VisorCentral.com

Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- War? (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=32929)

Posted by Toby on 03-24-2003 11:05 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
Do you have anything to back up that statement about the french and germans selling (parts for) chemical and biological weapons to Iraq?

I thought it was generally accepted...

quote:
Since the article is in a US paper it doesn't surprize me they gave it that twist at the end... (not that I blame them for doing that.. I guess everybody would try to give such a thing a more positive ending...)

I think you're not familiar enough with US papers. They're not as inclined to postively spin any such thing.

quote:
Fact of the matter stays that delivering materials that can be used for chemical/bio warfare to a country that is known for using it is at least a dubious thing to do... (that also applies to Germany and france if they did)

Should we bring up Saddam's reactor?

Posted by KRamsauer on 03-24-2003 11:31 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT

BTW the general opinion on a unilateral attack is not that it is the right thing.. but that is another discussion...

To some, but not those that make the decisions for the US.

__________________
<a href="http://www.kurtramsauer.com">KurtRamsauer.com</a>

Posted by sketch on 03-25-2003 12:13 AM:

ends justify the means?

I think support for this war boils down to one question about you as a person?

Do you believe the ends justify the means?

Posted by ToolkiT on 03-25-2003 12:35 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby

I thought it was generally accepted...

Hehehe, thats why I asked for 'proof'

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
I think you're not familiar enough with US papers. They're not as inclined to postively spin any such thing.

ok, point taken...

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
Should we bring up Saddam's reactor?

Please do because I have no clue what you are refering to..

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by Toby on 03-25-2003 03:02 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
Hehehe, thats why I asked for 'proof'

I wouldn't be able to find much more proof than the type of article you provided. I'm sure that they didn't provide anything directly weaponized just like I'm sure we didn't. The article suggests they just did more business in dual-use type items. Sort of like my going to the grocery store and buying up gallons of bleach cleaners and ammonia cleaners. In and of themselves, they don't necessarily raise suspicion, but added up with a motive and basic knowledge of chemistry, I might be making chlorine gas weapons. I'm not suggesting the French or Germans were necessarily arming them any more or less than 'we' were.

quote:
Please do because I have no clue what you are refering to..

The one that the Iranians tried to destroy and the Israelis later did: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/osiraq.htm

Posted by ToolkiT on 03-26-2003 01:29 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Toby
The one that the Iranians tried to destroy and the Israelis later did: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/osiraq.htm

Thanx for the link, but your logic could apply on this too.. a nuclear plant could be used for nuclear power too, not neccesarily for Nuclear weapons..
But given Saddams nature it probably was both..

__________________
<IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?

Posted by Toby on 03-26-2003 02:49 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by ToolkiT
Thanx for the link, but your logic could apply on this too.. a nuclear plant could be used for nuclear power too, not neccesarily for Nuclear weapons..

No doubt. I wasn't suggesting any differently. Only that if providing the potential for chemical or biological weapons was bad, France went the extra mile to give them nuclear potential as well.

quote:
But given Saddams nature it probably was both..

Yep, and ultimately _that's_ the problem that I have with all of the people criticizing the US on this one and defending France, Germany, et al. Yeah, we screwed up WRT Iraq, but so did lots of other Western 'superpowers', but how come no one else thinks 12 years isn't long enough to show that this bad seed needs to go? I think the funny thing about many people's reactions to all this is even people like William Saletan seem to get what's going on.

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 PM.

Pages (5): « 1 2 3 4 [5]
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page