The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

DrB0b

^yeah, the fact that they couldn't find any WMD proves that the Iraqis moved them somewhere else. Very cunning, those towelheads

General Clapper??

Boon Mee

Operative phrase there, Bob.
Like, maybe Syria?

keda

We could chew on this one till they find out the real truth as opposed to self interest. The fact the SH had WMD is not disputed, seeing as he used them and we know he didn't use them all because we know how much we gave him even if he had no other sources, so it's fair to fall back on circumstantial evidence that the balance is either concealed or moved elsewhere if not deteriorated.

Unlikely he would've trusted Iran after the Gulf War fiasco, when much of the invincible airforce he shipped over for safekeeping went missing, so the only other neighbouring suspect is Syria.

Puzzling though, is that they have incriminating satpics, but somebody couldn't be bothered following the convoys to see where they unloaded.

stroller

The UN-inspectors' reports disagree with your reasoning.

You can twist and turn it as you like, there was not sufficient evidence and those piles of WMDs have never been found.

He supposedly had an active 'nucelar' development program near completion as well, which made it a priority to invade in 2003.

DrB0b

I heard he stashed them in Disneyworld where they're being guarded by Father Christmas and the Tooth Fairy (you'd better not be naughty this year!)

keda

I know as little as anyone else about his nuclear development, but guess the joos would pounce again if he got too ambitious. As to other WMD, each to his own but there's no doubt in my mind that he had them and they're now either in Iraq or Syria.

stroller

This should have been done a long time ago:
U.S., Iran, Iraq to form group to address Iraq's security problems - CNN.com

keda

Nothing to twist, either they found them or they didn't and they didn't, which is what they work on at that level rather than the logical outcome of knowing he had them and that he did not use them all, which is circumstantial and therefore only to be invoked in bashing the right side.

As to nukes, I've never claimed and wouldn't claim he had them, more than satisfied that the nasty joos would've taken care of that end and without waiting for the UN to drag their heels to a debate.

sabang

The UN was rather succesful in it's monitored elimination of Iraqi 'WMDs'. Being chemical weapons, not nukes. This however did not suit the long term US agenda, which involved money, oil, and Israel.
By Scott Ritters own estimates (when he was still spying for the CIA, before he got disgusted with US foreign bullying and became dissident) AT LEAST 92% of Iraqi capacity had been destroyed. He was, of course, the Head of the UN weapons removal team, as well as a part time Spy, so what would he know??
To describe post sanctions pre invasion Iraq as a threat is laughable. Is it not rather obvious it was all about the oil?
Surely this was made even more obvious when it was released in popular media around six months ago that Iraq had probably the worlds largest untapped, easily obtainable oil field in it's western deserts. I mean whoopee doo- this had been known about for well over a decade.

Sorry Patriots and Blindfold men, but you are being manipulated by greedy, lying, violent Filth.

__________________
To err is human. To blame someone else is politics.

Roger

Boon Mee

For all you nattering nabobs of negativism, even the New York Times is calling it a War We Just Might Win.

Heh

lom

Do you know what the "Opinions section" of N.Y.Times is Booners?

Boon Mee

^
Yes, but, & this is a very big 'but' - it was printed in the NYT...

sabang

Well nice to read something a bit upbeat from Iraq anyway.

The situation for the people is still dire though- half of the population is living in absolute poverty, and 70% do not have access to clean water supplies, up from 50% in 2003.
Military and civilian deaths are down for July at least, and it appears Al Qaeda are losing hearts and minds in Iraq due to their murderous ways. A recent article from Al Jazeera:-

Al Jazeera English - News - Half Of Iraq 'In Absolute Poverty'

Half of Iraq 'in absolute poverty'Iraqi children are most at risk from the mounting crisis, the joint report says [EPA]





Up to eight million Iraqis require immediate emergency aid, with nearly half of the population living in "absolute poverty", according to a report by Oxfam and a coalition of Iraqi groups.

About four million people are lacking food and "in dire need of different types of humanitarian assistance", said the report, released in Amman on Monday.

"Iraqis are suffering from a growing lack of food, shelter, water and sanitation, health care, education, and employment," said the report, compiled by Oxfam and the NGO Co-ordination Committee in Iraq (NCCI).

The report also says two million people within the country are currently displaced, while more than two million are refugees.

Most of those refugees have fled to Jordan and Syria.


'Grim picture'

"Many of the figures and percentages in the report were actually derived from UN sources… so we concur with the findings"
Said Arikit, spokesman for the UN mission in Iraq
Read the joint report
Said Arikit, a spokesman for the UN mission in Iraq, told Al Jazeera the report painted a "grim picture".

"Many of the figures and percentages in the report were actually derived from UN sources… so we concur with the findings," he said.

"The government of Iraq is definitely the authority in Iraq and it bears responsibility for the welfare of its people."

Iraqi services have been left in crisis as most of those seeking refuge are professionals, according to the report.

"The 'brain drain' that Iraq is experiencing is further stretching already inadequate public services, as thousands of medical staff, teachers, water engineers, and other professionals are forced to leave the country," it said.

The entry of Iraqi refugees to neighbouring countries has placed a growing strain on health, education and social services in the two countries.

Ration crisis

Only 60 per cent of the four million people who depend on food assistance have access to rations from the government-run public distribution system, down from 96 per cent in 2004, the report said.

The number of Iraqis without access to adequate water supplies has risen from 50 per cent to 70 per cent since 2003.

The lack of effective sanitation was also highlighted by the joint report, which said 80 per cent of people in Iraq did not have safe access.

The report said children were the hardest hit by the fall in living standards, stating child malnutrition rates have risen from 19 per cent before the US-led invasion in 2003 to 28 percent currently.

"Despite the constraints imposed by the government of Iraq, the UN and the international donors can do more to deliver humanitarian assistance to reduce unnecessary suffering," the report said.

One recommendation called for the government of Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq's prime minister, to decentralise the distribution of aid to local authorities, and make it easier for civil society organisations to operate.

Deaths fall

Meanwhile in Iraq, officials from the US military say they have seen a drop in US troop deaths in July.

In April, the number of US soldiers who died was 104, increased sharply in May when 126 servicemen died, and decreased slightly with 101 troops dead in June.

For the month of July, at least 69 US soldiers have died, about half the casualties in May.

Iraq's police say the number of civilian deaths also decreased by 36 per cent, from an estimated high of 1,900 in May to 1,342 in June.

General David Petraeus, the US commander in Iraq, said: "The sheikhs and the tribes and the leaders have banded together and made a decision to oppose al-Qaeda and that has resulted in a substantially improved security situation."

Despite what appears to be at least a temporary let-up in both military and civilian deaths, many say there will be no security without a stable Iraqi government.

sabang

A potentially important shift in US policy is happening with respect to the UN. The US is now cosying up to it, and asking it to get more involved in Iraq. This is a major turnaround- in the New York Times last month, the US ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, praised the world body.
This isn't something I've heard much from the Bush administration.

The UN on it's part is reluctant to get more involved due to the security situation, but this could change if violence continues to fall. The other sticking point is that the UN will insist on going in very much on it's own mandate- it will not want to be seen as acting under the thumb of the US, indeed neither should it.

From The Guardian, 'UN must dance to own tune over Iraq'.

UN must dance to own tune over Iraq | Iraq | Guardian Unlimited

Milkman

The writers of this article are from the Brookings Institute. An advocacy group (aka, a Think Tank).

The NY TIMES, named the title of the article - the authors did not.

And the authors disagree with the title.

But under NY TIMES rules, the Times gets to name the headlines for articles it accepts as Op-Eds.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

_____________

Boon Mee

We get enough of these roaming the streets in Iraq, won't need no 'steenking' GI's over there, eh?



Link

Sir Burr

Yeah.....right Boonie.
Throw a bucket of paint over it and it's buggered.

Boon Mee