has told us where it came from, whether it was ours, Russian or of local manufacture. Those are all things that can be figured out from the remains of the shell casing, as can its general date of manufacture and the conditions under which it was stored.
So far I can’t accept it as a demonstration that chemical weapons in Saddam’s hands presented any grave and growing danger, let alone a clear and present one. You knew that sooner or latter something was going to turn up, but it is hard to argue from this alone that Saddam had a war fighting ability or a significant terrorist arsenal.
Ahem, (sic).
Sam
I suspect the following is not an unbiased source, and I don’t find it compelling, but it belies your claim that the search has been bone dry.
I’m beginning to lean towards accepting the theory that people have so much invested in the WMDs * not * existing that they will discount any evidence to the contrary – a form of intellectual dishonesty comparable to that of which they are accusing the administration.
"not an unbiased source you say? From the front page of the web site you linked too.
Even the artical you listed is full of BS. One example:
You and I both know that the wood and duct tape drones were fluffed by the Bush admin. Plus, as a non weapons system, they did not have to be declared to anyone.
If you are going to pull up some facts, then make sure it is not the half truths and exaggerations that the neo-cons have been using to rub their genitals with.
From MrTuffPaws’ “Insight on the News”:
This completely ignores the use to which the high speed bearing was actually put: food for a scientist’s rose bushes.
Whoops, should have put a finagle factor in there instead of MrTuffPaws.
Yes they did find uranium-enrichment centrifuges under someone’s rose bushes, but if you look into it, they were placed under the flowers before the first gulf war. If Iraq was actively seeking nuclear weapons after GWI, don’t you think they should at least dig up the equipment before you start your research?
Squink
He he, defensive ol’ me already replied to you
.
That’s the trouble with fast moving threads; too many opportunities to mess up. 
Though the military leaders expected a very high casualty rate, this information was largely not passed on to the fighting men. They had no idea they were being asked to do the impossible, nor that hundreds - thousands? - would drown in the water just getting off the transports because their gear was so heavy, and there were dropoffs in the seafloor.
When I asked my grandmother about the staggering losses at the beaches at Normandy, and how the men had no idea what they were going into because if they had known, they would not have gone…she said “But was that fair?” Now, she must have known some of the men who went, she was their generation. She must have known men who died.
“Was that fair?”
No, of course it wasn’t fair. Fairness couldn’t be factored in. They had to achieve their military objective, or not bother to go at all. Was that a comfort to the families who lost sons, fathers, brothers? I’m sure it was not.
The thing that bothers me most about this war, as it did about the Gulf War I, is that there seems to be no overall plan, no specific goal. I know what the plan was said to be, but it seems to have petered out badly. Now it’s just a war of attrition, with guerilla resistance picking off American soldiers and melting back into the populace, and … I am neither shocked nor awed.
ftr, it was only part of one centrifuge.
Less than one whole item of which tens of thousands would’ve been necessary to be useful for enrichment processes.
From Insight cited above
“In virtually every case - chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missiles - the United States has found the weapons and the programs…”
Nuclear weapons, nope. Nuclar weapons program, well we found that some scientists had suspicions that another scientist might have thought about restarting the nuclear program. I’d hesitate to call someone’s suspicions about what someone else may or may not be thinking a program. But as for Insight, I"d suppose that beggars can’t be choosers. If that’s alll that you’ve got for nuclear program then that’s all that you’ve got.
Biological weapons, nada zilch zippo. Bio weapons program? There were some places and equipment that may’ve had a dual use. They could’ve quickly started a bio-weapon program anyway. Though they didn’t actually have one. Oh yeah. they found a reference strain of some botulism. This isn’t a weapon nor a program.
Chemical weapons we found absolutely zilch. not even scientists suspecting one another of even thinking about a program.
ballistic missiles, yes, we did find some that exceeded the allowed range and prgrams for more of the same sorts of things.
So of the four items listed, we found the programs and weapons of one. Yet, 1 out of four, is somehow, for some reason, characterized as “In virtually every case.”
Mr. Timmerman either is really stupid or expects that his audience is really stupid.
What a crock of shit this fellas trying to hawk.
I hereby concede that Bush has found a WMD in Iraq.
The letter of the invasion’s original intent may have been fulfilled. Its spirit has certainly not. Every shred of evidence that we were fed before the war pertained to nuclear weapons, not chemical or biological agents.
Everybody knew he had nerve gas; he used it. Everyone knew he had anthrax, because we took some of it last time. What the neocons were supposedly “worried” about was whether or not he could incinerate Haifa, and we went to Iraq to find nukes.
If they’re found, I will still consider this Administration a dismal failure. However, I will vote for them and indeed tell everyone I know to do so, because they will have exceeded my expectations.
Man, that’s one tough rubric you use. “Stop short of dismal failure and I will vote for you.” Whoever fits that bill sure sounds like someone we should all want in office*.
*I am not saying the Bush Admin. has been a dismal failure, only that RNATB might consider them one.
Actually, he said they were a dismal failure either way. So I’m not sure what the standard is.
I’m sure I, and the millions of others I agree with, will continue to stay ahead.
I agree, it will take a few days for the focus groups to churn out the correct course of action for Bush.