Miscellaneous > The Lounge

The dossier

(1/5) > >>

KernelPanic:
The long awaited dossier (c. 450Kb)

sporkme:
ooo  ooo  did they use the words "shit" "for" "brains" and "saddam" in the same sentence?

Calum:
they say things like 'we don't know' and 'saddam has really been a naughty boy before so we think he might do it again' a lot.

Seems like largely spin, on the part of No 10 Downing street, however i agree that saddam is a ruthless criminal who cannot be trusted in any way, i think that it is not good to insinuate things unless you have irrefutable evidence (and sure there's some evidence, so fair enough). I think that those who would like to be seen to be on the side of right and goodness (or whatever) should always make double sure of everything and be very careful about things like gathering evidence and so forth. That is why i think the inspectors thing is very important. I do think a lot of timewasting is going on though and that Iraq should be made to let the inspectors do their job.

Bombing is not the answer, however a strong military policing presence for the duration of the inspecting might be a good idea.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]

zooloo:
It's all a bit Saddam "could".  Not can.

An interesting article from the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,794759,00.html

On the other hand George W Bush is a religious fanatic (Evolution the work of Satan!) who does have chemical weapons, who does have biological weapons, who does have nuclear weapons and (this is the important bit) he has the means to deploy them.

Also GWB is actively seeking a war, after all in his funamentalist Christain world this is "End times" and he is quite willing to make it so.

To counter any suspicion that I am anti-American I'd like to add that Tony Blair is sucking GWB's arse.

When war isn't government policy we don't have war - see Europe.

voidmain:
Hmmm, I should have known Scott Ritter was involved in that article. If you know a little about Scott Ritter you know that anything you hear from him really can't be taken seriously. He flip flops (probably for money) and just loves media face time.

Scott was a UN inspector who was sent to Iraq after the Gulf war to seek and destroy weapons of mass destruction etc.. In 1998 he made this statement:

 
quote:This most recent Security Council resolution on Iraq is only reflective of the continuing pattern of confrontation and concession. I cannot see how the recent resolution did anything more than delay the inevitable. Iraq has paid no real price for telling one lie after another and continuing its obstruction of the weapons inspection teams. If Iraq chooses in the future to allow the resumption of inspection activity, will it be rewarded with yet another round of "comprehensive reviews." The danger the objectivity of such a review. The track record of the Secretary General on Iraq is mixed at best.

I believe that the world, especially the Congress of the United States, must pay close attention in the weeks and months ahead to keep the process of disarming Iraq honest. If recent history is any guide, there will be many pressures placed upon the Special Commission, most behind the scenes and as such out of public view, to make compromises of substance concerning Iraq's unfulfilled disarmament obligations. The credibility of the United Nations and the United States is at stake here.
--- End quote ---


Full text here: http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1998_h/ws915981.htm

Now what has changed since he made this statement?  He hasn't been to Iraq since prior to making this statement. How could he possibly have any more information about Iraq's weapons? Why would he be so afraid of them doing bad things before and not now? Could it be the $400,000 he got from Iraq to make a movie? Dunno, but Scott Ritter has been "out of the loop" for many years now and is by no means an expert on what Iraq has today or what our governments know about Iraq. The information you could get from Ronald McDonald would be as good as the info you get from Scott Ritter.

And the GW being a religious fanatic comment. Right, and he's going to send Santa Claus on a secret mission to drop a nuke on Bagdad. Belonging to a religion does not make one a religious fanatic, gimme a break... Making an equally stupid comment about Tony Blair in no way proves you are not anti-American, not that it matters.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page