The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://www.neilswaab.com/comics/wiggles/images/rehab239.jpg
Hits the nail squarely on the head.
Hits the nail squarely on the head.
Page:
Light wrote:
> Heh. Well, of the people I've debated with in this thread (not
> including Biggles; cheers for the response to what I posted, but I
> simply haven't had the time to look through it properly), one posted
> full and frank responses to my queries with supporting evidence, and
> raised legitimate points of their own which (I hope) I've answered. I
> still disagree with what he says, but I think we can both agree that
> the reason for our disagreement is a point of faith; in the absence
> of any conclusive proof that the government was/was not lying, we
> both have mountains of evidence supporting our respective views.
> Though we disagreed, I don't think either one of us would try and say
> that the other didn't understand the relevant issues. It was an
> extremely enjoyable debate and exactly the reason I like this board.
>
> The other one wailed, trolled, repeated points discredited months
> ago, and evaded answering anything, preferring instead to post
> increasingly vague opinions that, judging by his refusal to explain
> or defend them, he doesn't actually fully understand. His tactics
> would perhaps be called 'bullying', were it not for the fact that
> he's so clearly a coward on every level and the response they elicit
> is contempt rather than the fear and awe he craves.
>
> No wonder he keeps running away from this board; the few moments of
> self awareness that he experiences must leave him so embarrassed that
> the heat from his subsequent blush could power a small country.
*yawn* Usual self righteous crap from you then Light. Such was my contribution that I accounted for two whole paragraphs of yours. I mean, if I am really that bad you'd think you'd be able to ignore me eh? But you can't.
*Light impression* WAH WAH WAH Nasty Bell WAH WAH etc
> Heh. Well, of the people I've debated with in this thread (not
> including Biggles; cheers for the response to what I posted, but I
> simply haven't had the time to look through it properly), one posted
> full and frank responses to my queries with supporting evidence, and
> raised legitimate points of their own which (I hope) I've answered. I
> still disagree with what he says, but I think we can both agree that
> the reason for our disagreement is a point of faith; in the absence
> of any conclusive proof that the government was/was not lying, we
> both have mountains of evidence supporting our respective views.
> Though we disagreed, I don't think either one of us would try and say
> that the other didn't understand the relevant issues. It was an
> extremely enjoyable debate and exactly the reason I like this board.
>
> The other one wailed, trolled, repeated points discredited months
> ago, and evaded answering anything, preferring instead to post
> increasingly vague opinions that, judging by his refusal to explain
> or defend them, he doesn't actually fully understand. His tactics
> would perhaps be called 'bullying', were it not for the fact that
> he's so clearly a coward on every level and the response they elicit
> is contempt rather than the fear and awe he craves.
>
> No wonder he keeps running away from this board; the few moments of
> self awareness that he experiences must leave him so embarrassed that
> the heat from his subsequent blush could power a small country.
*yawn* Usual self righteous crap from you then Light. Such was my contribution that I accounted for two whole paragraphs of yours. I mean, if I am really that bad you'd think you'd be able to ignore me eh? But you can't.
*Light impression* WAH WAH WAH Nasty Bell WAH WAH etc
Heh. Well, of the people I've debated with in this thread (not including Biggles; cheers for the response to what I posted, but I simply haven't had the time to look through it properly), one posted full and frank responses to my queries with supporting evidence, and raised legitimate points of their own which (I hope) I've answered. I still disagree with what he says, but I think we can both agree that the reason for our disagreement is a point of faith; in the absence of any conclusive proof that the government was/was not lying, we both have mountains of evidence supporting our respective views. Though we disagreed, I don't think either one of us would try and say that the other didn't understand the relevant issues. It was an extremely enjoyable debate and exactly the reason I like this board.
The other one wailed, trolled, repeated points discredited months ago, and evaded answering anything, preferring instead to post increasingly vague opinions that, judging by his refusal to explain or defend them, he doesn't actually fully understand. His tactics would perhaps be called 'bullying', were it not for the fact that he's so clearly a coward on every level and the response they elicit is contempt rather than the fear and awe he craves.
No wonder he keeps running away from this board; the few moments of self awareness that he experiences must leave him so embarrassed that the heat from his subsequent blush could power a small country.
The other one wailed, trolled, repeated points discredited months ago, and evaded answering anything, preferring instead to post increasingly vague opinions that, judging by his refusal to explain or defend them, he doesn't actually fully understand. His tactics would perhaps be called 'bullying', were it not for the fact that he's so clearly a coward on every level and the response they elicit is contempt rather than the fear and awe he craves.
No wonder he keeps running away from this board; the few moments of self awareness that he experiences must leave him so embarrassed that the heat from his subsequent blush could power a small country.
unknown kernel wrote:
> and that has been created by the
> very people who so despertely need to justify their war.
For many people, Saddam's regime being in existence was enough to justify the war, I'd say WMD was only really used because it was one of the few ways people sitting at home could be shown that the threat could one day effect them.
You're seeing it in Haiti right now, we're, more than likely, going to watch the country fall apart whilst journalists excitedly tape people being shot in the streets etc Because right now the political will for anyone to intervene is minimal, the public of most nations would never support it because there is no way to sell the idea that what happens in Haiti effects them. Because it won't, and in general the public will not support action in situations which will not affect them.
Take Afghanistan. Clinton's administration floated the idea of invasion back in 98, a study found little support. Fast forward to post 9/11, massive support, because Afghanistan was seen to be a threat to the US public. Had the 98/99 invasion gone ahead, then history is changed forever and the world would be different today. But nothing was done because the threat was not conceivable.
> and that has been created by the
> very people who so despertely need to justify their war.
For many people, Saddam's regime being in existence was enough to justify the war, I'd say WMD was only really used because it was one of the few ways people sitting at home could be shown that the threat could one day effect them.
You're seeing it in Haiti right now, we're, more than likely, going to watch the country fall apart whilst journalists excitedly tape people being shot in the streets etc Because right now the political will for anyone to intervene is minimal, the public of most nations would never support it because there is no way to sell the idea that what happens in Haiti effects them. Because it won't, and in general the public will not support action in situations which will not affect them.
Take Afghanistan. Clinton's administration floated the idea of invasion back in 98, a study found little support. Fast forward to post 9/11, massive support, because Afghanistan was seen to be a threat to the US public. Had the 98/99 invasion gone ahead, then history is changed forever and the world would be different today. But nothing was done because the threat was not conceivable.
unknown kernel wrote:
> Interesting that you (and apparently Tony Blair too) have now fallen
> back to the position 'the government knows best, don't worry your
> pretty little heads about it, they'd never lie'. So now - instead of
> basing your arguments on massaged, exaggerated and plagiarised
> evidence - you're basing it on evidence that you haven't seen, that
> has not and will not be published, and that has been created by the
> very people who so despertely need to justify their war.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/ speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html
Some bits from The Kay Report below that does show Iraq had WMD programmes, but the actual WMD are still unfound. On the link above, there are a number of explanations why this may be.
•A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.
•A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.
•Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.
•New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.
•Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).
•A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.
•Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.
•Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.
•Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.
The ISG has also identified a large volume of material and testimony by cooperating Iraq officials on Iraq's effort to illicitly procure parts and foreign assistance for its missile program. These include:
•Significant level of assistance from a foreign company and its network of affiliates in supplying and supporting the development of production capabilities for solid rocket propellant and dual-use chemicals.
•Entities from another foreign country were involved in supplying guidance and control systems for use in the Al-Fat'h (Ababil-100). The contract was incomplete by the time of OIF due to technical problems with the few systems delivered and a financial dispute.
•A group of foreign experts operating in a private capacity were helping to develop Iraq's liquid propellant ballistic missile RDT&E and production infrastructure. They worked in Baghdad for about three months in late 1998 and subsequently continued work on the project from abroad. An actual contract valued at $10 million for machinery and equipment was signed in June 2001, initially for 18 months, but later extended. This cooperation continued right up until the war.
•A different group of foreign experts traveled to Iraq in 1999 to conduct a technical review that resulted in what became the Al Samoud 2 design, and a contract was signed in 2001 for the provision of rigs, fixtures and control equipment for the redesigned missile.
•Detainees and cooperative sources have described the role of a foreign expert in negotiations on the development of Iraq's liquid and solid propellant production infrastructure. This could have had applications in existing and planned longer range systems, although it is reported that nothing had actually been implemented before OIF.
•Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons.
•In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn.
•In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre.
> Interesting that you (and apparently Tony Blair too) have now fallen
> back to the position 'the government knows best, don't worry your
> pretty little heads about it, they'd never lie'. So now - instead of
> basing your arguments on massaged, exaggerated and plagiarised
> evidence - you're basing it on evidence that you haven't seen, that
> has not and will not be published, and that has been created by the
> very people who so despertely need to justify their war.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/
Some bits from The Kay Report below that does show Iraq had WMD programmes, but the actual WMD are still unfound. On the link above, there are a number of explanations why this may be.
•A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.
•A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.
•Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.
•New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.
•Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).
•A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.
•Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.
•Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets through out the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.
•Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.
The ISG has also identified a large volume of material and testimony by cooperating Iraq officials on Iraq's effort to illicitly procure parts and foreign assistance for its missile program. These include:
•Significant level of assistance from a foreign company and its network of affiliates in supplying and supporting the development of production capabilities for solid rocket propellant and dual-use chemicals.
•Entities from another foreign country were involved in supplying guidance and control systems for use in the Al-Fat'h (Ababil-100). The contract was incomplete by the time of OIF due to technical problems with the few systems delivered and a financial dispute.
•A group of foreign experts operating in a private capacity were helping to develop Iraq's liquid propellant ballistic missile RDT&E and production infrastructure. They worked in Baghdad for about three months in late 1998 and subsequently continued work on the project from abroad. An actual contract valued at $10 million for machinery and equipment was signed in June 2001, initially for 18 months, but later extended. This cooperation continued right up until the war.
•A different group of foreign experts traveled to Iraq in 1999 to conduct a technical review that resulted in what became the Al Samoud 2 design, and a contract was signed in 2001 for the provision of rigs, fixtures and control equipment for the redesigned missile.
•Detainees and cooperative sources have described the role of a foreign expert in negotiations on the development of Iraq's liquid and solid propellant production infrastructure. This could have had applications in existing and planned longer range systems, although it is reported that nothing had actually been implemented before OIF.
•Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Even those senior officials we have interviewed who claim no direct knowledge of any on-going prohibited activities readily acknowledge that Saddam intended to resume these programs whenever the external restrictions were removed. Several of these officials acknowledge receiving inquiries since 2000 from Saddam or his sons about how long it would take to either restart CW production or make available chemical weapons.
•In the delivery systems area there were already well advanced, but undeclared, on-going activities that, if OIF had not intervened, would have resulted in the production of missiles with ranges at least up to 1000 km, well in excess of the UN permitted range of 150 km. These missile activities were supported by a serious clandestine procurement program about which we have much still to learn.
•In the chemical and biological weapons area we have confidence that there were at a minimum clandestine on-going research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi Intelligence Service. While we have much yet to learn about the exact work programs and capabilities of these activities, it is already apparent that these undeclared activities would have at a minimum facilitated chemical and biological weapons activities and provided a technically trained cadre.
Belldandy wrote:
> Yep, you know more than they do I'm sure of it....
------
Irony-meter...overloading...can't...take....much...more
> Yep, you know more than they do I'm sure of it....
------
Irony-meter...overloading...can't...take....much...more
Interesting that you (and apparently Tony Blair too) have now fallen back to the position 'the government knows best, don't worry your pretty little heads about it, they'd never lie'. So now - instead of basing your arguments on massaged, exaggerated and plagiarised evidence - you're basing it on evidence that you haven't seen, that has not and will not be published, and that has been created by the very people who so despertely need to justify their war.
Pandaemonium wrote:
> We're not talking about hiding a 2 litre bottle of coke in Iraq, we
> are talking about a program to develop weapons. This requires
> scientists, support staff, administrative staff, transportation,
> storage facilities and development facilities.
Well in that case you'll be glad to know that on the day of the Hutton Report Tony Blair told MP's that the Iraqi Weapons Survey Group had uncovered everything related to a WMD programe apart from the actual WMD. He also told ministers that this report would be placed in the House reading library for them to see as it is not for public release. Now I know many of you here hold our PM's words with little regard, so think on this, ever since that statement no MP has challenged Blair's statement about the findings of the Iraqi Weapons Survey group.
> Not everything can be
> moved to address Belldandys point above, and I find it hard to
> believe that all the people working on these programs will be
> fanatical to the cause (scientists are not soldiers.)
For starters many of those people are dead. In Iraq, before we destroyed the regime, if the regime wanted you gone they just took you and you went missing. So far there are around half a million Iraqi's whom this happened to and they are just the ones we've found evidence of. Those that are alive have families- families who are undoubtedly at risk from the terrorists and guerilla fighters in Iraq right now - there is also the fact that, given we know Saddam tested weapons on live people in the past, that these scientists were party to various crimes against Humanity for which they will fear being prisoned for. For all we know many such people escaped the country in the first days of the conflict before the borders were effectively sealed, in fact for all we know there is the evidence and the people sitting in Iraq right now - it's a massive country.
Look at it like this - Iraq makes a mockery of modern intelligence methods, the only useful thing is human intelligence and we have a problem in that area. When a person goes missing in the UK it takes massive resources to find them, often they aren't found at all. Now imagine searching for a smaller thing, in a larger country, whilst trying to restore law and order, as well as other things, in that country, all the time under the media gaze with your every action questioned.
> Until I am presented with concrete proof that Iraq were developing
> waeapons, I will continue to think our government were lying to us.
Yep, you know more than they do I'm sure of it....
> We're not talking about hiding a 2 litre bottle of coke in Iraq, we
> are talking about a program to develop weapons. This requires
> scientists, support staff, administrative staff, transportation,
> storage facilities and development facilities.
Well in that case you'll be glad to know that on the day of the Hutton Report Tony Blair told MP's that the Iraqi Weapons Survey Group had uncovered everything related to a WMD programe apart from the actual WMD. He also told ministers that this report would be placed in the House reading library for them to see as it is not for public release. Now I know many of you here hold our PM's words with little regard, so think on this, ever since that statement no MP has challenged Blair's statement about the findings of the Iraqi Weapons Survey group.
> Not everything can be
> moved to address Belldandys point above, and I find it hard to
> believe that all the people working on these programs will be
> fanatical to the cause (scientists are not soldiers.)
For starters many of those people are dead. In Iraq, before we destroyed the regime, if the regime wanted you gone they just took you and you went missing. So far there are around half a million Iraqi's whom this happened to and they are just the ones we've found evidence of. Those that are alive have families- families who are undoubtedly at risk from the terrorists and guerilla fighters in Iraq right now - there is also the fact that, given we know Saddam tested weapons on live people in the past, that these scientists were party to various crimes against Humanity for which they will fear being prisoned for. For all we know many such people escaped the country in the first days of the conflict before the borders were effectively sealed, in fact for all we know there is the evidence and the people sitting in Iraq right now - it's a massive country.
Look at it like this - Iraq makes a mockery of modern intelligence methods, the only useful thing is human intelligence and we have a problem in that area. When a person goes missing in the UK it takes massive resources to find them, often they aren't found at all. Now imagine searching for a smaller thing, in a larger country, whilst trying to restore law and order, as well as other things, in that country, all the time under the media gaze with your every action questioned.
> Until I am presented with concrete proof that Iraq were developing
> waeapons, I will continue to think our government were lying to us.
Yep, you know more than they do I'm sure of it....
Pandaemonium wrote:
> address Belldandys point above,
Below now. DOH! Back to work.
> address Belldandys point above,
Below now. DOH! Back to work.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Think of that as ten 2 litre bottles of coke. Do you think that if I
> was to hide something the size of a bottle of coke tonight, in
> Britain, you could ever find it? Now think of the fact that Iraq is
> not far off twice the size of Britain. Could be a bit on the
> difficult side couldn't it?
We're not talking about hiding a 2 litre bottle of coke in Iraq, we are talking about a program to develop weapons. This requires scientists, support staff, administrative staff, transportation, storage facilities and development facilities. Not everything can be moved to address Belldandys point above, and I find it hard to believe that all the people working on these programs will be fanatical to the cause (scientists are not soldiers.)
Until I am presented with concrete proof that Iraq were developing waeapons, I will continue to think our government were lying to us.
> Think of that as ten 2 litre bottles of coke. Do you think that if I
> was to hide something the size of a bottle of coke tonight, in
> Britain, you could ever find it? Now think of the fact that Iraq is
> not far off twice the size of Britain. Could be a bit on the
> difficult side couldn't it?
We're not talking about hiding a 2 litre bottle of coke in Iraq, we are talking about a program to develop weapons. This requires scientists, support staff, administrative staff, transportation, storage facilities and development facilities. Not everything can be moved to address Belldandys point above, and I find it hard to believe that all the people working on these programs will be fanatical to the cause (scientists are not soldiers.)
Until I am presented with concrete proof that Iraq were developing waeapons, I will continue to think our government were lying to us.
It'd also be considerably easy to take such weapons out of Iraq in the opening week of the war, into surrounding countries safe in the knowledge that the allies could not go into those countries. They could even avoid satellite detection if they knew certain information.
Page: