Weapons of Mass Destruction

What exactly is a weapon of mass destruction?

Does the new MOAB (Mother of All Bombs)qualify
as a wmd?

The U.S. Air Force today tested the biggest conventional bomb in the military's arsenal, dropping a new 21,000-pound device on a Florida test site. The Pentagon hopes the test will pave the way for use of the bomb -- should there be a war in Iraq -- against critical targets on the surface and underground. They also are counting on its psychological effects.

 

[radiofreecostarica]

that's a mother alright...

i would say that it qualifies as a WMD.
We must disarm.

 

I would think so, but we play by different rules. America would never try to attack another country without good reason

 

 

[Jazz]

Let's hope they won't have to use it, and when they do I hope it's only used to scare the Iraqi troops into surrender.

As far as WMDS, I see a world of difference between the US having a MOAB and the Iraqis possessing RX nerve gas and anthrax, especially with the mindset to use them. I could care less whether 2,000 Republican Guards are killed with one MOAB or 20 smaller bombs.

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

Since Dubya and Dumbsfeld have found other "reasons" why the troops and billions of dollars must remain in Iraq, I wanted a concise definition of WMD.

With 3 years to think about WMD, we should have greater understanding how great the lies about this illegal war have been.

:uzi:

 

[BASEHEAD]

Someone explain to me how its "illegal" again.....was it because the UN SAID SO? Maybe not giving all this money to crackheads and homeless people contribute to your sour outlook.....fill me in.

IMO as soon as Iraq fired one prohibited anti aircraft missle at an American aircraft the war becomes justifed.They fired about 700.

 

[CAPNCRUNCH]

I would think so, but we play by different rules. America would never try to attack another country without good reason

We were so naiieve and trusting - our Great Leader Dubya would never start a war for his and his buddies portfolios! Well, now we know! (Notice the date on the quote!)

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

Why have the UN if we arent going to oblige its vote?

Where are the WMD basehead? Inspectors find a few cans of spray paint and we therefore have justified killing and injuring thousands and wasting hundreds of billions of borrowed money?

Seems like the country was more stable with Saddam "regime" (which was a puppet US govt). Now, daily Iraqi "police" get killed and IED picking off our troops.

We are paying people to vote in Iraq and call them democratic elections. Maybe some truth in that statement since similar tactics are used in America.

How about we reopen 9-11 case and find out who in fact are the "terrorists"?

 

[CAPNCRUNCH]

We are paying people to vote in Iraq and call them democratic elections. Maybe some truth in that statement since similar tactics are used in America.

QUOTE]Their democracy may be more representative than the US!

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

Base, I agree with a government that governs least...an idea this country held throughout many years.

However, an inch at a time, we have allowed our government to get miles off the track.

I am merely doing my part to provide others different ideas to stop government from ruining a great nation.

Much of the damage is not going to repaired without great pain, but humpty dumpty may be put back together if enough of us do our part.

 

[docmercer--banned]

The Mexicans better not screw up on them deliveries of Tecata to the ranch in Crawford or Junior will drop a few of these hogs into Mexico City

 

[BASEHEAD]

Id have to say the same thing....Why have the UN (in the USA)?They disgust me.Useless in all areas they claim to be mostly responsible for.Oil for food is only one of many recent disgraces for the once reputable organization.

Iraq has become an ally instead of an enemy....seems like a fantasic turn of events.Especially in light of the ongoing fiasco with Iraq and Syria.The whole area needs to reject terror from the top down.Leaders who dont get it ,wont last.Saddam was the consumate example....a lesson for the rest.

Unfortunately the UN did not have glowing reports regarding Saddams cooperation during the 90s.He was evasive and highly contempuous and the UN knew it.This resulted in the UN being ejected.For three years had had free reign with no supervision.....who really knows what he had going on?Even when Kay went in with his teams he found Saddam to be the same way....secretive and elusive.There was no doubt in anyones mind he planned to resume WMD production (if he hadnt already).By Kays own admission following months in Baghdad the country of Iraq under Saddam was not stable...it was in fact more unstable than even Bush realized at the time.Terrorists were coming and going through Iraq....not a good formula.Its a fact Saddam was looking closely at sponsoring foreign terror (money,weapons/WMD-who knew)in order to have vengence on the US subversively.At that point it was his only option.There were many reasons to take him out.The fact is the UN had a huge conflict of interest as far as the US goes.These guys were ass reaming the oil for food program to the benefit of the very guy they were punishing with sanction in the first place.Their point of view means very little as far a US security is concerned.

The country doesnt seem to be falling onto the bowels of hell.....only 3 more years,then the Rats will have their chance again if the public beleives the GOP didnt perform.Its not possible for this country to tank in the short span of a Presidential term.

I post these things not as an attempt to sway anybody but to try and explain why it is I see things as I do.It seems really clear to me Iraq was the next logical point.

 

[Dawoofdaddy]

Base, I agree that Iraqis, other Arabs, and Muslims around the world are going to have to stop fundamentalists. Americans in their lands forcing things will only worsen relations and the overall situation. Also, many Americans, including myself feel our armies have no business fighting this illegal war.