If you’ve forgotten your own argumnt already, then I suppose there’s nothing left to do but let it drop, sievehead
We’re holding our hand over a fire, burning the shit out of it, yet if we pull it away, we’re “sissies”. :rolleyes:
Bush never said any of those things, but warned that it will be long and difficult instead. Don’t make stuff up. If you thought it was going to be easy…
Remeber me making that up when they’re saying Libya gave up it’s “WMD” as a result of the war.
I would think it’s pretty obvious they wanted to make a statement.
If you thought it was going to be easy…
[/QUOTE]
…you’re probably a republican.
Ahmed. Do you remember that bomb you set last week?
Yes Sadr.
Well Ahmed, I was just watching CNN, it turns out that bomb had sarin in it.
Yes Sadr.
Well Ahmed, Where did you get that shell?
I took it from the munitions dump It was unguarded.
Well Ahmed, can you get more?
Yes Sadr.
Then do so.
Yes Sadr. I will get them right away.
Oh, and Ahmed? Does your brother still own that import/export business?
I didn’t have an argument with you. You keep interjecting when I’m talking to other people, so I give you a kick once in a while.
…you’re probably a republican.
[/QUOTE]
Which republican was whining about hardships of Iraq invasion and advocated a withdrawal? If you can’t provide any cites, cut off the cheating hand you typed that garbage with, tough guy. No anesthetic.
Well to be fair, that isn’t all that he shouts.
Although there’s no denying, he does sound like an idiot.
I used to think that arabs had other names for their children other than Ahmed or Achmed; but I soon-after learned the horrible truth.
[QUOTE=New IskanderWhich republican was whining about hardships of Iraq invasion and advocated a withdrawal? If you can’t provide any cites, cut off the cheating hand you typed that garbage with, tough guy. No anesthetic.[/QUOTE]
Dude, seriously, I have no fucking clue what the hell you’re talking about.
I was making a joke implying that Bush and a lot of his boys thought this war would be a cakewalk.
Too bad you’re blinded by your insanity, otherwise you may have gotten it.
So Arafat is meeting in the Oval Office with Bill Clinton, after a successful negotiating session. Bill is in a celebratory mood.
“Here, Yassir! Have a cigar!”
“Hmmmm. Mr. President, can I have one still in the wrapper?”
Hmmmm, I must say they have been very quiet about this one. I haven’t heard shit since they found the thing.
If this is your idea of the sort of cruft that just sort of turns up around the office, I’d love to read the OSHA reports for your workplace…
Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache
By Scott Ritter
from the May 21, 2004 edition
If the 155-mm shell was a “dud” fired long ago - which is highly likely - then it would not be evidence of the secret stockpile of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that the Bush administration used as justification to invade Iraq
What gives away whether the shell had been fired is the base-bleed charge, which unlike the rest of the shell, will show evidence of being fired (or not).
Given what’s known about sarin shells, the US could be expected to offer a careful recital of the data with news of the shell. But facts that should have accompanied the story…were absent. And that’s opened the door to irresponsible speculation that the shell was part of a live WMD stockpile. The data - available to the ISG - would put this development in proper perspective - allowing responsible discussion of the event and its possible ramifications.
Copyright © 2004 The Christian Science Monitor
What, you don’t like my bad joke?
And I don’t like your bad joke.
Bad jokes taste bad, don’t they?
SimonX, quoting Ritter now, are we? You have really been scraping the bottom of the barrel lately. Notice how worthless your cite is: First, Scotty takes a break from chasing underage girls to say, “Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache.” But what evidence does he put forth? A nice blurb about dud rates, but he doesn’t know, he says he doesn’t know, yet he is still confident in saying that this shell was a dud/not from a cache?
All we know for sure is that a shell containing Sarin went off. We don’t know if it was a dud, or snatched up from some cache somewhere.
You’re getting downright Reederesque.
As far as I know, Iraq never declared that it had production capability of binary chemical rounds. The declaration that Ritter mentions was for 170 ‘test’ rounds that were handmade and used for evaluation. So it should be fairly easy to tell if, A) this shell has been fired before (Ritter’s correct about that), and B) whether it’s made from production tooling or handmade.
If it’s unfired, or it shows signs of being made from production tooling, then this is a ‘smoking gun’. If it shows tooling marks indicating it was handmade and a ‘dud’, then it doesn’t necessarily follow that there are more of them, and it could be a leftover shell from the 170 that were declared in 1995.
Here’s a Blog Entry from a U.S. soldier who was in Iraq, who seems to know this stuff, discussing both Sarin in general and Ritter’s comments. Seems pretty reasonable and thoughtful.
How does Mr. Blix explain the fact that Iraq did not declare any binary mix-in-flight chemical warheads after the Gulf war? There is absolutely no evidence I’m aware of that Iraq even had this capability before 1991. Methinks Blix is just guessing, and making a guess he wants to believe.