Main > Everything Else
Lost: 380 tons of high explosives - Last seen in Iraq
Crazy Cooter:
"VIENNA (Reuters) - The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency is unlikely to drop plans for a new term despite U.S. anger after pre-election revelations of missing Iraq explosives, a diplomat close to the agency said on Saturday.
A senior U.S. official said on Friday the Bush administration would seek to unseat International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei if Bush is re-elected president. ...
If Bush wins re-election next Tuesday, the plan is "to move from urging him to (leave the IAEA) to active opposition" to his reappointment, the senior U.S. official told Reuters."
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=6666162&src=rss/topNews§ion=news
Yeah, Bush is on the up-n-up. What a bitter, spiteful man. Yet another instance where Bush wants to burn someone because they aren't doing as he would like.
Drew, this stuff was sealed up because we were afraid of it being used to detonate a Nuke. The material itself wasn't necessarily "banned". The "retarded dental floss" worked (except on one occasion, but the material was returned).
Santoro, I think what Patrick is saying is that it is a threat, but it shouldn't be a threat to the ways of our Nation (Correct me if I'm wrong). That's what I've been trying to say. Consider that in 2001, there were 848 more deaths and 1134 fewer wounded than in 2000. These are worldwide numbers. That's why I say that 9/11 opened the eyes of people that didn't see terrorism before. If anyone was dreaming, it was America. Most Americans were unaware of what was going on around them. The rest of the world has been seeing this stuff for a long time. Now I hear people say we are fighting the war "there" instead of "here". It doesn't make sense. It's not really a choice that can be made. We can break up some groups and disrupt them, but attacks will continue to happen all around the world from other groups and eventually something will happen here again. It probably won't be Bin Laden's nutjobs, but it will happen. There are countries that US citizens should not even step foot in. Read the travel advisories: http://travel.state.gov/travel/warnings.html Like I said, this stuff has been happening for a long time. Adopting a NIMBY attitude won't help. Terrorism is global problem and needs a global effort to minimize it. We just don't have the resources where we can say at any point "the war is over". We need to bring in more help.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: patrickl on October 31, 2004, 07:36:12 pm ---These people died because of the actions people like Bush undertake.
--- End quote ---
before we were attacked on 9/11, Bush had done nothing. Go ahead, ask any liberal in America. We couldn't hear ENOUGH of how much Bush WASN'T doing, and now YOU want to blame Bush's actions, which were nonexistent towards terrorists, for the deaths there.
As Santoro stated, they tried to blow up the WTC during Clinton's watch. What was he doing to piss them off?
Again, your grasp of time is simply staggering. Things happen years ago, and the only reason you seem to find fault with what's happening now is some mythical "Bush brought it on America" theory.
You stating it's Bush's fault doesn't change the fact that things might be happening now that could have been prevented years ago by the very people who are now clamoring about how Bush screwed up.
The U.N. has shown obvious corruption in its plans to "help" the Iraqi people, whether you want to admit it or not. That's not being debated, as everyone accepts it. Where you veer off the road is the ability to connect the dots, see that one corruption isn't simply an isolated incident. We supposedly find out about how "weapons" are stolen (who did it, when was it done, how much, and why?) which should have been destroyed, or at the very least (I'll put this in slo-mo format so even you can understand it) should have been R-E-M-O-V-E-D by this corrupt organization. They've found someone to conveniently pin it on, and you're a willing accomplice.
You again seek to find justification for why the U.N. and it's investigations were legit, but can't seem to figure out how anyone with half a brain can think that these items may not have ever been there in the first place, but if they were, the IAEA was the body responsible for securing them, was the body responsible for them still being in that location, and used such minimal security precautions that it can ONLY be thought that they felt these materials to be INSIGNIFICANT.
That you would think otherwise is to know you only wish to have Bush removed, and for no other reason than you just don't like him.
You can say what you wish about Bush, but we've been attacked several times, from Clinton's watch through Bush's. The people attacking us hate our way of life, and hate the fact that we are not religiously pure, as they believe themselves to be. You believe all that you want about us crapping on their fire rings, its a religious war to them, plain and simple. Continuing to close your eyes to it doesn't make it less true, it just keeps you ignorant and willing to blame anyone other than the people who bear the responsibility for the consequences - the terrorists, and all who would provide aid, comfort, and safe harbor for them.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: Crazy Cooter on October 31, 2004, 09:52:00 pm ---What a bitter, spiteful man. Yet another instance where Bush wants to burn someone because they aren't doing as he would like.
--- End quote ---
We see collossal failure on the IAEA's part when first discovering these items, and you think it spiteful to want the head of the organization out. Kinda makes me wonder, if you'd give THAT guy a pass, why don't you also wish to give Bush the same pass. Same thing by your reasoning - they let the "weapons get looted/stolen and into the hands of terrorists". What's your reasoning on one, but not the other? Oh, that's right, Bush is ugly, stupid, and talks funny.
--- Quote ---Drew, this stuff was sealed up because we were afraid of it being used to detonate a Nuke. The material itself wasn't necessarily "banned". The "retarded dental floss" worked (except on one occasion, but the material was returned).
--- End quote ---
Now you're trying to paint this stuff as being "sealed up". The seals were at best a preventative to using the materials which seem to be easily defeated with wire cutters. They weren't cemented into the bunkers. If they could be easily looted/stolen, then they weren't SUFFICIENTLY "sealed up" enough to prevent their theft and possible use. If you are claiming that they were sealed up to prevent use with Nukes, then you've got nothing to worry about, right? There WERE NO NUKES over there, as you're wont to tell us, and since the "sealing" was so stellar as to prevent their use in detonating a nuke, we're still safe.
The "seal" was a deterrent, like a latch on a gate. You're now trying to paint it as if these items had a latch on the gate, the latch was locked, and the latch was sealed in concrete. These weapons didn't need to be "sealed up". They needed to be removed or destroyed when they were found. Period. You're making excuses and allowances for a corrupt organization (the U.N.) and attempting to pin it on a man who shouldn't have even needed to deal with them, but for the failure of the U.N. Where's your outcry of indignation against the U.N. ? Instead of asking why Bush didn't do anything about them, perhaps you should be wondering why the U.N. and its investigations are turning up things we were looking for, but weren't securing.
--- Quote ---Like I said, this stuff has been happening for a long time. Adopting a NIMBY attitude won't help. Terrorism is global problem and needs a global effort to minimize it. We just don't have the resources where we can say at any point "the war is over". We need to bring in more help.
--- End quote ---
A global effort like Russia and Syria were working on, selling weapons to Sadaam? A global effort like France, working to keep Sadaam in power to aid their country, pump up its economy by getting oil on the cheap and screwing its own people by aiding a psychotic dictator?
I agree, this stuff has been happening for a long time. Adopting a Not In My Back Yard attitude is EXACTLY what would help, as adopting a "we can't stop it, we can only hope to contain it" attitude will only serve to have the problem dissolve in our minds and start to question why we are fighting terrorism in the first place, as we are right now, and have people concern themselves with what's wrong with the U.S., rather than what the U.S. is doing RIGHT in the world.
We have weekly reports about how the U.S. is screwing up, no matter who the President, and have little to NO reports about what exactly the U.S. does in the world to help other nations. If the U.S. is such a widely hated country, then really, shouldn't we start to use the aid we hand out to solve the ills of our own country? It certainly doesn't seem to matter to the patrickL's or Dexter's or rcchadd's of the world HOW much we do for other countrys. As long as we've got someone doing a few things they don't agree with, they're willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Terrorism will be a threat to the U.S. as a country. Having a part of the U.S. hit affects the rest of our country due to the way we are set up. To have it not affect the "ways of our Nation" would show a callousness the terrorists might agree with. To have it not affect the "ways of our Nation" would open up any President to accusations of not caring about the security of our country. If 9/11 had not affected the "ways of our Nation", you'd be clamoring about how Bush didn't care enough about the security of our country, as we'd have surely been hit by terrorists again by this time.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: danny_galaga on November 01, 2004, 12:17:23 am ---P.S: how did you know i was a sparky? ;)
--- End quote ---
your browneyelashes gave you away.....long, flowing, but just a bit too much "color" :-X
The identifying marks of a "sparky" ;D
patrickl:
--- Quote from: Santoro on October 31, 2004, 09:30:21 pm ---
--- Quote from: patrickl on October 31, 2004, 07:36:12 pm ---...people died because of the actions people like Bush undertake.
--- End quote ---
The 9/11 attacks were in planning at the end of the Clinton era. The 1993 WTC bombing was under Clinton's watch. This isn't a 'people like Bush' phenomenon.
--- End quote ---
Clinton or Bush might perhaps have prevented the attacks on the WTC, but they are not the REASON for those attacks. The reasons for the attacks were actions taken long before they started. Aggressive actions are the cause of terrorism. Bush junior has set in motion a whole new session of terrorist attacks. You can count on that (even more so than the current surge of attacks in Iraq).
--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---You now try to abuse their death to scare people into voting for Bush because apparently he can instill a blind belief in people that he can actually take care of terrorism. Over here he would be institutionalized for claims like that.
--- End quote ---
Well then, I sure am glad I am not 'over there.' I will ignore your insult because I have already established you are not living in the real world.
--- End quote ---
Sorry, you are the one detached from the "world". You seem to belief "the whole world" believed there were WMD in Iraq and that Iraq has something to do with terrorism. I guess you even still do. I will let you in on a little secret. The US is not "the world". Only the US and the UK government believed Bush's claims. The rest of the world did NOT and that's why the UN did not sanction the invasion.
--- Quote ---{edit: They needn't 'take over' the country to destroy it. 2-3 dirty bombs in major cities could wipe out our economy.}
--- End quote ---
Again, you just blindly lap up the scare tactics of the Bush administration. Remember the Sarin attacks in Tokyo? This is supposed to be one of the most lethal WMD that Saddam was supposed to have. The scare mongers claim it can kill hundreds of thousands of people in an attack. You know how many people died in those attacks in Tokyo? 12!
--- Quote ---Anyway, this is why I hate debating politics. I am not having fun here, and all I am learning is that in general the world seems to care more about terrorist's rights than US security. Yet we always send our troops and money when one of you all gets in trouble. It is so very incredibly frustrating.
--- End quote ---
No, you should learn from these threads since the rest of the world has had a lot more experience in dealing with terrorism. If you think military action is going to prevent terrorism than you are sadly mistaken. You will probably only notice this in a couple of years, but by then it's too late.
I have to say I'm not enjoying this very much anymore either. A very bad sentiment is showing. "You people" are really starting to scare me. You are going completely insane. How many more countries need to be "brought to their knees" before you will feel safe? Who was in trouble that needed Iraq to be invaded? The US only fights for it's own interests. Don't blame this Iraq mess on us. We didn't ask for that crap.