Text 16911, 113 rader
Skriven 2005-11-24 13:01:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 16754 av Raymond Yates (1:3613/48)
Ärende: Collateral Damage
=========================
Hello Raymond,

 > Ok, lets go with buildings for a while.

 MV>> If the building still stands, there will be traces of its former use.

 > There's no guarantee of that, but it's a thought.

It is near impossible to leave no traces when one has all the time in the
world. These hyphothetical plants had to be dismantled on short notice prior or
during the invasion.

 MV>> Insecticides are in wide spread use all over the world. Most of the
 MV>> time they are used just for that: to control insects.

 > And sometimes, they can be used for..

"Can"is not proof for "are"...


 MV>> You are as you say "cherry picking". The IAEA reported that there was
 MV>> no nuclear programme in Iraq.

 > Like they might not be biased some?

What reason would they have for bias?

 > right now the UN is /not/ on my list of trustworthy sources
 > for /anything/...

As the US government is no longer on /my/ list of trustworthy sources...

 >>> True, but.. when you have a bunker full of "pesticide" placed
 >>> next to rocktes capapble of carrying liquid agents,

 MV>> I don't know where you got that information. Iraq was not
 MV>> allowed to have rockets with a range over 800 km. All the
 MV>> reports confirm that he had no long range rockets.

 > the UN Inspectors also found a few missiles that were of extended
 > range, and the motors to drive them.

A few lines ago you said:

 > right now the UN is /not/ on my list of trustworthy sources
 > for /anything/...

They tested ONE of those rockets with no payload. It went 30 km farther than it
should have. Insignificant in the grand scheme of things. a "parking ticket" at
best.

 >>> a conclusion could be drawn..

 MV>> It could be the wrong conclusion. There can be many an innocent
 MV>> explanation.

 > And some not so. Given who we are dealing with..

Demonising him won't convince me.

 >>> "pesticide" does not require it be kept in bombproofs.

 MV>> You don't want to leave it lying around where children can play with
 MV>> it either. Even if it is just what it says it is: pesticide, you want
 MV>> to store it behind locked doors. Maybe the bomb shelter just happened
 MV>> to be available.

 > Possible, but hardly likely.

You keep on looking for the worst possible explanation. Not convincing.

 MV>>>> I and many, if not most people this side of the pond on the
 MV>>>> other hand never believed they were there in the first place.

 >>> The where did they all go?

 MV>> There is no need to explain the disappereance of what was not
 MV>> there to begin with.

 > But we know he had some,

You saved the receipts?

 > and we aslo know that they can exist for a long time.

That's not proof that there was any left after the UN inspectors did their job
in 1991.

 MV>> Whatever was left of the pre gulf war I period was destroyed in 1991
 MV>> or shortly after under supervison of the UN inspectors.

 MV>> Hans Blix found nothing.
 MV>> Saddam did not use WMD's when he still could if he had them.
 MV>> The US army found nothing.
 MV>> The US weapon inspectors found nothing

 MV>> Ockham's razor tells me there was nothing.

 > Hans had limited success inspecting everything.

Nonsense. He was free to go where he wanted.

 > The Us Army found things and were Contradictied by the Inspectors.
 > both of them have only searched limited areas. I'm for keepin an
 > open mind about this for a while longer.

I have heard enough. The WMD's were a myth created by George Bush and Tony
Blair. A myth created to get support for the invasion.

Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)