[ummbikes]

First wager.

I'll bet a set of new Kool-Stop Avid disk pads that chemical and biological weapons will be found in Iraq. First taker with a $15-20 valued bike part is on.

Second wager.

I'll bet a new brake cable set, containing a shat load of the little cable end crimpy things that when they are found France, Germany, and Russia will still try and stall a war. Any takers?


Which raises a question in my mind.

Why are those countrys so willing to support Iraq. Could it be they have dirty secrets best left in Bagdad? I'm just guessing, I have no proof, or even guesses to what may be going on behind the scene. I'm a cynical guy and just am curious to what the formentioned governments have to gain from Iraq staying under the current regime. Don't say they are just peace lovers, I'm not buying that. There is money and power behind the effort to keep Hussien in power. Why?

 

[Serial Midget]

France and USSR have HUGE oil field developement contracts with the current Iraq, if we throw Sadam out they have no guarantee that these existing contracts will be honored.

BTW - It's not Chariots of Fire - it's Chippendales on Wheels!!!

 

[zibbler]

Originally posted by Serial Midget
France and USSR have HUGE oil field developement contracts with the current Iraq, if we throw Sadam out they have no guarantee that these existing contracts will be honored.

France and Germany have also supplied them with a lot of technology.

Iraq is definitely hiding stuff. The military has arial photos of suspected sights, that suddenly were covered over... litterally over night.

 

[patconnole]

Originally posted by ummbikes
First wager.

I'll bet a set of new Kool-Stop Avid disk pads that chemical and biological weapons will be found in Iraq. First taker with a $15-20 valued bike part is on.

Second wager.

I'll bet a new brake cable set, containing a shat load of the little cable end crimpy things that when they are found France, Germany, and Russia will still try and stall a war. Any takers?


Which raises a question in my mind.

Why are those countrys so willing to support Iraq. Could it be they have dirty secrets best left in Bagdad? I'm just guessing, I have no proof, or even guesses to what may be going on behind the scene. I'm a cynical guy and just am curious to what the formentioned governments have to gain from Iraq staying under the current regime. Don't say they are just peace lovers, I'm not buying that. There is money and power behind the effort to keep Hussien in power. Why?

Can't take the bets-- but I might agree on number two, I think it would be very hard to push them into agreeing to an invasion and replacement of the Iraqi regime. There will be have to be some sort incident to push things to war, and it will happen fast, I imagine. "There is money and power behind..." the US and everyone else. This is a power grab, imo.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by ummbikes
Why are those countrys so willing to support Iraq. Could it be they have dirty secrets best left in Bagdad? I'm just guessing, I have no proof, or even guesses to what may be going on behind the scene. I'm a cynical guy and just am curious to what the formentioned governments have to gain from Iraq staying under the current regime. Don't say they are just peace lovers, I'm not buying that. There is money and power behind the effort to keep Hussien in power. Why?

Its mainly about oil contracts. Currently, companies from 5 countries hold the oil contracts for Iraqi oil fields. Strangely enough those 5 countries are Russia, China, Germany, France and Italy. The fear is 2 fold.

1. Armed conflict will cause Saddam to destoy the equipment in the current oil fields. The destruction of these fields would cost the responsible parties into the billions of lost profits.
2. A regime change would cause these contracts to become null and void. New contracts are issued to new bidders.

In any situation, and I've said this a 1000 times, it doesn't matter because the companies currently holding these contracts do not have the necessary capital to develop the fields as stated in the contracts. They would have to sub contract out a large portion of the work (at substanial cost) to other companies. Those companies would most assuredly be a combination of the big oil companies, which by a strange twist are British and American companies. This practice is very common in the oil industry.

As for dirty little secrets, the vast majority of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons technology came from the former Soviet Union. Every chemical or biological weapon destroyed by the UN in the 90's was a derative of a Soviet design. Russia really hasn't made any attempts to hide this fact but doesn't own up to either. I would be surprised if an evidence was found that showed any assistance provided the Iraqis on WMD since the Gulf War.

The French have been attempting to establish themselves as the leader of European politics since the 50's. Great Britian and the US both have been the French's main target in establishing that leadership. I believe that part of the French's dissention is tied to this. It is an issue in which they have been able to ally themselves with the Germans (a rarity indeed). The issue at hand allows the French to oppose American policy without looking petty which has occurred in the past. But the French have had difficulty in keeping this from getting petty on their part. Look at the reaction of the French to the stance that many of the Eastern European nations (and potential EU and NATO members) took in regards to Iraq.

As for the Germans, I believe that the current governments stance is more out of necessity than anything else. It was unlikely that Schroeder would have been reelected if he had stood with the US on this matter. That is not to say that his decision was made just because of that but it certainly is part of the stance.

Of course, part of their opposition to the US that is based on the "morality" of the situation. I'm talking solely about the governments stance not the populations.

 

[fluff]

Originally posted by ummbikes
First wager.

I'll bet a set of new Kool-Stop Avid disk pads that chemical and biological weapons will be found in Iraq. First taker with a $15-20 valued bike part is on.

I'm a cynical guy.

I'm a cynical guy too and I'm certainly willing to bet that if no chemical or biological weapons are found prior to the invasion (which I believe is a matter of when not if) then there will certainly be some found afterwards, even if they have to be hauled right in there.....

I don't think anyone would suggest Saddam is a nice guy with a benevolent government of his own people, and I have little doubt that he'd like enough weaponry to deter invasion and would try and hide what he has, pretty much like any dictator would. I just don't think that this war is about that really. In the current situation if Saddam so much as sneezes in the direction of any other country Iraq will be flattened with UN blessing, do the US and UK really need to invade without UN support? Unless they just want a regime change for other reasons.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by fluff
I'm a cynical guy too and I'm certainly willing to bet that if no chemical or biological weapons are found prior to the invasion (which I believe is a matter of when not if) then there will certainly be some found afterwards, even if they have to be hauled right in there.....

Of course that's what would happen. The US is going to drag all its old stock of Soviet design chemical and biological weapons. I bet Oliver North will do it.

Iraq submitted a 12,000-page declaration in early December, which Blix says failed to account for many proscribed weapons, and the missing information has yet to be provided. That doesn't mean, necessarily, the Iraqis have the banned weapons Blix said. "One must not jump to conclusions. However, that possibility should not be excluded. It is hard to believe that a regime as regimented as Iraq would NOT have records of the destruction of the weapons in question."

So how surprising could it be if all of a sudden 1000 tons of chemical and/or biological weapons stock showed up?

See on one hand folks want you to listen to the inspectors when they say allow more time. But when the inspectors say things like this it is convenently ignored. The reverse is true as well. Then the inspectors tell Iraq to come clean and the Iraqis don't listen either. It seems that in reality no one really listens to the inspectors.

 

[fluff]

Originally posted by DRB
Of course that's what would happen. The US is going to drag all its old stock of Soviet design chemical and biological weapons. I bet Oliver North will do it.

See on one hand folks want you to listen to the inspectors when they say allow more time. But when the inspectors say things like this it is convenently ignored. The reverse is true as well. Then the inspectors tell Iraq to come clean and the Iraqis don't listen either. It seems that in reality no one really listens to the inspectors.

I'm never quite sure about sarcasm here, just doesn't come across well in writing but I think there is some....

Seems to me that if the weapons inspectors do enough to prevent build-up or deployment then war is not necessary. Maybe the threat is required in order to achieve co-operation but I still (cynically, maybe) think that there's a hidden agenda,