Normally I don't read MSNBC, this I found this recent article (5 days old) worthwhile:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/931304.asp

"COMPELLING EVIDENCE?
_ _ _ _U.S. officials said the discoveries did not constitute final proof that Saddam had rebuilt his banned weapons program, as administration officials alleged in justifying the invasion of Iraq. But they said the materials were the best evidence so far that the Iraqi government could have done so and was actively trying to deceive U.N. inspectors before the war.
_ _ _ _Richard Butler, the United Nations’ former chief weapons inspector, told MSNBC TV’s Lester Holt that he was “absolutely unsurprised” by the report. “We have known of [Saddam’s previous plans] for a decade,” he said."

Not really a surprise - we were after all dealing with a dictator. And this brand of people rarely have the moral scruples that most of the rest of us do.



And, as to the civilian losses, according to Associated Press:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/924810.asp

"_The AP’s finding: At least 3,240 civilians died throughout the country, including 1,896 in Baghdad."

so: at minimum 3240, and likely the ~5000 I earlier posted.

" _“Did the Americans bomb civilians? Yes. But one should be realistic,” said Dr. Hameed Hussein al-Aaraji, new director of Baghdad’s al-Kindi Hospital. “Saddam ran a dirty war. He put weapons inside schools, inside mosques. What could they do?”"

" _Al-Aaraji, at al-Kindi hospital in Baghdad, saw things differently.
_ _ _ _“It was a war,” he said. “This is the price of liberty."

Did you see the state that the Iraqi WMD program was in? All that was, was a bunch of small pieces of what? I highly doubt a bomb. Explain this to me, in 1989 Saddam was 2 years away from having the bomb, yet there were no complaints. You cannot say that the Gulf war was also b/c of WMD b/c the Americans didn't have a clue as to how extensive his nuke program was until after. Yet we didn't care, but now we do? I see a disconnect, also 95% of Iraq's WMD were destroyed, including the production facilites. And another question to you, why shouldn't Iraq have the bomb? Israel which has proven beligerant against Iraq in the past (1981) has 300+ nukes, yet Iraq was left defenceless? Shouldn't we have a WMD free Middle East, and get rid of this double-standard? Also Iraq has NO connection to Al Qaeda so I would love to hear how Iraq would directly threaten the USA? That discovery means nothing, they found barrels full of radioactive material but that means nothing. this is just another sad attempt to get on the legitimacy train. It ain't working, also stop with the humanitarian crap. Just one word: Congo. :rolleyes:

Ohhh so scary watch it Concrete it may hurt you :rolleyes:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/images/01_alhussein.jpg



OFF TO WAR! :rolleyes:

this cleverly formulated term WMD, now is that to detract away from the fact that all the Millions of dollars worth of weapons sold by the west to Saddie were all "conventional" weapons?

Normally I don't read MSNBC, this I found this recent article (5 days old) worthwhile:
Already discussed here :
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24566

And, as to the civilian losses, according to Associated Press:
Also already discussed.

Why bring up something already discussed and exposed as less than it appears on other threads, which you participated in?

Originally posted by bhudmaash
this cleverly formulated term WMD, now is that to detract away from the fact that all the Millions of dollars worth of weapons sold by the west to Saddie were all "conventional" weapons?

Yeah, the weapons we have are for 'defense' and the weapons Isreali fools have are also for 'defense' purposes. But any primitive weapon possesed by middle east nations is suddenly a mass destruction.

THE USA has been spreading death and destruction around the globe (and helping, though rarely)...yet I don't recall these 'axis of evil' nations bullying other states.

bhudmaash

Now let's me fair, the Chinese gave the Saudi's the CSS-2's IRBM's as well. So let's also blame them, we can also blame the Saudi's for funding the Pakistani nuke program.

:)

hey...they need those nukes for self defence, against the Hindustanis:D

Well that's not the reason why S.A funded their program it was so that if S.A was ever threatened by nukes Pakistan would act as the umberrla state.

Originally posted by bhudmaash
hey...they need those nukes for self defence, against the Hindustanis:D

Yeah we Hindustanis are very dangerous! :D

Originally posted by nico
Well that's not the reason why S.A funded their program it was so that if S.A was ever threatened by nukes Pakistan would act as the umberrla state.

I bet the saudi people sleep that much sounder, safe in the knowledge that should their country come under nuclear attack...the Pakistanis (!!!) of all people will "have their backs"

lol! The Pakistanis cant evenget their own shit together! bet it went like this:

Saudi, handing over big wad of cash to Pakistani:

Saudi: "ok, beeruder, here, ...but u promise ..theees furr protektion of da soodee people...hokey?"
Pakistani:" Yes, yes!...beeruder..dont worry..inshallah we will protect you"
*fingers crossed behind back*
"..crazy Arab goathumper!.......":D

I have my own theory on that one, for example why would S.A buy IRBM's (Chinese = not great ones) which some token conventional warhead? I think in a time of war Pakistan would transfer nukes to S.A to put on their CSS-2's so they have a nuke deterant. ;) They aren't that dumb, that's my theory.

That constitutes justification for the war? Pre-91, still buried parts for a centifuge? The fact that they were still buried suggests that Saddam wasn't pursuing a weapons program.

Besides these are genuine parts. To enrich fraudulent uranium everyone knows you would need a fraudulent gas centrifuge.

Butler also says:
Butler said that the discovery of components of a uranium enrichment system suggested that Iraq was far from production of actual weapons. The need for an enrichment system established that “Iraq does not have adequate sources of natural uranium,” he said. “... It has to be, above all, enriched to get weapons grade.”