From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sat Sep 14 2002 - 15:39:39 MDT
On 14 Sep 2002 at 15:08, Hermit wrote:
>
> The trouble with this argument is that *anyone* could do it, but such
> troubles are only probable where the country has access to the
> appropriate materiel. Currently there is no evidence that such
> materiel is held by Iraq. while the inability to monitor developments
> in Iraq since 1998 is troubling we should note that she did comply
> with UN requirements until then, when the US, UK and Israel, acted
> extremely blatantly against the UN mandate, presumably in the hope of
> causing the "regime change" which has finally been acknowledged to be
> the US objective.
>
Actually, Saddam's Iraq did everything within her power to elide, elude,
deceive and evade the inspectors, including spying on them so it would
know where they were going next, so they could move any WMD-
related records and materials from the to-be-investigated sites; when
Saddam's son-in-law defected, he revealed the existence of TONS of
chemical and biological weapons that had been successfully hidden
from UNSCOM. We KNOW that Iraq has been attempting to obtain the
means to refine fissile uranium, and that it possesses the technology,
were it to refine or obtain such material, to construct nukes in less than
a year.
>
> On the other hand, Israel, the UK, previous CIS members, The Peoples
> Republic of China, and US, are known to hold nuclear, biological and
> chemical weapon stocks. All these countries also have attacked other
> countries. The CIS and Israel have repeatedly brutally attacked their
> neighbors. Israel is currently involved in an illegal occupation,
> while the CIS is involved in a quasi-legal occupation and genocide in
> Chechnya and is threatening Georgia. The US has announced its
> willingness to use WMDs in warfare. Israel rejects not only
> monitoring, but even the treaties which Iraq has signed, limiting the
> development, storage, proliferation or use of such weapons - and has
> allegedly been heavily involved in such transfers. The US too, has
> rejected the same treaties and facility inspections as it is demanding
> that Iraq submit to, and is involved in an International campaign to
> undermine the one court which would be able to act against the leaders
> of nations.
>
Iraq is the only nation that has attempted to annex another sovereign
nation in toto, and Saddam is the only presently installed national ruler
to use chemical weapons. Part of the problem in Chechnya has to do
with Al Quaeda terror cells staging attacks within Russia proper; this
has provoked a strong response from Vladimir Putin. Israel has
occupied parts of Palestine in self-defence; every time it leaves, these
areas are used as bases from which to stage terror attacks against
Israeli civilians. Since the recent reoccupation (in response to 70+
Palestinian suicide bombings in two years), there has been no suicide
bombing in over a month - the longest period without one since the
intifadeh began. Although Israel has been repeatedly attacked by its
neighbors acting in concert, it has never resorted to the use of the
nuclear weapons it possesses at Dimona. At present it is at peace with
Egypt and Jordan, and is negotiating with Syria for the return of the
Golan Heights in return for binding security guarantees that the region
will not be used as a base from which to attack Israel. The US would
indeed use nukes in warfare, if attacked by same, as would any nation
possessing them. And Iraq has proven, by its actions concerning the
agreements it signed to end the Gulf War, that it's signature on a treaty
or agreement means nothing to it.
>
> Does this mean that we need to see preemptive removal from his office
> of the executive leaders of at least the US, the CIS and Israel? If
> so, who is going to do it? If not, why are we focusing on possible
> threat while employing current threats to do so?
>
Of course not. You keep pulling straw-man red herrings out of your ass
like a magician reaching for rabbits in a top hat. You, and any sane
human being, well know the manifest differences between Saddam
Hussein and the leaders of the other nations you mention, as well as
the differences in their forms of government and their degree of
responsibility vis-a-vis WMD's and the lives of people in their own
countries and others'.
> ----
> This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2002 board on Church of
> Virus BBS.
> <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;thread
> id=26560>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:58 MDT