PDA

View Full Version : Scuds

BrandNewRock05
03/21/03, 03:01 PM
Words off of many liberals lips a few weeks back
"There is no proof that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons"

The US has intercepted 6 scuds so far, with anthrax in the nose.
WithStamin
03/21/03, 03:05 PM
Well then there's the "proof" that all you liberals have been asking for for so long. Nuff said.
BrandNewRock05
03/21/03, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by WithStamin
Well then there's the "proof" that all you liberals have been asking for for so long. Nuff said.
So xnotedgex, evil zach, emoboy, neph, you happy now? Theres your proof.
kidinthecorner
03/21/03, 03:18 PM
Ya, there's your proof.
kidinthecorner
03/21/03, 03:18 PM
What more proof do you need?
NOFXdesendents5
03/21/03, 03:53 PM
no illegal weapons eh?

did anyone notice that SCUD missiles are illegal in Iraq?
Justin_stacy
03/21/03, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by BrandNewRock05
Words off of many liberals lips a few weeks back
"There is no proof that Saddam has chemical and biological weapons"

The US has intercepted 6 scuds so far, with anthrax in the nose.

not one has had anthrax on it yet. if you have a link show it, but there has been no report on that yet, and the 4 that hit by Kuwait city were anthrax free.
yeat182
03/21/03, 07:26 PM
whether or not they had biologigcal weapons is somewhat irrelevant since SCUD missles were banned by the UN resolutions and Iraq claimed they had none...
BrandNewRock05
03/21/03, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by yeat182
whether or not they had biologigcal weapons is somewhat irrelevant since SCUD missles were banned by the UN resolutions and Iraq claimed they had none...
thank you, 12 years may i remind you they had to get rid of them
Justin_stacy
03/21/03, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by yeat182
whether or not they had biologigcal weapons is somewhat irrelevant since SCUD missles were banned by the UN resolutions and Iraq claimed they had none...

I'm not disagreeing with that, i just didn't want him to post some as a fact that wasn't true.
BrandNewRock05
03/21/03, 08:12 PM
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
I'm not disagreeing with that, i just didn't want him to post some as a fact that wasn't true.
you may be right, but i could have sworn i heard they had anthrax in the noses
Justin_stacy
03/21/03, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by BrandNewRock05
you may be right, but i could have sworn i heard they had anthrax in the noses

Trust me if there had been ANTHRAX every news agency would have been reporting it.
yeat182
03/22/03, 05:03 AM
Originally posted by Justin_stacy
I'm not disagreeing with that, i just didn't want him to post some as a fact that wasn't true.

i wasn't disagreeing with you either, i was just trying to simplify it, since he isn't even supposed to have SCUDs, let alone bio/chem weapons...
NOFXdesendents5
03/22/03, 05:25 AM
Saddam has already been proved to been a liar, 2 days into the war. SCUDs are illegal because the weapon can deliver weapons of mass destruction. Fucking liberals.....
evil zach
03/22/03, 08:57 AM
I'm just going to say this and leave this conversation (or maybe not)
If the US is allowed to defend themselves, why can't Iraq?
BrandNewRock05
03/22/03, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
I'm just going to say this and leave this conversation (or maybe not)
If the US is allowed to defend themselves, why can't Iraq?
Because the US uses weapons to defend themselves. Iraq uses weapons to start fights, there is a difference.
evil zach
03/22/03, 09:04 AM
If I recall correctly, Iraq didn't stat this fight.
BrandNewRock05
03/22/03, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
If I recall correctly, Iraq didn't stat this fight.
Well you didnt recall correctly. Iraq did start it. Murdering thousands upon thousands of innocent lives is considered starting it. Iraq killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people. Not only that, but they had 12 years to disarm, and they didnt. Its like a parent counting to 3, and then punishing a child. Except the US counted to 12 years, and Iraq didnt do what the UN said, so we punished them.
yeat182
03/22/03, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by evil zach
I'm just going to say this and leave this conversation (or maybe not)
If the US is allowed to defend themselves, why can't Iraq?

I'll see if i can give you a good explanation...

Iraq has the right to defend themselves. they are allowed to buy/build weapons(guns, tanks, airplanes etc.) however, when they invaded kuwait, and then signed a cease fire agreement with the coalition, they promised to destroy their weapons of mass destructions and limits were placed, such as no fly zones, and range limits on their missles, in order to prevent them from taking hostile action against either their neighbors, the shiite's in the south or the kurds in the north. they are allowed missles and rockets, but they are limited to defense only.

now they have broken the cease fire agreement because they did not abide by the UN resolutions.