I excerpted some non-essentials on the memo.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-31 last
To: shrinkermd
I posted this about a month ago in a different thread on the same topic...
I wonder what the repercussions of our acknowledgment of being in control of a large stockpile of WMD would be in terms of the problems involved with their disposal. If you read the article by Ion Mihai Pacepa, a Romanian, who is the highest-ranking intelligence officer ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc, here...
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030820-081256-6822r.htm
In the article, he states "All chemical weapons were to be immediately burned or buried deep at sea... Chemical weapons, especially those produced in Third World countries,which lack sophisticated production facilities, often do not retain lethal properties after a few months on the shelf and are routinely dumped anyway. (A note here... not retaining lethal properties does not mean that the chemicals have turned benign, just that it may now take a gallon of the stuff to do what a drop would formerly do).
All well and good for the Soviets or their clients, but...
Our forces would certainly have custody of the inventory and would therefore be expected to handle its disposal. Do you really think we would get a pass on dumping at sea or old fashioned burning?. I think not. If memory serves. at the end of the first Gulf War, we blew a huge stockpile of chemical munitions in place and exposure to the low level residuals from the combustion products were being blamed for Gulf War Syndrome.
Before you know it, we'll be expected to build one of those billion dollar incinerators like we use to destroy our domestic stocks of chemical weapons. We'll have to pass EPA inspections and file environmental impact studies, then deal with N.I.M.B.Y lawsuits and in a few years the neighbors will be suing us and not Sadam over cancer clusters. Also, won't that facility be an uber terrorist magnet, not to mention the convoys hauling stuff from stockpiles from all over the country?.
Maybe thats one of the reasons we want to leave 'em where they are. Quite frankly, I trust this administration to do what it thinks is right for our Country and it's national security, and it appears that they have weighed the political benefit of exposing the existence of the WMDs vs. the present stance. I, for one, applaud an administration that is willing to take a political hit while it does what is best for our security, for whatever reasons, which I, as a civilian may never know.
Just a thought.
92 posted on
07/29/2006 11:43:32 AM PDT by
ADemocratNoMore
(Jeepers, Freepers, where'd 'ya get those sleepers?. Pj people, exposing old media's lies.)
To: shrinkermd
94 posted on
07/29/2006 12:00:58 PM PDT by
shield
(A wise man's heart is at his RIGHT hand; but a fool's heart at his LEFT. Ecc. 10:2)
To: shrinkermd
ANY BETS THAT SOME OF THOSE WMD ARE IN LEBANON?
Why does Koffi want 72 hour hiatus?
So the Hezzies can get them BACK to Syria before the whole world finds out?
95 posted on
07/29/2006 12:23:06 PM PDT by
Candor7
(Into Liberal flatulance goes the best hope of the West, and who wants to be a smart feller?)
To: shrinkermd
I knew this over two years ago from an article in the Dutch publication De Telegraf.
99 posted on
07/29/2006 4:13:43 PM PDT by
Lexinom
To: shrinkermd
This needs to be posted and reposted.Freepers get out the news when the MSM will not.
102 posted on
07/29/2006 6:05:07 PM PDT by
alienken
(Bumper sticker idea- We have God in heaven & a Texan in the whitehouse,LIFE IS GOOD!!)
To: shrinkermd
I shudder to think what would happen if the WMD's get into Hezbollah's hands from Syria. I guess Syria would dedicate the song "You Light Up My Life" to Israel.
105 posted on
07/29/2006 9:33:52 PM PDT by
rfreedom4u
(Native Texan)
To: shrinkermd
Part of the reason this is important is Dems will use the mistaken belief that NO WMD were found to hamper or block action against Iran. They will say we had bad intel there, we have bad intel on Iran. EVEN if they agree Iran is working toward nukes, they'll say it is not an "imminent threat," and not allow action to go forward.
106 posted on
07/29/2006 10:30:36 PM PDT by
PghBaldy
(The Unabomber & Eric Rudolph were lone individuals who committed terrorist acts)
To: shrinkermd
The question is will Assad and the Iranians be dumb enough to use Saddam's former WMD on Northern Israel? If so Damascus will be reduced to rubble and Tehran the same.
-----------------------------
Nasrallah threatens to fire missiles at central Israel |
|
By Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent and News Agencies |
|
Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah on Saturday vowed to fire rockets on communities in central Israel if the military operation in Lebanon continued, and accused Israel of being an American "slave."
"The bombardment of Afula and its military base is the beginning ... Many cities in the center [of Israel] will be targeted in the 'beyond Haifa' phase if the savage aggression continues on our country, people and villages," Nasrallah said in a speech aired on Hezbollah's Al-Manar television.
Read the rest here |
107 posted on
07/29/2006 10:46:27 PM PDT by
M. Espinola
(Freedom is never free)
To: shrinkermd
No one ever seems to remember that Hussein took the extreme step of burying MIG aircraft in the desert. Any clues there as to his mode of thinking?
117 posted on
07/30/2006 9:11:05 PM PDT by
Rembrandt
(We would have won Viet Nam w/o Dim interference.)
To: shrinkermd
122 posted on
08/13/2006 12:52:50 AM PDT by
MaineVoter2002
(http://www..cafenetamerica.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-31 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson