traitor congressman calls bush liar

[Admiral Piett]

I have but one question:

If Saddam is so horrible (which he is), why the fuck wasn't he assassinated back in the Regan-era?? You can't blame the current president for a screw up that should have happened a long time ago. Besides, he's not running the country, at least not alone. I don't think the right hand knows what the left is doing.

At the time he was not a problem,in the same way Pakistan is not a problem now.

[Mr Bean]

If Saddam is so horrible (which he is), why the fuck wasn't he assassinated back in the Regan-era?? You can't blame the current president for a screw up that should have happened a long time ago.

They tried, few people used to know it, they know it alot better now but the fact is Saddam has not one but FOUR doubles running around and has since 1972 it appears, Infact he has not appeared in public till just this year for a FIVE year period

The Saddam you see out on the balcony firing the gun CNN likes to show? One of his doubles

[Durandal]

I am not willing to bet my life and the lives of my countrymen on your biased opinion about whether Saddam is capable of having nukes. getting rid of him removes the doubt of whether he can.

This is not an "opinion." It is easily demonstrable fact. Despite what you may believe from watching The Sum of All Fears, getting your hands on a nuclear weapon is not as simple as digging around a desert with a metal detector for a few hours. Building one is far more complex. You need the right people with the right skills (nuclear physicists, engineers), and most of all, lots of money. The sheer amount of resources required to build a nuclear weapon is staggering. You think plutonium is readily available at every hardware store in Iraq?

Nevermind this, but you actually fear that, if Saddam gets a nuclear weapon, he'll be able to fire it across the whole fucking Atlantic! Iraq isn't Russia. They don't have the resources or the capablity to build a nuke, much less one capable of touching the US. You think that building an ICBM is as simple as strapping a rocket to a nuke and letting it fly?

The nuclear defense program is a waste of time and money, and it only exists to give people the illusion of security. It's a strawman to distract people from the more apparent threat of biological and chemical weapons, coincidentally, the much more difficult threat to combat.

I can almost hear it "There is Peace in our time...."

To hell with the "Forever Peace" rehtoric of the "peace party". Its time for war.

It's always time for war with fascists like you. Iraq is not a nuclear threat, and they certainly aren't a threat to the United States. Even so, you're taking the possibility of Iraq maybe having the capability to build nuclear weapons without any concrete evidence at all as an excuse to continue Daddy Bush's war.

[Admiral Piett]

The only Iraq reactor was destroyed by the Israelis before it became operational.Thus no plutonium.
Their uranium refinement plants were blown up by the UN inspectors a few years ago.Fissile materials were seized.No additional uranium usable for weapons would be available in sufficient quantitatives.They have tried to rebuild their centrifuges but the necessary high quality alloys imports have been stopped.

They could build a bomb only if some one handed them a sufficient quantitative of plutonium or highly enriched uranium.But this is a joke because procuring the fissile elements is exactly the main problem when building a nuclear weapon.The design part is relatively easy.A couple of clever phyisics students could do that.

[Azeron]

Admiral Piett,

I had no idea you were an expert in nuclear pyshics, and gained such a reputation to speak definitively on this subject. The fact remains, is that ther had been 4 years of us not having any weapons inspectors on the grounds. No one can be sure what he does and does not have. The people who have defected say he does, and I haven;t heard any defector say otherwise.

I do not want bush to wait untill he has a bomb before we do anything. I do not want to see an american or isreali, or any other arab city blown up to settle this dispute. Its the very nature of this dispute, of clandestine operations inside a forigen country which makes anything you say idle speculation. for all we know he could already have several of hte missing nukes from the former soviet union.

You say you have read the dossier from Blair. I doubt it. Blair put it together, and said it does say Iraq is a threat. I tend to beleive the nature of the contents from the people who made it, than from pundits from the peanut gallery who have already made up thier minds on the case.

It could have included a pictuer of saddam standing next to a bomb with the words "Crude Nuclear Weapon" written on it in plain english, and you would still doubt if it were really an atomic bomb.

Its not as if Atomic weapons are the only thing we have to worry about, there is the preasence of al quaeda in Iraq, saddams bio weapons program already produces useable weapons. I don't want to wait for that to be sprayed in a major US city either.

If I was the facist, I would be supporting facists like saddam, if you beleived in democracy you would be promoting a war to liberate oppressed people by facists. But the truth is, you like facist governments, they meld into you elitest ways.

[The Yosemite Bear]

You are aware that Tony Blair has also produced the memo's of his government's Warnings to the U.S. government about the posibility/probability of the attacks months before 9-11, The Isreali's warned the U.S. It's looking at this present time that we are quitelikely to see in 50 or so years the release of classified information that will show, that President Bush like President Roosevelt KNEW the attack was comming and ALLOWED it to happen in order to promote a political agenda. Sure this is sickening. but history is repeating it's self again, I sure hope someone has learned from it.

BTW do you realize what this means don't you Azeron?

[Azeron]

Yes, You are a paranoid idiot.

[Eleas]

Yes, You are a paranoid idiot.

*giggles*

Thank you for:
1. not being able to answer my post (hence, conceding), and
2. being the most unintentionally amusing human alive.

[The Yosemite Bear]

I am just showing what has happened: Documents released in the last 10 years have shown that Roosevelt Knew that Japan was going to attack before it happened. The same documents that were declasified only in the last 10 years that the Japanese codes had been deciphered and Washington had a 24 hour advanced notice that the attack was comming. Washington was either completly negligent or Roosevelt allowed the attack to occur.

At this time, we know that The CIA, Mossad, The British, the Saudi Royal Family All warned the U.S. state department to watch our Airports, and that an attack was comming, Months before it actually happened. Looking at the series of "Fuck Ups" that made the attack possible either our entire intellegnece gathering services. Or Bush ALLOWED this to happen.

This is not me being paraniod, this is the likelyhood of what may have happened. It took us a hundred years to find out that the Maine was brown up by our own incompetance.

[Master of Ossus]

Just because Bush had warning of something that MIGHT be happening in the future CLEARLY does not mean that he KNEW something was going to happen, and when. There is a clear distinction there. Think about it. Are we to respond to every single threat that comes in to the country? It would soon strain our resources beyond our ability to maintain. There are literally THOUSANDS of threats that come in to government officials every single day, and only a fraction of them are actually carried out. You are not being paranoid, but you are being utterly stupid and unrealistic. You clearly have no clue what it's like being in a government office, and your ability to second guess people after the fact is laughable.

Also, you BUTCHER what Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor. ONE branch of the military knew that an attack was coming, and assumed that Pearl Harbor was the target, but it did not know when. Another branch of the military thought that there was an attack coming and had it down to a four week span (which was later shown to be inaccurate), but it had no idea what the target was. A third branch of the military suspected that an attack was coming, but had no concrete information to back that up. Only the British appear to have had definitive knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack before it happened. The Soviets did have knowledge of the Japanese fleet's location two weeks before the attack, and they knew that the fleet was probably moving to attack an American target, but they did not know which target and they did not know when the attack was going to happen.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Maybe Roosevelt felt that if he attacked Japan first then people would think we were war mongers as they always do when we are at peace.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

For further evidence backing up my argument, (points at all anti-war people here). I support invading Iraq because once they acquire nukes, we can't invade them anymore without having to start a little nuclear holocaust. I say it's better to invade now and to avert any chance of a nuclear holocaust and do the same with all other countries that "harbor terrorists." I guess maybe we should intervene with Israel and Palestine afterwards too.

[Master of Ossus]

Unfortunately the US's actions before Pearl Harbor now seem ridiculously naive. Congress even rejected a resolution to condemn the Holocaust while it was happening! In any case, the VAST majority of Americans did not believe that we should have entered the war before Pearl Harbor. In fact, many of them were arguing vehemently against it. To enter a war with such a divided nation may have been a larger mistake than allowing Pearl Harbor to be attacked. But I digress, the point is that Roosevelt's information of the attack was far too sketchy to act upon in a definitive, pre-emptive manner, as was Bush's information about Sept. 11.

[Azeron]

Far as I have seen the Jury is still out on what FDR knew, wen when he knew it. Lets see where the evidence takes us. From what I hear, the conspiracey theory detractors have been backing off of this over a meno that was unconvered showing FDR was egging the japs to attack us.

Who knows?

I Don't think for a moment that Bush Would let the trade towers get hit. LOOK AT THE GUY!! he isn't that smart to be that devious!! Thats why you are paranoid!

sheesh!!

[Master of Ossus]

For further evidence backing up my argument, (points at all anti-war people here). I support invading Iraq because once they acquire nukes, we can't invade them anymore without having to start a little nuclear holocaust. I say it's better to invade now and to avert any chance of a nuclear holocaust and do the same with all other countries that "harbor terrorists." I guess maybe we should intervene with Israel and Palestine afterwards too.

Iraq already has nuclear weapons. They just lack the ability to deliver them.

And I definitely think we need to intervene over the Palestine vs. Israel issue.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Ok, a better reason to invade then. We should follow Bush senior's diplomacy and tell them we will nuke them if they nuke our forces or use chemical weapons on our forces. They can't nuke our homeland, but we can nuke theirs. So it would probably still be a similar decision as it was back then.

But why do I always hear this talk about "if and when Iraq will acquire nuclear weapons to use against America"? Or am I misunderstanding it and it's really "if and when Iraq will use nuclear weapons against America"?

[Mr Bean]

But why do I always hear this talk about "if and when Iraq will acquire nuclear weapons to use against America"? Or am I misunderstanding it and it's really "if and when Iraq will use nuclear weapons against America"?

Simple because since 1981 as far as we know Iraq, Iran and Pakstan have been devopling Nuclear Weapons Programs, Pakstans got nukes now, Iran WILL have nukes in six years if our intellgence is auccurate and Iraq has them now, however they are not TRUE Thermonuclear weapons, now the best we know he has is the low kiloton, messey bombs, Bascily he has a best a few *Little Man nukes like we droped on Japan

They are highly ineffectin and roughly the size of a small Bus ATM, Very infeccent and not the kind he would use

See Saddam as he has in the past will not be launching missles at anyone with Nukes Aboard
Rather this year or next he will have the fabled *Briefcase nuke who he can hand-off or sell to any dumb fuck anywhere who can then take a ride on the nearest American or Japanise or WHOEVER the fuck they have a problem with who will mearly blow himself and a small section of that city to hell

Then Saddam Can Laugh Revile the OTHER Missle tiped Nukes he's also built and say come attack me and I can fuck over Washington, Boston and Cali too

If not that he can hold Jerusilium Hostage at the very least

[IRG CommandoJoe]

So then we should definitely get him the fuck out of there.

[Master of Ossus]

The threat of Iraqi nuclear weapons is not against America. It is against Israel. Such an attack would necessitate a response by the entire United Nations, except that it would be unprepared and would require several months, during which time Israelis would be counter-attacking, possibly even drawing Syria and Jordan into the battle on the Iraqi side through bombing raids on those countries.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Yeah, so like I said, let's get him the fuck out of there.

[Sea Skimmer]

The threat of Iraqi nuclear weapons is not against America. It is against Israel. Such an attack would necessitate a response by the entire United Nations, except that it would be unprepared and would require several months, during which time Israelis would be counter-attacking, possibly even drawing Syria and Jordan into the battle on the Iraqi side through bombing raids on those countries.

Israel's response against a nuclear or even chemical attack from Iraq would be two fold. Jericho's onto the top three Iraqi cities and top 10 military bases, and F-15E's against Iraq's 21 major dams. This would effectively wipe out the country. Baghdad's smoking debris would be under ten feet of water within 12 hours.

The planes would fly through Jordan. In a night strike neither Jordan is unlikely to even put up interceptors if they have there route right.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

What is the Saddamster actually puts some thought into what targets he attacks and nukes all of Israel's air bases and then the rest of the crucial military targets before strking civilian cities?

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Or does he not have enough to do so?

[Master of Ossus]

What is the Saddamster actually puts some thought into what targets he attacks and nukes all of Israel's air bases and then the rest of the crucial military targets before strking civilian cities?

He does not have enough nuclear warheads to do so, as of 2001. The ones that he has are far too large to easily smuggle into Israel.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Yes, EASILY. But if he put his entire resources into figuring out a way of doing so, as that's all he really has to do, he'd do it, wouldn't he?