- #31
kyleb
you don't understand that there are other chemicals besides chemical weapons do you?
News What Are the Implications of Shock and Awe Tactics in Baghdad?
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Shock
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the military strategy known as "Shock and Awe," which critics argue results in significant destruction, particularly in Baghdad, under the guise of liberation. Participants reference military theorists like John Boyd and John Warden, discussing their influence on modern warfare tactics. There is a heated debate about the existence of chemical weapons in Iraq, with some asserting that evidence has been found, while others argue that no substantial proof exists. The conversation also touches on the role of media in shaping public perception of the war, with accusations of bias from both sides. Participants express frustration over the portrayal of the conflict, the impact on civilians, and the motivations behind the U.S. military actions. The dialogue reflects deep divisions in opinion regarding the justification for the war, the nature of Saddam Hussein's regime, and the implications for Iraqi civilians caught in the conflict.
you don't understand that there are other chemicals besides chemical weapons do you?
- #32
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,739
- 11,188
It is pretty easy to tell from the specific chemicals in the warehouse what the plant is for.
Easy, buddy. I'm on your side. My point was that they didn't find any actual chemical weapons in the plant. Its hairsplitting, yes. But those hairs are ones the rest of the world is going to split.
- #33
kyleb
sure enough, but i have not heard reports of what specific chemicals were found.
- #34
Nicool003
O.K so you (Kyleb and Adam) Say there are no weapons of mass destruction and no chemical weapons? Saddam ordered his republican guard to use them at will as soon as allied forces reach the baghdad.
Also
Also
- #35
Adam
- 65
- 1
Nicool003
1) Can you please show me the evidence that Saddam Hussein has ordered his Republican Guard to use chemical weapons?
2) Actually my personal suspicion is that Iraq has NBC weapons. However, I try to never let my own suspcions influence my actions. I must keep in mind that a suspicion is not a fact.
1) Can you please show me the evidence that Saddam Hussein has ordered his Republican Guard to use chemical weapons?
2) Actually my personal suspicion is that Iraq has NBC weapons. However, I try to never let my own suspcions influence my actions. I must keep in mind that a suspicion is not a fact.
- #36
Zero
Adam, you live in the new world, where whatever you make up to support your view becomes 'fact', and suspicion is as good as knowledge. If Fox News or Rush Limbaugh say it is true, it is true, by default, in a 1984 sort of way.
- #37
Adam
- 65
- 1
War is Peace!
Aka: "To liberate the Iraqi people, we're going to bomb the hell out of Baghdad."
Aka: "To liberate the Iraqi people, we're going to bomb the hell out of Baghdad."
- #38
Zero
'giving Iraq self-determination' = 'giving U.S. companies control of Iraqi resources and industries, and the Iraqi people have to accept the slave wages that those companies are willing to pay'
- #39
Nicool003
Oh give it up! Open your eyes! It's everywhere. Unless your media is so bad that you don't know about it. It's been on the news all day!
Not really. We are going to try to avoid civilian casualties. By the way speaking of civilians. Many Iraqi's have taken up the fight. They have been attacking Saddam husane's loyalists and troops.
Oh great another one. IF you payed attention you would know that we are giving the Iraqi's control of their oil fields etc... Read what I just said to adam. You seem to think the Iraqi's like saddam husane. They DONT!
- #40
damgo
- #41
kyleb
- #42
kat
- 42
- 0
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1048562545224
Last edited by a moderator:
- #43
kyleb
so it is all still speculation.
- #44
Nicool003
What is still all speculation? That the Iraqi citizens don't like him? Hey you know them morons that went and became a human shield? They interviewed a few people that left on the news yesterday and when asked why the left they reponded that they thought the Iraqi's liked or at least were fine with saddam but when they talked to iraqi citizens they were told what horrible and disgusting things he did to people who disliked him.
What is still all speculation? That he has weapons of mass destruction? He certainly does. He ordered them used and he already fired missles much stronger and longer ranged than he was supposed to have.
What is still all speculation? That the Iraqi's that are loyal to saddam are almost as evil as him? That they got American uniforms and are killing innocent iraqi citizens?
What is still all speculation? That he has weapons of mass destruction? He certainly does. He ordered them used and he already fired missles much stronger and longer ranged than he was supposed to have.
What is still all speculation? That the Iraqi's that are loyal to saddam are almost as evil as him? That they got American uniforms and are killing innocent iraqi citizens?
- #45
Njorl
Science Advisor
- 284
- 22
I'm not convinced Iraq has chemical weapons that it can use in this war. Last I heard, Iraq had chemicals for chemical weapons. While they claimed that they had destroyed these chemicals, they offered no proof. There are scenarios that would lead to no use of chemical weapons though.
They might have destroyed the chemicals, and refused to prove it so as to keep the possibility alive for deterrence purposes. Foolish and unlikely, but possible.
They may not have had the opportunity to arm the chemicals into munitions while inspectors were in the country, or in the brief period between their departure and the beginning of fighting.
If they had no chemical weapons ready to use, the Iraqis would try to convince us that they did. They would make sure that we found chemical protection suits, and atropine injectors. This way, we expect and diligently prepare for an attack that doesn't happen.
That being said, we still have to assume that they will use them, and prepare accordingly.
Njorl
They might have destroyed the chemicals, and refused to prove it so as to keep the possibility alive for deterrence purposes. Foolish and unlikely, but possible.
They may not have had the opportunity to arm the chemicals into munitions while inspectors were in the country, or in the brief period between their departure and the beginning of fighting.
If they had no chemical weapons ready to use, the Iraqis would try to convince us that they did. They would make sure that we found chemical protection suits, and atropine injectors. This way, we expect and diligently prepare for an attack that doesn't happen.
That being said, we still have to assume that they will use them, and prepare accordingly.
Njorl
- #46
Nicool003
You took a good amount of time to write that whole post and in the end you come to basically the same conclusion I already mentioned. So you could have saved some time you know...
- #47
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,739
- 11,188
Cut him some slack, Nicool. Njorl clearly has taken the time to think through his opinion. Its refreshing considering all the knee-jerking going on here.
- #48
Njorl
Science Advisor
- 284
- 22
It's tough being a liberal hawk. Njorl
- #49
Nicool003
You are right although you have to admit, that was nothing next to what adam and kyleb are getting... Sorry Njorl it wasn't anything you said I was just saying that you basically said what I said and that you need not have typed all that. I had just responded to another of kyleb's posts so I wasn't thinking to clearly...sorry.
- #50
damgo
Well, despite what one might think from watching Faux News, there is still no evidence of Iraq using any banned weapons. The supposed SCUDS that were launched turned out to be perfectly legal (ironic term) short-ranged missiles.
Personally, I think it's fairly certain Saddam has a few chem weapons left, but no real evidence has been found of them yet. Does he have chemical production facilities left? Possibly, but I tend to doubt it. The US did a pretty good job of wiping those out it Gulf War I, and the off-and-on inspections probably made things quite difficult for Saddam recently.
- #51
kyleb
well at least you admit it.
- #52
Nicool003
'
It wasn't just fox news so you must not watch the other channels I watch... Also it has been online on a very trustworthy website that has things up a day or more before the news ever has them on...
- #53
damgo
^^^ :) Where at? Debka? aeronautics.ru? None of the places I consider reliable have reported even good suspicions of banned missiles. The worst confirmed thing so far is the NBC protection suits found in that Iraqi hospital...
Njorl -- I feel ya.
Njorl -- I feel ya.
- #54
Nicool003
Ahh! Now I see! Fox news is not reliable because it is actually run by republicans AND democrats instead of just democrats who change everything or don't tell you everything because they don't like the president! Instead (like i have said before) you want the democrats and their wonderful Clinton to come back so Bill could run to Canada because he doesn't have the intelligence to know that 1) there isn't a draft! 2) He is too old . In case any of you don't know or chose not to listen, Bill clinton ran to Canada to escape getting drafted to war. Yes and those other democratic stations also want bill back so he can lie to the country again the democrats just love those presidents. Yes I see your point completely Yes I see. You don't like republicans so now Fox News is unreliable. Well they aren't the only station to say that and there are also websites like i mentioned...
In case you said that to Njorl because I kinda snapped at him then once again I am sorry.
In case you said that to Njorl because I kinda snapped at him then once again I am sorry.
- #55
BoulderHead
You mean like; Oh, that Saddams a baaaad man... He must be stopped...
Ever notice how 'they' all have the same slant?
- #56
kat
- 42
- 0
I'm quoting a bit offPhotoDude.com He grabs the quote from CBN. This is the first time I've read their site so reader beware. I don't discredit the info due to that but..I do..do...my due...diligence as you should do yours!
Paul Strand: “What I just heard from a highly placed source here is that they've discovered, they've captured chemical warheads, they're Russian, they have Russian writing all over them and they are chemical warheads. Of course, they can't get into them and find out if there’s chemicals because once they open them they'd all die right there on the spot. But they're going to ship them off for testing.”
“They also captured a launcher that was able to shoot these very munitions that they've captured. And they’ve captured a man who mixes the chemicals, that was his job with the Medina Division which is the division we're facing right now near the city of Karbala. So all these things leading the military here to believe we might have been hit by chemical shells any time now, and we're not sure we've got them all. So those are the developments here near Karbala about 60 miles south of Baghdad.”
as you should do yours!Paul Strand: “What I just heard from a highly placed source here is that they've discovered, they've captured chemical warheads, they're Russian, they have Russian writing all over them and they are chemical warheads. Of course, they can't get into them and find out if there’s chemicals because once they open them they'd all die right there on the spot. But they're going to ship them off for testing.”
“They also captured a launcher that was able to shoot these very munitions that they've captured. And they’ve captured a man who mixes the chemicals, that was his job with the Medina Division which is the division we're facing right now near the city of Karbala. So all these things leading the military here to believe we might have been hit by chemical shells any time now, and we're not sure we've got them all. So those are the developments here near Karbala about 60 miles south of Baghdad.”
- #57
damgo
Whoa! Take it easy there Nicole... cmon, let me at least make some outrageous liberal claims before you go attacking me for them!
Anyways, I think Fox is unreliable, because, well, everytime I've watched them they seem to be. They're too gung-ho, and, well, biased for me to take them seriously. Incidentally, I think the exact same thing about many liberal sources--you'll not see me quoting IndyMedia, for example.
Anyways, so I'm curious, what is this site?
Anyways, I think Fox is unreliable, because, well, everytime I've watched them they seem to be. They're too gung-ho, and, well, biased for me to take them seriously. Incidentally, I think the exact same thing about many liberal sources--you'll not see me quoting IndyMedia, for example.
Anyways, so I'm curious, what is this site?
- #58
russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,739
- 11,188
I don't watch FOX news because they try too hard to make the news exciting. Not quite the same as their mild right leaning bias.
I tend to watch CNN because with their resources they generally have the best information. And I can tell the difference between fact and opinion, so their mild left slant doesn't bother me.
- #59
Nicool003
That would be Nicool or Nick.
- #60
damgo
Ooops! My bad. :) Oh, you asked in another thread (I lost which) where I hear rumors from... usually it's from www.agonist.org[/url] , [url]www.dailykos.com[/url] , [url]www.tacitus.org[/URL] and a number of other blog sites. I've found them to be usually pretty accurate, but I try and qualify things if I haven't seen confirmed on a major media outlet (besides Faux or al Jazeera ;) ).
Last edited by a moderator: