Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: X Y Zebra who wrote (9339)	2/11/2003 3:33:36 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14610

we're already target practice. Leaving them alone will not make them go away. They'll just be emboldened. It's like the world is full of people subject to some grand scale Stockholm Syndrome. If we're really nice to the terrorists, maybe they'll leave us alone. After all , we identify with them now, so maybe they won't kill us.. Like that's gonna work with fanatics. As for private agendas, I daresay there has never be a single war fought in history where only one purpose---the articulated primary purpose-- was the only reason for the conflict. There are layers of reasons. The question is whether the primary reason is valid. Finally, I disagree as to your first question. If we made a mistake in 1991, is that a reason to repeat it now? Saddam had his chance to comply, but instead blithely went about doing as his pleased.

To: X Y Zebra who wrote (9339)	2/11/2003 3:34:03 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14610

Is it that clear that he has those weapons ? Transcript from electronically intercepted message played back in audio by Secretary Powell to the UN last week: Just a few weeks ago, we intercepted communications between two commanders in Iraq's Second Republican Guard Corps. One commander is going to be giving an instruction to the other. You will hear as this unfolds that what he wants to communicate to the other guy, he wants to make sure the other guy hears clearly, to the point of repeating it so that it gets written down and completely understood. Listen. (BEGIN AUDIO TAPE) Speaking in Foreign Language. (END AUDIO TAPE) POWELL: Let's review a few selected items of this conversation. Two officers talking to each other on the radio want to make sure that nothing is misunderstood: ``Remove. Remove.'' The expression, the expression, ``I got it.'' ``Nerve agents. Nerve agents. Wherever it comes up.'' ``Got it.'' ``Wherever it comes up.'' ``In the wireless instructions, in the instructions.'' ``Correction. No. In the wireless instructions.'' ``Wireless. I got it.'' Why does he repeat it that way? Why is he so forceful in making sure this is understood? And why did he focus on wireless instructions? Because the senior officer is concerned that somebody might be listening. Well, somebody was. ``Nerve agents. Stop talking about it. They are listening to us. Don't give any evidence that we have these horrible agents.'' Well, we know that they do. And this kind of conversation confirms it. XY Zebra, in your view, what were the Iraqis talking about in that conversation (which was recorded just after the inspections resumed late last year)? "Nerve agents." Maybe it was anti-anxiety medication? What's your explanation for that conversation? You can argue we shouldn't go in. But I don't think it is credible to argue there is no evidence he has those weapons. A nerve agent is a weapon of mass destruction, pure and simple: Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough agent to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets. Even the low end of 100 tons of agent would enable Saddam Hussein to cause mass casualties across more than 100 square miles of territory, an area nearly five times the size of Manhattan. Let me remind you that, of the 122 millimeter chemical warheads, that the U.N. inspectors found recently, this discovery could very well be, as has been noted, the tip of the submerged iceberg. The question before us, all my friends, is when will we see the rest of the submerged iceberg? <further excerpt from Powell testimony>

To: X Y Zebra who wrote (9339)	2/11/2003 3:37:21 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14610

we have the technology to know when he is going to get them out and when that happens, you bomb the bastard. What technology exists to intercept a shipful of nerve gas sent to a port to be released in an urbanized area? What technology exists to intercept a longer range missile such as the ones which Iraq, according to satellite photos, has been testing? (Oh, and BTW, it is the primitive missile interception technology we do have that Turkey has asked for from NATO....and the French, Germans, and Belgians are saying "No, you don't need that").