Powell's case on Iraq... Definite Ownage against the Iraqi's

[Info-Man]

As you all are probably aware of, Colin Powell Presented the new evidence against Iraq's violations of resolution 1441.  The accusations of the U.S. has been firmly backed up by satalite photos, intercepted phone calls, eye witnesses, videos, etc.

If you saw the presentation, the satalite photos showed chemical bunkers before U.N. Inspectors, and the time U.N. Inspectors showed up to the location. The photos before the U.N. Inspectors showed up to the locations, were chemical bunkers, with clear signs of the compound. Large cargo trucks were all around the location.  

Days later, the compound has been bulldozed. You can see the U.N. Inspectors arriving. As you are aware, they found nothing.

The photos also brought up the attention of Iraq's mobile chem labs. The labs are clearly to keep U.N. Inspector's from knowing what Iraq is trying to produce.

Also brought to the Security Council was many intercepted phone calls between top Iraqi officials. The interceptions clearly showed that Iraq was not trying to cooperate with the Inspectors but to deceive longer, as Powell stated in the presentation. The Iraqi officials mentioned "nerve agents" and how to hide them. The Iraqi officals talked about their mobile bio-labs. They spoke about what they would do if the inspectors spotted them.

This evidence alone is enough to screw the Iraqi's Regime over and to crush their lies.

But Powell wasn't finished. He showed videos of an Iraqi test flight spraying virtual test agents below.

One of the most astonishing new elements brought forth was the link to Al-Queda. They showed more photos of terrorist training camps in Iraq.  They also presented that Iraq made a deal with Al-Queda, that if they were to harbor them inside Baghdad, that they would leave Iraq out of their attacks.

Another violation next to having possession of nuclear/chemical and biological agents, is the refusal to interview scientist in private. This was in clear violation of Resolution 1441, where Iraq agreed to let inspectors have unfettered access to all sites requested by Inspectors. They have also refused to allow U-2 Recognisance flights over Iraq.

Sorry for the semi-long post about all this. You probably all heard about it, but this is just for a debate. Speak freely about what you think about all this.

[Golo]

Hey.. I have an idea... lets start another thread about the war...that's an original idea.....

[Cossack]

At the moment I do not know what to think. WAR WAR WAR, some of you will say, many Americans not knowing what war is. This so called evidence? Is it false, fabricated, the weapons inspectors do not agree with it. I myself have not accumulated or analyzed enough information to form a rational opinion. My hart says it cant be it just cant be, one part of my brain says they are guilty, the other part of my brain (the paranoid part) says the evidence is fabricated. Here are some links that can help you.

You hear about Resolution 1441 but you dont know what it means exactly? Here it is word for word by the UN http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm

Want to hear the conspiracy theorist view www.rense.com and dont forget www.infowars.com

Want to hear a more rational anti-war view http://www.truthout.com/ and go to many other newspapers from Europe. www.pravda.ru News from Russia, gotta click on English version for this one.

[Cossack]

My one concern about Powell's evidence, could this be another "Gulf of Tonkin incident?" American has fabricated evidence before they can do it again.

[Info-Man]

Good thoughts.

yes, true, we have made fake evidence before, but the Iraqi's have also attempted to hide weapons before.

Iraq has tried to lie and we have caught them at many of their lies. 1 example is when inspectors were around in 1991 after the 1st Gulf War. We found VX gas. Now Iraq claims it has NEVER produced any form of VX EVER.  They should know if you are going to lie... you should know what you have said in the past. Another example is in the 1980's Iraq was about 1 year away from making their 1st nuclear bomb. They denied it for years, even after people have proven that they had it.  Then the Israeli's bombed their nuclear facilities.

Iraq will never let go of its lies. Iraq could murder a thousand people infront of the entire world and it would STILL deny the fact they did it. As a matter of fact, they would probably call it "Typical American Hollywood special effects"

I'm not saying that this justifies war, but i feel something needs to be done. I don't feel that we should invade the country because of what one family is doing (Saddam's Regime) but again SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! We can't just let a man that wants to produce weapons in the effort to harm another country do what he pleases. Hell, if a small child got a weapon that would give him the advantage to some one far superior to him, he would use it out of either fear or just trying to show that he is"tough" . That's what Iraq would do.

Cossack, thanks for your opinions and facts. Please give more insight, to lead me on the right track, because i am just going by what I have seen.

[Cossack]

Heh, you make me feel like Jesus. I dont know what the right track is. I used to be against the war unless there was suffecient evidence, and we had the world community with us. I am still deciding if this is suffecient in my view. BTW info man who are you. Are you anyone in particular in this community? Not that it takes away any validity of your points, I am just curious.

[kami]

Just a minor detail, Iraq actually let one of their scientists be interogated just the other day, which could be a sign of them wanting to cooperate more...
About those sattelite photo's, I think it's very difficult to say exactly what they show, they're black and white and you can't really see any details at all.

[abe]

kami, i would not be surprised if the scientest that suddenly wanted to cooperate was a mukabarat or military intellegence officer. even if he is a real scientist, this means nothing since he would proabably know that giving anyting to the inspectors means that he and potentially his family will bite it. this is how things have worked in Iraq for 20 years and theyre not about to change...
as for powell's evidence: some of this stuff is pretty damn incriminating (i.e conversations like 'did you get rid of the forbidden ammo') and damaging for Iraq. I don't think the US would wan't to put its credibility on the line here by presenting false evidence so I doubt any of it is doctored or "photoshoped" as some of conspiracy minded folks are claiming. then again, the Bay of tonkin thing and the iran/contra all happened so im also inclined towards some degree of scepticism. obviously some ppl are not going to be convinced no matter what, just like bin laden (there are still people coming up with theories about who did the WtC attacks-the "it was the israeli mossad" one is still very popular in the Arab world).
Cossack, its good that at least somone is thinking about this stuff. it seems that almost everyone here has theyre mind made up one way or another, which makes discussing anything kinda pointless and circular. also, nj in knowing propaganda from fact and seeing this stuff for what it is-> conspiracy theory. do u study IR or somthing? u understand a of this stuff much better than most GR ppl, even if we disagree on some things
Info-man, good post. i also had the feeling that powell made a pretty good case, but again, i doubt that it will help in convinving anyone....
just in case anyone cares, heres the transcript of what powell actually said.
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/05/arpubcp020503.htm

[*(SPU) mono]

well, you might want to read iraq's reply to the allegations (as much propaganda as everything for sure, but also as "convincing", if you're unbiased), but for the "quality" of these and other "proofs" that media and gov's feed us, have a look here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2735031.stm

and for those who understand german, also here:

http://www.nzz.ch/2003/02/07/al/page-newzzDBW8HFQM-12.html

... and just as an example on powell's speech - the video of the "chem-spray" airplane was taken 1991!

 ... the pictures of the mobile labs looked like photoshop and c4dxl imho ... and the phone calls were certainly not convincing either, i can do that myself in our studio with help from two arab-speaking fellas. so ... i don't believe much i see or read these days, and certainly not when it comes from the US gov ... :

http://english.pravda.ru/usa/2001/10/11/17799.html
http://foi.missouri.edu/osi/index.html
http://www.crf-usa.org/terror/FreePress.htm

mind it, i'm not saying this is *only* a problem of US media/gov, but it *is* certainly a problem in the US.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Ok, I'm not a blind follower of the US Government, that's for sure.  But, when it comes to who has more credibility, the Powell or Saddam, I'll go with Powell.

But, I'm not just taking anyone's word for it.  I'm trying to look at the whole picture.  The former head UN inspector confirmed the bulldozing of some inspection sites, along with telling the story of 8 feet of river gravel being dumped over one site that they had to try to dig through to get soil samples (by hand with no help from the Iraquis).  While the UN inspectors are saying they haven't found anything, they are also saying that cooperation is less then forthcoming.  

Oh, mono, I watched the coverage live.  Powell did mention it was an older photograph of the chem plane.  He was showing the picture while talking about how they've practiced this in the past, and if they are allowed to have that huge amount of chemical and biological weapons (that he claims they have), they are practiced in the ways to distribute it.  He was trying to point out that more then just Iran, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia were in danger.  Nice slant you have there.

I know people think that the media is slanted, and they all are, US, European, all of them.  They all put their own spin on things.  I watched it live.  Spin free.  Maybe you guys should tune into CSPAN and other live feeds, and hear it first hand, instead of just posting links.

Mono -  It *is* certainly a problem everywhere.  

[*(SPU) mono]

Oh, mono, I watched the coverage live.  [...] Nice slant you have there.

well, obviously not everyone else ... i saw it too, but as info-man said "But Powell wasn't finished. He showed videos of an Iraqi test flight spraying virtual test agents below" as an example of 'definite ownage', it thought it had to be mentioned, and also that some might not have known it and find it interesting.

I watched it live.  Spin free.  Maybe you guys should tune into CSPAN and other live feeds, and hear it first hand, instead of just posting links.

well, my point was that i don't belive government representatives are "spin-free" either, especially not the US gov ones and especially not at times of (pre-)war. propaganda wasn't and isn't a weapon only for dictators and communists ... if you check the bbc link, you'll see why i'm sceptical (despite it being only a poor static link and not live).

[kami]

Abe, I'm not saying it's enough, I'm just saying it's a step in the right direction. I feel that I'm pretty open minded actually Abe, I just don't think that any action is right without the UN security counsil being in on it.

[The Ghost of Bondo]

I think that Saddam may well have some sort of chemical or biological weapon.  I however do not think they are a threat to the US seeing as Saddam has never done anything against the US in the past...against some countries near him yes, but not the US.  There is no reason for a preemptive strike.  That is why the war should take place only with UN clearance.  It still looks like Russia, Germany and France are holding out on that.

[*DAMN Exe1{utioner]

Do you guys think the U.S. Govt.  would lie through thier teeth to the U.N.??  I know the possibilities of fabricated evidence, but in an issue this big?  I dunno about that.  Can you guys imagine how much shit the U.S. would be in if it really was fabricated evidence?  *shivers*

-Exe

[cookie]

Abe, I'm not saying it's enough, I'm just saying it's a step in the right direction. I feel that I'm pretty open minded actually Abe, I just don't think that any action is right without the UN security counsil being in on it.

The security council is good for nothing shit  

[abe]

bondo: u admit that iraq probably has weapons of mass destruction, yet you claim that there is no threat to the US. the US has made clear, before and after 9/11 that preventing the proliferation of wmds is in our national interst. saddam has shown himself capable of using them in warfare and he has, at times, supported terrorists. i dont put anything past that guy. do we have to wait until a major western (or any other) city gets wiped out before we start to do somthing about countries that are known to have them and that we feel are most likely to use them? u are using the same logic reasoning (i.e. they havent done anything yet.....) that allowed hitler to remilitarize the rhineland and eventually start ww2. im trying to use this analogy carefully and i am not comparing saddam to hitler, btw.
and executioner, that was the point i was trying to make. this is too big for the US government to put its credibility on the line by presenting false evidence. cynicism is important, but you cant go around thinking everything is lie.
and finally kami. i dont think i have to quote u, cookie just did. where the hell did u see me post anything about you being closeminded? i dont know you and i cant make that judgement. and if i did i certainly wouldnt do so here. my point was that this guy (i.e. Saddam) has a pretty shitty track record as far as "steps in the right direction" go. in fact, every such step has, in the past, only been a manuver to delay and deceive the inspections process.
cookie, are u kidding? i hope so.  the security council is important because anything it does requires the consensus of the major powers. it might be ineffective, but the reason a security council resolution is so important is because it means that Russia, the US, the UK, China and France all agree on somthing....that also the reason they are so vague and tough to get.

[The Ghost of Bondo]

Well, the weapon inspectors would keep doing their job so it isn't like Saddam would be free to do as he likes.

I think the main point is that the US can only have this war with the support of the rest of the world via the UN.  Otherwise it isn't a justified war even if there is a risk.  It has always been the policy not to have preemptive attacks.  It is too dangerous a line to cross to dissolve that policy.  What is preferable is to convince the rest of the middle east that they need to take the inititive in forcing the regime change.

[Ghost of Bondo]

Just had an additional thought...

Bush claims he has the right to attack Iraq preemptively in order to protect the security of the American people.  Well, in this war many Iraq civillans will die.  If this precedent is set, then Iraq could claim America is a threat to their safety and launch a premptive atack against the US under equal moral grounds.  That is how absurd this war is.  Sorry, but if the US feels it can have this war outside of the pretext of the UN policing, then every other country that feels a threat from another will have the right to attack another and to force a regime change.  Somehow the US thinks it can have special rules of war just because it is the strongest.

[kami]

Cookie, the UN is all we've got, it would be bad if we had no international organ like that at all.

The reasons for the war should be to free the opressed people of Iraq from the mad dictator that is Saddam. They should have done it earlier though. Saying that it's because he thinks that Iraq is a threat to US national security is rediculous at the least.

[Info-Man]

Bush claims he has the right to attack Iraq preemptively in order to protect the security of the American people.? Well, in this war many Iraq civillans will die.? If this precedent is set, then Iraq could claim America is a threat to their safety and launch a premptive atack against the US under equal moral grounds.? That is how absurd this war is.? Sorry, but if the US feels it can have this war outside of the pretext of the UN policing, then every other country that feels a threat from another will have the right to attack another and to force a regime change.? Somehow the US thinks it can have special rules of war just because it is the strongest.

Yea, sure Iraq can take a preemptive strike on the U.S if they wanted, if any of their troops could even get there with out being detected and/or whiped out. And if Iraq made an open preemptive strike on the U.S; God only knows what we would do to them. Oh don't forget that the U.N security council would surely act, for striking Iraq. Thus, Iraq would not just be disarmed, but completely and utterly annihilated. If you didn't get the picture just from that,  picture the Gulf War. Iraq invaded a small mid. east country, Kuwait, and we completely crushed his invading army. Now if they were to preemptive strike the U.S, a far more powerful country... heh ::Waves goodbye::

And for other countries preemptive striking other countries because they feel it's a threat and wanting a regime change. Well one, they need evidence of the threat (something we have presented and others know). Two, will have to have a logical reason other than "that leader is a jerk or that leader has a bigger army than i do." (Saddam has gassed his people, invaded another country, relations with terrorist [which is a threat to us], etc, etc,etc.)

As for the "U.S thinks it has special rules of war just because it is the strongest". Well, hell, it isnt like we have been working with the Security Council for over 4 months. And I think Bush said it well, " We will not allow others to run our country." It was somewhere along those lines.