D
Dr Engelbert Bu
Guest
Jack May wrote:
> He is in a very unstable part of the world with a large supply of WMD's that are extremely
> attractive to terrorist that do not now have the capabilities to produce those WMD's.
What large stores of weapons of mass destruction? The whole world has been looking for them for 10
years now and found a few pieces of scrap metal (empty bomb shells that could be filled with
chemical weapons). And that despite satelite survaillance, secret service supervision and ground
based controls.
The US had to use forgeries when accusing the Iraq of having WMD, which were so thin that 11 out of
15 members of the UN Security Council refused them authorisation for war.
Terrorist have access to WMD (the Tabun attacks on the Tokio subway by religious fanatics a couple
of years back are a case in point), and if they don't, they can always steal them from the US
military (as the antrax spores a year back).
> Terrorist can get those WMD's if they kill or over throw Sadam and the key leaders as they did in
> Afghanistan. They have experience and think they know how to do it.
Again, they do not need Sadams weapons for that, just money and a safe place to make their own.
Taliban was building such labs in Afganistan but were disturbed just in time.
> With the three main religions in Iraq and the religious fanatic that infest that part of the
> world, the terrorist have a power base in the country and Sadam's military. They can pull off at
> least a temporary overthrow before the US regains control.
Again unconfirmed propaganda of the US goverment. There isn't a shred of evidence linking Iraq with
terrorist attacks in general and 11.09.01 in particular. All there are are unconfirmed rumors that a
Taliban member got medical treatment in a Bagdad hospital under false name.
And overthrowing Sadam isn't as easy as you make it sound either. A couple of people have tried over
the years.
> I assume you realize that this is a likely event and would happen if we attack or don't attack
> Iraq. The only prevention is to remove the WMD's from this very unstable part of the world.
Good idea, I completely agree. Lets start with the WMD of the US of A, which have the biggest
arsenal in the world, and are the biggest spender on earth to increase their stores!
> He is in a very unstable part of the world with a large supply of WMD's that are extremely
> attractive to terrorist that do not now have the capabilities to produce those WMD's.
What large stores of weapons of mass destruction? The whole world has been looking for them for 10
years now and found a few pieces of scrap metal (empty bomb shells that could be filled with
chemical weapons). And that despite satelite survaillance, secret service supervision and ground
based controls.
The US had to use forgeries when accusing the Iraq of having WMD, which were so thin that 11 out of
15 members of the UN Security Council refused them authorisation for war.
Terrorist have access to WMD (the Tabun attacks on the Tokio subway by religious fanatics a couple
of years back are a case in point), and if they don't, they can always steal them from the US
military (as the antrax spores a year back).
> Terrorist can get those WMD's if they kill or over throw Sadam and the key leaders as they did in
> Afghanistan. They have experience and think they know how to do it.
Again, they do not need Sadams weapons for that, just money and a safe place to make their own.
Taliban was building such labs in Afganistan but were disturbed just in time.
> With the three main religions in Iraq and the religious fanatic that infest that part of the
> world, the terrorist have a power base in the country and Sadam's military. They can pull off at
> least a temporary overthrow before the US regains control.
Again unconfirmed propaganda of the US goverment. There isn't a shred of evidence linking Iraq with
terrorist attacks in general and 11.09.01 in particular. All there are are unconfirmed rumors that a
Taliban member got medical treatment in a Bagdad hospital under false name.
And overthrowing Sadam isn't as easy as you make it sound either. A couple of people have tried over
the years.
> I assume you realize that this is a likely event and would happen if we attack or don't attack
> Iraq. The only prevention is to remove the WMD's from this very unstable part of the world.
Good idea, I completely agree. Lets start with the WMD of the US of A, which have the biggest
arsenal in the world, and are the biggest spender on earth to increase their stores!
