- #106
Skyhunter
Yes.NewScientist said:
Later in his life when he needs a job and the geek is the one who decides whether or not to hire him.
Does the US administration owe an apology to the French ?
- News
- Thread starter vanesch
- Start date
In summary, the French were targeted with an organized hate campaign by the US administration because they were against the war in Iraq. The US should offer an apology for their actions, but it's doubtful that anyone would accept it.
Later in his life when he needs a job and the geek is the one who decides whether or not to hire him.
- #107
edward
- 62
- 166
The topic is not about history or like or dislike of the French. It is about Iraq and about oil and money.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm
France was right about WMD and we were wrong. Whether we appologize or not I could care less. Appologies have never been one of America's strong points. The French are aware of this.
We did screw them out of a $650 billion oil deal in Iraq. We seem to be very strong at doing things like that.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm
France was right about WMD and we were wrong. Whether we appologize or not I could care less. Appologies have never been one of America's strong points. The French are aware of this.
We did screw them out of a $650 billion oil deal in Iraq. We seem to be very strong at doing things like that.
Last edited by a moderator:
- #108
Skyhunter
And now just who is the beneficiary of that $650 billion now?edward said:
The American tax-payer will spend more than that before this quagmire they want to call a "struggle" is over.
Do you think the average American is really going to benefit?
Haliburton is doing alright as a war profiteer, Chevron, now that they just bought Unocal should do alright.
Who else is profiting from this?
Hey sounds like a good topic for a thread. I'm sure the members of this forum can find all the major beneficiaries of the Iraq "struggle".
Last edited by a moderator:
- #109
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
Good point. The French had merely negotiated a 'deal'. It isn't like they paid up front. The French are still able to take those funds and approach other governments ... Might I suggest Venezuela? I think they would find a sympathetic ear.Skyhunter said:
It is the USA who are digging the hole for themselves. Especially when they tested the wells and found that due to the abuses of the 'oil for food' system which allowed little for well maintenance had been reduced to a 20% efficiency with only a possibility of recovery to a maximum of 80%.
It seems they had been increasing pressure in the wells by pumping seawater into them.
- #110
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:It seems they had been increasing pressure in the wells by pumping seawater into them.
This is common practice for wells that start to lower in pressure from what I have read. I don't see the point in finding a link as this should be common knowledge and you can look it up yourself.
How is this relates to what you're point is well beyond me unless you think this is a new idea that the US came up with to fix the problem. I would not be surprised if you actually believe that was the case...
- #111
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
Well, it might help if you read some more and try to remember what it was they were saying at the end of the conflict instead of hyping your 'vastly superior knowledge'.Townsend said:This is common practice for wells that start to lower in pressure from what I have read. I don't see the point in finding a link as this should be common knowledge and you can look it up yourself.
How is this relates to what you're point is well beyond me unless you think this is a new idea that the US came up with to fix the problem. I would not be surprised if you actually believe that was the case...
Some of us were paying attention and not 'dazzled by the pretty lights' as markets were being blown up.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P44037.asp
- #112
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:
I realize it maybe hard for you to do but please try to concentrate on this one simple concept...
What does the water being pumped into the well have to do with it? The question is not why does water need to be pumped into the wells or what is to blame for the need to pump water into the wells, just simply "what does water being pumped into the well have to do with anything?"
- #113
NewScientist
- 171
- 0
So...just to clarify, the argument is should Amercia apoligse to France for going to war on the false pretext of WMD and also ignoring the UN despite the fact the US has lost thousands of troops, incurred billions of dollars of costs, increased its military hold in a volatile area and ousted a tyrannical regime?
- #114
- 5,117
- 20
NewScientist said:
No, not at all. The argument is: should the US administration apologize to the French for the hate campaign that was set up around towards them when the US decided to go to war.
- #115
The Smoking Man
- 67
- 0
Oh, look ... Townsend is all embarrassed and he can't figure out the words to say I was right.Townsend said:
Keep trying Townsend.
People are starting to get used to your little tantrums now.
- #116
DM
- 161
- 0
vanesch said:
The hate campaign was closely associated with the false pretext of WMD. Jacques Chirac supported the UN's evaluation and used it to argue against false beliefs of harboured WMD in Iraq.
- #117
kat
- 42
- 0
Oh my..
I think the french could better occupy theirselves with some introspection and self examination, maybe then they would do something about their stinky anti-semitism...maybe then they might deign to apologize to rwandians...and the ivory coast..who have begged for the U.S. to come in place of the French.
On to the topic at hand. No, we shouldn't apoligize based on the MSM myths and misconstrued reporting or the Duelfer and Kay reports.
The http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html or rather the unclassified public speech on it.
Directly and verbatim from Kay's report:
network of laboratories
"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."
prison laboratory
" 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." And elsewhere in the report, the chilling implication that the Iraqis didn't just have this facility, but that they used it: "Additional information is beginning to corroborate reporting since 1996 about human testing activities using chemical and biological substances, but progress in this area is slow given the concern of knowledgeable Iraqi personnel about their being prosecuted for crimes against humanity"
new research in... biological weapons
Verbatim from Kay: "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."
"Actual live biological weapons"
Verbatim: "Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons."
To aid those who need visuals and further documents:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay/97vials_300.jpg
Documents and equipment to develop nuclear weapons
Here's what Kay actually said: "Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS)".
Specially developed airplanes, designed to spray anthrax out of a small device on the underside of the plane.
kay stated that "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." And elsewhere, more detail: " two UAV programs that were working in parallel, one at Ibn Fernas and one at al-Rashid Air Force Base. Ibn Fernas worked on the development of smaller, more traditional types of UAVs in addition to the conversion of manned aircraft into UAVs...All these systems had declared ranges of less than 150km. Several Iraqi officials stated that the RPV-20 flew over 500km on autopilot in 2002...Additional work is also focusing on the payloads and intended use for these UAVs... Iraq's interest before the Gulf War in attempting to convert a MIG-21 into an unmanned aerial vehicle to carry spray tanks capable of dispensing chemical or biological agents, attention is being paid to whether any of the newer generation of UAVs were intended to have a similar purpose. This remains an open question."
several vials of live biological weapons that could be used to replicate and mass produce toxins to kill humans "within one week.
Here's Kay verbatim: "The scientists discussed the development of improved, simplified fermentation and spray drying capabilities for the simulant Bt that would have been directly applicable to anthrax, and one scientist confirmed that the production line for Bt could be switched to produce anthrax in one week if the seed stock were available."
the scientists caught holding these weapons admitted that there were large stockpiles of such weapons
"The scientist who concealed the vials containing this [biological] agent has identified a large cache of agents that he was asked, but refused, to conceal. ISG is actively searching for this second cache.".
Additionally, David Kay estimates that out of Iraq's 130 known storage sites, only 10 have been properly searched
What is that you say? "Then why did Kay come back and say there are no weapons?"
As the complete report documents, he didn't say that at all.
Here's what Kay said: "there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous."
U.S. forces discovered seven pounds of cyanide
The entire class of chemical weapons known as blood agents (particularly Hydrogen Cyanide, AC in the military chem agent code, and Cyanogen Chloride, CK) are cyanides. (See US Army Field Manual 3-9, US Navy Publication P-467, US Air Force Manual 355-7, "Potential Military Chemical/Biological Agents and Compounds," December 12, 1990, chapter 2, p. 26). A particular problem with AC is that it can penetrate American gas masks. Other cyanides are easily converted into these cyanide weapons, for example, mercuric cyanide is often used in shells with a reagent that will cause it to form AC when the shell is detonated.
While speaking to Congress, Kay also said of the Iraqi nuclear program, "They started building new buildings, renovating it, hiring some new staff and bringing them together. Fortunately -- and they ran a few physics experiments, re-run -- re-ran experiments they had actually run in the '80s. Fortunately from my point of view, Operation Iraqi Freedom intervened, and we don't know how or how fast that would have gone ahead."
I think the french could better occupy theirselves with some introspection and self examination, maybe then they would do something about their stinky anti-semitism...maybe then they might deign to apologize to rwandians...and the ivory coast..who have begged for the U.S. to come in place of the French.
On to the topic at hand. No, we shouldn't apoligize based on the MSM myths and misconstrued reporting or the Duelfer and Kay reports.
The http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html or rather the unclassified public speech on it.
Directly and verbatim from Kay's report:
network of laboratories
"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."
prison laboratory
" 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." And elsewhere in the report, the chilling implication that the Iraqis didn't just have this facility, but that they used it: "Additional information is beginning to corroborate reporting since 1996 about human testing activities using chemical and biological substances, but progress in this area is slow given the concern of knowledgeable Iraqi personnel about their being prosecuted for crimes against humanity"
new research in... biological weapons
Verbatim from Kay: "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."
"Actual live biological weapons"
Verbatim: "Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons."
To aid those who need visuals and further documents:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay/97vials_300.jpg
Documents and equipment to develop nuclear weapons
Here's what Kay actually said: "Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS)".
Specially developed airplanes, designed to spray anthrax out of a small device on the underside of the plane.
kay stated that "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." And elsewhere, more detail: " two UAV programs that were working in parallel, one at Ibn Fernas and one at al-Rashid Air Force Base. Ibn Fernas worked on the development of smaller, more traditional types of UAVs in addition to the conversion of manned aircraft into UAVs...All these systems had declared ranges of less than 150km. Several Iraqi officials stated that the RPV-20 flew over 500km on autopilot in 2002...Additional work is also focusing on the payloads and intended use for these UAVs... Iraq's interest before the Gulf War in attempting to convert a MIG-21 into an unmanned aerial vehicle to carry spray tanks capable of dispensing chemical or biological agents, attention is being paid to whether any of the newer generation of UAVs were intended to have a similar purpose. This remains an open question."
several vials of live biological weapons that could be used to replicate and mass produce toxins to kill humans "within one week.
Here's Kay verbatim: "The scientists discussed the development of improved, simplified fermentation and spray drying capabilities for the simulant Bt that would have been directly applicable to anthrax, and one scientist confirmed that the production line for Bt could be switched to produce anthrax in one week if the seed stock were available."
the scientists caught holding these weapons admitted that there were large stockpiles of such weapons
"The scientist who concealed the vials containing this [biological] agent has identified a large cache of agents that he was asked, but refused, to conceal. ISG is actively searching for this second cache.".
Additionally, David Kay estimates that out of Iraq's 130 known storage sites, only 10 have been properly searched
What is that you say? "Then why did Kay come back and say there are no weapons?"
As the complete report documents, he didn't say that at all.
Here's what Kay said: "there are approximately 130 known Iraqi Ammunition Storage Points (ASP), many of which exceed 50 square miles in size and hold an estimated 600,000 tons of artillery shells, rockets, aviation bombs and other ordinance. Of these 130 ASPs, approximately 120 still remain unexamined. As Iraqi practice was not to mark much of their chemical ordinance and to store it at the same ASPs that held conventional rounds, the size of the required search effort is enormous."
U.S. forces discovered seven pounds of cyanide
The entire class of chemical weapons known as blood agents (particularly Hydrogen Cyanide, AC in the military chem agent code, and Cyanogen Chloride, CK) are cyanides. (See US Army Field Manual 3-9, US Navy Publication P-467, US Air Force Manual 355-7, "Potential Military Chemical/Biological Agents and Compounds," December 12, 1990, chapter 2, p. 26). A particular problem with AC is that it can penetrate American gas masks. Other cyanides are easily converted into these cyanide weapons, for example, mercuric cyanide is often used in shells with a reagent that will cause it to form AC when the shell is detonated.
While speaking to Congress, Kay also said of the Iraqi nuclear program, "They started building new buildings, renovating it, hiring some new staff and bringing them together. Fortunately -- and they ran a few physics experiments, re-run -- re-ran experiments they had actually run in the '80s. Fortunately from my point of view, Operation Iraqi Freedom intervened, and we don't know how or how fast that would have gone ahead."
Last edited by a moderator:
- #118
Smurf
- 443
- 3
Why would this excuse the US for their hate campaign?
- #119
kat
- 42
- 0
The US doesn't need to apologize or have an excuse for responding to Chirac's outragious behavior and statements which the american so firmly and clearly responded to with boycotts of French wines and well..."freedom fries". Personally, I think congress had more important things to do then bother fries and what to call them..but apoligize to france who back the outragious chirac? I dn't think so.Smurf said:
- #120
- 5,117
- 20
kat said:
What was so outragious about it ? That he didn't agree with you and tried by all means not to get you have a "UN permission for war" ?
Is not agreeing with you by definition "outragious behaviour" ? And does, as a result, this justifies vilifying an entire nation ?
- #121
- 5,117
- 20
kat said:
So, only suspicions and a lot of extrapolation. No evidence.
A possibility. But again no proof. Just a few vials in a scientist's home. You don't know what I have in MY basement :-)
Stuff that "would have been useful if..."
Ok, that was a real danger of course for the US's integrity. All the rest is again speculatoin.
Again, no hard evidence of actual weapons ready to be used. Just discussions on a SPRAY.
"I'm sure it must be somewhere"
... and not worth the effort of course, so that terrorists can look for it themselves, hahaha.
Mymymy. Every paint production hall must contain more than that !
There was again not much, but they MIGHT.
Conclusion: effectively what was announced to be there and ready to be launched against the US, wasn't there. (the reason of the war, remember) There might, eventually, if we let them do, and if they wanted, and had the means, one day, be something.
Yeah. But they found 7 pounds of cyanide.
Hey, and even cigarettes with high tar content. Also very dangerous.
Outragious to say such a thing. The guy who says such a thing, and his whole country must be justifiably be vilified.
- #122
- 5,117
- 20
kat said:
? Because a few madmen have painted some swastika on a few Jewish and Christian graves and are actively looked for by the police ?
And for your information, Arab populations are semitic populations too...
- #123
TRCSF
- 60
- 0
vanesch said:
No kidding. If France started a war based on religious bigotry and scapegoating and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, then there'd be something to complain about. Given it's the other way around...
- #124
solutions in a box
The key chemical ingredients which were most highly studied by the USA were: The high carbon content and the low sulfur content present in Iraqi crude oil.
It is all about oil. During Iraq's war with Iran we even sent Saddam information on WMD, and sold him the ingredients to make them. We sent Iraq samples of anthrax, west nile virus, and many other biological agents.
We invaded Iraq during the first Gulf war, but we didn't do anything to significantly address the problem of WMD. Why didn't we? We blew up a few ammo dumps that we suspected held the same chemical weaopns that we had earlier suggested that Iraq use against Iran
It was only after France, Germany, and Russia had signed agreements to develop oil fields in Iraq that we decided that the possible WMD were a problem.
I seriously don't think that France, Germany, or Russia would have signed those agreemets if they thought the WMD allegations were true. They would not have invested billions to develop the iraqi oil fields if there was a chance that they could lose it all because of WMD.
It is all about oil. During Iraq's war with Iran we even sent Saddam information on WMD, and sold him the ingredients to make them. We sent Iraq samples of anthrax, west nile virus, and many other biological agents.
We invaded Iraq during the first Gulf war, but we didn't do anything to significantly address the problem of WMD. Why didn't we? We blew up a few ammo dumps that we suspected held the same chemical weaopns that we had earlier suggested that Iraq use against Iran
It was only after France, Germany, and Russia had signed agreements to develop oil fields in Iraq that we decided that the possible WMD were a problem.
I seriously don't think that France, Germany, or Russia would have signed those agreemets if they thought the WMD allegations were true. They would not have invested billions to develop the iraqi oil fields if there was a chance that they could lose it all because of WMD.
- #125
TRCSF
- 60
- 0
solutions in a box said:
Did anybody really think they were true? I don't think anybody did. Except maybe a few Fox viewers.
- #126
stoned
- 83
- 0
kat said:
what kind of outragious statements ? chirac said no to war and that is for you strange ?
i ask you to quote some of his "outragious " statements, go ahead !
- #127
alexandra
The 'US' does not exist! There are two 'groups' (or, to use a more politically incorrect term, 'classes') in the US: the capitalists, and the working class. The working class has had the wool pulled over its eyes (as usual); it does not know what the heck is in its own interests. It does not need to apologise at all (not even for its 'stupidity' - after all, it has been subjected to the most intense propangada ever - worse than Nazi Germany). The ruling class has nothing to apologise for either. They got what they wanted - what they intentionally set out to get. What need for apologies? They've got their profits (at a cost paid by working class tax-payers). Nah, no apologies...
Last edited by a moderator:
- #128
- 5,117
- 20
TRCSF said:
In the beginning I really believed that American and UK policymakers were so misguided that they really believed (part) of what they said. I think it is now clear that they didn't. Most of the non-US population didn't believe it in any case.
- #129
alexandra
Too true, vanesch - and what logical conclusion does that lead us to? Everyone acted in the full knowledge of lies. What does that *mean*?vanesch said:
- #130
Townsend
- 232
- 0
The Smoking Man said:
You really don't get it do you...I actually feel sorry for you...
- #131
Smurf
- 443
- 3
I don't think anyone else get's either of you.Townsend said:You really don't get it do you...I actually feel sorry for you...
- #132
selfAdjoint
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
- 6,894
- 11
vanesch said:
I think is the US there were three players in the inner circle (each with a clacque) Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. All the others were yes-men or ineffictive, like Colin Powell.
Bush wanted to invade Iraq for personal reasons, and is known to ignore things that are inconvenient for him.
Cheney wanted to implement the neocon world plan, and was totally cynical about use of data.
Rumsfeld just wanted to try out his nifty new military ideas.
- #133
Townsend
- 232
- 0
Smurf said:I don't think anyone else get's either of you.
I really don't see what is hard to understand about my question? The only thing that might confuse people is when they want to assume they think they know why I am asking the questions and in a stupid attempt to avoid giving me a point they reply with answers that have nothing to do with the question at hand.
This question I asked to TSM and the answer I received are a perfect example. The point I wanted to make is simply that pumping water into the wells to pressurize the well is meaningless. It has nothing to do with his argument but he uses it to reinforce his argument like it somehow matters.
So giving him the benefit of the doubt I have asked him to supply me with a reason for including the fact they have in fact pumped water into the well to pressurize it.
Do you see how stupid that is? It like me saying that cars pollute the environment and then going off on how they use water in the radiator system to cool the engine. Ok, they use water but what the hell does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Nothing...so why should I use that to reinforce my argument? I shouldn't...
It would be one thing if TSM was simply offering that little trinket up as information about what is done when an oil well runs low on pressure but that is far from what we was doing. What he did was to use it as evidence to claim that the US is making another blunder that is stupid...
What is sad is that no one else sees it. I honestly would have expected you, Smurf, to see the point I was making. The fact that you missed it makes me feel as though most people will probably not see my point at...oh well, like it matters...
Perhaps your just mad at me for being so late with any comments on your government system...
- #134
- 5,117
- 20
selfAdjoint said:
So you guys have a bozo, a liar and a guntotting cowboy in the cockpit then
- #135
Townsend
- 232
- 0
vanesch said:So you guys have a bozo, a liar and a guntotting cowboy in the cockpit then
Replace the cowboy part with liberal wiener and the same could be said if Kerry was elected...
- #136
- 5,117
- 20
Townsend said:
Eh, Bush wasn't the cowboy...
- #137
Townsend
- 232
- 0
vanesch said:
Oh...you talking about Rummy then?
sorry about that- #138
- 5,117
- 20
Townsend said:
What I understood from TSM's argument was that they were using DIRTY water to do so, which fills the pores of the sediments in which the oil resides, and makes the pumping much more difficult afterwards, reducing its value.
- #139
Townsend
- 232
- 0
vanesch said:
TSM said:
This is a common practice...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(oil_production)
And therefore It has nothing to do with any point he is trying to make...
- #140
Smurf
- 443
- 3
Heh, don't flatter yourself I don't even remember how this argument got started, both of your points have been lost in the flail of ad hominem attacks and childish scolds. Then again, I admit I havn't scrolled up once to re-read anything so for all I know it's written in plain english and I just havn't seen it.Townsend said:
Oh, yeah.. that tooPerhaps your just mad at me for being so late with any comments on your government system...