Last time (a couple of weeks ago) I heard it was around 65-70% and not 85%. [img]tongue.gif[/img] Did it go up again? [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 09-10-2002, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: Spelca ]

Actually, I would quite agree with the massing-at-the frontiers-and delivering-an-ultimatum strategy. I really do feel that, if the Iraqi generals are not all incompetent fools, they would possibly talk Hussein into allowing real inspections (with us still mobilised and taking out a target of opportunity from time to time to keep his feet in the fire. They might even overthrow him, though I personally doubt it. He has made of Iraq what Hitler made of Germany, a series of headlless sructures with all power concentrated in himself.

I heard on ABC News just now that the weapons inspectors could not mobilize in less than 6 weeks.

Mark

Six weeks? What is that? If Iraq would send some clear signals, and show their good faith, with us mobilised on their fronteirs, as we are doing, then I am sure that a war could be averted. I am, however, worried that Saddam is too monomaniacal in his determination to build nukes.

Of course Iraq says the info from the USA and England is false and there are no weapons programs going on. That was in this morning's papers.

If so, send in the inspectors to validate the claims. Yeah, right. Iraq's stupidity on this issue is incredible.

Mark

LOL, for once I agree with your stupid posts ;) [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Me wuvs you all too! Don't like all the paranoia and resentment online and in the world today, nuh-uh, me doesn't likes it one bit! *shakes head vigourously*

<font color="hotpink", size=5>GROUP HUG!!!</font> *bounces*</font>[/QUOTE]Don't you just wish all the stupid problems of the world could be solved just like that? Sigh... :(

*Basks in the blissful warmth of LS's and Melusine's hug* [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 09-10-2002, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

I believe that if Saddam were to build a nuke, he will not use it as a weapon, but as a deterrence. A sort of immunity if you will. Not the kind of situation you want to be in, as India and Pakistan has shown.

Just a never-ending cycle of bitterness and counter-bitterness isn't it.</font>[/QUOTE][img]graemlins/rant.gif[/img]

It's not about bitterness. It's about follow-through. If the US' 'allies' had allowed President Bush to finish what he'd started in Desert Storm, Saddam Hussien and his Biological, Chemical, and (possibly) Nuclear weapons wouldn't be an issue right now. Why? because he'd be dead, or locked in a cell so deep in the earth that not even the moles would know where he is. If the US' 'allies' had the intelligence to stop hamstringing Isreal, and the intestinal fortitude to live with the consequences, instead of whining about them, then the Palestinian threat wouldn't even exist. If the US' 'allies' weren't such a pack of whining, liberal, feel-good-politic, panty-waists who actually got up off their collective asses and actually *DID* something about the things they constantly whine about, then the world really *would* be a better place.

So, I say again, it's not about bitterness. It's about anger! Anger at the politics of appeasement, anger at wishy-washyness, anger at cowardice. Our dear European 'Allies'(with a singular exception...and the British still aren't fully on-board) are so happy to enjoy the benefits of our money, our culture, our fashions, and our aid, but, when the chips are down, and there's real work to be done...well, then all you hear is the sound of crickets and cowards.</font>[/QUOTE]Bearing in mind that the politics of the original Gulf War centred around blocking Saddam Hussein's potential control of the oilfields of Kuwait - and therefore protecting the strength of the american dollar rather than people - it's a vile thing to think as you do. Our leaders went in, created a mess, and now our new leaders are having to clean it up ten years later; fair enough. But that doesn't change the fact this started out being about money. No-one's hands are clean. We are the agressors and we've killed thousands so we can stay rich.

But if pushed far enough, won't he still use it as a weapon?

[ 09-10-2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

[quote]Originally posted by Nachtrafe:

Quote:

It's not about bitterness. It's about follow-through. If the US' 'allies' had allowed President Bush to finish what he'd started in Desert Storm, Saddam Hussien and his Biological, Chemical, and (possibly) Nuclear weapons wouldn't be an issue right now. Why? because he'd be dead, or locked in a cell so deep in the earth that not even the moles would know where he is. If the US' 'allies' had the intelligence to stop hamstringing Isreal, and the intestinal fortitude to live with the consequences, instead of whining about them, then the Palestinian threat wouldn't even exist. If the US' 'allies' weren't such a pack of whining, liberal, feel-good-politic, panty-waists who actually got up off their collective asses and actually *DID* something about the things they constantly whine about, then the world really *would* be a better place. So, I say again, it's not about bitterness. It's about anger! Anger at the politics of appeasement, anger at wishy-washyness, anger at cowardice. Our dear European 'Allies'(with a singular exception...and the British still aren't fully on-board) are so happy to enjoy the benefits of our money, our culture, our fashions, and our aid, but, when the chips are down, and there's real work to be done...well, then all you hear is the sound of crickets and cowards.

it amuses me to read about europe enjoying the benefits of usa money, culture and fashion... lol... yeah right. you could make an argument about money (pretty hard though) but culture??? fashion??? i am missing something here and the world has turned upside down??? [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]