Re: IRAQ sort of: Re: Tim May calls for nuking of D.C.

From: Kai Becker (kmb@kai-m-becker.de)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 07:30:10 MST

  • Next message: Brett Paatsch: "Re: [wta-talk] Cloning of kidneys or other organs?"

    Am Sonntag, 23. Februar 2003 06:13 schrieb John K Clark:
    > VX is a colorless liquid and the most powerful nerve agent known, one
    > drop anywhere on your skin will kill you in minutes.

    That's a scientific fact. But you don't think you'll ever be in danger
    from iraqi chemical weapons, do you? There are so many unanswered
    questions: Is there really VX (or other B/C weapons)? Where? How much?
    How shall it be used and against whom? Do you expect Saddam to ship it by
    boat or will he charter an airplane, because he has no air force left?

    Okay, maybe rockets. He could really reach his neighbors, but he knows
    well what would happen in this case. Even a single rocket launch would
    buy him the total demolition of what he wants to preserve: Power, wealth
    - and his life. _If_ there are WMDs, they serve just one interest: To
    drive the prize for a prospective enemy higehr than bearable. In other
    words: _If_ Saddam produces WMDs, he does so to some extend _because_ of
    the military threat from the US. (As we've learned, a state is safer
    against US/UN invasions, the more dangerous weapons it has.)

    > And you think Iraq is now telling the truth, Kai

    I don't think that Iraq is telling the tuth, but I also doubt the "clear
    and present danger" babble of Mr. Bush.

    I say send more inspection teams, do more surveillance, form a real
    international coalition, force Iraq to accept human rights, free press,
    free political activities. But _not_ by a massive attack and military
    invasion, but by one step after another, full publicity and no chance for
    arab extremists and terrorists to use the Iraq incident for their own
    business - e.g. get their hands on the leftovers of any WMD fabrication.

    If an invasion is necessary, make it a silent invasion of inspection
    teams, human rights supervisors, international relief organizations, etc.
    until the Iraq regime can no longer maintain its pressure on the people.
    If Saddam refuses to comply, use restricted force against the spots he
    denies access to. Even if this requires years, it will be cheaper and
    more under control than a war at this time.

    > Very soon it will be as obvious to the man on the
    > street as it is already obvious to every intelligence agency in the
    > world

    Pardon, the MI-6 (that's the secret service of Mr. Bush's best ally) not
    only lacks any evidence, but also got so fed up with the fabricated
    evidence (cf. that student homework) of Mr. Blair (that's the boss of
    that secret service), that they informed the press about this[1].

    The CIA is neither convinced that Saddam _has_ significant amounts of
    weapons, nor that he is going to attack the US. Instead of asking for
    real evidence, the White House presses the analysts to produce PR for Mr.
    Bush's already made decision[2].

    In other words: Do you have any proof for your claim?

       Kai

    [1] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2727471.stm
    [2] http://www.latimes.com/la-na-cia11oct11,0,2360915.story

    -- 
    == Kai M. Becker == kmb@kai-m-becker.de == Bremen, Germany ==
      "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced"
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 07:32:57 MST