 |
 | |
 |  |
| 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. |
Let's talk about the war from an intelligence perspective, and a military perspective, and build on each others' strengths. FAQ: Who was the major supplier of arms to Iraq? Table here - #1 Soviet Union, %57 of share; #2 France, %13 of share; # 3 China, %12 of share; # 4 Czech Republic, %7 of share; #6 Brazil, %4 of share; # 7 Egypt, %2 of share; # 8 Romania, %1 of share; # 9 Denmark, %1 of share; # 10 Libya, %1 of share; # 11 USA, %1 of share. projects.sipri.se FAQ: What about Saddam's WMD? From Kay's final appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee: Dr. Kay has stated that, although we have not found evidence of large stockpiles of WMD, or forward-deployed weapons, the ISG group have made the following evidence as a part of their record that will be forthcoming: first, evidence of Saddam Hussein's intent to pursue WMD programs on a large scale; actual ongoing chemical and biological research programs; an active program to use the deadly chemical ricin as a weapon, a program that was interrupted only by the start of the war in March; and evidence of missile programs; and evidence that in all probability they were going to build those weapons to incorporate in the warheads, what we know not for sure, but certainly the possibility of weapons of mass destruction; evidence that Saddam Hussein was attempting to reconstitute his fledgling nuclear program as late as 2001; and, most important, evidence that clearly indicates Saddam Hussein was conducting a wide range of activities in clear contravention of the United Nations resolutions. As you recently stated, Dr. Kay -- and I quote you -- "It was reasonable to conclude that Iraq posed an imminent threat. What we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war," end quote.... KAY: Senator Warner, you're absolutely -- I think -- and I think I've said, but let me be absolutely clear about it -- Iraq was in clear and material violation of 1441. They maintained programs and activities, and they certainly had the intentions at a point to resume their program. So there was a lot they wanted to hide because it showed what they were doing that was illegal. I hope we find even more evidence of that. globalresearch.ca Hat tip to Neocon. This is a moderated subject, which means that I can exclude you for reasons of my choosing. So far I only have four: 1) You are allowed to attack other people's ideas but you must be witty, and no hitting below the belt. Otherwise, you're out of here, although I may let you back in if you demonstrate redeeming social value. 2) If you believe that the world is controlled by a secret society, any secret society, be it the Bilderbergers or twelve foot tall lizards, you are banned for life. 3) If you like to say nasty things about Jews or Muslims, don't even come here. You can say nasty things about Islamists or Israeli policies, but not the entire religion. 4) People who think it's fun to try to get banned will have their wish granted. Some people are pre-moderated, because I've encountered them on other threads, and they've already broken Rules 2 and/or 3. No second chances. | ||||||||||||
|
| Home | Hot | SubjectMarks | PeopleMarks | Keepers | Settings |
| Terms Of Use | Contact Us | Copyright/IP Policy | Privacy Policy | About Us | FAQ | Advertise on SI |
| © 2025 Knight Sac Media. Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News |