The Saddam was bluffing theory

[Axis Kast]

Yea, holes which spare parts which can't produce refined material passed through.. OH NO!

That makes it intelligent to let Iraq get one step from fission? Because it's impossible for anything but spare parts to get through your glorious sanctions?

Seriously, moron.

You people have major issues with something called ego.

what you call step one is what we knew they were capable of: Producing bombs and being able to send a guy to a Western university.

There's a whole range of efforts that must be undertaken to finally produce a bomb. You know this.

[SirNitram]

Yea, holes which spare parts which can't produce refined material passed through.. OH NO!

That makes it intelligent to let Iraq get one step from fission? Because it's impossible for anything but spare parts to get through your glorious sanctions?

My god, you don't realize how simple what you've declared 'step one', do you?

Seriously, moron.

You people have major issues with something called ego.

You have problems with my arrogance? Blow me.

what you call step one is what we knew they were capable of: Producing bombs and being able to send a guy to a Western university.

There's a whole range of efforts that must be undertaken to finally produce a bomb. You know this.

Yes. And what you have termed step one is being able to produce conventional bombs and send some guys to college. You don't realize how moronic this is.

[Axis Kast]

My god, you don't realize how simple what you've declared 'step one', do you?

I haven't declared it anything. I mean we want them to be without the capability to do anything more than think about reconsitution - rather than, of course, letting them get one step away and holding out on the hope that sanctions will work effectively on all counts.

Yes. And what you have termed step one is being able to produce conventional bombs and send some guys to college. You don't realize how moronic this is.

It's an analogy. You know what I'm getting at unless you're just plain stupid.

[SirNitram]

My god, you don't realize how simple what you've declared 'step one', do you?

I haven't declared it anything. I mean we want them to be without the capability to do anything more than think about reconsitution - rather than, of course, letting them get one step away and holding out on the hope that sanctions will work effectively on all counts.

If you knew about what you were blabbering about, Axis, you'd know you have to smash their industry back to the stone age and then some to prevent them from thinking about reconstituting. And even then, you must smash it to rubble every time they erect a building. And then you will have destroyed the quality of life for an entire nation far more thoroughly than their very evil ruler.

Yes. And what you have termed step one is being able to produce conventional bombs and send some guys to college. You don't realize how moronic this is.

It's an analogy. You know what I'm getting at unless you're just plain stupid.

You say they have a weapons plan because they have nuclear scientists and bombs. You're just trying to spin this desperately into 'The sanctions weren't working' with all the success of a duck trying to acheive orbit.

[Axis Kast]

f you knew about what you were blabbering about, Axis, you'd know you have to smash their industry back to the stone age and then some to prevent them from thinking about reconstituting. And even then, you must smash it to rubble every time they erect a building. And then you will have destroyed the quality of life for an entire nation far more thoroughly than their very evil ruler.

My argument is that we take it to the lowest possible level. Yours was that it didn't matter if he was only one step away.

You say they have a weapons plan because they have nuclear scientists and bombs. You're just trying to spin this desperately into 'The sanctions weren't working' with all the success of a duck trying to acheive orbit.

No, I suggested he might have a weapons plan on the basis of feasiability studies and financial transactions alone. If he has bombs, it's evidence of (A) unconventional armaments and (B) a capability to evade inspection - not to mention active contravention from the start.

Oh, and by the way ...

http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/duckdodgers/

[SirNitram]

f you knew about what you were blabbering about, Axis, you'd know you have to smash their industry back to the stone age and then some to prevent them from thinking about reconstituting. And even then, you must smash it to rubble every time they erect a building. And then you will have destroyed the quality of life for an entire nation far more thoroughly than their very evil ruler.

My argument is that we take it to the lowest possible level. Yours was that it didn't matter if he was only one step away.

BZZZZT. Wrong. Don't make strawman, little retard. It doesn't matter that they're on the same level as every other militarized nation: Can make conventional bombs, can send people to university. OOO! SCARY!

You say they have a weapons plan because they have nuclear scientists and bombs. You're just trying to spin this desperately into 'The sanctions weren't working' with all the success of a duck trying to acheive orbit.

No, I suggested he might have a weapons plan on the basis of feasiability studies and financial transactions alone. If he has bombs, it's evidence of (A) unconventional armaments and (B) a capability to evade inspection - not to mention active contravention from the start.

Oh, and by the way ...

http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/duckdodgers/

Is that your hero, Axis?

[Axis Kast]

BZZZZT. Wrong. Don't make strawman, little retard. It doesn't matter that they're on the same level as every other militarized nation: Can make conventional bombs, can send people to university. OOO! SCARY!

This quotation is yours, is it not?

"It all becomes clear: Axis has no idea how a nuclear bomb works, so he assumes if they are just missing the fissile material, they are a serious danger."

My argument's no Strawman. It's fact. You've virtually brushed aside the idea that a threat might increase between feasibility studies and actual bomb construction until the point of acquisition of fissile material.

[SirNitram]

BZZZZT. Wrong. Don't make strawman, little retard. It doesn't matter that they're on the same level as every other militarized nation: Can make conventional bombs, can send people to university. OOO! SCARY!

This quotation is yours, is it not?

"It all becomes clear: Axis has no idea how a nuclear bomb works, so he assumes if they are just missing the fissile material, they are a serious danger."

My argument's no Strawman. It's fact. You've virtually brushed aside the idea that a threat might increase between feasibility studies and actual bomb construction until the point of acquisition of fissile material.

You are aware that without fissile material or the capability to make fissile material, all you need is the ability to assemble conventional bombs and some nuclear physicists? IE, what I've been on about? A simple fission bomb is only remarkable for what it takes to produce weapons-grade nuclear material.

[Axis Kast]

You are aware that without fissile material or the capability to make fissile material, all you need is the ability to assemble conventional bombs and some nuclear physicists? IE, what I've been on about? A simple fission bomb is only remarkable for what it takes to produce weapons-grade nuclear material.

First of all, those nuclear physicists shouldn't be available to him in the first place. I seriously doubt Iraq is permitted even a passingly civilian nuclear option. While I understand that one can obtain a Western (or, these days, Eastern) education on the topic, he shouldn't be engaging them at all. That and, of course, the potential for construction or larger bombs or missiles to carry the new warhead and disperse the material.

Don't forget, either, that a nuclear weapon requires a shell designed by special machine tools. Saddam probably doesn't have access to most of those even under the best of "dual-purpose" permissions.

[SirNitram]

You are aware that without fissile material or the capability to make fissile material, all you need is the ability to assemble conventional bombs and some nuclear physicists? IE, what I've been on about? A simple fission bomb is only remarkable for what it takes to produce weapons-grade nuclear material.

First of all, those nuclear physicists shouldn't be available to him in the first place. I seriously doubt Iraq is permitted even a passingly civilian nuclear option. While I understand that one can obtain a Western (or, these days, Eastern) education on the topic, he shouldn't be engaging them at all. That and, of course, the potential for construction or larger bombs or missiles to carry the new warhead and disperse the material.

Ah, we should know aggressively screen college applicants because of what we fear they might do with knowledge of nuclear physics. Sorry, Axis, but the UN doesn't support or allow that sort of discrimination at current.

Well, you've not gone anywhere towards they having these new warheads and larger bombs and missiles. If you studied your history, you'd know Saddam's biggest step towards a long range missile was a group-SCUD.

Don't forget, either, that a nuclear weapon requires a shell designed by special machine tools. Saddam probably doesn't have access to most of those even under the best of "dual-purpose" permissions.

Exactly. So fretting over him having some postgraduates with degrees and the ability to manufacture conventional weapons is a pointless and retarded exercise, showing nothing of WMD capability. Desire? Yes. Of course, prosecuting the desire for WMD will upset a great many countries, some of whom provide needed material for the US economy.

[Axis Kast]

Ah, we should know aggressively screen college applicants because of what we fear they might do with knowledge of nuclear physics. Sorry, Axis, but the UN doesn't support or allow that sort of discrimination at current.

Well, you've not gone anywhere towards they having these new warheads and larger bombs and missiles. If you studied your history, you'd know Saddam's biggest step towards a long range missile was a group-SCUD.

I said “shouldn’t be engaging them at all,” Nitram. As in “shouldn’t be milking the military potential of civilian professionals.” It’s something we could easily raise a fuss about, prohibited or otherwise. Not to mention that any evidence of something more than speculation could have been damning for someone in Saddam Hussein’s position.

Well, you've not gone anywhere towards they having these new warheads and larger bombs and missiles. If you studied your history, you'd know Saddam's biggest step towards a long range missile was a group-SCUD.

There was still a potential he might have acquired equipment to use toward new missile development. It wasn’t as if he didn’t have untapped capabilities lying around in the first place (i.e. the al-Samoud testing sites).

Exactly. So fretting over him having some postgraduates with degrees and the ability to manufacture conventional weapons is a pointless and retarded exercise, showing nothing of WMD capability. Desire? Yes. Of course, prosecuting the desire for WMD will upset a great many countries, some of whom provide needed material for the US economy.

I’m pointing out that they might have been smuggled. He wouldn’t have them “lying about” in the same way a few students or scientists might still reside in Iraq. They’re certain something of a “step up” on the ladder to fission.

[SirNitram]

Ah, we should know aggressively screen college applicants because of what we fear they might do with knowledge of nuclear physics. Sorry, Axis, but the UN doesn't support or allow that sort of discrimination at current.

Well, you've not gone anywhere towards they having these new warheads and larger bombs and missiles. If you studied your history, you'd know Saddam's biggest step towards a long range missile was a group-SCUD.

I said “shouldn’t be engaging them at all,” Nitram. As in “shouldn’t be milking the military potential of civilian professionals.” It’s something we could easily raise a fuss about, prohibited or otherwise. Not to mention that any evidence of something more than speculation could have been damning for someone in Saddam Hussein’s position.

First you will have to prove these individuals are being coerced; they may be quite happy being nuclear toadies. Having individuals knowledgable in something is not a crime; in fact there are numerous efforts in the international levels to keep knowledge flowing. Restricting it will be quite difficult to do without pissing on the majority of the world.

Well, you've not gone anywhere towards they having these new warheads and larger bombs and missiles. If you studied your history, you'd know Saddam's biggest step towards a long range missile was a group-SCUD.

There was still a potential he might have acquired equipment to use toward new missile development. It wasn’t as if he didn’t have untapped capabilities lying around in the first place (i.e. the al-Samoud testing sites).

Newsflash.. He had such 'development'. What'd he do? Build Baby Babylon, Babylon, and duct-taped together SCUDs. None of which did a damn thing in the war over Kuwait.

Exactly. So fretting over him having some postgraduates with degrees and the ability to manufacture conventional weapons is a pointless and retarded exercise, showing nothing of WMD capability. Desire? Yes. Of course, prosecuting the desire for WMD will upset a great many countries, some of whom provide needed material for the US economy.

I’m pointing out that they might have been smuggled. He wouldn’t have them “lying about” in the same way a few students or scientists might still reside in Iraq. They’re certain something of a “step up” on the ladder to fission.

So, without actually showing the machine tools required for shell design, you are concluding that they exist, they were smuggled, and they are restricted equipment, and we should smash them because it's a 'step up' in your completely delusional progress towards nuclear weapons. Thankfully, professionals with more than your 2nd grade understanding of nuclear weaponry are on hand for this.

[Axis Kast]

First you will have to prove these individuals are being coerced; they may be quite happy being nuclear toadies. Having individuals knowledgeable in something is not a crime; in fact there are numerous efforts in the international levels to keep knowledge flowing. Restricting it will be quite difficult to do without pissing on the majority of the world.

At what point did I include the term “coercion?” I used the word “milking.” That refers to his attempts to use those scientists to the point of conducting feasibility – or worse, active – study into weaponization. Either way, those are poor indicators. We certainly don’t want him doing anything more than that. I never proposed restricting scientific knowledge – merely, as best we can, its application by Iraq toward prohibited ends.

Newsflash.. He had such 'development'. What'd he do? Build Baby Babylon, Babylon, and duct-taped together SCUDs. None of which did a damn thing in the war over Kuwait.

The point is that we need to be aware of the fact that certain items were smuggled successfully and that the sanctions weren’t full-proof. According to Vympel, there’s no need to worry over high-profile items at all.

So, without actually showing the machine tools required for shell design, you are concluding that they exist, they were smuggled, and they are restricted equipment, and we should smash them because it's a 'step up' in your completely delusional progress towards nuclear weapons. Thankfully, professionals with more than your 2nd grade understanding of nuclear weaponry are on hand for this.

A nuclear warhead requires specifically machined components. Fact.

Specifically machined components are produced with the aid of lathes. Fact.

Prohibited items – some with military applications – were acquired by Iraq without our immediate knowledge between 1991 and 2002. Fact.

We need to be aware of certain potentials. That’s all.

[SirNitram]

First you will have to prove these individuals are being coerced; they may be quite happy being nuclear toadies. Having individuals knowledgeable in something is not a crime; in fact there are numerous efforts in the international levels to keep knowledge flowing. Restricting it will be quite difficult to do without pissing on the majority of the world.

At what point did I include the term “coercion?” I used the word “milking.” That refers to his attempts to use those scientists to the point of conducting feasibility – or worse, active – study into weaponization. Either way, those are poor indicators. We certainly don’t want him doing anything more than that. I never proposed restricting scientific knowledge – merely, as best we can, its application by Iraq toward prohibited ends.

Like preventing weapons grade material from entering the country. You will notice the stunning lack of Uranium and Plutonium in weapons-grade quality in the country.

Newsflash.. He had such 'development'. What'd he do? Build Baby Babylon, Babylon, and duct-taped together SCUDs. None of which did a damn thing in the war over Kuwait.

The point is that we need to be aware of the fact that certain items were smuggled successfully and that the sanctions weren’t full-proof. According to Vympel, there’s no need to worry over high-profile items at all.

Yea, so fucking terrifying that they got spare parts for assembly lines.

So, without actually showing the machine tools required for shell design, you are concluding that they exist, they were smuggled, and they are restricted equipment, and we should smash them because it's a 'step up' in your completely delusional progress towards nuclear weapons. Thankfully, professionals with more than your 2nd grade understanding of nuclear weaponry are on hand for this.

A nuclear warhead requires specifically machined components. Fact.

So do Buicks.

Specifically machined components are produced with the aid of lathes. Fact.

So do baseball bats.

Prohibited items – some with military applications – were acquired by Iraq without our immediate knowledge between 1991 and 2002. Fact.

And never amounted to jack or shit.

We need to be aware of certain potentials. That’s all.

But potentials do not make hte case for invasion, you stupid fuck.

[SirNitram]

To truly portray the overwhelming STUPID Axis is spewing, he thinks a lathe, something found in most Shop classes, is a sign of smuggling for WMD contruction.

[Axis Kast]

Like preventing weapons grade material from entering the country. You will notice the stunning lack of Uranium and Plutonium in weapons-grade quality in the country.

You’re sure this is the right response to the given quote?!

Yea, so fucking terrifying that they got spare parts for assembly lines.

Strawman. You must at least acknowledge the possibility.

So do Buicks.

Strawman. We should be concerned over whether or not Iraq is attempting to acquire those items.

So do baseball bats.

Strawman. See above.

And never amounted to jack or shit.

… and yet are still important indicators of holes in the inspections régime – particularly that Chinese communications equipment.

But potentials do not make hte case for invasion, you stupid fuck.

I didn’t say that these specific issues were the case for invasion – merely that they warranted our attention and that your and Vympel’s standards of what constituted a “threat” were different than my own. This, of course, ties in with the larger questions of whether inspectors were fully capable of launching absolutely intrusive, completely comprehensive inspections in the first place – while a régime capable of organized deception was still in power –, and also whether the United Nations was trustworthy considering the history of Iraq’s violations.

[Axis Kast]

To truly portray the overwhelming STUPID Axis is spewing, he thinks a lathe, something found in most Shop classes, is a sign of smuggling for WMD contruction.

The kinds of lathes we're talking about are in no shop classes I've ever seen.

[SirNitram]

Like preventing weapons grade material from entering the country. You will notice the stunning lack of Uranium and Plutonium in weapons-grade quality in the country.

You’re sure this is the right response to the given quote?!

I'll check...

"Saddam's team of nuclear scientists still lack the fissile material to complete the bomb, and there have been no indications from satellite imagery of any attempt to build a facility capable of enriching uranium to bomb-grade quality. For that complex process the Iraqis would need substantial infrastructure and a power supply that could be spotted by American spy satellites." The Times, August 2002

Yep, looks like there's nothing approaching the required materials in Iraq, not even the infrastructure to start.

Yea, so fucking terrifying that they got spare parts for assembly lines.

Strawman. You must at least acknowledge the possibility.

That they got lathes? Sure. I am under no compulsion to admit more must have gotten through, however, because logic doesn't work like that.

So do Buicks.

Strawman. We should be concerned over whether or not Iraq is attempting to acquire those items.

Buicks? Or machining tools?

So do baseball bats.

Strawman. See above.

So an industrial lathe is immediately signs of WMD production? Do you listen to yourself?

And never amounted to jack or shit.

… and yet are still important indicators of holes in the inspections régime – particularly that Chinese communications equipment.

Which amounted to so much during the war. Oh, and that GPS blocking equipment which was destroyed by GPS-guided munitions. Let's not forget the whole array of truly pathetic smuggled material. Given Saddam's track record, these lathes probably couldn't machine a Louisville Slugger.

But potentials do not make hte case for invasion, you stupid fuck.

I didn’t say that these specific issues were the case for invasion – merely that they warranted our attention and that your and Vympel’s standards of what constituted a “threat” were different than my own. This, of course, ties in with the larger questions of whether inspectors were fully capable of launching absolutely intrusive, completely comprehensive inspections in the first place – while a régime capable of organized deception was still in power –, and also whether the United Nations was trustworthy considering the history of Iraq’s violations.

Your definition of a threat is pathetically paranoid. Industrial lathes to nuclear weapons, there's a textbook Leap In Logic fallacy in action.

[Axis Kast]

I'll check...

"Saddam's team of nuclear scientists still lack the fissile material to complete the bomb, and there have been no indications from satellite imagery of any attempt to build a facility capable of enriching uranium to bomb-grade quality. For that complex process the Iraqis would need substantial infrastructure and a power supply that could be spotted by American spy satellites." The Times, August 2002

Yep, looks like there's nothing approaching the required materials in Iraq, not even the infrastructure to start.

We’re talking about possibility. You indicated that it was acceptable to you that Iraq complete each of the steps toward nuclear fission save the last: actual acquisition of weapons-grade material. That’s a bit naive, no? Especially when they’ve proven able to smuggle other items in the past.

That they got lathes? Sure. I am under no compulsion to admit more must have gotten through, however, because logic doesn't work like that.

Must? Of course not. Could have? Yes.

Buicks? Or machining tools?

Heavy machine tools.

So an industrial lathe is immediately signs of WMD production? Do you listen to yourself?

It’s a warning sign. Not a cause for war. A warning sign.

Which amounted to so much during the war. Oh, and that GPS blocking equipment which was destroyed by GPS-guided munitions. Let's not forget the whole array of truly pathetic smuggled material. Given Saddam's track record, these lathes probably couldn't machine a Louisville Slugger.

Which was still equipment given them by a UNSC member in violation of sanctions to which it was a party in the first place. We’re not talking about the impact of what was smuggled, merely the fact that it escaped interception in the first place.

Your definition of a threat is pathetically paranoid. Industrial lathes to nuclear weapons, there's a textbook Leap In Logic fallacy in action.

Warning signs. Warning signs. Warning signs.

On the subject of whether Iraq was a threat, it’s safe to say there’s room to disagree. I can’t see where this conversation is going, given that fact, but round and round and round.

[SirNitram]

I'll check...

"Saddam's team of nuclear scientists still lack the fissile material to complete the bomb, and there have been no indications from satellite imagery of any attempt to build a facility capable of enriching uranium to bomb-grade quality. For that complex process the Iraqis would need substantial infrastructure and a power supply that could be spotted by American spy satellites." The Times, August 2002

Yep, looks like there's nothing approaching the required materials in Iraq, not even the infrastructure to start.

We’re talking about possibility. You indicated that it was acceptable to you that Iraq complete each of the steps toward nuclear fission save the last: actual acquisition of weapons-grade material. That’s a bit naive, no? Especially when they’ve proven able to smuggle other items in the past.

Bullshit. I indicated no concern they had the same level of nuclear capacity as every other militarized nation. You continue to harp on wild possibilities as if they mean anything. There's the possibility tomorrow I will have 115 million dollars. I'm not basing my spending on it.

That they got lathes? Sure. I am under no compulsion to admit more must have gotten through, however, because logic doesn't work like that.

Must? Of course not. Could have? Yes.

Again you think possibility is as valid as proof positive. You clearly are a retard.

Buicks? Or machining tools?

Heavy machine tools.

So an industrial lathe is immediately signs of WMD production? Do you listen to yourself?

It’s a warning sign. Not a cause for war. A warning sign.

Warning sign of what? He wants to build Buicks or other things that require heavy industrial equipment? Oh, wait, I forgot, we're supposed to be worshipping the idea he was actively seeking WMD at every turn.

Which amounted to so much during the war. Oh, and that GPS blocking equipment which was destroyed by GPS-guided munitions. Let's not forget the whole array of truly pathetic smuggled material. Given Saddam's track record, these lathes probably couldn't machine a Louisville Slugger.

Which was still equipment given them by a UNSC member in violation of sanctions to which it was a party in the first place. We’re not talking about the impact of what was smuggled, merely the fact that it escaped interception in the first place.

The impact is worth considering, because if only shit gets through, one needn't worry as much as you do.

Your definition of a threat is pathetically paranoid. Industrial lathes to nuclear weapons, there's a textbook Leap In Logic fallacy in action.

Warning signs. Warning signs. Warning signs.

So you finally admit Bush had nothing but circumstantial evidence, insufficient to go to war.

On the subject of whether Iraq was a threat, it’s safe to say there’s room to disagree. I can’t see where this conversation is going, given that fact, but round and round and round.

I can see where it's going just fine: You will continue to deny everything that disagrees with you.

[Axis Kast]

Bullshit. I indicated no concern they had the same level of nuclear capacity as every other militarized nation. You continue to harp on wild possibilities as if they mean anything. There's the possibility tomorrow I will have 115 million dollars. I'm not basing my spending on it.

You're going off on ridiculous tangents here. I never indicated that you were concerned that they had the same level of nuclear capacity as any other militarized nation - merely that you had expressed your opinion that Iraq was no threat at all so long as they didn't have fissile materail, period.

The $115 million example is a clear Strawman, by the way - but then, you already knew that.

Again you think possibility is as valid as proof positive. You clearly are a retard.

That is your assumption. I'm merely trying to wring the acknowledgement out of you that the holes in sanctions were worthy of alarm.

Warning sign of what? He wants to build Buicks or other things that require heavy industrial equipment? Oh, wait, I forgot, we're supposed to be worshipping the idea he was actively seeking WMD at every turn.

Considering his history, that's not very far from the truth. I didn't say we should base war on that alone - I would say it's something we should look into.

The impact is worth considering, because if only shit gets through, one needn't worry as much as you do.

You have no way of knowing what you missed. Appeal to the Unknowable.

So you finally admit Bush had nothing but circumstantial evidence, insufficient to go to war.

This wasn't a justification used by George W. Bush as far as I am aware. More importantly, it wasn't the only justification.

I can see where it's going just fine: You will continue to deny everything that disagrees with you.

Get a mirror.

[Vympel]

To interrupt the utter pasting you're getting:

You have no way of knowing what you missed. Appeal to the Unknowable.

Don't even ATTEMPT to presume to try and use logical fallacies- we already know you have no idea what they are. What you just did was commit a blatant appeal to ignorance (aka burden of proof, prove a negative) fallacy. It's not for us to prove that somethinng was missed. That's for you.

You clearly have no idea what it takes to build a nuclear bomb, and have spent the last page trying to re define what a nuclear threat is by ignoring the fissile material, which is the ONLY part of a nuclear weapon by which they can realistically be controlled. Anyone has the capability to machine parts for bombs, and for you to use this practical tautology as evidence of anything is truly hilarious.

UNSCOM/UNMOVIC could place, what, approximately two hundred or four hundred persons on the ground at any of a dozen or two dozen locations at once? That’s hardly complete coverage in a country larger than Texas.

I doubt your figures regarding UNSCOM and UNMOVIC are correct- in the latter case, they weren't even up to full capability when they left because of the war. Regardless of how many there were, they were moving around constantly with free run of the country by air and land. That you continue to think that you can hide NBC infrastructure from inspectors is quite lame.

The real argument is that they’re an added, intrusive capability when combined with electronic surveillance – but we know that the later has failed to detect certain hidden cachés before

In the absence of intrusive capability or any sanctions regime to prevent North Korea from getting anything. Try again.

and that UNMOVIC could only go so far when presented with Iraq’s own lack of documentary evidence on the current status of more than 10,000 litres of anthrax poison.

Any anthrax that may have been hidden is no longer viable. Fact.

What it all boils down to is that given certain precedents – the planes buried at al-Taqqadum

Irrelevant.

the length of North Korea’s own evasion of detection by satellite

Nothing to detect by satellite, and furthermore, nothing like Iraq.

and Hussein’s long history of non-compliance –, considering Iraq a danger despite containment is quite legitimate.

Only if you're entirely ignorant of the nuances of each situation, as well as having incredible ignorance of nuclear weapons.

And yet they’d begun a uranium enrichment program, no? That implies the presence of a facility in which uranium was in fact enriched

"What we have said publicly and in consultations is not that the North Koreans necessarily have nuclear weapons produced through the uranium enrichment program. What we've said is that they are seeking a production scope capability to produce weapons-grade uranium and that that effort is a violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty…"
(Press Conference with John Bolton, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, October 22, 2002)

No, it does not. There is no confirmation that NK has a uranium enrichment plant, and furthermore, the construction activity detected by the CIA that led America to confront North Korea indicates that they were just starting out on a plant last year.

Such facilities are known as “uranium enrichment planes” – even those not constructed in a smiley-face pattern just under the center focus of satellite photographs

Indulging in more fantasies of hiding fully operational plants requiring massive amounts of power and infrastrcuture can be hidden, I see

It doesn’t mean they might have missed something

You're learning!!!

That does not however mean that, like North Korea, Iraq couldn’t try something far less conventional

North Korea ordered significant amounts of suspicious construction materials (including, amusingly, high strength aluminum tubes- the CIA must've tried to go for two out of two with Iraq) and was confronted with the information and owned up to it. QED. Hardly 'far less conventional'.

You mean like the paper-trail program Iraq could as easily have developed?

You mean like university undergrad papers? Oh shock horror, call in the 3rd Division!

In 1991, there was strong evidence that Iraq had complete the outer shell of a nuclear weapon – the fissile material was the exception. Assuming they planned to smuggle fissile material, why mightn’t Iraq produce another such frame? It’s a tautology that one begs the question of the other’s use – not that one requires the other to be immediately on-hand.

Any reasonably industrialized country can complete the outer shell of a weapon. It is NOT HARD. Without fissile material it is little more than a conventional bomb. Fissile material is what nuclear nonproliferation is all about, not the mundane industrial capabilities required to build a mere casing.

Why is it untrue that Iraq could have built additional missile components? The al-Samouds were in fact tested at facilities capable of dealing with engines imparting four times the thrust. Iraq certainly had people who could’ve obliged in that regard.

No, the Al Samouds were not tested at al-Rafah / Shahiyat. The claim the CIA made was:

"The Al-Rafah-North Liquid Propellant Engine Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Facility is Iraq's principal site for the static testing of liquid propellant missile engines. Baghdad has been building a new test stand there that is larger than the test stand associated with al-Samoud engine testing and the defunct Scud engine test stand. The only plausible explanation for this test facility is that Iraq intends to test engines for longer-range missiles prohibited under UNSCR 687."

Blix, 14 Feb 2003: "The experts also studied the data on the missile engine test stand that is nearing completion [...]. So far, the test stand has not been associated with a proscribed activity."

And I really hope I don't have to explain this to you- but you can't even hope to produce missiles with significantly long range without being noticed. They must be test flown. They can be monitored for proscribed activity.

Deterred by what? American threats or the failure of the United States and its Coalition allies to meet certain requirements in order that the contingency enters effect?

Unlike you, I actually read one of the sources Pollack cited. If you did so, you'd see that at one point it is agreed that Iraq was clearly deterred from launching an unprovoked WMD attack. It then moves on to discuss the contingency, which is a SEPERATE issue.

It wasn’t under investigation at all until six months before!

Bullshit. Consistent threat assessments and intelligence work on Iraq was being done non-stop over the years. Not that this you actually rebutted what I said, which I'll repeat: they knew jack shit, and just went in hoping they'd be vindicated, despite all their statements of absolute confidence.

[Axis Kast]

Don't even ATTEMPT to presume to try and use logical fallacies- we already know you have no idea what they are. What you just did was commit a blatant appeal to ignorance (aka burden of proof, prove a negative) fallacy. It's not for us to prove that somethinng was missed. That's for you.

Nitram’s nonsense: “The impact is worth considering, because if only shit gets through, one needn't worry as much as you do.”

His confidence is founded in the unknowable, Vympel. He’s avoiding acknowledging that sanctions were riddled with holes that placed into question their very effectiveness.

You clearly have no idea what it takes to build a nuclear bomb, and have spent the last page trying to re define what a nuclear threat is by ignoring the fissile material, which is the ONLY part of a nuclear weapon by which they can realistically be controlled. Anyone has the capability to machine parts for bombs, and for you to use this practical tautology as evidence of anything is truly hilarious.

If you’re so confident Hussein’s infrastructure wouldn’t escape detection, why go to such great lengths to justify the notion that he might seek these items for some other purpose? The original argument here was whether or not past contravention was cause for alarm.

You might also remember that Nitram virtually waved away the notion that Saddam would be any more a threat if he was lacking only fissile material rather than the entire bomb assembly itself.

I doubt your figures regarding UNSCOM and UNMOVIC are correct- in the latter case, they weren't even up to full capability when they left because of the war. Regardless of how many there were, they were moving around constantly with free run of the country by air and land. That you continue to think that you can hide NBC infrastructure from inspectors is quite lame.

Whether or not four hundred persons could adequately locate every element of infrastructure – especially that which is inactive – all of the time is still a matter of debate. Not to mention that the concerns go beyond weaponization facilities to specific items or actual stockpiles, neither of which would be dissimilar to planes buried during the war but lost to electronic intelligence.

In the absence of intrusive capability or any sanctions regime to prevent North Korea from getting anything. Try again.

Your faith in “intrusive capability” is a personal choice. I am not so easily swayed in the argument that four hundred men and women are an utterly infallible force as regards total disarmament – even accepting the help afforded by satellite or airplane surveillance.

Any anthrax that may have been hidden is no longer viable. Fact.

That does not absolve Iraq of the responsibility of providing adequate documentation. Other chemicals were also missing, Vympel. You’ve also yet to explain why we didn’t pick up on this large-scale unilateral disarmament until after the fact anyway.

Irrelevant.

Utterly relevant in relation to stockpiles.

Nothing to detect by satellite, and furthermore, nothing like Iraq.

Nothing to detect by satellite?! Whether or not you draw conclusions between Iraq and North Korea – or fail to do so as a result of willful ignorance – is not a reflection on the reality of the situation.

Only if you're entirely ignorant of the nuances of each situation, as well as having incredible ignorance of nuclear weapons.

Only if you’re entirely ignorant of the fact that no measures are infallible and that several major questions regarding the integrity of both sanctions and those who enforce them have yet to be answered.

"What we have said publicly and in consultations is not that the North Koreans necessarily have nuclear weapons produced through the uranium enrichment program. What we've said is that they are seeking a production scope capability to produce weapons-grade uranium and that that effort is a violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty…"
(Press Conference with John Bolton, Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, October 22, 2002)

No, it does not. There is no confirmation that NK has a uranium enrichment plant, and furthermore, the construction activity detected by the CIA that led America to confront North Korea indicates that they were just starting out on a plant last year.

And this nascent program is totally divergent from possibilities in Iraq how, exactly?

You're learning!!!

Might not have missed something, rather.

North Korea ordered significant amounts of suspicious construction materials (including, amusingly, high strength aluminum tubes- the CIA must've tried to go for two out of two with Iraq) and was confronted with the information and owned up to it. QED. Hardly 'far less conventional'.

This has to do with Iraq how, exactly?

You mean like university undergrad papers? Oh shock horror, call in the 3rd Division!

Strawman.

Any reasonably industrialized country can complete the outer shell of a weapon. It is NOT HARD. Without fissile material it is little more than a conventional bomb. Fissile material is what nuclear nonproliferation is all about, not the mundane industrial capabilities required to build a mere casing.

Those “mundane industrial capabilities” should not however escape our interest. If fissile material is the final link, we can never by 100% certain we’ve managed to close those doors to him. It’s allowing him dangerous “wiggle room”.

No, the Al Samouds were not tested at al-Rafah / Shahiyat. The claim the CIA made was:

"The Al-Rafah-North Liquid Propellant Engine Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Facility is Iraq's principal site for the static testing of liquid propellant missile engines. Baghdad has been building a new test stand there that is larger than the test stand associated with al-Samoud engine testing and the defunct Scud engine test stand. The only plausible explanation for this test facility is that Iraq intends to test engines for longer-range missiles prohibited under UNSCR 687."

Blix, 14 Feb 2003: "The experts also studied the data on the missile engine test stand that is nearing completion [...]. So far, the test stand has not been associated with a proscribed activity."

And I really hope I don't have to explain this to you- but you can't even hope to produce missiles with significantly long range without being noticed. They must be test flown. They can be monitored for proscribed activity.

Iraq certainly would have had people dealing with this aspect. It’s yet another avenue of interest.

Unlike you, I actually read one of the sources Pollack cited. If you did so, you'd see that at one point it is agreed that Iraq was clearly deterred from launching an unprovoked WMD attack. It then moves on to discuss the contingency, which is a SEPERATE issue.

But we’re talking about the contingency, Vympel. And Iraq isn’t worrisome merely as a nation with a first-strike in mind, but also one that could take the North Korean “turtle” route.

Bullshit. Consistent threat assessments and intelligence work on Iraq was being done non-stop over the years. Not that this you actually rebutted what I said, which I'll repeat: they knew jack shit, and just went in hoping they'd be vindicated, despite all their statements of absolute confidence.

Inspections began only six months before the war; the four-year gap left plenty of room for the same kind of circumvention as North Korea managed.

In any case, this debate is over. I refuse to have to deal with this any further. It’s circular. We’re going nowhere. We must agree to disagree.

[SirNitram]

Don't even ATTEMPT to presume to try and use logical fallacies- we already know you have no idea what they are. What you just did was commit a blatant appeal to ignorance (aka burden of proof, prove a negative) fallacy. It's not for us to prove that somethinng was missed. That's for you.

Nitram’s nonsense: “The impact is worth considering, because if only shit gets through, one needn't worry as much as you do.”

His confidence is founded in the unknowable, Vympel. He’s avoiding acknowledging that sanctions were riddled with holes that placed into question their very effectiveness.

Appeal to ignorance fallacy; you assume because one thing gets through many more must get through without evidence.

Make an argument against me that isn't solely based on fallacies, bitchtits.

[Axis Kast]

Appeal to ignorance fallacy; you assume because one thing gets through many more must get through without evidence.

Make an argument against me that isn't solely based on fallacies, bitchtits.

Oh, I just couldn't resist this one ...

Appeal to the unknowable; you assume that because Iraq has not yet been proven to have imported certain dangerous materials that it will never attempt to import certain dangerous materials.

My point was never that anything would get through, but that something could get through - a potential that bears our constant attention.