Proof of WMDs?

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-06-2003
Proof of WMDs?
157
Mon, 05-17-2004 - 2:43pm
>>Sarin Nerve Agent Bomb Explodes in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A roadside bomb containing deadly sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. It was believed to be the first confirmed discovery of any of the banned weapons that the United States cited in making its case for the Iraq war.

Two members of a military bomb squad were treated for "minor exposure," but no serious injuries were reported.

...

<<

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040517/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_sarin

thoughts?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-10-2004
In reply to: jadethief
Fri, 05-21-2004 - 4:03pm
Yes, the ignore button is great when you don't want to face the facts or open your mind.
Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: jadethief
Fri, 05-21-2004 - 4:27pm
Yes I have found that out...Thanks.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
In reply to: jadethief
Fri, 05-21-2004 - 11:58pm

>"how much of the drugs come from the Middle East"<


Afghanistan grows poppies, which is

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: jadethief
Sat, 05-22-2004 - 9:46am
Okay I think I have heard that in the past...So the finished product probably comes through Europe, not the Middle East. Just trying to figure out how WMD's would actually get into this country.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
In reply to: jadethief
Sat, 05-22-2004 - 10:09am

There was this case recently.........


Suspected Missile Smuggler Charged With Trying to Support Terrorists.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94580,00.html


At ports those metal cargo containers are not inspected 100%. Those could be a means of getting 'whatever' into the country. These same containers have been used for human trafficking. Plus the US has hundreds of miles of porous border.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
In reply to: jadethief
Sat, 05-22-2004 - 2:15pm
This is what I've been saying for a long time. We don't know where the weapons currently are, and I find that chilling - terribly frightening. They may already be in the hands of terrorists, and maybe they aren't.

Nevertheless, I do think the situation is better now than it was when Saddam was in control of them. We knew what his intentions were not good. Would you *really* rather that this tyrant was still in control of them?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
In reply to: jadethief
Sat, 05-22-2004 - 5:07pm
If you're asking who I would rather see have WMD - Saddam Hussein or Al Qaeda, my answer is Hussein, hands down, no contest. A, we knew where the heck he was. B, there are traditional measures we can use against him since he has alot to loose (power, presteige, his country, his money...). We already had him pinned between two no-fly zones. He had very little popular support outside the Baath party and many natural enemies in the Arab world.

Is it better that WMD may have been knocked loose into the hands of Al Qaeda? Desperate people with nothing to loose, no country (which translates to the Pentagon as "no targets") and increasing popular support throughout the Middle East, Asia and Eurasia, AND a plan for world power whose first step is to kill as many Americans as possible? This is not a hard decision.

There's no doubt that Iraq needed to be disarmed (especially before Uday and Quasay took over the family business) but the way the Bush administration did it was foolish and irresponsible. If we had to go in, it should have been with a real coalition with three times the troops in order to provide real security and lock the place down.

So you're right when you say that we don't know where the weapons are, and that is chilling, but we have the Bush administration to thank for it.

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: jadethief
Sun, 05-23-2004 - 10:05am
So if the WMD's get here it will be our own lack of security that is responsible....


Edited 5/23/2004 10:07 am ET ET by baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
In reply to: jadethief
Sun, 05-23-2004 - 10:29am

A country can only be secure to a point. Those intent on smuggling have unlimited ideas around restrictions. (Note the drug trade).


I think there are gaping holes in security at

 


Photobucket&nbs

Avatar for baileyhouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: jadethief
Sun, 05-23-2004 - 10:34am
I agree..But what makes me angry is the money being spent in Iraq that could be going to better our Security here at home.

Pages