SCUDs

Luna probes

Yes Arthur the USSR was the first to reach the moon, albeit only with a probe. I believe the total number in the Luna series is 24.

I think that the first Luna to actually crash land on the surface was luna 2 (1959) and the first to soft land was actually Luna 9 in 1966 (which took a few photos). It certainly put the green cheese theory to rest 🙂 I am sure NASA was relieved.

Between the Luna, Rangers, Surveyors and Apollos we have managed to litter even the Moon.

Regards

Sauron

Originally posted by GarryB
How do we know he has any SCUDs?

You’re right, I forgot, intelligence sources can no longer be trusted. Neither can the media.

If the man had 100 SCUDs, shot 50 of them, and verifiably destroyed 25 more, he obviously has 25 left, or needs to PROVE HE GOT RID OF THEM. Simple math. Unless you’re a Frenchman or a German.

Sauron,

The Russians were on the moon first. Not manned, but the Luna 7 moon vehicle landed on the moon surface on october 7th, 1965. It proved the moon was not made of Cheese, information which was gratefully accepted by NASA as this meant they had to stash more food in the Apollo capsule for the US’ manned landings.

Garry

I suppose that because they never managed to get there maybe the Russians still think the moon is made of cheese. Green cheese I believe…ha,ha,ha.

😀

Regards

Sauron

“If we know Saddam is prepositioning SCUDs, and these clearly violate the range he is allowed to posess in missiles, why isn’t anyone jumping on this?”

And if we knew that the moon was made of cheese then we could solve most of the world hunger problems (except for those who are lactose intollerant).

How do we know he has any SCUDs?

The problem is that if Sadam uses one of those weapons(scud or chem.) he shows clearly that he violated UN resolutions, and giving the US their reason to justify the war.

The US feels justified already, and UN resolutions have not been met 100% anwyay. If he uses banned weapons, or dares to use chemical/biological weapons it will justify a STIFF US response and hardly the war itself as the US know he has them anyway.

Loss of support of France…?? When will that ever happen? :p

The problem is that if Sadam uses one of those weapons(scud or chem.) he shows clearly that he fiolated UN resolutions, and giving the US their reason to justify the ware.
So it will be stupid for Saddam to use the scud for the reason that he is lossing the support of France and that sort of country’s.

Aw come on guys! Saddam says he doen’t have any such weapons.

😉

Yes its a very good point. I also wonder why he has been so agreeable to destroying (reluctantly and slowly) his Al Samoud 2 stocks (the ones that we know about that is). The obvious reason is to avert an invasion, but beyond that it could be a way of hoping to divert attention from a more sophisticated system.

If such a missile does exist, its development history will make interesting reading.

Regards

Sauron

Re: SCUDs

Originally posted by SOC
If we know Saddam is prepositioning SCUDs, and these clearly violate the range he is allowed to posess in missiles, why isn’t anyone jumping on this?

VERRRY GOOD point Sean, they should have been dealt with post-’91.