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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PartyTime who wrote (20584)	3/14/2003 2:09:03 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 25898

Well, if you don't like FoxNews polls, or doubt their integrity, why not see how they stack up against other polling agencies: realclearpolitics.com And you search around, I think you'll find that that most of the other poll results are fairly comparable to Fox's I've heard numerous times that the 101st is supposed to go in and capture the weapons of mass destruction. How does the 101st know where these weapons are, and if they do know where they are why haven't the UN weapons inspectors been informed? I haven't heard that.. And I don't know how you can believe such a tale since you apparently don't believe Saddam has any weapons of mass destruction. Otherwise, you'd be supporting UNSC resolution 1441, which demanded that he reveal them all last December. But assuming that this rumour is correct, there are a couple of scenarios. WMDs require a delivery system, usually multi-tube rocket launchers, artillery, or aircraft. And those chemical warheads have to be co-located in special bunkers near those artillery positions. So it's quite possible that the 101st would receive a mission tasking to conduct an airmobile insertion behind Iraqi lines with the goal of finding and destroying all delivery systems and any WMDs that are discovered. As for why UN inspectors haven't been informed, I would guess if would have to do with "sources and methods". I have to believe that US "operatives" have probably been in contact with most of the Iraqi military leadership already, trying to see if they will fight or not. And I'm sure these US operatives have attempted to make deals whereby these generals would inform them of any WMDs they have and arrange for US forces to take charge of them as a condition of surrender/defection. But were such negotiations to be discussed, or acknowleged publicly, it would obviously put the defecting general in great danger. Hawk