Printable View
Just an update(5:17AM CST)it appears the Iraqi parliment has recommended that Saddam reject the proposal,and cut off the oil flow to any attacking countries and their allies.The Pakastani government also reported to the US that Iraq is trying to buy a million doses of antidote for sarin nerve gas.It sounds like a war to me.
Yes! I heard that too today gghornet, it seems that the medicene they are trying to buy is, when used in smaller doses, used to treat heartattacks. Now what do they think we are going to think that all of them people are planning on having heartattacks..? I think not ..
Quite correct Sweetlissa... The MAXIMUM dose used for cardiac arrest is 3mg, for bardycardia (really sloooow heart rate) it is the same and that is given over several minutes at no more than 0.5-1mg per dose... You can use it for organophsphate posioning (basicly the same as a nerve agent) and then the dose is 3-5 mg to a max of 10mg.... The auto injector they are trying to buy hits you with 25mg of Atropine and 30mg of 2pamcloride at once and the max you are supposed to take is three of them over the course of a few minutes... Nice to know that I still remember ACLS after all of these years:DQuote:
Yes! I heard that too today gghornet, it seems that the medicene they are trying to buy is, when used in smaller doses, used to treat heartattacks. Now what do they think we are going to think that all of them people are planning on having heartattacks..? I think not ..
If anyone believes that the 'Iraqi parliament' is a parliament in the normal sense of the word, then they are living in a different universe, as they only do what they are told to do by their leader.
Well, yes, this happens in the US & the UK, but at least you won't be shot if you disagree with him. And, if you have a good case for your argument, then you will probably get re-elected.
The latest statements from Iraq say that they believe that the UN resolution is "in violation of international law" - in other words they are not going co-operate fully.
I don't believe it's a parliment in any sense of the word,but since the parliment is a big room full of puppets assigned by Saddam himself it seems logical that they would reflect the true intentions of Saddam.
...and another thing to add to the Atropine thing is that auto-injectors themselves are almost speciffically used for the military,because a soldier under fire or dying from exposure to nerve gas can't be expected to mix the correct dosage in a normal syringe.Hospitals,although I realize they are under pressure,have people experienced enough in administering medication in all forms that mixing it themselves would be quicker than the autoinjectors,which from what an ex-medic said on fox takes about three minutes to administer the whole thing.I worked at the Belleville area humane society for about a year,and had to mix and administer tons of vaccinations every day,and it would usually take about 30 seconds per syringe(depending on the cooperation of the animal).
Ahem..... Have we yet thought of why he would want a million doses of an antidote for Sarin? I don't believe for one second that SO DAMN INSANE..... :) is expecting the US etc. to go popping Sarin all over Baghdad. So, logically, the only other reason to buy it in large quantities would be because SoDamn intends to pop it all over his own country.
Now, the burning question in my little brain is - Is this a genuine attempt or is it misdirection on the part of SoDamn. Misdirection would have it's use at this point. It would give the UN a reason to hold their breath to await his response which would then make them feel all nice and fuzzy about him when he accepts the resolution. It might also make the US etc. rethink and adjust some of their plans..... It's offputting to all to say the least and it gives the bleeding hearts more reason to say no to war.
OTOH - if this is a serious attempt to purchase the antidote because he is going to sling Sarin all over the place - Israel isn't too far away either - it's all the more reason to level Iraq before any infantrymen set foot in the middle east.
Who seriously thinks that Turkey is actually gonna sell this vaccine to Iraq????
I don't think anyone in their right mind would sell this stuff to Iraq,but the fact that he's looking for it suggests a lot about his plans,and I don't think not being able to get an antidote is going to stop him from carrying his plans out.He knows as well as anyone else in the world that if he doesn't cooperate with the UN that his time in office(and probably on the planet)is limited.So do you really think he gives a **** about antidotes?
I think the only reason he made the attempt is because if by some extremely freakish fluke of logic as we know it Iraq was able to beat the allied forces out of their country it would make having killed all of those people with nerve gas look better if he tried to save a few of them with this antidote.
I don't think that's much of a concern.For the forces outside of the big cities,but the forces inside of populated areas are sheltered in hospitals and schools which is going to make for one hell of a choice for Bush.Which brings me to another interesting little bit of information.Saddam was instructed to shelter his military in public buildings by an American business professor at George Washington University who to my knowledge still has his job today.In my mind this man has the blood of any civilians and soldiers who die because of this arrangement on his hands and should be punished accordingly.Advising a ruthless dictator to take advantage of the fact that the US does everything in their power not to kill civilians while also minimizing troop casualties is at least treason,and if not only that a major crime against humanity.I find it rediculous that such a person is allowed to not only walk the streets in our country,but allowed to have a respectible job,and probably quite a comfortable life.I saw this on FNC,and since visited the web site of Daniel Pipes,the man who was being interviewed and made this public.Here's that particular piece of the article.Quote:
it's all the more reason to level Iraq before any infantrymen set foot in the middle east.
Here's the link to the whole article...Quote:
Tom Nagy, associate professor of business at George Washington University, proudly informed his university newspaper about providing aid to the Saddam regime against the United States during a recent (illegal) trip to Iraq. Specifically, he offered "estimates of the number of civilians needed to act as a human shield to protect infrastructure and buildings for Iraqi citizens."
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/923
Here'sthe link to the web site.
http://www.danielpipes.org/
I encourage all of you to browse this page,as there are quite a few interesting articles that really make you wonder.
Daniel Pipes seems to have a very unhealthy obsession with Islam, so I'm very reluctant to give much credence to what he has to say.
And if you're gonna be upset with this that he mentions, perhaps you should also be asking for Dick Cheney's head as his company was trading with Saddam as I mentioned earlier in this thread.
Hmmmm.I must have missed that one.Very interesting.Perhaps you're right,maybe we should also have Cheney's head on a platter.Although not as blatantly disgusting as instructing Saddam to turn public buildings jam packed full of civilians into military bases and command centers,I'm sure more than a few of those dollars went into Saddam's WMD fund.Right now I'm looking for a copy of the George Washington University newspaper.I'll post the article along with a link to the paper if/when I find it.
Here's the paper(from a source other than Daniel Pipes)
http://www.gwhatchet.com/
Here it is straight from GWU.It sounds like Mr. Nagy had good intentions in what he did,but being a college professor he should be intelligent enough to figure out that Saddam would use the idea to protect his troops and weapons,not to protect Iraqi citizens.The only thing his bright idea is going to do is succeed in getting more people killed,because now it is going to make bombing cities in Iraq nearly impossible,so we're going to have to roll in with the infantry.Then instead of a few citizens here and a few there dying from bombs,they're going to be getting killed by the thousands by stray machine gun fire,nerve gas,and mistaken identity killings.These soldiers aren't going to have time to examine each person who passes by for a weapon,so it's likely that they're going to shoot a lot of people on sight.I can't say if I was in that position I wouldn't do the same,actually I know I would.
http://www.gwhatchet.com/main.cfm?in...storyid=301881
I just looked at some his work, one that I found particularly interesting was this one. A clear violation of the Geneva accords. It makes for very good reading.
The professor's webpage can be found here.
EDIT: Funny how it's almost always us three or four usual suspects who debate this :D You know who you are. ROFL!
As of right now, Iraq and Baghdad are agreeing to the term's that the U.N put up and they are saying that the inspectors won't find anything. The compliance, however, can not be changed AT ALL say's the Iraqi government. They want to make sure the U.S (or U.N in general) doesn't change anything in the compliance that they have made. Sound's pretty fair, but my next question and I would love to hear opinions, is what happens if we find Nuclear, Chemical, or Biological Weapons?..
The purpose of the inspections has been changing ever since Saddam was moved to the front page. First it was his "supposed" relationship with Al-Qaida and Sep 11th. That didn't pan out. Then it was ...."regime change" which is a euphemism for having someone who will obey the US govt there. Then it was again changed....to Saddam being in violation of his commitment to disarming.
Now to Spyder's question, ideally what should happen is that IF such weapons are found, they be dismantled, since that's what White House is apparent most concerned about. But thats unlikely to happen, I believe we will see a new "govt" in Iraq no matter what happens.
I'd have to agree because if the U.N/U.S does find weapons, I'm sure they will do more than dismantle the weapons. It's pretty inevitable to me that the Iraqi government will be changed. I'm more than sure of it and it's pretty clear that's what Bush wants. Tomorrow will be interesting when they publicly accept the terms and then to see what the response from the U.S government is..Quote:
Originally posted here by Mahakaal
The purpose of the inspections has been changing ever since Saddam was moved to the front page. First it was his "supposed" relationship with Al-Qaida and Sep 11th. That didn't pan out. Then it was ...."regime change" which is a euphemism for having someone who will obey the US govt there. Then it was again changed....to Saddam being in violation of his commitment to disarming.
Now to Spyder's question, ideally what should happen is that IF such weapons are found, they be dismantled, since that's what White House is apparent most concerned about. But thats unlikely to happen, I believe we will see a new "govt" in Iraq no matter what happens.
Let me see...... Some of you seem a little pissed about the US/UK et al's attitude to the regime in Iraq right down to silly little pieces about how the sanctions would make them have to drink tainted water against the Geneva convention....... Oh Dear.... If any of you had ever stepped off your hallowed shores onto those of under-developed nations rather then the developed ones you would know that it is absolutely normal for them to be drinking water that would make you and I sick for weeks - but their bodies are used to it - it is normal for them. It's all too easy to look at nations like that and compare our way and standard of living with thiers and find them sub-par and beyond a level _we_ find acceptable. Forget such silly reports - they are just that - silly.
Now some of you are carping on about how the purpose of the inspections have "changed" and how regime change is all we are after. Lets look at it another way - SoDamn and his cronies are saying we won't find anything. OK. What happens when we do. It is clear - and it was done to the governments and people of the world - that SoDamn and his regime lied about researching and producing weapons we deem unnaceptable. So you want them dismantled..... Brilliant.... what about the ones we don't find? Are we going to slap his little wrist and tell him not to do it again? Are those of you who expouse such action prepared to prostrate yourselves in front of the families of victims of the remaining weapons - in whatever country those families may be - and beg their forgiveness for your stupidity in not ending it hen you could? Are you H**L. You will sit there simpering on about how "awful" it was and pretending it had nothing to do with you.......
I have news folks: It will be those of you that water down the determination of the politicians who are to blame for the deaths of everyone who suffers as a consequence of your bleeding heart doctrines and opinions. If you don't have the stomach to do what is necessary step aside and let those who have some intestinal fortitude do it for you - but have the decency to be quiet while they do........
Rant over - thank you for your time...... :)
Hrrmmm....the only one who seems "a little pissed about the US/UK et al's attitude" in this thread is me. Let me guess subtle flames are not really your forte. <----example of subtle flame.
And now to your "rant"... bet you didnt know that until the Gulf War that Iraq had one of best healthcare industries in the Middle East, comparable to most Western countries. That is of course until we bombed the crap out of them.
Now you tell me who was it that gave him all these lovely weapons? He sure as **** didnt develop them indigenously. I bet you didn't know that either, but that's okay I didn't expect you to. <----example of a not so subtle flame.
Mahakaal: I really am ROFLMAO...... I do not make subtle flames directed at anyone. If I have something to say about/to someone I say it directly and there will be no doubt in the recipient's mind as to my intent.
Now that is cleared up.......
"bet you didnt know that until the Gulf War that Iraq had one of best healthcare industries in the Middle East"......
And your point is?????? Then they decided that it was just fine to invade one sovereign nation and threaten another. I take it that's ok in your book but heaven forbid we do any damage to their health care industry..... This is the inconsistency shown by you bleeding hearts.... You don't give a crap about the Kuwaitis or the Suadi's that were killed, stolen from, scared crapless etc. but the poor little Iraqis - that's a different matter. Newsflash Mahakaal - if the Iraqis _really_ didn't want SoDamn Insane in power they could remove him - but they don't - so, their tacit support is implied - thus my level of sympathy is equally diminished.
"Now you tell me who was it that gave him all these lovely weapons?"
And here we go again..... Lets waste our time trying to prove that it was those ideologically opposed to you that are to blame...... This, as usual, is a situation where "we have made our bed - now we must lie in it". It is a problem! Period! It needs to be fixed! Period! But then the bleeding hearts aren't in doing things - they prefer to woffle on about anything semi-relevant and hope that the issue will go away on it's own - and if it doesn't they hope to hell that it does not detrimentally affect them......
DIRECTED AT YOU, MAHAKAAL:- If the cap fits, wear it. If you wear it - have the decency to not whine while others stand up and do something!!!!!
This thread has been moved to a conference room because
1.The AP's are starting to fly
2.It's not really security related,and certain people are getting too many posts in here(myself included.
If you want a key,contact myself or Mahakaal,and we'll get you one ASAP.I already sent them out to everyone listed as a thread subscriber.The room isn't specifically for this particular subject in general,it's about War with Iraq in general.
Quote:
Originally posted here by Mahakaal
Hrrmmm....the only one who seems "a little pissed about the US/UK et al's attitude" in this thread is me. Let me guess subtle flames are not really your forte. <----example of subtle flame.
And now to your "rant"... bet you didnt know that until the Gulf War that Iraq had one of best healthcare industries in the Middle East, comparable to most Western countries. That is of course until we bombed the crap out of them.
Now you tell me who was it that gave him all these lovely weapons? He sure as **** didnt develop them indigenously. I bet you didn't know that either, but that's okay I didn't expect you to. <----example of a not so subtle flame.
Whoa, hold up their dude. First, Iraq has laid claim that they have gotten them from other Arabic countries. No article can prove the own dictator wrong. Secondly, it say's in the article that we were selling them up 'till 1992? That's odd that nearly two years after they invade kuwait, that we give them weapons of mass destruction.
I'm sure you can be right to a degree, but I have quite a few arguable points to the fact that the U.S (based on facts and news) didn't sell Iraq jack.
This resoultion needs to be summed up with one answer a nuclear winter for the arabic world. God forbid a nuclear cloud float over the skies of Iran. How many oil fields are going to be set on fire this time by Iraqi's with bic lighters, we have strategic nukes lets use them. Oh yeah have you seen the amount of palaces that ***** has, its unreal, when's the last time you heard Saddam letting american round eyes in, much less UN inspectors. I dont think so!
Uhm, I'm not going to comment of the idiocy of that post. Wait, maybe it's not idiocy but my opinion of idiocy. In any sense, Iraq will have the inspectors in there and I can only hope to see what happens now that they are saying that inspectors are able to come in. The next following weeks (and maybe months?) will be very interesting.
Interesting read on the Progressive site Mahakaal... Sorry I don't agree with their conclusions though... I have a deep rooted distrust of any group who spouts anything about "Social Justice."
I spent most of the 1980's fighting so called social justice movements in Central America and from what I saw the only social justice, human rights, poverty, and disenfranchisement they are interested in is there own.Quote:
The mission of The Progressive is to be a journalistic voice for peace and social justice at home and abroad. The magazine, its affiliates, and its staff steadfastly oppose militarism, the concentration of power in corporate hands, the disenfranchisement of the citizenry, poverty, and prejudice in all its guises. We champion peace, social and economic justice, civil rights, civil liberties, human rights, a preserved environment, and a reinvigorated democracy.
And where are the so called documents? Why not post them with the article? I like his use of "the children" in his article. It has been my experience that only those who can not get sympathy for their cause in any other way use the children in a desperate attempt to sway people to their side... I have seen how "social justice" movements treat children and it is not pretty...Quote:
Over the last two years, I've discovered documents of the Defense Intelligence Agency proving beyond a doubt that, contrary to the Geneva Convention, the U.S. government intentionally used sanctions against Iraq to degrade the country's water supply after the Gulf War. The United States knew the cost that civilian Iraqis, mostly children, would pay, and it went ahead anyway.
Now here is my rub with the article... It blames the US for all of these supposed problems... It was the UN, not the US, which placed sanctions against Iraq... It is the UN, not the US that has allowed the sanctions to remain in effect... I will allow that the US has done everything it can to keep the sanctions in place... At this point it is rather stupid to keep them since Iraq has not lived up to a single agreement it has made in the past ten years... The time for waiting and watching is over... It is time to get rid of Saddam and those of the ruling party who ARE hurting the children... It is Saddam who used chemical weapons against villages in his own country not the US... How many children died in those attacks??? I don't see any compassion for them... It is Saddam who routinely use murder and torture against his own people to maintain his power... Where is the outrage at that??? It is Saddam who is a despotic leader who wants to wipe the Jews from the face of the earth... Where is the outrage at the man who wants and seeks to commit genocide???
I have no love for communists in any shape or form Makahaal... And it would seem to me that is exactly where you are getting your information from... A communist front group... I guess that they all didn't die and go away when the Soviet Union fell apart after all...
BTW America was never intended to be a "genuine democracy...” It was and is meant to be a Republic....Quote:
By enriching and diversifying the public debate on the issues of the day, the Progressive Media Project is doing its part to establish a more vibrant civil society and a more genuine democracy in America.
IMO you were right the first time Spyder32... It is an idiotic post... paulie walnuts... Anyone who would openly advocate the use of nuclear weapons as a first stike is either:Quote:
This resoultion needs to be summed up with one answer a nuclear winter for the arabic world. God forbid a nuclear cloud float over the skies of Iran. How many oil fields are going to be set on fire this time by Iraqi's with bic lighters, we have strategic nukes lets use them. Oh yeah have you seen the amount of palaces that ***** has, its unreal, when's the last time you heard Saddam letting american round eyes in, much less UN inspectors. I dont think so!
1. Not well enough informed of the repercussions of using nuclear weapons.
or
2. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
or
3. All of the above.
Which are you? :confused:
Well, it looks as if Saddam is saying he want's to avoid war. This is one of the latest articles from yahoo.com and it is pretty interesting. I didn't want to create a new thread so I'd add to this one instead. Enjoy..
**** From Yahoo.com****
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) said Saturday he had no choice but to accept a tough, new U.N. weapons inspection resolution because the United States and Israel had shown their "claws and teeth" and declared unilateral war on the Iraqi people.
In an open letter to Iraq's parliament, Saddam said he hoped the weapons inspectors would help the U.N. Security Council "to see the truth as it really is about Iraq being completely free of weapons of mass destruction."
The advance team of inspectors is expected in Baghdad on Monday after a four-year absence. Under a new resolution approved last week, the inspectors are empowered to go anywhere and interview anyone to determine if Iraq still has banned weapons. Failure to cooperate fully will probably bring a U.S.-led attack.
Saddam told Parliament in the letter he accepted the resolution "because your enemy, the alliance between Zionism and the American administration has ... after showing its claws and teeth, decided to wage war unilaterally against our people."
"If the unjust persist in their wrongdoing, then you know that the potentials and obligations that we carry from our revolution to withstand all injustice will ensure their defeat," he added.
The Revolutionary Command Council, the top decision-making body headed by Saddam, decided on Wednesday to accept the resolution. The rubber-stamp parliament had earlier recommended rejecting it but left the final decision to the Iraqi leader.
Addressing the legislators as "esteemed brothers and comrades," Saddam said "your enemy has returned, once again, to camouflaging its schemes under the cover of the Security Council, which has ... infringed upon all that may represent the conscience of international unanimity."
The U.N. team will begin preliminary inspections of suspected weapons sites on Nov. 27, according to chief inspector Hans Blix. He then has 60 days to report back to the council with his findings.
"We hope and expect to have full Iraqi cooperation," Blix said Saturday in Paris. "A denial of access or a delayed access ... this would be a serious thing."
Under the resolution, Iraq must declare all weapons programs to the United Nations by Dec. 8. The Iraqi declaration will then be compared with previous data gathered by inspectors.
Blix said access to suspected sites would be key to the mission's success, adding that Iraq would be held accountable for blocking inspectors' work.
The United States believes Iraq has been illegally rearming for several years. Inspectors, out of Iraq since December 1998, have not been able to verify that claim.
In Baghdad, a government newspaper on Saturday urged the arms experts to resist U.S. pressure and not create pretexts that could open the way for an attack on Iraq.
"The inspectors should not mix up the cards, creating a crisis and fabricating pretexts that aim to harm the people of Iraq," the daily Al-Jumhuriya said in a front-page editorial.
"They should adopt an honest, objective and professional attitude to their work and not to bend to U.S. pressure," it said.
In Cairo, Amr Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, also urged the inspectors to carry out their mission in "a neutral ... and honest way which will endorse their credibility." Arab countries have urged Iraq to cooperate with inspections, and warned that a U.S.-Iraq war could create instability throughout the volatile region.
In Syria, Masoud Barzani, leader of one of the two anti-Saddam Kurdish parties in control of northern Iraq, said Saturday that Iraq's acceptance of the U.N. resolution would only delay a U.S. attack.
Meanwhile, a London newspaper reported Saturday that Libya agreed to give Saddam's family and leading members of his regime asylum in Libya if Iraq goes to war with the United States, at a $3.5 billion price tag.
The Times said Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi would not give refuge to Saddam or for his eldest son Odai. But it said Saddam's extended family and 12 senior officials would get sanctuary.
Syria had agreed to provide an overland escape route, allowing the Iraqis to fly on to Libya, the paper said.
Libyan Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassouna al-Shawish denied the report, the official Libyan news agency JANA said.
****End Article****
It's extremely odd to me that Saddam included Israel into this when I don't think Israel "showed it's claws and teeth". I don't think the U.S did, and if it did it was only to a degree. It's rather strange of him to add Israel into this which could have been a tactic to get other Arabic countries (those that hate Israel) to back Iraq. Hrm, I believe I've seen this before, say around the Gulf War?
Another Interesting note is the note of Syria and Libya being involved one way or another. I don't know what Saddam is up to, but like I've said, the next coming weeks will be most interesting to see how the inspection plays out. Especially since the inspectors are leaving or arriving sometime monday. What do you all think?..