[$tinkle]

from cnn article a couple days back:

"In a series of raids, the Jordanians said, they seized 20 tons of chemicals and numerous explosives."

"Jordanian authorities said the attack would have mixed a combination of 71 lethal chemicals, which they said has never been done before, including blistering agents to cause third-degree burns, nerve gas and choking agents. "

now, the right-wing conspiracy theorist in me says these were smuggled across the rather porous iraq border some time in the past year. Add to that now undeniable link 'tween al-qaeda & iraq - specifically Abu Musab al-Zarqawi - and i'm trying real hard to not make an ass outta myself & say "i told you so!"

however, applying occam's razor i'm steered to thinking these may very well have come from iraq.

thoughts?

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by $tinkle
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s3i3120



please provide a reputable (ie mainstream news) source for this definitive link between al-Zarqawi and Iraq.

also, Occam's Razor would point to there NOT being a connection imo. smuggling across the border is not the simplest scenario, especially because it requires that iraq had the material in the first place (which was what we were searching for, assuming this isn't another giant fertilizer bomb).

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Toshi
also, Occam's Razor would point to there NOT being a connection imo. smuggling across the border is not the simplest scenario, especially because it requires that iraq had the material in the first place (which was what we were searching for, assuming this isn't another giant fertilizer bomb).

sorry, at work, don't have time to read all the links, but will comment on the above...

Border crossings are easy if you have the money. And as for the materials, if Iraq sold 'em before the invasion, then of course we won't find 'em.


Unirregardless (Jr_B ) of all that... the fact remains that a hardline investigative stance into terrorists and materials needs to be done and all states need to cooperate... As Syria is learning.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
please provide a reputable (ie mainstream news) source for this definitive link between al-Zarqawi and Iraq.

here i was thinking that CNN was mainstream to you (it's left leaning to me & great many others, but i digress). Is radio free europe mainstream? or the financial times? Please realize your doubt is even in contrast to what al-jazeera reports.

I'm confused. It seems you're taking great pains to discredit the helpful confession of a would-be terrorist. Am i missing something here?

Originally posted by Toshi
also, Occam's Razor would point to there NOT being a connection imo. smuggling across the border is not the simplest scenario, especially because it requires that iraq had the material in the first place (which was what we were searching for, assuming this isn't another giant fertilizer bomb).

i see.
you choose not to believe that iraq ever had the materials. Which is your perfect right. However, this is in contrast with those folks on both sides of the aisle who serve on various committees on capitol hill who in open & closed door sessions all testify to the contrary. I choose to find them more credible than you. No offense.

back on topic, how do you think WMD got in jordan? And please don't wait more than 2 days to reply, or by then you may have forgotten it was ever there, & thusly dismiss this original story.

 

[derekbob]

They had a whole butt-load of stuff, it probly came from anywhere and everywhere. Perhaps some of it came from Iraq, maybe even from Saddam (Team Saddam that is). Im sure Saddam was in the market of selling arms/weapons to whoever could pay for them. I doubt this act was "sponsored by team saddam" as you might be suggesting.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by derekbob
They had a whole butt-load of stuff, it probly came from anywhere and everywhere. Perhaps some of it came from Iraq, maybe even from Saddam (Team Saddam that is). Im sure Saddam was in the market of selling arms/weapons to whoever could pay for them. I doubt this act was "sponsored by team saddam" as you might be suggesting.

i like how the UN is doing the WMD equivalent of gun control:

UN okays resolution on WMD

United Nations, April 30. (PTI): In a binding resolution, the United Nations Security Council has asked all states to take effective measures to prevent nuclear weapons and their delivery systems from falling into the hands of terrorists and non state actors.

hindu times

if they had only thought of this 8 days, 8 months, or 8 years ago, this whole mess could've been avoided.


"when WMD are outlawed, only terrorists will have WMD"

 

[derekbob]

Most of the stuff they had were chemicals which have legit industrial uses, and dont form a "WMD" until theyre properly mixed. If I were a betting man, Id put some odds that at least a good portion of that stuff came from our good buddys the saudis.

Stinkle, just curious, do you affiliate al-queda with Iraq and not Saudi-Arabia? From what I understand, they are a "multi-national" organization, but the majority of members and resources come from Saudi-Arabia

 

[Westy]

Originally posted by derekbob
Most of the stuff they had were chemicals which have legit industrial uses, and dont form a "WMD" until theyre properly mixed.

I also saw no reference to the chemicals being "weapons grade". With a little know how and large enough quantities gasoline and something as simple as pool chemicals could be made into chemical weapons.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by derekbob
Most of the stuff they had were chemicals which have legit industrial uses, and dont form a "WMD" until theyre properly mixed.

i was curious as to the make-up & portions.
can you supply your findings? (i.e. of the 20 tons, X-tons were mustard gas, Y-tons were blister agents, etc.)

Originally posted by derekbob
If I were a betting man, Id put some odds that at least a good portion of that stuff came from our good buddys the saudis.

did they ever have WMD? wouldn't be hard to believe if chemical warfare was used as far back as WWI. What i'm getting at is: i believe these things are regulated, and we can guestimate how much they had/have, ya?

Originally posted by derekbob
Stinkle, just curious, do you affiliate al-queda with Iraq and not Saudi-Arabia? From what I understand, they are a "multi-national" organization, but the majority of members and resources come from Saudi-Arabia

neither.
i view them as a de-facto "terrorists without borders" organization, as you've stated

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Westy
I also saw no reference to the chemicals being "weapons grade". With a little know how and large enough quantities gasoline and something as simple as pool chemicals could be made into chemical weapons.

"nerve gas and choking agents"

these don't exactly come in civilian varieties, or homeopathic extracts. They are both by definition weapons grade.

At least that's what my chemical warfare training in the military taught me.

 

[derekbob]

Im goin on the CNN article here:

'At issue is the presence of a large quantity of sulfuric acid among the tons of chemicals seized by Jordanian authorities. Sulfuric acid can be used as a blister agent, but it more commonly can increase the size of conventional explosions, according to U.S. officials.

Nevertheless, U.S. intelligence officials called the capture of tons of chemicals that together could create several large conventional explosions "a big deal." '


Id be very curious to see a list of exactly what they had, but I know that wont be public anytime soon.

As far as nukes are concerned, tracking those should be easy. But trying to record every transaction involving a chemical that could be used as a weapon would be difficult if not impossible.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by derekbob
As far as nukes are concerned, tracking those should be easy. But trying to record every transaction involving a chemical that could be used as a weapon would be difficult if not impossible.

i believe you're correct, much like spent uranium has a "fingerprint", and chemicals, well...they're just molecules with no traceable identity.

Perhaps if the perps were innoculated with some of the choice substance, they could be influenced to squeal. I know that Egypt & SA love to torture & have absolutely no regard for int'l law WRT to interrogations, & they're both conveniently located within dragging distance from amman.

 

[Changleen]

Originally posted by Toshi

...because it requires that iraq had the material in the first place...

Iraq did have Chem and Bio weapons, The US, UK and France sold them to them. This is a matter of public record pre-1991.

Saddam used them on his own people remember?

 

[MMike]

All I know is that he never should have bothered with baseball. And retiring his #23 jersey was a good idea

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by Changleen
Iraq did have Chem and Bio weapons, The US, UK and France sold them to them. This is a matter of public record pre-1991.

Saddam used them on his own people remember?

time frame, people. i'm not talking about the 80s. the relevant question is "did iraq have wmds RECENTLY?" as in a year ago or so

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Toshi
time frame, people. i'm not talking about the 80s. the relevant question is "did iraq have wmds RECENTLY?" as in a year ago or so

are we going down this road again? He did have WMDs, by his admission, by UN and UNMOVIC inspectors. Saddam needed to prove he didn't have them any more. You can't simply throw them in the trash... they *have* to be neutralized and when you neutralized said weapons, there's all sorts of evidence to prove it.

But really, we've been down this road before.

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by LordOpie
But really, we've been down this road before.

fair enough. let's discuss something more interesting, such as vanunu and israel's nuclear program... how's that for wmds in the middle east? and confirmed to boot.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Toshi
fair enough. let's discuss something more interesting, such as vanunu and israel's nuclear program... how's that for wmds in the middle east? and confirmed to boot.

I don't think that's how the WMDs got in jordan.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
fair enough. let's discuss something more interesting, such as vanunu and israel's nuclear program... how's that for wmds in the middle east? and confirmed to boot.

more interesting? Did israel stop just short of entering launch codes in the past week?




not that i would object...

 

[Westy]

Originally posted by $tinkle


not that i would object...

Yeah, that would solve all of the Middle East problems.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Westy
Yeah, that would solve all of the Middle East problems.

done properly, this would certainly put a few things in check. I would never seriously buck for this, but again, i wouldn't object. There are parts of the world where force is respected more than negotiations. The middle east is certainly one. They aren't fully part of the 21st century by choice, most notably indicated by subjugation of women & other sundry human rights violations.

At least our violations are well documented.

 

[Toshi]

i find it more interesting because a) israel bucked the international sentiment to get said nuclear weapons, b) risked escalating the violence to a, er, "unsustainable level" (think smoking holes in the ground), and c) they HAVE WMDs IN THE MIDDLE EAST. why is it ok for them to brandish weapons and not other nations? because they're our friends? hmm.

why were we after saddam hussein? because was a dictator, and because he tortured his people? no, there are plenty of dictators with human rights abuses out there, think africa. because he had wmds? besides being far from clear, why shouldn't he do what israel did 15 years prior? oil? perhaps we did, but with wolfowitz and co. at the rein i'd say that the real reason we went after them is because, like $tinkle, we simply don't like muslims.

i am no fan of cultural relativism myself, and would hate to be a woman under the taliban's rule in afghanistan, but i found the concept of $tinkle's "use the nukes" jest to be abhorrent.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Toshi
...the real reason we went after them is because... we simply don't like muslims.

Isn't that kinda backwards?

 

[Toshi]

Originally posted by LordOpie
Isn't that kinda backwards?

do explain. my statement, explained more: the neocons (wolfowitz) want to reshape the middle east to NOT be muslim or theocratic. the war is their excuse to go in and do that, under the pretense that we're after WMDs or removing a dictator or whatever the spin is that week.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Toshi
do explain. my statement, explained more: the neocons (wolfowitz) want to reshape the middle east to NOT be muslim or theocratic. the war is their excuse to go in and do that, under the pretense that we're after WMDs or removing a dictator or whatever the spin is that week.

you're gonna have to correlate some facts here to convince us that that conclusion holds water.

I agree that this admin wants to reshape the middle east, but I don't see that we dislike them. Not trust 'em? Sure. Afraid of 'em? Okay. Control 'em? Perhaps. But dislike? Want to remove or exterminate? I don't see that.

Reason I thought your statement was backwards was cuz if they didn't hate us so much, then there wouldn't be such an agressive policy "against" 'em.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
i find it more interesting because a) israel bucked the international sentiment to get said nuclear weapons, b) risked escalating the violence to a, er, "unsustainable level" (think smoking holes in the ground)

seeing how israel has no allies in the region, this is a deterrent to those who do wish them ill

Originally posted by Toshi
c) they HAVE WMDs IN THE MIDDLE EAST. why is it ok for them to brandish weapons and not other nations? because they're our friends? hmm.

they don't brandish 'em. I think it's these guys did, though:

• PDRK
• PRC
• USSR

(gee, what do they have in common?)

Originally posted by Toshi
why were we after saddam hussein? because was a dictator, and because he tortured his people? no, there are plenty of dictators with human rights abuses out there, think africa. because he had wmds?

it's well documented - even here in past threads - the burden of proof was upon SH, & he could have prevented this war at any time he was willing.

Originally posted by Toshi
besides being far from clear, why shouldn't he do what israel did 15 years prior?

you mean in 1981 when they struck at the reactor? When has israel ever demonstrated or hinted at taking over the middle east and/or eradicating another tribe/nation? never.

Originally posted by Toshi
but with wolfowitz and co. at the rein i'd say that the real reason we went after them is because, like $tinkle, we simply don't like muslims.

whether you care to acknowledge it or not is your choice, but there are more than just a few pockets of islamic extremists who are anti-west. My problem is with those people. I don't care for muslims any more than i care for mormons, or jehovah's witnesses, or branch dividians, and neither do i cast apersions toward these groups. Tell me, do you like christians and jews?

Originally posted by Toshi
i am no fan of cultural relativism myself, and would hate to be a woman under the taliban's rule in afghanistan, but i found the concept of $tinkle's "use the nukes" jest to be abhorrent.

do you have a similar opinion of this dead-serious statement?

"God knows, if we did possess (a chemical bomb), we wouldn't hesitate one second to use it to hit Israeli cities such as Eilat and Tel Aviv

"Terrifying events are awaiting you."

audio tape of Al-Zarqawi

 

[Toshi]

ok, i can't come up with relevant quotes. pnac is insiduous, tho.

http://home.earthlink.net/~platter/neo-conservatism/pnac.html

maybe it is the case that they simply want to dominate the non-western world and hold no special ire for the muslims...