SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : DON'T START THE WAR

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (24740)6/11/2003 3:28:29 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Read Replies (3) of 25898
 
Re: Because it clearly showed that out of an inventory of 19,000 chemical warheads, only 13,000 had been expended during the Iran-Iraq war.

Thus, 6,000 warheards are unaccounted for... No evidence of destruction, but sufficient evidence that the Iraqis continued to carry them as current inventory, despite supposedly having destroyed them all by 1992.


Too bad you flunked your biological warfare course... Here's clue from Robin Cook, Britain's former Secr of State:

Nor did the dossier at any stage admit the basic scientific fact that biological and chemical agents have a finite shelf life. Nerve agents of good quality have a shelf life of about five years and anthrax in liquid solution of about three years. Saddam's stocks were not of good quality. The Pentagon itself concluded that Iraqi chemical munitions were of such poor standard that they were produced on a "make-and-use" regimen under which they were usable for only a few weeks. Even if Saddam had destroyed none of his arsenal from 1991 it would long ago have become useless.

It is inconceivable that no one in the Pentagon told Rumsfeld these home truths, or at the very least tried to tell him. So why did he build a case for war on a false claim of Saddam's capability?
[...]

Message 19000209
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext