The Question
Eternal
Well, if the "bad guys" are only doing exactly the same shit the "good guys" are doing -- and they are -- then what makes them the "bad guys"?
Hundreds of WMD found in Iraq since 2003!
- Thread starter Ogami
- Start date
HeroicFool
New member
The good guys just want to exist...
The bad guys want to blow the infidel to hell, regardless of the consequences.
One would have thought that would be self-evident.
The bad guys want to blow the infidel to hell, regardless of the consequences.
One would have thought that would be self-evident.
Rafterman
There's no place like home-
Ogami said:
As I already posted in another thread; you are either a teenager (with his head up his ass) or a complete moron.
Yes Virginia, the US produces chemical weapons and we sell them. Rummy has worked in every Rethuglican administration back to tricky Dick himself.
The stuff Saddam used against Iran came from the good ole US of A.
Here's a suggestion, try enlisting if you think war is so fucking romantic.
Ogami
New member
Rafterman wrote:
As I already posted in another thread; you are either a teenager (with his head up his ass) or a complete moron.
I'm supposed to take you seriously with such a silly signature pix? "Me hate Bush cause other people tell me to!". A real brain surgeon there.
Yes Virginia, the US produces chemical weapons and we sell them. Rummy has worked in every Rethuglican administration back to tricky Dick himself.
So under the Nixon Administration, Reagan Administration, Bush I Administration, and Bush II Administrations, Rumsfeld sold chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein?
Not that I disbelieve you (goodness knows you're too handicapped to post an actual link to any of what you just claimed), but what time would that have left Rumsfeld to do any of his other jobs? Sounds like full-time work. (If that sounds like I'm mocking you and your claim, I am. Even a rocket scientist should figure that out.)
The stuff Saddam used against Iran came from the good ole US of A.
Prove it. It costs you nothing, post a link.
Here's a suggestion, try enlisting if you think war is so fucking romantic.
I'm in the United States Army. Any other brilliant comments, pointy-head? (Must be a self-portrait)
Your tag says 429 posts. I really have to wonder whether you have said anything worthwhile in all of those 429 posts. Is this the limit of your education? I'm not seeing a lot of substance here from you.
-Ogami
As I already posted in another thread; you are either a teenager (with his head up his ass) or a complete moron.
I'm supposed to take you seriously with such a silly signature pix? "Me hate Bush cause other people tell me to!". A real brain surgeon there.
Yes Virginia, the US produces chemical weapons and we sell them. Rummy has worked in every Rethuglican administration back to tricky Dick himself.
So under the Nixon Administration, Reagan Administration, Bush I Administration, and Bush II Administrations, Rumsfeld sold chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein?
Not that I disbelieve you (goodness knows you're too handicapped to post an actual link to any of what you just claimed), but what time would that have left Rumsfeld to do any of his other jobs? Sounds like full-time work. (If that sounds like I'm mocking you and your claim, I am. Even a rocket scientist should figure that out.)
The stuff Saddam used against Iran came from the good ole US of A.
Prove it. It costs you nothing, post a link.
Here's a suggestion, try enlisting if you think war is so fucking romantic.
I'm in the United States Army. Any other brilliant comments, pointy-head? (Must be a self-portrait)
Your tag says 429 posts. I really have to wonder whether you have said anything worthwhile in all of those 429 posts. Is this the limit of your education? I'm not seeing a lot of substance here from you.
-Ogami
HeroicFool
New member
Ogami, for 90% of TK these days if you divided their word count by their post count they'd be lucky to make it to 10.
Words that actually mean something... much lower than that.
Words that actually mean something... much lower than that.
The Question
Eternal
HeroicFool said:
And take as much of the "bad guys' " land as they can get their hands on, while abusing the living fuck out of civilian "bad guys" in their own (former) homeland, following "bad guys" around inside our borders and then just letting 'em blow our shit up, "graciously" accepting billions of our dollars and our military technology to blow up apartment buildings and beaches (which they claim were full of "bad guys", but only after we hear about it.)...
The Bad Guys just want the "Good Guys" to stop fucking with them. Seems to me the Good Guys are like a little playground Napoleon, picking on other little kids and then screaming their heads off to Teacher when their victims fight back.
Only if you're only listening to Little Napoleon instead of actually watching the playground.
Ogami
New member
HeroicFool wrote:
Ogami, for 90% of TK these days if you divided their word count by their post count they'd be lucky to make it to 10. Words that actually mean something... much lower than that.
I try not to judge by appearances. In Rafterman's case, his signature said it all, but I tried to hold a conversation. He can't handle one because his side knows they are losers. The bitterness of Bush's critics prove the Left will never hold power again in 2006 or 2008, maybe not even in the next few decades.
After 5 years of the war on terror, Bush has a lot to show for it. Iraq and Afghanistan are killing grounds for Islamic terrorists, Al Queda and its derivatives have been financially broken, their entire leadership either arrested or killed, their sanctuaries destroyed, their national government sponsors like Libya have dried up.
And what does the opposition have to show for all their rhetoric? It is all summed up by Rafterman's Bush signature. Therein lies their complete and utter failure to "get Bush", or get themselves back into power. All they have is their bitterness and bile.
I love it.
-Ogami
Ogami, for 90% of TK these days if you divided their word count by their post count they'd be lucky to make it to 10. Words that actually mean something... much lower than that.
I try not to judge by appearances. In Rafterman's case, his signature said it all, but I tried to hold a conversation. He can't handle one because his side knows they are losers. The bitterness of Bush's critics prove the Left will never hold power again in 2006 or 2008, maybe not even in the next few decades.
After 5 years of the war on terror, Bush has a lot to show for it. Iraq and Afghanistan are killing grounds for Islamic terrorists, Al Queda and its derivatives have been financially broken, their entire leadership either arrested or killed, their sanctuaries destroyed, their national government sponsors like Libya have dried up.
And what does the opposition have to show for all their rhetoric? It is all summed up by Rafterman's Bush signature. Therein lies their complete and utter failure to "get Bush", or get themselves back into power. All they have is their bitterness and bile.
I love it.
-Ogami
HeroicFool
New member
The Question said:
Hmm.. I could have sworn that Irael gave a huge chunk lof their land to the bad guys in an attempt to appease them not too long ago. An attampt that didn't work btw...
We were fucking with them when we were hit on 9/11?
Israel isn't attacking or bombing anyone that I know of, unless it's in retaliation. Israel is the geeky looking jew that's surrounded by a bunch of muslim bullies in the playground my friend. The only twist is that the geeky little Jew is one bad motherfucker that won't take their shit.
Ogami
New member
HeroicFool wrote:
We were fucking with them when we were hit on 9/11?
We were ignoring the islamic fascists, which in their minds was an intolerable offense. They tried to get our attention with the first WTC bombing, Khobar towers, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, and in Somalia. But they got our full and undivided attention now, certainly.
-Ogami
We were fucking with them when we were hit on 9/11?
We were ignoring the islamic fascists, which in their minds was an intolerable offense. They tried to get our attention with the first WTC bombing, Khobar towers, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, and in Somalia. But they got our full and undivided attention now, certainly.
-Ogami
The Question
Eternal
HeroicFool said:
We've been financially, militarily and politically supporting Israel without reservation since the '60s, and Israel has been raiding its neighbors, illegally seizing their land and assets and subjecting non-Jews within their borders to the shit end of an apartheid state since at least a decade earlier. We feed the monster that feeds on the Middle East, so it's no wonder the Middle East hates us for that. I'm not excusing the ragheads' actions, but I'm not blind to their motives, either.
Like I said, you're listening to Little Napoleon to the exclusion of actually watching the playground. The record shows that Israel is the geeky little Jew that steals the other kids' lunch money, kicks 'em off the playground equipment and then "retaliates" after they fight back against its bullying.
Rafterman
There's no place like home-
Chemical Weapons
Chemical agents in the modem sense were first used in World War I, when chlorine gas was released, from large cylinders, in a favorable wind. This surprise operation caused massive casualties, demoralisation of the forces attacked and demonstrated the need for protection from this kind of warfare. The first improvised mask was a cotton pad soaked in sodium thiosulphate, glycerine and sodium carbonate. Subsequently in World War I, a great variety of chemical agents were used by both sides, the most damaging being the blister producing mustard gas. Military clothing, even with a respirator, gave little protection against this agent.
Immediately prior to World War II and during the early part of that war, Japan is supposed to have used chemical weapons against China. During World War II, President Roosevelt announced a no-first-use policy but had promised instant retaliation for any Axis use of chemical agents. Over 600 military casualties and an unknown number of civilian casualties resulted from the 1943 German bombing in Bari Harbor, Italy, of the John Harvey, an American ship loaded with two thousand 100-pound mustard bombs.
At the end of the war stockpiles of newer agents, called "nerve gases," were discovered. These were found to be effective in much lower concentrations than those agents known up to that time. The end of World War II did not stop the development or stockpiling of chemical weapons. The U.S., which used defoliants and riot-control agents in Vietnam and Laos, finally ratified the Geneva Protocol in 1975 but with the stated reservation that the treaty did not apply either to defoliants or to riot-control agents.
US policy renounces the first use of lethal or incapacitating chemical agents. However, it retains the right to retaliate if deterrence fails to prevent the enemy's first use of chemicals. As is the case with nuclear weapons, the President of the United States must approve the initial use of chemical weapons. This approval procedure is known as chemical release.
The United States stockpile of unitary lethal chemical warfare munitions consists of various rockets, projectiles, mines, and bulk items containing blister agents (mustard H, HD, HT) and nerve agents (VX, GB). About 60% of this stockpile is in bulk storage containers; 40% is stored in munitions, many of which are now obsolete. The stockpile is stored at eight sites throughout the Continental US (Edgewood Chemical Activity, MD; Anniston Chemical Activity, AL; Blue Grass Chemical Activity, KY; Newport Chemical Depot, IN; Pine Bluff Chemical Activity, AR; Pueblo Chemical Depot, CO; Deseret Chemical Activity, UT; and Umatilla Chemical Depot, OR) and at one site outside of the Continental US on Johnston Atoll.
In 1985, the Congress passed Public Law 99-145 directing the Army to destroy the US stockpile of obsolete chemical agents and munitions. Recognizing that the stockpile program did not include all chemical warfare materiel requiring disposal, the Congress directed the Army in 1992 to plan for the disposal of materiel not included in the stockpile. This materiel, some of which dates back as far as World War I, consists of binary chemical weapons, miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel, recovered chemical weapons, former production facilities, and buried chemical warfare materiel. In 1992, the Army established the Nonstockpile Chemical Materiel Program to dispose of the materiel.
In 1993, the United States signed the UN-sponsored Chemical Weapons Convention. In October 1996, the 65th nation ratified the convention making the treaty effective on April 29, 1997. Through ratification, the United States agreed to dispose of its unitary chemical weapons stockpile, binary chemical weapons, recovered chemical weapons, and former chemical weapon production facilities by April 29, 2007, and miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel by April 29, 2002.
US Chemical Munitions
Quantity of Assembled Chemical Weapons by Site
Weapon Type
155-mm Projectile (H, HD)
4.2-in. Mortar (HD, HT)
155-mm Projectile
8-in. Projectile
M55 Rocket
8-in. Projectile
M55 Rocket
M23 Land Mine
The Non-Stockpile Project
While the stockpile project poses many challenges, the non-stockpile project faces its own set of complex issues. The term non-stockpile chemical materiel describes a wide variety of chemical warfare materiel that is not part of the unitary stockpile as declared in 1986. This materiel exists in a variety of physical configurations that range from chemical agent identification sets once used to teach soldiers how to identify chemical agents to large former weapons-production facilities.
This materiel is located on active or former military bases, and much of it is buried at small, geographically dispersed sites, as burial was once an accepted disposal practice. The logistical problems posed by locating burial sites, identifying what is buried there, and determining how to remove it safely are serious and far-ranging.
By the end of Fiscal Year 1999, materiel had been identified, or was believed to exist, at 99 locations in 38 states and U.S. territories, some of which had or have multiple burial sites. Approximately 229 known or suspected sites have been identified. At 33 of the 99 locations, hazardous materiel was removed, or no hazardous materiel was found. Transportable treatment systems provide the flexibility to rapidly identify, treat and/or neutralize certain types of materiel. The Army prepared a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, issued in the fall of 1999, that examined the feasibility of deploying these systems across the country at locations where chemical warfare materiel must be treated
The Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp
Chemical agents in the modem sense were first used in World War I, when chlorine gas was released, from large cylinders, in a favorable wind. This surprise operation caused massive casualties, demoralisation of the forces attacked and demonstrated the need for protection from this kind of warfare. The first improvised mask was a cotton pad soaked in sodium thiosulphate, glycerine and sodium carbonate. Subsequently in World War I, a great variety of chemical agents were used by both sides, the most damaging being the blister producing mustard gas. Military clothing, even with a respirator, gave little protection against this agent.
Immediately prior to World War II and during the early part of that war, Japan is supposed to have used chemical weapons against China. During World War II, President Roosevelt announced a no-first-use policy but had promised instant retaliation for any Axis use of chemical agents. Over 600 military casualties and an unknown number of civilian casualties resulted from the 1943 German bombing in Bari Harbor, Italy, of the John Harvey, an American ship loaded with two thousand 100-pound mustard bombs.
At the end of the war stockpiles of newer agents, called "nerve gases," were discovered. These were found to be effective in much lower concentrations than those agents known up to that time. The end of World War II did not stop the development or stockpiling of chemical weapons. The U.S., which used defoliants and riot-control agents in Vietnam and Laos, finally ratified the Geneva Protocol in 1975 but with the stated reservation that the treaty did not apply either to defoliants or to riot-control agents.
US policy renounces the first use of lethal or incapacitating chemical agents. However, it retains the right to retaliate if deterrence fails to prevent the enemy's first use of chemicals. As is the case with nuclear weapons, the President of the United States must approve the initial use of chemical weapons. This approval procedure is known as chemical release.
The United States stockpile of unitary lethal chemical warfare munitions consists of various rockets, projectiles, mines, and bulk items containing blister agents (mustard H, HD, HT) and nerve agents (VX, GB). About 60% of this stockpile is in bulk storage containers; 40% is stored in munitions, many of which are now obsolete. The stockpile is stored at eight sites throughout the Continental US (Edgewood Chemical Activity, MD; Anniston Chemical Activity, AL; Blue Grass Chemical Activity, KY; Newport Chemical Depot, IN; Pine Bluff Chemical Activity, AR; Pueblo Chemical Depot, CO; Deseret Chemical Activity, UT; and Umatilla Chemical Depot, OR) and at one site outside of the Continental US on Johnston Atoll.
In 1985, the Congress passed Public Law 99-145 directing the Army to destroy the US stockpile of obsolete chemical agents and munitions. Recognizing that the stockpile program did not include all chemical warfare materiel requiring disposal, the Congress directed the Army in 1992 to plan for the disposal of materiel not included in the stockpile. This materiel, some of which dates back as far as World War I, consists of binary chemical weapons, miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel, recovered chemical weapons, former production facilities, and buried chemical warfare materiel. In 1992, the Army established the Nonstockpile Chemical Materiel Program to dispose of the materiel.
In 1993, the United States signed the UN-sponsored Chemical Weapons Convention. In October 1996, the 65th nation ratified the convention making the treaty effective on April 29, 1997. Through ratification, the United States agreed to dispose of its unitary chemical weapons stockpile, binary chemical weapons, recovered chemical weapons, and former chemical weapon production facilities by April 29, 2007, and miscellaneous chemical warfare materiel by April 29, 2002.
US Chemical Munitions
- M60 105mm
- M360 105mm
- M104 155mm
- M110A1/A2 155mm
- M121/A1 155mm
- M122 155mm
- M687 155mm
- M426 8-inch
- M23 landmine
- M55 rocket
Weapon Type
Weapon Quantities by Site (1)
Anniston
Blue Grass
Pine Bluff
Pueblo
Tooele
Umatilla
JACADS
Mustard Agent (H, HD, HT) 105-mm Projectile (HD)Anniston
Blue Grass
Pine Bluff
Pueblo
Tooele
Umatilla
JACADS
155-mm Projectile (H, HD)
4.2-in. Mortar (HD, HT)
23,064
17,643
258,912
17,643
258,912
—
15,492
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
383,418
299,554
97,106
299,554
97,106
—
54,663
63,568
63,568
—
—
—
—
—
46
5,779
43,660
Agent GB 105-mm Projectile5,779
43,660
155-mm Projectile
8-in. Projectile
M55 Rocket
74,040
9,600
16,026
42,738
9,600
16,026
42,738
—
—
—
3,977
51,716
51,716
—
—
—
—
—
90,231
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
798,703
89,141
89,141
—
17,353
—
47,406
14,246
91,375
47,735
6,386
13,020
14,246
91,375
47,735
6,386
13,020
—
Agent VX 155-mm Projectile8-in. Projectile
M55 Rocket
M23 Land Mine
139,581
—
35,636
44,131
12,816
44,131
12,816
—
17,733
—
—
—
—
—
19,582
9,378
9,378
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
53,216
—
3,966
22,690
32,313
3,752
14,513
11,685
42,682
14,519
22,690
32,313
3,752
14,513
11,685
42,682
14,519
—
13,302
(1) Munitions quantities are as of July 11, 1997
The Non-Stockpile Project
While the stockpile project poses many challenges, the non-stockpile project faces its own set of complex issues. The term non-stockpile chemical materiel describes a wide variety of chemical warfare materiel that is not part of the unitary stockpile as declared in 1986. This materiel exists in a variety of physical configurations that range from chemical agent identification sets once used to teach soldiers how to identify chemical agents to large former weapons-production facilities.
This materiel is located on active or former military bases, and much of it is buried at small, geographically dispersed sites, as burial was once an accepted disposal practice. The logistical problems posed by locating burial sites, identifying what is buried there, and determining how to remove it safely are serious and far-ranging.
By the end of Fiscal Year 1999, materiel had been identified, or was believed to exist, at 99 locations in 38 states and U.S. territories, some of which had or have multiple burial sites. Approximately 229 known or suspected sites have been identified. At 33 of the 99 locations, hazardous materiel was removed, or no hazardous materiel was found. Transportable treatment systems provide the flexibility to rapidly identify, treat and/or neutralize certain types of materiel. The Army prepared a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, issued in the fall of 1999, that examined the feasibility of deploying these systems across the country at locations where chemical warfare materiel must be treated
The Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp
Rafterman
There's no place like home-
The Federation of American Scientists
http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp
Is a gold mine of info providing links to many sites.
It's suggested reading for anyone who enjoys taking Rethuglican/Faux News talking points as gospel. LOL!
Not that the Dems are blameless mind you, they do the same shit when they're in power. SEE: Lyndon Johnson, Viet Nam etc.
http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp
Is a gold mine of info providing links to many sites.
It's suggested reading for anyone who enjoys taking Rethuglican/Faux News talking points as gospel. LOL!
Not that the Dems are blameless mind you, they do the same shit when they're in power. SEE: Lyndon Johnson, Viet Nam etc.
Dor_Jan
missmanners' favorite toy
SilentBtViolent
Rape Ape
Messenger's right -- these weapons were all pre-1991 and the consensus in the US governmet is that they were unusable.
The only fucktard saying otherwise is Rick Santorum, who's a nutjob.
CBS has some funny quotes from David Kaye on the topic, my favorite is this one about pre-1980 sarin that Santorum focused on:
"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen sink at this point," Kay said.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/23/politics/main1747450.shtml
The only fucktard saying otherwise is Rick Santorum, who's a nutjob.
CBS has some funny quotes from David Kaye on the topic, my favorite is this one about pre-1980 sarin that Santorum focused on:
"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen sink at this point," Kay said.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/23/politics/main1747450.shtml
SilentBtViolent
Rape Ape
Uh... Sarin's a biological agent, so I don't find it at all counterintuitive that it might have a genuine "shelf life" -- though I'm not claiming to be an expert or anything.
In smaller words (for big dog):
It's kind of like milk.
It goes bad.
In smaller words (for big dog):
It's kind of like milk.
It goes bad.