If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Then again - so many things can be faked these days - Right?
In other words, even if WMD are found, some people will claim them to be fake...?
And their abilties in critical media analysis is only for the conservative press.
The reason for the war was deliniated in the London Times this weekend: Officials of the Iraqi regime met Bin Laden's gang back in 1998. Iraqi Scientists we've captures have said they were making large volumes of Antrax and more.
For good and bad reasons there are people who never see the reason for the war. Luckily for the UK and USA, we had Blair in office who acted to end Saddam's reign before he could create a dirty bomb and pass it on to Al Qaeda.
Whereas I won't state outright that the documents are false, I think everyone should act with caution until further is known. Any graphic designer geek could produce a very legitimate-looking document- let alone a government agency. Don't you think it is a litle weird- to put it midly- that in the middle of the chaos and looters' paradise that is Baghdad reporters from a newspaper keep 'wondering in' at official Iraqi govenment buildings and "finding" such documents? Amongst the dozens of buildings, thousands of file cabinets and undoubtely millions of files, these people just walk in, obviously by-passing US troops thanks to their invisibility cloak, open a draw at random and bingo! The Labour MP who spoke most openly against the war and Tony Blair is suddenly in Saddam's payroll, and more importantly one of the twin pillars for the Axis of Idiots' excuse for war, the alleged link between Saddam and Al Qaeda, are all proven thanks to these miraculous finds. How long before we find a dossier detailing all those WMDs Saddam was suppossed to own (but that to date have provided a tad elusive?
LOL! Why the UK? Or just Blair?
Oh, and your views on world politics seem to represent the more hardline unilateralsts in the Bush administration perfectly. Are you sure Fox news isn't fed to you intravenously? (P.S who would trust a channel tat plays the national anthem over the vast majority of footage from the war?)
Why trust us we only hanging onto your coattails in the hope of getting some scraps. If it was in our best interests then we would quite happily screw the US because that is how politics works and to honest if it is in your own interests the US would do the exact same thing
Dont trust our press either bacause they are the biggest bunch of shit stirrers and lyers this side of the alantic. Especially the Sun i wouldnt wipe my arse with the rag it is a reactionary right wing intollerant paper which is owned by the Devil literally as it is a Murdoch paper
What is the explanation for the huge store of radioactive material found?
Leaking containment, extremely radioactive, stored in a basement over which UN inspectors passed three times.
Aladdin? Clandestine?
I'm sure byny will tell you that it is a CIA plant...
No, News International owns The Times and The Sun. The Telegraph is owned by Conrad Black's Hollinger Group.
http://media.guardian.co.uk/top100/story/0,10430,512973,00.html
Timing is everything...
Friday's Washington Post
Oh what a delightful irony it would be if radioactive material had fallen into the wrong hands as a direct result of the Allies' war of liberation and against terrorism.
The UN was criminal in both its methods for verification and disregard for Saddam's vicitimization. The oil for food program was twisted into this profit thing for France and Russia and Germany and Belguim.
I'm curious to see what the US will value in meeting with our "allies". I understand the global trade thing so I know we can't just break relations with France and company. But when it comes to strategic military alliances...I don't see the merit in being in NATO, having any military in Turkey, being part of the Security Council.
That's one of the few benefits... although it will be of little comfort for the families of 2,000 civilians and up to 100,000 soldiers killed in the illegal war.
The US was criminal in its collaboration with Saddam, including the supply of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and in its illegal war, illegal detention of PoW and disregard for international law.
No it wasn't. It's just too bad the US wasn't profiting from it isn't?
I completely agree with you.
Given the condition under which it was stored, if anyone looted anything from it, they are currently dying or more likely dead from radiation sickness.
Of course, you still have failed to address what the purpose of that material was, nor have you bothered to consider what might have happened had Saddam arranged for some of that material to go to terrorists, as he arranged for arms and funds to go to terrorists.
I think that's what Blair and Bush believe happened or believe there was a high probability he would do.
Only Muslim extremists who follow that Wahabbism and believe all Muslims everywhere are brothers would believe that. And I want all of those people dead anyway...so who cares what they think. France is the one that is isolated and seen as untrustworthy.
The existence of these materials is not new or secret. So until someone has a look we won't be able to tell whether those materials, fully on record, were destroyed or in the process of being destroyed. And even if they were still there Saddam would have been very far away indeed from building a nuclear weapon. It is not that easy to build one when you have no infrastructure, even if you happen to have the materials.
Speaking of materials and actual working warheads, one of the tricks the US played on Spain during Franco's regime was to separate the two main elements of their nuclear warheads when bombers landed on US bases or US warships docked. Spain had allowed the US to build 4 bases there but had not agreed to nuclear weapons being in its territory. By momentarily separating the two elements the US claimed it had no nuclear weapons in Spain. Neat eh?
As for Saddam giving radioactive materials or know-how to other parties, well there is always the possibilty that might happen. As there is with every other country in possession of such materials. In fact, other countries have already provided dangerous materials and know-how to others. Can you think of any names?
Basic C4 and some radioactive material would make a rather "interesting" bomb, wouldn't you say?
Bin Laden did. So why not Saddam?
Are you suggesting that Saddam would never support a terrorist attack against the US?
Really?
How so?
Saddam Hussein: a secular dictator who was best friends with the West and encouraged to do pretty much anything he wanted against Iran and other Muslim "menaces" to our way of life. Provided with all sort of weapons by Britain and the US, including WMDs, Saddam eventually turned on his masters and invaded Kuwait. Successfully removed from Kuwait and under severe sanctions and vigilance he spent his last 12 years in power governing Iraq ruthlessly and oppressing its people. Hated by Al Qaeda and Muslim extremists for his secularism.
I guess they both hate Israel and like mint tea, but other than that I can't see that many similarities.
Or they could have transported it safely... Al Qaeda has money...