Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:26 PM
 
Location: Florida
23,795 posts, read 13,249,351 times
Reputation: 19952

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Just like to remind everyone that last year ISIL siezed the stockpiles of Saddam's weapons that "didn't exist."

Isis storms Saddam-era chemical weapons complex in Iraq - Telegraph

When this story came out, some of the idiots in the Obama administration told two big whoppers:

A) The munitions captured were too old to be used
B) ISIL would never use them because they are not safe for the users.

Both of these are idiotic lines of reasoning. Some of them are known to be 84% pure, and they are still lethal at at even 43% purity.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...pons.html?_r=0

Some quotes from the article.

By 2006, the American military had found dozens of these blister-agent shells in Iraq, and had reports of others circulating on black markets, several techs said. Tests determined that many still contained mustard agent, some at a purity level of 84 percent, officials said.

Separate quote.

Had these results been publicly disclosed, they would have shown that American assertions about Iraq’s chemical weapons posing no militarily significant threat could be misread,

and again, just for context here:

Its canisters had ruptured during the roadside bomb’s detonation, mixing precursors to create sarin with a purity of 43 percent — more than enough to be lethal.

As for the terrorists not using them because they are dangerous to those using them, yeah, becasue its not like terrorrists strap exposives to themselves and blow themselves up or anything.

It was only a matter of time before they started using them, and indeed it is probable that they started using them immediately:

Is ISIS Using Chemical Weapons? - Defense One

Now you are hearing the news media tell new whoppers such as "ISIL may have made mustard gas themselves" and "they may have gotten it from Syria."

Why would they make it themselves or get it from Syria when they already have hundreds of perfectly operational shells from Saddam?

About 5000 rounds of chemical muntions, many perfectly serviceable (1000 found in a Republican guard compound!) were pulled out of Iraq and it is highly suspected that thousands of more made it into Syria, Russia, or were covertly destroyed.

Chemical weapons WERE found in Iraq but Pentagon kept it secret | Daily Mail Online

Saddam also had 500 tons of yellow cake uranium...

500 tons of uranium shipped from Iraq, Pentagon says - CNN.com

...and banned dual use high explosive.

Why didn't we hear about this- the embarrasing fact that THE EUROPEANS manufactured Saddam's WMD. Not Americans, but EUROPEANS. That is also why thy did not want to fight, and lied through their teeth. America only sold precursors which could be used for pesiticdes and other harmless agenst. It was the Europeans who made actual agent and finished shells.

Iraqi Scientist Reports on German, Other Help for Iraq Chemical Weapons Program


Lest we revive old canards, let us be clear that stockpiles were a declared reason that we went to war in Iraq:

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

This is exactly what Bush was concerned would happen, and if we would not have pulled the troops out under Obama, this would not be happning.

Hillary and Obama lied, Kurds died.
So Bush and Cheney could not find these, but ISIS could. How ironic. Guess they were busy looking for oil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:31 PM
 
Location: Southern California
15,080 posts, read 20,464,507 times
Reputation: 10343
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post


That would have been very dangerous for our troops. Bush had them secured, and Obama abandoned the country knowing that they were there. Obama's fault, pure and simple.

To what end? Certainly he anticipated our withdrawal so why was the job of destroying these "WMDs" not a priority. Isn't that why we invaded the country in the first place?

[or did we invade for something else?]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Southern California
15,080 posts, read 20,464,507 times
Reputation: 10343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
So Bush and Cheney could not find these, but ISIS could. How ironic. Guess they were busy looking for oil.
Exactly. Anyone who believes that Bush, Cheney, et al cared about the Kurds is lying to himself.

[laughter]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:38 PM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,960,211 times
Reputation: 29434
So Bush's Folly - for all the lives and limbs and treasure and goodwill lost - failed to do even the one basic objective we were told it was supposed to achieve? Not just a bad idea, but a complete strategic failure on top of that? Half a decade of occupation - just under the GWB administration - and no chemical weapons found.

If you're trying to convince us that the Iraq war wasn't just a bad idea, but a bad idea executed in the least competent manner possible, step up and claim your prize.

If you're trying to sell the idea that if this wild-eyed idea of ISIS getting hold of Iraqi weapons is true (it isn't) would somehow justify your boy-king marching into Iraq - then you're not just arguing against common sense, but against logic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:39 PM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,960,211 times
Reputation: 29434
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
They were secured under Bush, abandoned under Obama.

They were secured under Bush, abandoned uder Obama.

Bush had them secured, and Obama abandoned the country knowing that they were there. Obama's fault, pure and simple.

They were found and secured. They became unsecured when Obama abandoned the country.

Bush had them secured, and Obama abandoned the country knowing that they were there.
Look at that, five lies in one post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:42 PM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,960,211 times
Reputation: 29434
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWiseWino View Post
Ah, can I ask who left them there between 2003 to 2009?
No, you can't. The world's sole remaining superpower cannot destroy mustard gas. Denmark can, because we pull WWII chemical munitions out of the Baltic all the time, but it's just too dangerous for US troops.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:43 PM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,960,211 times
Reputation: 29434
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Last warning before I go to the mods.
Awww. Thread not going as planned?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 05:50 PM
 
46,943 posts, read 25,960,211 times
Reputation: 29434
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Saddam also had 500 tons of yellow cake uranium...
Ah yes, the Tuwaitha facility, sealed and monitored by IAEA - except for the little embarassing interlude when the US Army blundered on the scene, broke the seals, then took off again without posting guards. See, it wasn't until Cheney & Co. needed something to distract stupid people that anyone gave two sh.ts about the declared and controlled yellowcake. Hint: UO2 isn't a WMD.

Quote:
Lest we revive old canards...
Too late. Way too late.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 06:47 PM
 
30,058 posts, read 18,650,451 times
Reputation: 20860
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Just like to remind everyone that last year ISIL siezed the stockpiles of Saddam's weapons that "didn't exist."

Isis storms Saddam-era chemical weapons complex in Iraq - Telegraph

When this story came out, some of the idiots in the Obama administration told two big whoppers:

A) The munitions captured were too old to be used
B) ISIL would never use them because they are not safe for the users.

Both of these are idiotic lines of reasoning. Some of them are known to be 84% pure, and they are still lethal at at even 43% purity.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...pons.html?_r=0

Some quotes from the article.

By 2006, the American military had found dozens of these blister-agent shells in Iraq, and had reports of others circulating on black markets, several techs said. Tests determined that many still contained mustard agent, some at a purity level of 84 percent, officials said.

Separate quote.

Had these results been publicly disclosed, they would have shown that American assertions about Iraq’s chemical weapons posing no militarily significant threat could be misread,

and again, just for context here:

Its canisters had ruptured during the roadside bomb’s detonation, mixing precursors to create sarin with a purity of 43 percent — more than enough to be lethal.

As for the terrorists not using them because they are dangerous to those using them, yeah, becasue its not like terrorrists strap exposives to themselves and blow themselves up or anything.

It was only a matter of time before they started using them, and indeed it is probable that they started using them immediately:

Is ISIS Using Chemical Weapons? - Defense One

Now you are hearing the news media tell new whoppers such as "ISIL may have made mustard gas themselves" and "they may have gotten it from Syria."

Why would they make it themselves or get it from Syria when they already have hundreds of perfectly operational shells from Saddam?

About 5000 rounds of chemical muntions, many perfectly serviceable (1000 found in a Republican guard compound!) were pulled out of Iraq and it is highly suspected that thousands of more made it into Syria, Russia, or were covertly destroyed.

Chemical weapons WERE found in Iraq but Pentagon kept it secret | Daily Mail Online

Saddam also had 500 tons of yellow cake uranium...

500 tons of uranium shipped from Iraq, Pentagon says - CNN.com

...and banned dual use high explosive.

Why didn't we hear about this- the embarrasing fact that THE EUROPEANS manufactured Saddam's WMD. Not Americans, but EUROPEANS. That is also why thy did not want to fight, and lied through their teeth. America only sold precursors which could be used for pesiticdes and other harmless agenst. It was the Europeans who made actual agent and finished shells.

Iraqi Scientist Reports on German, Other Help for Iraq Chemical Weapons Program


Lest we revive old canards, let us be clear that stockpiles were a declared reason that we went to war in Iraq:

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

This is exactly what Bush was concerned would happen, and if we would not have pulled the troops out under Obama, this would not be happning.

Hillary and Obama lied, Kurds died.

I can't decide whether it is pathetic or funny. When has a liberal ever been right about anything?

Saddam clearly had WMDs, as he used them against the Kurd himself. Did the libs think that they just evaporated after that and that he used them all?

Now that ISIS is using chemical weapons (Saddam's old weapons that do not exist), perhaps the libs should go and get on the recieving end of those weapons that do not exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 06:54 PM
 
30,058 posts, read 18,650,451 times
Reputation: 20860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
No, you can't. The world's sole remaining superpower cannot destroy mustard gas. Denmark can, because we pull WWII chemical munitions out of the Baltic all the time, but it's just too dangerous for US troops.
Are you talking about the same Danes that had their a*ses handed to them by the Germans in about a week?

I guess it is good that they can destroy
chemical weapons, as it appears as though the Danish army is not good for anything else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:59 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top