So the information was good after all? So U.S. and friends going into Iraq was justified?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

All Liberal apologies can be sent to

George W Bush, President
1800 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC
20500

Haha, and I quote from the article:

[quote]
The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s.
[/quote]

[quote]
Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."
[/quote]


And old nonworking weapons with remainders of mustard gas are still found in Sweden to this day. Yikes, I guess Sweden has WMD!!!!!

[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=15217.msg154753#msg154753 date=1150948046]
All Liberal apologies can be sent to

George W Bush, President
1800 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC
20500
[/quote]1600*

[quote author=rabbit link=topic=15217.msg154775#msg154775 date=1151002921]
[quote author=hismajesty[yL] link=topic=15217.msg154753#msg154753 date=1150948046]
All Liberal apologies can be sent to

George W Bush, President
1800 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC
20500
[/quote]1600*
[/quote]

My mistake. I just copied/pasted the address from elsewhere I didn't check it.

My post was intended to be understood as sarcasm since WMD's were found in Iraq previously.

Adron is ignorant as ever about the issue and hismajesty should tell Mr. Bush to write a letter to himself since Mr. Bush stated himself that there were no WMD's in Iraq and that "much of the intelligence was wrong."

As for the WMD found in Iraq:
1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents
Chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times more deadly than sarin gas)
Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas

Can we find that laying around Sweden?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm

And now I quote your next article:

[quote]
The 1,000 "sources" evacuated in the Iraqi operation included a "huge range" of radioactive items used for medical purposes and industrial purposes, a spokesman for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration told AP news agency.
[/quote]

Oooh? Radioactive items used for medical and industrial purposes evacuated from Iraq? Wow. Dangerous! Obviously there has to have been ill will since they were using radioactive items for medical purposes!

And we move on to your comment about radioactive materials being "in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas"; find the relevant article quote:

[quote]
Bryan Wilkes said much of the material was "in powdered form, which is easily dispersed".
[/quote]

Oooh, so it was in powdered form which is easily dispersed? Nothing about it being that way for the purpose of dispersal over populated areas; only that it happened to be in that form. Which is a convenient form for the actual radioactive substance to have whenever you want to shape your radiation emitting device.

Conclusion: Another case of you making things up or completely misinterpreting. Next time, link an article that actually supports what you are saying.

You forgot about the 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, I wonder how that fits into the 'medical purposes' category

I'm sorry to say this but Adron sounds like a self hating individual. He hates himself for being wrong and falls into a state of denial. I'm embarrassed for him.

The excerpts from the article that Adron pulled out are of no significance.

[quote]
The 1,000 "sources" evacuated in the Iraqi operation included a "huge range" of radioactive items used for medical purposes and industrial purposes, a spokesman for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration told AP news agency.
[/quote]

1,000 sources included radioactive items used for medical purposes which means that not all of the sources were radioactive items used for medical purposes.

Also it says that there was a "huge range" of these radioactive items that were used for medical purposes which means that there was a huge variety of these medical radioactive items and in no way signifies whether or not the majority of the 1,000 sources were the radioactive items that were used for medical purposes.

It also states that the items were also used for industrial purposes. Industrial purposes could mean anything including the creation of WMD's.

What Adron fails to mention is that these 1,000 sources were found in a former nuclear research facility and not some hospital or other medical facility.

[quote]
Bryan Wilkes said much of the material was "in powdered form, which is easily dispersed".
[/quote]
There is nothing in this quote about it not being for the purpose of dispersal over populated areas. Who knows? Maybe they were going to use it to making a nuclear powered oven to make Swedish meatballs (I love Swedish meatballs). We can only speculate.

Adron, the first step in saving face is admitting that you are horribly wrong. It is you my friend that makes things up and completely misinterprets things even though it is really hard to misinterpret 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium.

[quote author=Invert] 1,000 sources included radioactive items used for medical purposes which means that not all of the sources were radioactive items used for medical purposes. ...  Also it says that there was a "huge range" of these radioactive items that were used for medical purposes which means that there was a huge variety of these medical radioactive items and in no way signifies whether or not the majority of the 1,000 sources were the radioactive items that were used for medical purposes. [/quote]

Without specific numbers, this is not relevant. If specific numbers aren't given, and the article's intention is to prove that there were "bad evil cruel forces at work", then it is actually hurting your arguement to even bring it up; as it is most suspicious.

[quote author=Invert] It also states that the items were also used for industrial purposes. Industrial purposes could mean anything including the creation of WMD's. [/quote]

It sounds almost as bad as Dihydrogen Monoxide.

[quote author=Invert] What Adron fails to mention is that these 1,000 sources were found in a former nuclear research facility and not some hospital or other medical facility. ... even though it is really hard to misinterpret 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium. [/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium

[quote author=Zef link=topic=15217.msg154942#msg154942 date=1151253446]
Without specific numbers, this is not relevant. If specific numbers aren't given, and the article's intention is to prove that there were "bad evil cruel forces at work", then it is actually hurting your arguement to even bring it up; as it is most suspicious.[/quote]

But also useful because it brings up the potential for dangerous uses.

[quote author=Zef link=topic=15217.msg154942#msg154942 date=1151253446]
It sounds almost as bad as Dihydrogen Monoxide.[/quote]

Hah

[quote author=Zef link=topic=15217.msg154942#msg154942 date=1151253446]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium[/quote]

Only thing useful I see on that page that might contribute to your argument refers to nuclear energy. I don't think its even relevant, since afaik Iraq doesn't have any nuclear power plants or any in development (correct me if I'm wrong).

[quote author=Invert link=topic=15217.msg154927#msg154927 date=1151223156]
What Adron fails to mention is that these 1,000 sources were found in a former nuclear research facility and not some hospital or other medical facility.
[/quote]

Which goes very well with what you should be doing with your radioactive devices while your country is being bombed by invading forces. You wouldn't want to be losing control over them, maybe having them stolen by terrorists. There have been enough cases of radioactive sources for medical use being taken from dumps or closed hospitals in the former soviet republics.

As for enriched uranium; it has civilian uses as well as military uses. If this was weapons grade enriched uranium, I am sure the article would have mentioned that, since it would've strengthened their case.

Thinking about the reasons for powdering radioactive materials, how about having a look at the wikipedia article about enriched uranium? One of the illustrations is of powdered uranium. If the main reason for powdering radioactive materials was to spread them into populated areas, then that picture surely comes from a secret terrorist weapons manufacturing site... Likely?

So you expect us to believe a report by 2 conservative lawmakers published on a conservative network to be unbiased? "WMDs" found from time of Gulf War and others which could have very well be used for harmless domestic uses. And what's with this? U.S. is allowed to have WMDs so why are they disallowing anyone else to have any chemical-based weapons whatsoever. Is it because they will use them for terroristic activities? How is everyone else sure U.S. won't? =/ I'm just very skeptical about this issue.

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154967#msg154967 date=1151294872]
So you expect us to believe a report by 2 conservative lawmakers published on a conservative network to be unbiased?
[/quote]

If you don't trust Fox, trust BBC.

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154967#msg154967 date=1151294872]"WMDs" found from time of Gulf War and others which could have very well be used for harmless domestic uses.[/quote]

As I said before, Iraq (afaik) doesn't have any nuclear powerplants, including any in development. The only paths that enriched uranium can lead to are either nuclear power or nuclear weaponry. How good are you at deductive reasoning?

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154967#msg154967 date=1151294872]And what's with this? U.S. is allowed to have WMDs so why are they disallowing anyone else to have any chemical-based weapons whatsoever. Is it because they will use them for terroristic activities? How is everyone else sure U.S. won't? =/ I'm just very skeptical about this issue.[/quote]

Because we are a superpower, because we would be held accountabe, because few people in the US have the political power to launch a nuke, because many middle eastern countries have grudges against the West. Why do you think a great deal of the free world is unsettled and worried about the fact that Iran is possibly developing weapons-grade uranium? They have the armarents and delivery systems to put most of the world at risk of an attack.

Now, I understand you're anti-America, anti-Bush, anti-free will, but try to think things through.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=15217.msg154968#msg154968 date=1151296247]
As I said before, Iraq (afaik) doesn't have any nuclear powerplants, including any in development. The only paths that enriched uranium can lead to are either nuclear power or nuclear weaponry. How good are you at deductive reasoning?
[/quote]

Do only nukes fall into the category of WMDs? According to both articles, that is not the case. Enriched uranium can also be used in nuclear powered devices, not including nukes or powerplants.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=15217.msg154968#msg154968 date=1151296247]
Because we are a superpower, because we would be held accountabe, because few people in the US have the political power to launch a nuke, because many middle eastern countries have grudges against the West. Why do you think a great deal of the free world is unsettled and worried about the fact that Iran is possibly developing weapons-grade uranium? They have the armarents and delivery systems to put most of the world at risk of an attack.
[/quote]

Yes so have their activities moderated, and please if you're a superpower then don't even tell me you don't have ways to stop a nuke which is flying out from Iran into U.S... that is a good half of the globe.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=15217.msg154968#msg154968 date=1151296247]
Now, I understand you're anti-America, anti-Bush, anti-free will, but try to think things through.
[/quote]

I'm not anti-America, I live here. I am anti-Bush because bush is disallowing what you have said in your third point, free will. Patriot Act.. war.. etc..

What exactly are the qualifications something has to reach to be a WMD and not just a WD?

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154971#msg154971 date=1151300229]
Do only nukes fall into the category of WMDs? According to both articles, that is not the case. Enriched uranium can also be used in nuclear powered devices, not including nukes or powerplants.[/quote]

Really? What other 'devices' would be powered by nuclear energy?

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154971#msg154971 date=1151300229]
Yes so have their activities moderated, and please if you're a superpower then don't even tell me you don't have ways to stop a nuke which is flying out from Iran into U.S... that is a good half of the globe.[/quote]

The Iranian PM/President (forget which) specifically said that he would wipe Israel off the map. I don't think the US can protect Israel at the sort of distance that we're at. Not only that, but they can attack anyone else - it doesn't have to be the US.

[quote author=l2k-Shadow link=topic=15217.msg154971#msg154971 date=1151300229]
I'm not anti-America, I live here. I am anti-Bush because bush is disallowing what you have said in your third point, free will. Patriot Act.. war.. etc..[/quote]

Your disdain for the American lifestyle leads me to believe that you're anti-American. Do you even know _why_ you are anti-Bush? Why you dislike the PATRIOT Act? The Second Gulf War? Or are you just another parrot?

[quote author=Disco link=topic=15217.msg154973#msg154973 date=1151300858]
What exactly are the qualifications something has to reach to be a WMD and not just a WD?
[/quote]

Potential for widespread murder. The definition of it varies from person to person, but nukes would be included.

(Opinion) With the amount of radioactive material that was found, I think it's safe to say that, if they were to be used, would create widespread destruction.