GostHacked Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 If Sweden had chemical weapons would anyone (except maybe among residents of Malmo) die? Weapons in the hands of dangerous people are different from weapons in the hands of sane people. The carnage is caused not by the weapon but by the people using them. So, why sell Iraq the materials in the first place then? It is because Saddam was a bitch, but he was the US's bitch. Then once he used the materials, he became the bastard and needed to be invaded. Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 So, why sell Iraq the materials in the first place then? Because the west was asked to share it's knowledge so that a green revolution would catch fire in the third world and the imbalance between nations that use modern agricultural methods and those who didn't would lessen. There are plenty of nations who has access to the same material and didn't engage in weaponizing them. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
kactus Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 If Sweden had chemical weapons would anyone (except maybe among residents of Malmo) die? Weapons in the hands of dangerous people are different from weapons in the hands of sane people. The carnage is caused not by the weapon but by the people using them. And your point is!?? We're talking about Iraq here and why the weapons were sold to Saddam not another muslim bashing and linking this thread to anti israeli Malmo Davis cup protest! Quote
jbg Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 (edited) And your point is!?? We're talking about Iraq here and why the weapons were sold to Saddam not another muslim bashing and linking this thread to anti israeli Malmo Davis cup protest!If you read my other post, I attack the Western press as pro-Zionist. Do you always attack your on-line posting allies? As for Malmo I wasnt' aware of that particular protest. I am aware that Malmo is a paradise as a result of immigration. Edited March 27, 2009 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
kactus Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 If you read my other post, I attack the Western press as pro-Zionist. Do you always attack your on-line posting allies? As for Malmo I wasnt' aware of that particular protest. I am aware that Malmo is a paradise as a result of immigration. I am not aware I attacked you in any post. I'm sorry if you feel that way. My point of contention is the relevance of your post by bringing in the muslims in Malmo to the west selling arms to saddam during the eighties and somehow making the connection between the two. Whether Malmo is a paradise or hell for muslims or jews for that matter doesn't concern me as regards to the topic at hand! Quote
dub Posted March 27, 2009 Report Posted March 27, 2009 (edited) Because the west was asked to share it's knowledge so that a green revolution would catch fire in the third world and the imbalance between nations that use modern agricultural methods and those who didn't would lessen.There are plenty of nations who has access to the same material and didn't engage in weaponizing them. why do you continue? stop lying, you'll feel better about yourself as a person. Edited March 27, 2009 by dub Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 28, 2009 Report Posted March 28, 2009 why do you continue?stop lying, you'll feel better about yourself as a person. He's on to you M.Dancer. Better fess up to selling those gas bombs to Saddam now before he uncovers more. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
jbg Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 I am not aware I attacked you in any post. I'm sorry if you feel that way. My point of contention is the relevance of your post by bringing in the muslims in Malmo to the west selling arms to saddam during the eighties and somehow making the connection between the two. Whether Malmo is a paradise or hell for muslims or jews for that matter doesn't concern me as regards to the topic at hand! The pattern of Muslim violence compared with the peaceful and constructive nature of the Israelis. Contrary to your views this thread is about Israel v. Iran so Muslim violence is highly relevant. I dont' see how an ad hominum attack on Bush and the reasons for the Iraq war is on topic. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
kactus Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) The pattern of Muslim violence compared with the peaceful and constructive nature of the Israelis. I find your generalisation on all muslims astonishing and quite frankly a cross line between having prejudices against all nations that are muslim and absurdity. "Peaceful and constructructive nature of the israelis"? Don't think so! That has not always been transpired in their aggressive illegal expansions and on the other hand the arab palestinians having their equal share of blame with their propaganda machine in reporting their news. But it seems your views are biased towards Israel. One has to argue from both perspectives not just one-sided! Contrary to your views this thread is about Israel v. Iran so Muslim violence is highly relevant. I dont' see how an ad hominum attack on Bush and the reasons for the Iraq war is on topic. And again what is your point? That's too generalising on holding such a view against iranians who happen to be muslims. Is there an insiniuation that therefore all iraninans (who happen to be muslims) are evil and israelis (parctising judaism) are superhero??? My replies here have always been very much on topic. I just don't see how your post below has any relevance to the topic at hand other than using the same paint brush to portray iranians in the same picture: If Sweden had chemical weapons would anyone (except maybe among residents of Malmo) die? Weapons in the hands of dangerous people are different from weapons in the hands of sane people. The carnage is caused not by the weapon but by the people using them. This can be misconstrued as yet another muslim bashing if that ever was your intention... There is no place for 'ad hominem' in this day and age! The history of the middle east (specifically Iran/ US relations to stay on topic) concerns many historical events that relates a lot of subject areas being discussed here. One can only hope that the role of the new US elect president Obama is to in establish a constructive engagement with Iran where the past US policies have failed and exploring new opportunities given the upcoming election in Iran. Edited March 30, 2009 by kactus Quote
GostHacked Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 Because the west was asked to share it's knowledge so that a green revolution would catch fire in the third world and the imbalance between nations that use modern agricultural methods and those who didn't would lessen.There are plenty of nations who has access to the same material and didn't engage in weaponizing them. What do you mean by green revolution? Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 What do you mean by green revolution? Modern agriculture Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
dub Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 Because the west was asked to share it's knowledge so that a green revolution would catch fire in the third world and the imbalance between nations that use modern agricultural methods and those who didn't would lessen.There are plenty of nations who has access to the same material and didn't engage in weaponizing them. you are a clown. how is VX nerve gas used in agriculture? how do you expect people to take you seriously with foolish posts like that? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) you are a clown.how is VX nerve gas used in agriculture? how do you expect people to take you seriously with foolish posts like that? Phosphorus trichloride is a key compound in many high powered insecticides. Edited March 30, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dub Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 Phosphorus trichloride is a key compound in many high powered insecticides. instead of distancing yourself from foolish arguments, you jump right in there and join the other clown. "VX nerve gas" is not used in agriculture. neither are some other chemicals which were sold to iraq by the U.S. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 instead of distancing yourself from foolish arguments, you jump right in there and join the other clown."VX nerve gas" is not used in agriculture. neither are some other chemicals which were sold to iraq by the U.S. It's precursors are. Organophosphates. Americans didn't supply the precursors for VX, either. A Singapore holding company did if I recall. "The United States" didn't sell anyone anything. Individual American companies did. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dub Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 It's precursors are. Organophosphates. Americans didn't supply the precursors for VX, either. A Singapore holding company did if I recall."The United States" didn't sell anyone anything. Individual American companies did. This assistance, according to the report, included 'chemical warfare-agent precursors, chemical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment'.Donald Riegle, then chairman of the committee, said: 'UN inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licenses issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programs.' what's next? are you going to say that the US senate committee and the UN inspectors are part of hamas or this is all pallywood? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 This assistance, according to the report, included 'chemical warfare-agent precursors, chemical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment'.Donald Riegle, then chairman of the committee, said: 'UN inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licenses issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programs.' what's next? are you going to say that the US senate committee and the UN inspectors are part of hamas or this is all pallywood? Common Dreams?? Why not let the Grateful Dead comment on precursor sales. Seriously... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dub Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 Common Dreams?? Why not let the Grateful Dead comment on precursor sales. Seriously... what's wrong with that site? i don't understand your reaction. it was an article that was published in scotland and the quotes are genuine. tell me what your problem with the information provided. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 (edited) what's wrong with that site? i don't understand your reaction.it was an article that was published in scotland and the quotes are genuine. tell me what your problem with the information provided. Common Dreams: Leftwing, anti-Capitalist, anti-Western, anti-War, terrorist apologists. Just my opinion...and perhaps fellows like Christopher Hitchen's. He refered to one of their regulars (Naomi Klein) as 'walking with fascists'. Other regulars include: Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan. It's like Rosie O'Donnell started a web-site. But, it should suit you just fine. Edited March 30, 2009 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dub Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 Common Dreams: Leftwing, anti-Capitalist, anti-Western, anti-War, terrorist apologists. Just my opinion...and perhaps fellows like Christopher Hitchen's. He refered to one of their regulars (Naomi Klein) as 'walking with fascists'. Other regulars include: Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan. It's like Rosie O'Donnell started a web-site. But, it should suit you just fine. even though i don't agree with everything the above people have said, the few times i've read articles from the site, i haven't found any holes in the information that they've posted. the article is hardly an opinion piece. if you have found any of the information that the senate committee has given in regards to the US government allowing the selling of these chemicals, by all means, share away. otherwise, the tactic of dismissing this information, simply because the article was "re-posted" on the web site common dreams is ridiculous. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 30, 2009 Report Posted March 30, 2009 even though i don't agree with everything the above people have said, the few times i've read articles from the site, i haven't found any holes in the information that they've posted. the article is hardly an opinion piece. if you have found any of the information that the senate committee has given in regards to the US government allowing the selling of these chemicals, by all means, share away. otherwise, the tactic of dismissing this information, simply because the article was "re-posted" on the web site common dreams is ridiculous. They cherry-pick articles to suit their political stance as do many media sources. At least with a granola name like Common Dreams, one doesn't have to read a lot of their rag to figure out which way their wind blows. Sort of like me trying to convince you of something by posting an article from 'Stars and Stripes'. Good luck with that...eh? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dub Posted March 31, 2009 Report Posted March 31, 2009 They cherry-pick articles to suit their political stance as do many media sources. At least with a granola name like Common Dreams, one doesn't have to read a lot of their rag to figure out which way their wind blows. Sort of like me trying to convince you of something by posting an article from 'Stars and Stripes'. Good luck with that...eh? looks like you're going to avoid responding again. as stated before, the article is from a scottish paper and you're still not telling me what it is that the senate committee was wrong about. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 31, 2009 Report Posted March 31, 2009 looks like you're going to avoid responding again. as stated before, the article is from a scottish paper and you're still not telling me what it is that the senate committee was wrong about. Donald Riegle: One of the Keating 5. Scott Ritter: Child molester. Like Galloway, part of the Oil for Food scandal. According to Ritter, between 90% and 95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were des troyed by the UN. He believes the remainder were probably used or destroyed during 'the ravages of the Gulf War'. Neither are experts on anything other than politics. The claim that the US sold Saddam weaponized VX is right out to lunch. It would be akin to handing Saddam a hydrogen bomb. "Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix came to similar conclusions on Jan. 27, [2002] when he delivered an "update" to the U.N. Security Council based on his inspection efforts in Iraq according to Timmerman, "...Blix's recent report to the United Nations documented many other instances in which Iraq has failed to disclose prohibited weapons. The Iraqi documents, revealed here for the first time, portray a worldwide procurement network that relied on top-drawer assistance from governments and major banks in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Iraq's suppliers range from huge multinational corporations... little-known entities, such as an outfit identified by the Iraqis as "Kim Al-Khalleej" of Singapore, which they claimed supplied more than 4,500 tons of VX-, sarin- and mustard-gas precursors and production equipment." http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m157..._19/ai_97874290 Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
jbg Posted March 31, 2009 Report Posted March 31, 2009 Modern agriculture Dr. Greenthumb would beg to differ. He'd think it was a grow-op. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
dub Posted March 31, 2009 Report Posted March 31, 2009 Donald Riegle: One of the Keating 5. true. same as mccain. didn't you support mccain? if you supported mccain and he was part of the keating 5, why do you have something against riegle?' Scott Ritter: Child molester. Like Galloway, part of the Oil for Food scandal. can you show me some information on scott ritter being a 'child molester'? has he been charged as one or was that one of your dirty and cheap comments? Neither are experts on anything other than politics. The claim that the US sold Saddam weaponized VX is right out to lunch. It would be akin to handing Saddam a hydrogen bomb. scott ritter is not an expert? i'm not sure what your definition of expert is, but scott ritter has: - served 4 years as a marine - then he was commissioned as an intelligence officer where he served for 12 years - then he served as an advisor to schwarzkopf - he served as a UN weapons inspector from '91 to '98 DoP: you're a very dishonest person. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.