Saddam's destruction of missiles?

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-03 05:12pm

What do you think about this?

He has also made a defiance of the UN by destroying each one individually instead of blowing them up like the UN told him to. Even more violations.

Personally, I think this is a load of BS, anyone who thinks that he will just up and throw his wildcard away is at the pinnacle of naivety.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-03 05:19pm

I heard today that he said if the Americans continue on their plan to attack Iraq he will stop destroying the missiles.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-03 05:36pm

This crap will go on and on and on. Every time it gets close to a security counsel vote, complies with something, but not all the way. BTW did ya know that Hans F-inn Blicks can't order anyone to do anything. This is a G-dam charade and anyone with a bit of sense can see this. (head almost blows off) sorry rant!!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-03 05:56pm

theski wrote:This crap will go on and on and on. Every time it gets close to a security counsel vote, complies with something, but not all the way. BTW did ya know that Hans F-inn Blicks can't order anyone to do anything. This is a G-dam charade and anyone with a bit of sense can see this. (head almost blows off) sorry rant!!

The UN has no power. They can request countries to do stuff, but the power lies within its members. Blix hasn't got sh*t on anyone.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-03-03 05:58pm

KILL HIM!

End the fucking charade, burn his goddamn palaces to the ground and make Iraq a fucking protectorate for twenty years until the damn place is actually worth a rat's ass.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-03 06:43pm

closet sci-fi fan wrote:Bush is intent on invading Iraq. War is going to happen one way or another. Sadam might meet every demand(not likely) but Bush will just raise one more requirement.

Bush isn't setting the requirements, the UN is. And the UN and Bush are usually at each others necks.

And Saddam has yet to meet all, or even most, of the terms set by the UN.

Frankly, this is the typical anti-war arguement. Can't think of a real argument against it, so you go with personal insults against Bush.

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2003-03-03 06:44pm

closet sci-fi fan wrote:Bush is intent on invading Iraq. War is going to happen one way or another. Sadam might meet every demand(not likely) but Bush will just raise one more requirement.

Bush can't raise any additional requirements. The requirements are already layed out on paper, that Saddam signed at the end of the Persian Gulf War.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-03 06:55pm

closet sci-fi fan wrote:
NF_Utvol wrote:
closet sci-fi fan wrote:Bush is intent on invading Iraq. War is going to happen one way or another. Sadam might meet every demand(not likely) but Bush will just raise one more requirement.
Bush isn't setting the requirements, the UN is. And the UN and Bush are usually at each others necks.

And Saddam has yet to meet all, or even most, of the terms set by the UN.

Frankly, this is the typical anti-war arguement. Can't think of a real argument against it, so you go with personal insults against Bush.
Who said I was neccessarily anti-war? I'm just laying out something I observed.

EDIT - I can't find the news article I saw earlier to prove my claims so I shall be silent.

Oh, don't mind me, sorry, I had you confused with someone else...

My bad!

EmperorChrostas the Cruel · Post by **EmperorChrostas the Cruel** » 2003-03-03 08:23pm

Is this where Saddam reluctantly agrees to destroy some of the treaty violating weapons that don't exsist?

("The empty hand has nothing to give.")-Does anyone here have enough long term memory to site the source of this blatant lie?

Teric Aziz?

Kamakazie Sith · Post by **Kamakazie Sith** » 2003-03-03 08:29pm

Emperor Chrostas the Crue wrote:Is this where Saddam reluctantly agrees to destroy some of the treaty violating weapons that don't exsist? ("The empty hand has nothing to give.")-Does anyone here have enough long term memory to site the source of this blatant lie?
Teric Aziz?

Al Samoud 2 are weapons that don't exist? Most of the world, including Iraq disagress with you......

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-03-03 08:48pm

There at presant are over 600 Items found by Blix that should have been destroyed, when he destroys all of them, not five or ten as per Resoultion 1441 then I will be intrested

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-03-03 08:52pm

Mr Bean wrote:There at presant are over 600 Items found by Blix that should have been destroyed, when he destroys all of them, not five or ten as per Resoultion 1441 then I will be intrested

Do you have a link to some article that states that over 600 items have been found? I could really use it against some Anti-war fanatics.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-03-03 08:58pm

Just google search for the UN Feburary Blix report and give them that

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-03-03 09:04pm

Mr Bean wrote:Just google search for the UN Feburary Blix report and give them that

I've looked it up and there's not a whole lot of meat there. Oh well, I'll keep looking...

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-03 09:11pm

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/r ... guest.html

Alex here is about 50 good links.. Have fun

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-03-03 10:03pm

theski wrote:http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/r ... guest.html

Alex here is about 50 good links.. Have fun

Thanks.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2003-03-04 04:53am

Even if Saddam walked over water, the USA would say "Look, he can't swim, either".

There will be war, wether or not he destroys those missiles.