Thread: Downing Street Memo

Just a couple points:
1. All those links you posted in the first batch are essentially the same (in several cases, exactly the same, all from AP), so that is not multiple sources.
2. In regards to chemical weapons in Jordan...

Sir Bedevere: ...Exactly. So, logically...
Peasant 1: If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood.
Sir Bedevere: And therefore...
Peasant 2: ...A witch!

3. You proceed to post old news. Yes, Iraq did make WMDs, (yes, we supported Iraq), but no, that does not mean that they had anything two years ago.
4. Hmm...

UNSCOM has
reported no firm evidence that Iraq still retains weapons or material,
but the Iraqi government has not provided adequate evidence to support
its claim all its CBW arsenal has been destroyed, nor has it accounted
for CBW production materials known to have been in its possession.

No proof either way.
5. Iraq was uncooperative, and may have had chemical/biological weapons. This is not news to anyone.
6. I tried reading through that, and perhaps he makes some good points, but everything was masked by pure emotion, so it was hard to tell, and I couldn't stomach too much.

So, you've demonstrated what everyone here already knew: there is very little 'proof' for either side of the argument, but there is very little evidence (beyond posturing) that Iraq did have WMDs.

And so, I leave you with this very relevant link: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8288955/

> where do you think the terrorists in jordan got them?

Definitely it's obviously from Iraq, since they are the only place in the whole entire world with them and Jordan sure as hell doesn't have the money to make any because I mean, who buys OIL?

> If you would actually read the refute it might help, but I have posted my evidence.

I scanned it, but it didn't provide much new information. If I posted information from the National Enquirer, would you take it seriously? No? OK.

Why does it take over a month for this story to hit the main stream US media?


>>We knew he had WMDs that were given to Iraq when they were helping us in the middle east, I think in the 70's.

Actually it was up to 1990. Only when Sadan invaded Kuwait did the US stop sending Sadam WMD inc. Anthrax, Botulism, gangrene and Sarin. Not to mention the helicopters to spray the stuff. (according to the US senate report on Gulf War Syndrome 'the Riegle Report')

WMD was always a smokescreen.

The US knew Sadam was using WMD indiscriminately (on both Kurds and Iranians) but kept sending him the stuff for two more years.
Why no concern then?
Because it suited US foreign policy.

Why the concern NOW?
Because it suited US foreign policy.

I find it much more disturbing that we 'lost' hundreds of tones of military grade explosives (that is now being used against our forces).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/3950493.stm

Or that all our military are being exposed to chronic low-level radiation poisoning (Gulf War Syndrome) from Depleted Uranium ammo. Leading to over 50% of Gulf War vets being permanently disabled (compared to <10% for other wars).