http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39243
I wonder what the liberal excuse is going to be for this?
I wonder what the liberal excuse is going to be for this?
Last time I checked George Bush didn't use mustard gas on the population of DC. There is a difference. Now klinton just had people offed and didn't bother with the WMD's.Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
Ummm, looks like we found WOMD in the U.S.!!!
Nope, I heard about that on monday, not to mention everyone on the planet, except for the 'tards, knows he had WMD's.Does this change your POV?
:bored:
Originally posted by 03DOHC
Last time I checked George Bush didn't use mustard gas on the population of DC. There is a difference. Now klinton just had people offed and didn't bother with the WMD's.
We didn't just wake up one day and say hmmm, we have these nukes just lying around and I wanna do an air burst over some wooden houses because I like fire. Or, let's go test it on some humans! I wonder what radiation does to human flesh? Mikey said he didn't want to try it. I know, let's go test it on the japanese, they're like Mikey, they might like it.Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
True, but we were the only country in the history to use nukes in wartime too. Now, that was 60 years ago, but still, it's like the UK coming over here and telling us, "Hand over all your nukes! While you're at it give us all your guns because we told you so."
Don't think that would go over very well. :shrug:
Although it makes us look suspicious when we do the same to North Korea and other countries where the use of these WOMD are unconfirmed.
Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
True, but we were the only country in the history to use nukes in wartime too. Now, that was 60 years ago, but still, it's like the UK coming over here and telling us, "Hand over all your nukes! While you're at it give us all your guns because we told you so."
Don't think that would go over very well. :shrug:
The intent is not the same and is only a paradox or contradiction to those who perceive no difference between a free nation acting for self defense and a dictatorship acting in offense. We don't threaten to take over other countries to occupy, that's not what we do and that's not who we are. If we go into a country it is to free it. And freedom is NEVER and imposition. Unlike sadumb insane, who invades other countries to take them for himself. We have them for self defense, NOT for offense. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference.Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
No, I don't support it. But what you are saying is a paradox. We can't force others to not use WOMD if we have them, since the intent is the same. It's not how they are used, it's the use of them or the ownership of them for the intent of using them that I have a problem with.
Does this make sense?
Everything that comes off your keyboard is spun.Originally posted by bunny_power
LOL, this is a text book example of spin by omission. They left out a couple of pretty key quotes in that story so you guys could get excited and post it around the net. Guess WND is taking lessons from Michael Moore.
Same story from USA today, from AP.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-07-01-poland-iraq-sarin_x.htm
WARSAW (AP) — Polish troops have found two warheads in Iraq believed to contain a deadly nerve agent, but it is not clear what period the weapons came from, the Defense Ministry said Thursday.
The two warheads were found in early June in a bunker in the area controlled by Polish forces, and they tested positive for cyclosarin, a substance many times stronger than sarin, the ministry said in a statement.
"There is no doubt that the warheads contain chemical weapons," Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski told TVN24. "The problem is what period they came from, whether the (Persian) Gulf War or earlier, and whether they were usable, partly usable or not at all."
Another dozen were found later in June and were being tested in Baghdad and the United States, he said.
"Some of them are very corroded. They are probably not usable, but are dangerous to the local environment," Szmajdzinski said.
Originally posted by bunny_power
LOL, this is a text book example of spin by omission. They left out a couple of pretty key quotes in that story so you guys could get excited and post it around the net. Guess WND is taking lessons from Michael Moore.
Originally posted by bunny_power
LOL, this is a text book example of spin by omission. They left out a couple of pretty key quotes in that story so you guys could get excited and post it around the net.
Originally posted by 03DOHC
The intent is not the same and is only a paradox or contradiction to those who perceive no difference between a free nation acting for self defense and a dictatorship acting in offense. We don't threaten to take over other countries to occupy, that's not what we do and that's not who we are. If we go into a country it is to free it. And freedom is NEVER and imposition. Unlike sadumb insane, who invades other countries to take them for himself. We have them for self defense, NOT for offense. I'm sorry you don't understand the difference.
You used japan and our dropping the bomb on them as an example of WMD's that we had as an example. I followed through on that thought. Now you want to get into specific WMD's.:shrug: I don't recall the US to have ever used nerve gas, mustard gas or any other type of chemical or biological weapon in war or to occupy a country for our own use. But I could be wrong since I'm not in the CIA or priviledged to spun info like moore.Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
I do understand the difference. Using WOMD for defense or offense is not my issue, it's the use or possible use of WOMD PERIOD. The primary intent of using WOMD is not for defense, especially when using chemical weapons. From a tactical standpoint they are near impossible to control and cause extreme collateral damage. In many cases environmental issues abound, like radioactivity.
Many of the leaking cesspools of chemical weapons prove that their use has been minimal for quite some time.
Since they are difficult to transport safely in battle, I find it hard to believe these WOMD's are worth anything other than letting everyone else know that "My peter is is bigger than yours".
Section 2332a. Use of certain weapons of mass destruction
(a) Offense Against a National of the United States or Within the
United States. - A person who, without lawful authority, uses,
threatens, or attempts or conspires to use, a weapon of mass
destruction (other than a chemical weapon as that term is defined
in section 229F), including any biological agent, toxin, or vector
(as those terms are defined in section 178) -
(1) against a national of the United States while such national
is outside of the United States;
(2) against any person within the United States, and the
results of such use affect interstate or foreign commerce or, in
the case of a threat, attempt, or conspiracy, would have affected
interstate or foreign commerce; or
(3) against any property that is owned, leased or used by the
United States or by any department or agency of the United
States, whether the property is within or outside of the United
States,
shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, and if death
results, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of
years or for life.
(b) Offense by National of the United States Outside of the
United States. - Any national of the United States who, without
lawful authority, uses, or threatens, attempts, or conspires to
use, a weapon of mass destruction (other than a chemical weapon (as
that term is defined in section 229F)) outside of the United States
shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, and if death
results, shall be punished by death, or by imprisonment for any
term of years or for life.
(c) Definitions. - For purposes of this section -
(1) the term ''national of the United States'' has the meaning
given in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)); and
(2) the term ''weapon of mass destruction'' means -
(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this
title;
(B) any weapon that is designed or intended to cause death or
serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or
impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals, or their precursors;
(C) any weapon involving a disease organism; or
(D) any weapon that is designed to release radiation or
radioactivity at a level dangerous to human life.