Republican Guard may have been Given orders to use CHEMICALS

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-24 11:45pm

israel will certainly fling nukes if theyre chemmed, i think thats a given, and saddam has already flamed israel even tho this war doesnt involve them.

so its not hard to assume that saddam will choose to chem SCUD israel and that israel will turn baghdad into a molten pit.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-24 11:48pm

I don't get it. We should have invaded him a long time ago, because look at what happened when we invaded

No, we should have invaded them before because they broke international law, ignored the UN, and are two microts from breaking all conventions of war that exist today regardless of their being invaded.

Not even the "evil" US would do such.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-03-25 12:14am

We should have finished the job in 1991, UN be damned.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-03-25 12:18am

RedImperator wrote:We should have finished the job in 1991, UN be damned.

Indeed.

Sokar · Post by **Sokar** » 2003-03-25 12:24am

I too would have been far happier if we had finished this bit of nastyness in 91 as well. War wolf that I am , even I have no desire to see chem weapons get thrown around. I personally hope its just the Iraqi's bluffing, but that little voice n my head says not to bet the farm on it.....

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2003-03-25 12:28am

Saddam should have been disposed of back in '91 but I don't think the Saudis and the rest of th Arab coelition members would have agreed. Forcing the issue then would have created a situation much worse than what we've got now.

Bush should have supported the Kurds and Shiites when they responded to his call by rising up against Saddam. This would have been politically difficult within the Arab world but nowhere near as bad as sending US troops to march on Baghdad.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-25 12:30am

fgalkin wrote:I see that whatever I wanted to say had been said twice already, so I'm going to say something different:

SCREW YOU, HANS BLIX!

Blix was one naieve son of a gun, right up there with Chirac.

Thing is, Chirac is only protecting his own arse, cause he don't want us to find all the stuff with Made in France stamped on it in the middle of Baghdad, same goes for Russia.

I still don't know what to think of Germany...

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-25 12:32am

RedImperator wrote:We should have finished the job in 1991, UN be damned.

Quite.

We knew that Slick Willy wouldn't do anything, but Bush should had, and now that we have a pres with the guts to do it, he gets chewed.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-03-25 12:34am

Enlightenment wrote:Bush should have supported the Kurds and Shiites when they responded to his call by rising up against Saddam. This would have been politically difficult within the Arab world but nowhere near as bad as sending US troops to march on Baghdad.

I agree. It was a damn shame that he was so fucking stupid. But now.... as they say the sins of the father.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-25 12:41am

I still don't know what to think of Germany...

to quote the radio..

"Times really have changed. The most popular rap artist is white, the best golf player is black, and Germany doesn't want to go to war!"

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-03-25 12:46am

kojikun wrote:
I still don't know what to think of Germany...
to quote the radio..

"Times really have changed. The most popular rap artist is white, the best golf player is black, and Germany doesn't want to go to war!"

LMAO!

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-03-25 01:10am

I'm praying my ass off they don't use them. Aside from the huge number of deaths fromthe gas, it would put the US in a bind: Go nuclear and kill thousands, possibly trigger WW3 and set off another Jhiad, or don't go nuclear and show that we will backdown when the fear that America will nuke the hell out of them is the only thing that has been holding some countries back.

I really hope that somone on the Iraqui side sees this and makes the best call.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-25 01:20am

what is Israel blames the US? ..

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-03-25 01:24am

kojikun wrote:what is Israel blames the US? ..

huh? That's less coherent than usual.

Shadow WarChief · Post by **Shadow WarChief** » 2003-03-25 02:18am

MKSheppard wrote:
This comes from US Army radio intercepts of Iraqi Army
transmissions, specifically Republican Guard transmissions.

Everyone is reporting it, from Fox News to CBS, etc etc

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/ ... 1815.shtml

In the link there wasn't any mention of an intercepted radio broadcast. I don't doubt it's true, I'm just wondering if there's a more detailed report that I can tape to the hallways of my school and tell everybody "I told you so"

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-25 02:35am

kojikun wrote:
No, we should have invaded them before because they broke international law

Then by all means, invade everyone whoose done so.

ignored the UN

like the US did? like Israel does? like pretty much everyone does? Since when did this become a mandate for war? These are all ad hoc excuses to justify a predetermined course of action. Let me put it this way- the only way someone can make an honest case for war is saying that Iraq will be better off when it's over.

and are two microts from breaking all conventions of war that exist today regardless of their being invaded.

The intelligence community disagrees with you. They were not going to use chemical weapons unless backed up against a wall- which is what they are, and with the eyes of the world on them, they never would have again. I should reiterate that the only time Iraq did use them was when it had the US on side- against Iran in wartime, and against the Kurds in [insert hard to spell city name here].

Not even the "evil" US would do such.

Who says the US is evil?

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-03-25 06:29am

Enlightenment wrote:Saddam should have been disposed of back in '91 but I don't think the Saudis and the rest of th Arab coelition members would have agreed. Forcing the issue then would have created a situation much worse than what we've got now.

Bush should have supported the Kurds and Shiites when they responded to his call by rising up against Saddam. This would have been politically difficult within the Arab world but nowhere near as bad as sending US troops to march on Baghdad.

had we done that, people like you would be bitching about how we are waging a bloody war by proxy against the people of Iraq

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2003-03-25 08:52am

The closest article I found on that site about chemical weapons was this

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/ ... 5902.shtml

which still says "US officals say..." which means nobody is putting their name to this. In contradiction, the article also says that there is still no evidence for chemical weapons. I'm not saying he absolutely doesn't have them, but let's not turn this into Fox News.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2003-03-25 09:18am

To add fuel to this fire, a report from MSNBC:

NBC News’ Jim Miklaszewski reported from the Pentagon, meanwhile, that intercepted Iraqi communications indicated that the Republican Guard was under orders to attack with chemical weapons once U.S. ground troops crossed a line around Baghdad drawn roughly between Karbala and Al Kut.

The entire report can be found at http://www.msnbc.com/news/870749_asp.htm.

Scroll down the last section.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-25 09:29am

storm, i meant if israel is hit with chems, what if they blame the US for starting a war that got israeli innocents killed.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-03-25 03:06pm

Im not sure they would, considering how much money we float their way. they might get pissy towards their neighbors tho.

as for the chem weapons. . . Im quietly panicking.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-25 03:46pm

Israel is effectively out of range of every missile Iraq ever got into production with American forces holding western Iraq.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-03-25 05:37pm

Israel is efficiently out of range of every missile Iraq ever got into production with American forces holding western Iraq.

Please be right. I don't want to be capable of visitng the Baghdad Wastelands in the coming years.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-03-25 05:48pm

kojikun wrote:
Israel is efficiently out of range of every missile Iraq ever got into production with American forces holding western Iraq.
Please be right. I don't want to be capable of visitng the Baghdad Wastelands in the coming years.

Their primary launch facilities against Israel were at the H2 and H3 airfields, IIRC, which are under Coalition hands.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-03-25 06:10pm

The chemical weapons might be a hoax to force American troops to retreat, but I doubt that. If they do, it could be the thing that causes the invasion to royally screw up, Bush's approval rating and support for the war to plummet, and possibly an end to the fighting to prevent further casualties.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Republican Guard may have been Given orders to use CHEMICALS

Re: Republican Guard may have been Given orders to use CHEMI