Printable View
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2949441.stm
Blastards!! They don't want to give the UN inspectors any more time, but they can take all the time in the world to come to the conclusion that they are wrong!!Quote:
The US military commander, General Tommy Franks, says that it could take a year to complete a search.
.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html
Liar Liar!!Quote:
The survey team will focus on putting a larger number of people into the country to undertake a more organized search based on intelligence leads.
The latest effort underscores the growing Pentagon view that the United States no longer expects to find weapons of mass destruction on its own, but will have to offer rewards to Iraqis to elicit information as to where to look.
.
just get over it already... sit in your little honeybee world because you will never change a damn thing..
But do you not see his point ?
The US wouldn't give the UN weapons inspectors the time to find the weapons - but now that the US are in there, now they're giving themselves all the time they want.
So that means that the original reason for going to war is now completely null and void.
Especially seeing as rumsfeld is now saying that they probably won't find the weapons.
his one and only point has been the same in every post he has... it is just bashing the united states.. regardless of what the topic is... and what has changed since then???? nothing at all.. the war still happened.. the people that support it still do.. the people that don't support it still don't...
But the reason at the time for going to war was because the US knew that Iraq had these weapons and they knew where they were.
But the US wouldn't provide any proof.
The US also said that the UN were taking too long.
But now the US are doing the exact same thing.
In all fairness that's just so stupid.
see you twist words to make them sound how you want them to soundQuote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Especially seeing as rumsfeld is now saying that they probably won't find the weapons.
he didn't say we probably won't find them.. he says they need intelligence information from iraqi officials.. and so far they have been doing pretty well capturing them.. 2 top ranking officials in the past 2 days...Quote:
While U.S. military personnel have yet to find chemical, biological or nuclear weapons within Iraq, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he believes it will take Iraqis coming forward with information before such weapons turn up.
Okay sorry it wasn't rumsfeld who said that.
I read that from somewhere else.
But look at it now though, its obvious the US doesn't in fact know where the weapons were.
And the entire war was based on them supposedly knowing for a fact that they did in fact have them.
well listen we will argue back and forth about it and the thing that sucks is the "facts" we present to eachother, we dont even know how accurate they are since we use the news as our source of information... i did this interview with some top ranking US military offical who was saying something along the lines ofQuote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Okay sorry it wasn't rumsfeld who said that.
I read that from somewhere else.
But look at it now though, its obvious the US doesn't in fact know where the weapons were.
And the entire war was based on them supposedly knowing for a fact that they did in fact have them.
"We do know there are these weapons because we KNOW and everyone else knows that Iraq had them at one point, but can't account for them now (and couldn't account for them when inspectors where there) all that VX and anthrax.. everyone knows they had it.. they never denied having it.. they just say they dont have it now.. with no record where it went..."
they also went on to talk about how Iraq is a huge place, and if they wanted to hide weapons the dessert would be an ideal place... we have yet to explore much more than the major cities... or the weapons could have been moved out of iraq... we didn't close the border with iraq and syria until recently...
if Iraq could account for these weapons that just magically disappeared.. then i would be more reserved about the war... but they can't... they just say "we dont have them"... and from a man like saddam.. i don't know about you.. but i am not about to take his word for it
so If it is going to take 300,000 Marines/Army a year to search how long would it have taken 100 UN inspectors with the weapons moving while they look?Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2949441.stm
Blastards!! They don't want to give the UN inspectors any more time, but they can take all the time in the world to come to the conclusion that they are wrong!!
.
Fact is the US said it knew exactly where the weapons were at the time.Quote:
Originally posted by MasterBlaster
so If it is going to take 300,000 Marines/Army a year to search how long would it have taken 100 UN inspectors with the weapons moving while they look?
The US never said it knew exactly where they were. But they knew that it was there because they had firm intelligence. And the same firm intelligence points to these weapons being cleverly hidden among the general population. i won't be surprised if the weapon hunt takes some time.Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Fact is the US said it knew exactly where the weapons were at the time.
And the US were against not giving UN weapon inspectors more time because it was no use as Saddam was playing a game of hide n seek.
The US never said it knew where the weapons were. It was not up to the US to provide proof that Iraq had weapons...It was up to The Iraqi government to proof that they didn't...and they never (after 12 years) gave any solid proof that they're weapons had been destroyed.
Face it the UN inspectors couldn't find sand in a desert. We can take all the time we need because now there isn't an Iraqi government that will kick us out if we get too close.Quote:
The US wouldn't give the UN weapons inspectors the time to find the weapons - but now that the US are in there, now they're giving themselves all the time they want.
It may take a year for 300,000 troops and 1,000 scientists to find the weapons...especially if the iraqi scientists don't cooperate. Hell, they're trying to search a country that is 171,599 square miles. And it isn't like they'll be sitting in the open desert either...They'll probably be in underground bunkers or storage facilities or just buried somewhere in the desert..some of locations probably aren't known to anyone except, Saddams regime.
I read something from the pentagon that refered to a couple thousand different suspect sites. Taking about a year sounds like a fair over estimate. I'm still suprised that the US hasn't brought in more scientists to help out with the slow testing process. Iraqi looters already mistakenly stole AIDS and Cholera samples. I'd hate to see someone stealing a vile of VX from a lab thinking it was an antibiotic or pain killers.Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Fact is the US said it knew exactly where the weapons were at the time.
If the US had firm intelligence about the existence (and even some locations, going by Powell's presentation to the UN) I think the US informers should be coming forward and pointing the coalition forces to those suspect sites. So far there haven't been any such incidents. And whatever sites have been found so far have been anything but weapons manufacturing sites.Quote:
Originally posted by OrdinaryGuy
The US never said it knew exactly where they were. But they knew that it was there because they had firm intelligence. And the same firm intelligence points to these weapons being cleverly hidden among the general population. i won't be surprised if the weapon hunt takes some time.
And the US were against not giving UN weapon inspectors more time because it was no use as Saddam was playing a game of hide n seek.
Maybe the US is deliberately trying to delay the process, so as to heighten the tension and excitement around the world, and then it will announce the discovery of the WMDs in the most dramatic scoop ever, is it so? :)
I don't understand why the "informers" and the "intelligence sources" of the US are not coming forward now to offer any help. With the help of such sources it shouldn't take a few millions of the US troops to uncover a couple of weapons manufacturing sites a whole year.
.
There are only < 350,000 troops, not millions.Quote:
With the help of such sources it shouldn't take a few millions of the US troops to uncover a couple of weapons manufacturing sites a whole year.
And you think that makes a difference? :)Quote:
Originally posted by hellswraith
There are only < 350,000 troops, not millions.
.
No, but you can't twist facts to present your point of view. State them as they are, and you will be much more credible.
Alright, here you go:Quote:
Originally posted by hellswraith
No, but you can't twist facts to present your point of view. State them as they are, and you will be much more credible.
With close to 3,50,000 troops in Iraq, do you still need about a year or so to know that you are wrong??
That looks even worse, now that it's closer to the truth :rolleyes:
.
Well if it takes 350,000 troops a year to find it when it's not being moved every day, how long do you think it would have taken 100 UN inspectors to find it when it WAS being moved every day?
It does look worse because you didn't type it right....lol... Here let me help you....Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Alright, here you go:
With close to 3,50,000 troops in Iraq, do you still need about a year or so to know that you are wrong??
That looks even worse, now that it's closer to the truth :rolleyes:
.
350,000
Surely it would be much better if you just upped the number of inspectors ...Quote:
Originally posted by Arc
Well if it takes 350,000 troops a year to find it when it's not being moved every day, how long do you think it would have taken 100 UN inspectors to find it when it WAS being moved every day?
Oh, ok, I got it :D It's not the UN inspectors who are gonna find the WMDs, but the US marines! :rolleyes:
.
Did it ever occur to you that people outside the US would like to format numbers the non-US way, or that 3,50,000 and 350,000 mean the same figure and so the formatting would make little difference?Quote:
Originally posted by hellswraith
It does look worse because you didn't type it right....lol... Here let me help you....
350,000
No?
I figured so :rolleyes:
.
See HereQuote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Did it ever occur to you that people outside the US would like to format numbers the non-US way, or that 3,50,000 and 350,000 mean the same figure and so the formatting would make little difference?
No?
I figured so :rolleyes:
.
Indeed, out of all the asian countries listed, for seperator position, India is the contrary.
-Lou
Your new to Honeybee's posts aren't you? :pQuote:
Originally posted by hellswraith
No, but you can't twist facts to present your point of view. State them as they are, and you will be much more credible.
X
Doesn’t matter how you format it you were still wrong in stating the US had millions of troops looking for weapons. Just as in most of your posts Honeybee they are usually low on facts and high on Anti-American rhetoric.Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Did it ever occur to you that people outside the US would like to format numbers the non-US way, or that 3,50,000 and 350,000 mean the same figure and so the formatting would make little difference?
No?
I figured so :rolleyes:
.
X
Are you so blind in my hate that you forgot I had corrected the figure a couple of posts later when it was pointed out ? :)Quote:
Originally posted by Xanith
Doesn’t matter how you format it you were still wrong in stating the US had millions of troops looking for weapons. Just as in most of your posts Honeybee they are usually low on facts and high on Anti-American rhetoric.
X
.
He was not reffering to your numeric inadequacies, he was refering to your lack of facts and proliferation of anti-American rhetoric :)
When are you going to go back and fix all your other posts? ;)Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Are you so blind in my hate that you forgot I had corrected the figure a couple of posts later when it was pointed out ? :)
.
X
You have to consider that the job of the UN inspectors was to find the weapons with the co-operation of the Iraqi government.
Without the Iraqi government, it will take longer to find weapons.
The Iraqi dictatorship was playing a game of hide and seek. I doubt theyd find anything with the regime in placeQuote:
Originally posted by FantastichenEin
Without the Iraqi government, it will take longer to find weapons.
Ah yes and there's that mass of proof to prove they were hiding things from the inspectors.
Interesting how the US boasts about the capabilites of their spying networks of planes and satellites, yet when it suits them to lay blame and blagg the public, they can't seem to spot anything :rolleyes:
Blagg?Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
..., yet when it suits them to lay blame and blagg the public, ...
X
yes, the proof kept on coming up over and over again. Their weapon declaration was full of holes. The inspectors repeatedly found weapons that should have been declared... hmmm... then there were those audio tapes.... then we have reports of it being hidden among the general population.Quote:
Originally posted by plenderj
Ah yes and there's that mass of proof to prove they were hiding things from the inspectors.
Interesting how the US boasts about the capabilites of their spying networks of planes and satellites, yet when it suits them to lay blame and blagg the public, they can't seem to spot anything :rolleyes:
The US doesn't boast about its spying or military capabilities. Point out any instance where ithas. And Jamie, the war isnt yet fully over and you are already complaining about where is the WMD. Give it some time. They'd find it. The Kurds, the Kuwatis the Israelis all were scared of them being used during the war. But for some reason, you believe that they don't even exist.