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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (161943)2/23/2003 3:23:02 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1579687
 
It is clear from the statement that (a) it is unaccounted for and (b) there is no proof it was destroyed. What person, in their right mind, would conclude that Saddam destroyed such weapons and didn't document it? Obviously, if he did something like this it would be documented for propaganda purposes if nothing else.

Clear as mud.......and you can't imagine why France and Germany don't want to go to war on that basis.

ted



To: i-node who wrote (161943)2/23/2003 4:35:40 PM
From: Dan3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1579687
 
Re: a document, which Iraq provided, suggested to us that some 1,000 tonnes of chemical agent were "unaccounted for."

Wow! That's almost as much stuff as Los Alamos lost:
aliroo.com

Maybe we need to invade Los Alamos...

:-)

There's a difference between old, confusing, accounting entries, and certain guilt.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News