“Well you suggested I was gloating when I mentioned that I was correct in the assumption that the US and UK could do a better job of Baghdad than the Russians could do in Grozny!.Your exact words were “So the Iraqis lack a bit of spine, of course it is a little soon to gloat now isn’t it?” from a post made on the “Should France and Germany Have a Say” thread dated 11th April 2003 .

Do you not like the term you used now?”

Umm… you missed the point. As I explained… the invasion and defeat of Saddams forces in Iraq was always going to be the easiest part of what the US was trying to do… not that it was guaranteed to be easy per say, just that compared to creating a country and government in Iraq that will remain stable with the religious factions and the relations it has had with its neighbours it was the sort of thing the most powerful armed forces in the world is supposed to be able to do.

I hear there are still attacks on US troops and have been many demonstrations against US occupation.
I hear that the first military leadership the US imposed was not working fast enough to supply power and water and proper sewerage to the people of Bagdad let alone the little places… it also takes time to divy up all the juicy commercial contracts for the right companies (ie ones with General xyz ret. as CEOs).

“The situation is obviously different but the net result of using an unconventional arms capability to cover a weakness in the conventional area certainly has parallels.”

Interesting idea, but how long would he need to develop such weapons systems. The Iraqis are in as bad a shape as the SU was just after WWII and we all know they only developed weapons through stealing ideas from the americans or captured Germans… where was Iraq to aquire a capability you seem to think the Russians have problems maintaining?

“Point is Garry that 10,000 litres of bio agent is a legitimate weapon of mass destruction, a truly horrendous weapon, and it was accepted by all of the signatories to UN1441 to be held by Hussein in Iraq.”

And how many hundreds of thousands of litres does the US have… for research purposes of course. After more than 50 years of defensive research you’d think it wouldn’t be a problem anymore… just an injection and you’re fine.

“Right now its a threat to no-one, thankfully, if Hussein where still in power its a threat to anyone he can reach within a matter of days of his order being given.”

How do you know Saddam hasn’t got it with him?

How do you know one of Osamas supporters hasn’t found it in the desert?

It might have crossed the border into Jordan or Syria for all you know.

“It doesnt take too long to dig something up and transfer material to a transport vessel to go into freefall bombs or rocket warheads!.”

Of course and before when he had a country the only thing stopping him doing that was the threat of retaliation… now what are you going to do?

“So if he dropped that over a few Saudi oil facilities the 1500 or so infected oil workers would be off work for a couple of days, take a few aspirin, then be as right as rain would they? The Saudi medical infrastructure (or anyone elses for that matter) could suddenly cope with several hundred to a thousand cases of severe disease infection simultaneously could they?”

A few thousand might die in the worst case scenario of large numbers of aircraft with crop spraying gear being allowed to fly low and slow over the Saudi oilfields long enough to deliver it in lethal concentrations.
As I mentioned the problems with such weapons is the law of diminished returns. If you injected the perfect lethal dose and lined up your victims then a relatively small volume could kill the world population several times. In the real world wind direction temperature, even sunlight can seriously effect the use of chem and bio weapons and degrade their effectivenesss… in the Tokyo subway incident they would have killed more if they’d simply set the place on fire.

“A search that many thought that the UN could perform with 60 or so scientists in a country the size of Iraq WITH Saddam still in power manipulating it all! Don’t you see how ludicrous that situation would have been now?”

I could care less if saddam had anthrax or botulism or any WMD.
I think Iraq has paid enough… you’d think he had bombed america the way they carried on. All he did was invade a neighbour. His forces were kicked out of the country he invaded and his country has been punnished with sanctions for 12 years.

WTF for?

That is why I find it so hard to see the US as the all powerful wonderful country its citizens seem to perceive it to be.

“Yeah right he wouldnt immediately rearm with the best kit he could lay his hands on when the sanctions were lifted!. “

Who is to say the military sanctions need ever be lifted?
So what he buys some anti tank missiles… how many has the US got?
Why is he not allowed an army?

“Who cares? What possible relevance does that have to this discussion?. I’m talking about Iraq and WMD’s here not going off on some kind of tenuous little tangent!.”

Interesting that you think being consistant is a tenuous tangent…

“IF we’d have waited perpetually as the French and Russians wanted us to do (well at least until Hussein had cleared off his debts to THEM of course!) and he had rearmed (prob buying French and Russian arms of course – which might have made you happy eh?) “

Of course the world is saved again because it is British and American companies getting the contracts… and probably rearming as well in the not too distant future.

“it wouldnt have been twenty odd days and a mere two heavy divisions needed to do the job would it?. It would have been a damnsight more and would have had to try and assemble under a constant, developed, WMD threat. That would have been better in some way would it? Easy to play armchair general when its not your troops doing the fighting eh? “

Yes, of course, Iraq of 1991 was such a Stalingrad… millions dead on both sides.

In that case if it should become normal business to invade countries before they have done anything wrong… you just think they might do something wrong in the hazy future which other country is to be invaded… come on WMDs are dangerous things… Syria has them…. how many US and UK soldiers are you prepared to risk by not invading Syria right now… and then there is Iran… evil they are… of course we can never trust those Saudis… perhaps we should just list the countries we aren’t going to invade… it’ll be shorter.
All purely in the interests of preemptive self defence of course…

“In effect we went in BECAUSE the UN WASN’T doing its job and backing up its own decrees.”

Well I guess they must want to thank you… seeing how you didn’t even bother to put it to a democratic vote in the UNSC… of course democracy only works when there is a foregone conclusion in your favour right?
Saddam style demoracy if ever I saw it… vote the way I want you to vote… oh don’t bother… I’ll just hear the votes I want to hear and do what I want.

“We see now that their interest was no more humanitarian than just that by their desire to attack the US “

Their desire to ATTACK the US…. you shouldn’t post after you have been drinking Jonesy… or has an American poster pinched your username?

What attack?
Worst case scenario was that France and Russia were only interested in business with Iraq.. ie money …but the actions of the US/UK forces… secure the oilfields and surround but do not enter the cities… like Stalin did to Warsaw show they were only interested in oil. WMDs would hardly be hidden in oil fields… the US never stops looking at them. Burning wells just means more revenue for US oil fire fighting companies so they could care less about them.

But at the end of the day the worst case scenario is France and Russia looking after THEIR OWN INTERESTS!!!!!!!!! Something the US is VERY GOOD AT.

How does that become an attack on the US?

(BTW if it was why isn’t it the end of NATO?)

“Like I said above, all those who were wringing their hands about the plight of the poor Iraqi citizenry in the face of American and British evil are now showing their true natures.”

By legitimising what the US and UK have done in Iraq giving them a rubber stamp would risk the lives of Syrians, Iranians, and many other small and largely defenceless countries.

It is standard practice for an invading army to be responsible for the wellbeing of those they have conquered… if the UK and US can’t look after the Iraqi people what can the rest of the world do?

“Can’t have it both ways pal!.”

Of course you can… blow stuff up, have fun (I have heard the tapes on aircraft recorders after a weapon hits… and they aren’t crying… unless they get told it was a blue on blue) get all of the best contracts and then whine because the UN won’t lift sanctions that were imposed on the country of Iraq… not Saddam Personally. If you are right and there are WMDs unaccounted for then they must be found, recorded and disposed of before the sanctions can be lifted. If one of Saddams rivals taken power would you have dropped the sanctions?

“As to the stupid petri dish analogy, “

Ummm Vortex… that “stupid” petri dish analogy was regarding the difference between theoretical and practical.
A WMD could theoretically kill tens of millions… in practise they certainly wouldn’t.
Much the same that the rate bacteria reproduce should mean that there is far more bacteria around than there is… the reality is that once the bacteria reach the limits of their environment they stop reproducing… or more accurately splitting.
Kinda assumed you’d understand that of all the people here…