• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ISIS in Iraq seizes control of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons facility

re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Yeah right - smart people can put them back together - I could.

The real cost is assembling these weapons - not reassembling the weapons.

Do you not understand that?

No one gets to make a statement like "Yeah right - smart people can put them back together - I could."
And not be required to submit demonstrable proof to that effect.

I'll just say that I don't believe you until I see proof, mmmkay?
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

No one gets to make a statement like "Yeah right - smart people can put them back together - I could."
And not be required to submit demonstrable proof to that effect.

I'll just say that I don't believe you until I see proof, mmmkay?

So basically you want to know how to build a nuclear weapon....

I'll tell you and you will kill yourself doing it but....
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

I'm smart enough to put something back together - especially with directions. However, that is not the point.

Uranium is easy - it's **** - so is enriching it if you're a ****ing Jihad terrorist that doesn't give a ****, a monkey could do that. Other weaponry takes skill but it has already been manufactured and putting together is nothing for the right guy.

****, I'm sure a gear-head could build a nice ride out of a junk yard but can that gear-head actually mold the parts for that car? NO but the analogy here is that the parts have already been molded - they've been produced and they just need to be reassembled NOT created - understand?

It's no different than building an IKEA product - more complicated - yes, but no different.

Someone in this thread, I won't say who, had a father who was directly involved with nuclear weapons, their manufacture, their testing, (both pre and post test ban treaty) weapons effects, nuclear hardening, pulsed power, both SALT Talks programs, thermal X-ray lasers, and global development of early fusion power projects.

That someone is looking at your statement with a rather jaundiced eye because while that person does not possess his father's level of acumen in the field, he's also not that stupid and still has access to enough materials that he could ask some very embarrassing questions.

Is this what you really want?
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Yellow cake doesn't make a very good 'dirty' bomb

It doesn't make ANY kind of dirty bomb, at all...ever.
You run more risk futzing around with the lighting elements of some old thorium laced Coleman lantern wicks
or some old Thorium coated photo lenses.
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

So basically you want to know how to build a nuclear weapon....

I'll tell you and you will kill yourself doing it but....

No I did NOT SAY THAT.
I want to see YOU prove that YOU know how.
You made the statement so all I am doing is waiting for you to support it, back it up with something.

Never mind what I know or don't know, we can get to that later if you like.
But know this, I have not claimed that I know what you claim to know.
I've never told anyone that I am capable of (A) putting together a nuke weapon, (B) putting one BACK together,
(C) enriching yellowcake into weapons grade fissionable materials, (D) assembling the necessary "fuze" devices, checking their integrity or
(E) barring that, estimating their yield as "dirty bomb" type devices.

Throughout this thread you have either directly and indirectly claimed knowledge and capability of all or part of each of these points.
Now, where I come from, with my youthful background, (because I am not a nuclear physicist) that's like a guy pulling up at a light, revving
his engine and claiming he can smoke what I'm driving.

I'm pointing at the traffic light and saying "On green dude, let's see what you got."
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Someone in this thread, I won't say who, had a father who was directly involved with nuclear weapons, their manufacture, their testing, (both pre and post test ban treaty) weapons effects, nuclear hardening, pulsed power, both SALT Talks programs, thermal X-ray lasers, and global development of early fusion power projects.

That someone is looking at your statement with a rather jaundiced eye because while that person does not possess his father's level of acumen in the field, he's also not that stupid and still has access to enough materials that he could ask some very embarrassing questions.

Is this what you really want?

SALT lol, sounds more like someones father worked at a nuke plant..

Just for fun, who's to say I don't understand or have the engineering abilities to just build a bomb with the right materials (not that I would)...

I'll tell you this much I could create yellow cake to fun cake but I would probably kill myself doing it - but so could a lot of people. The key is safety.

I'm not a nut but understanding how things work is a perplexity of mine - anything.

Building an "bomb" would not be difficult......

Getting the "cake" to status would be suicide unless you had the appropriate facilities and safety.

Do you really think suicide bombers think about that? the engineers will just tell them what to do.
 
re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

No I did NOT SAY THAT.
I want to see YOU prove that YOU know how.
You made the statement so all I am doing is waiting for you to support it, back it up with something.

Never mind what I know or don't know, we can get to that later if you like.
But know this, I have not claimed that I know what you claim to know.
I've never told anyone that I am capable of (A) putting together a nuke weapon, (B) putting one BACK together,
(C) enriching yellowcake into weapons grade fissionable materials, (D) assembling the necessary "fuze" devices, checking their integrity or
(E) barring that, estimating their yield as "dirty bomb" type devices.

Throughout this thread you have either directly and indirectly claimed knowledge and capability of all or part of each of these points.
Now, where I come from, with my youthful background, (because I am not a nuclear physicist) that's like a guy pulling up at a light, revving
his engine and claiming he can smoke what I'm driving.

I'm pointing at the traffic light and saying "On green dude, let's see what you got."

Yeah you did and the only way I could EVER prove myself is if I told you how to build a nuclear weapon using Uranium.

I'm not even going to tell you what type of uranium to use - I'm not going to tell you anything.

I'm full of ****.....

I know nothing....
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Nice straw man, but prior to your post that wonderfully beat up the old brainless scarecrow no one really was suggesting that....they were simply suggesting claims that there were no WMDs in Iraq was incorrect.

It's entirely possible to believe those claims to be incorrect and still think the action in Iraq was unjustified or ill advised.

Oh yeah? How about this little gem at the end of the OP:

Lots of people owe Bush/Cheney a big apology.

I dunno about you, but that is pretty much telling. Seems that long after the truth has been revealed, there are those still trying hard to find justification.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

That's really not true. The war was sold to the American public based on WMD, the fear of another 9/11, only this time with chemical/biological/nuclear weapons. I remember the Powell presentation....

If you would actually follow the argument being made that would really help. I was responding to someone arguing that the justification was centered on Saddam's nuclear program. I stated there were many more reasons that that.

Yeah, sure, the formal declaration of war contained all the breaches, etc. but really no one outside the State Dept or UN cared or cares about violations of UN agreements or terms of a ceasefire.

This is a very odd statement. The Powell argument was that Saddam had violated many requirements of the cease fire agreement. UN Resolution 1441 is simply a reaffirmation of UN Resolutions 660,661, 678, etc. that were all terms of the original cease fire. The argument was about suspected stockpiles of weapons, unlawful capabilities to produce, unlawful attempts to reconstitute programs and blocking of UN teams from inspections of key Iraqi sites.

By violating the terms of the cease fire Saddam had entered a war posture. That is all the justification needed for restarting the hot war.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant - Worldnews.com

Reportedly the ISIS has seized control of Saddam Hussein's best chemical weapons plant and it STILL has stockpiles of Sarin, VX, and mustard gas.

What happened what we've been hearing about for 12 years about "Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq".

Now, you can say "oh they're old" (20 years plus).

Who gives a damn. Lots of old weapons still work fine. The U.S. was using bombs built in WW2 during the Vietnam War.

The U.S. was firing 16 inch gun rounds from the Iowa class battleship forty years later in Desert Storm.

At any rate, supposedly, Iraq had NO WMDs which means NO CHEMICAL WEAPONS. And in fact supposedly had NO ABILITY to build them.

Lots of people owe Bush/Cheney a big apology.

Why on earth would we apologize for remnants of weapons that were sealed in bunkers because they were too dangerous to destroyed but where military useless for Saddam?

The UN knew it was there and the material was but beyond use. The production of chemical weapons had been stopped there decades ago. Saddam did not have stockpiles of weapons grade chemical weapons, he did not have a production program of chemical weapons. Nothing had changed since after the first Gulf war. Most chemical weapons had been destroyed, a bit was left an put beyond use and not reused by Saddam.

Bush and Cheney lied about Saddam's nuclear and chemical weapons programs. That has long been established. This bunker does not change that fact at all.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

GE (General Explosive) bombs have a longer shelf life than some chemical compounds, and I'll admit to not knowing the shelf life of Iraqi Mustard - from what I understand it was pretty stable, but yeah, as you point out, it's been decades.


What I don't understand is why folks are surprised. We knew that Saddam still had Sarin back in 2004, which was also the year that it leaked that we had secretly found and removed 2 tons of enriched uranium and roughly 1,000 highly radioactive sources" that "could potentially be used in a radiological dispersal device," or dirty bomb. That's part of what made the simplistic "bush lied people died" chants so annoyingly vapid.

More like vapid CON no-sense... :doh

Minute amounts of old chem weapons doesn't a stockpile make. Some arty pro-jos tested positive but were 'rebranded' shells filled with explosives. I can only find 2 cases where an IED tested positive for chem AND apparently were so degraded they failed to be lethal. A test range dstroyed hundreds of bombs and apparently 8 survived destruction in the detonation pits.

Did you read the Faux Noise article you cite? 2 tons of 3-5% uranium that CAN'T be used for a dirty bomb... :doh

The more deadly sources are CIVILIAN MEDICAL isotopes that can be found by the 'thousands of sources' in ANY major city...

The 2007 CIA report on the 'facility' claims the buildings are razed, the equipment destroyed, and the chem stockpiles are old damaged and contaminated.

You have done ZERO to counter the simplistic chant- 'Bush lied and good troops died'... :peace
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

More like vapid CON no-sense... :doh

Minute amounts of old chem weapons doesn't a stockpile make.

Excellent point. Can you post the chemical weapons inventory, types, age, amount and storage facility details?
 
11 years later? No. However in 2003 the weapons were quite usable and quite dangerous.

Really? Where are those weapons then? Oh let me guess you're going to go conspiracy theory and say Syria right?
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Excellent point. Can you post the chemical weapons inventory, types, age, amount and storage facility details?

The ISG (Iraq Survey Group) report did a most excellent job of that. Many online sources have it. The Faux reports, while attempting to ramp the threat up, do show how little was found. (did you read CP's links????) The 2007 CIA report is online. Rather than reinvent the wheel, go check for yourself... if you find a massive stockpile of ready to use Chems by all means post it.... :peace
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

And if these remnants of weapons were so dangerous and Bush and Cheney knew exactly it was there (which is proven from the CIA report I just read), then why did they not destroy it themselves? If they were so dangerous, then why were they not destroyed when the US military was over there and could have done something about it.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Of course you don't.

What you want to hear is that Saddam was awesome and that Iraq having WMD's was a lie.

He was a murderous dictator.

And whether Saddam had "WMD" or not, we'll probably never know. We never found them, most of Powell's presentation to the UN that sold the war to the American public was false or never confirmed, we never found any evidence of ongoing chemical or biological or nuclear programs, etc.

I'm not a Bush fan but I know that is epic bull****..... How can someone gas the Kurds on live TV then turn around and tell the world he has no WMD's then they're found, no one cares because they want to believe in their political fantasies, then turn around and make excuses when rebels start using them?

He absolutely HAD them, but of course after that was a war then years of inspections and sanctions.

And how does my post relate - pretty simple - you claim one cannot rebuild a weapon or create one - yet I call bull**** and say it's happened numerous times and that I can throw lighting bolts at people if I wanted to just to prove that fact.

?
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

If you would actually follow the argument being made that would really help. I was responding to someone arguing that the justification was centered on Saddam's nuclear program. I stated there were many more reasons that that.

Yes, the fear of biological or chemical weapons and another 9/11.

This is a very odd statement. The Powell argument was that Saddam had violated many requirements of the cease fire agreement. UN Resolution 1441 is simply a reaffirmation of UN Resolutions 660,661, 678, etc. that were all terms of the original cease fire. The argument was about suspected stockpiles of weapons, unlawful capabilities to produce, unlawful attempts to reconstitute programs and blocking of UN teams from inspections of key Iraqi sites.

By violating the terms of the cease fire Saddam had entered a war posture. That is all the justification needed for restarting the hot war.

First of all, Powell didn't say, to the effect, "He might have weapons, he might have mobile labs capable.." He said the U.S. KNEW those things. A direct line was drawn between him having tose weapons and the safety of the U.S., we were told to fear another 9/11 if we didn't act, potentially a nuclear weapon. And we never found evidence for any of it. That was the 'justification' and it just wasn't true.

The UN stuff, and you know this, was just the legal wrapping around the WMD allegations. Without the WMD allegations, there is no ground war.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

The ISG (Iraq Survey Group) report did a most excellent job of that. Many online sources have it. The Faux reports, while attempting to ramp the threat up, do show how little was found. (did you read CP's links????) The 2007 CIA report is online. Rather than reinvent the wheel, go check for yourself... if you find a massive stockpile of ready to use Chems by all means post it.... :peace

They did that survey report and addendum is from 2005. The CIA report you identified is from 2007.

The date today is June 20, 2014. So you're claim then is the exact same chemicals and inventory exists. Is that your assumption given a 9 year old and 7 year old report?
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

The argument that no WMD were found except for the ones that we found, but that they don't count, is a very poor argument.

You can't sell a war based on the existence of military grade WMD existing, being distributed to commanders in the field, assert we know they have existing mobile production labs - see, there's one there, and over here are five sites we know store chemical weapons, etc. (reread what Powell told the UN), and then when we find NONE of that, but we do find some old, degraded, unusable except for 'dirty bomb' material, pretend that's enough to justify the war.

If they told us old degraded stuff was the reason we went in, fine. That's not what was sold to the world.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Oh yeah? How about this little gem at the end of the OP:

Which in context of what he was saying, it was as it relates to the claims that there were no WMD's or that they lied that there were WMD's there.

The OP, and anyone after it, did not make any argument as to whether or not this itself justified the invastion.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

They did that survey report and addendum is from 2005. The CIA report you identified is from 2007.

The date today is June 20, 2014. So you're claim then is the exact same chemicals and inventory exists. Is that your assumption given a 9 year old and 7 year old report?

Do you suppose the stockpile increased in that period? Gas bombs made babies?
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

If you have the parts - yes it's like building IKEA furniture if you're an engineer or have some background in engineering.

You do realize a 15-year-old build a nuclear reactor in his shed right? (which was stupid btw because he almost died).

If you have the right parts for a weapon - there will always be someone around to put it back together...... Someone built it didn't they? so what makes you think for a second someone couldn't rebuild it?

Don't confuse engineer or design with build either...

You do realize these weapons are obsolete. They no longer work! They are useless.
 
Re: ISIL seizes Saddam's chemical weapons plant

Do you suppose the stockpile increased in that period? Gas bombs made babies?

Way to step up! So you answer the question:

Ockham said:
They did that survey report and addendum is from 2005. The CIA report you identified is from 2007.

The date today is June 20, 2014. So you're claim then is the exact same chemicals and inventory exists. Is that your assumption given a 9 year old and 7 year old report?

Yes or no?
 
Back
Top Bottom